Who Else Saw The Plates Besides Smith?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bill_Pick
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This isn’t about Mormons, it’s about THE Book of Mormon Witnesses and THE Book of Mormon.

Paul’s churches had a plethora of GIFTS - do you know what those are? And the early followers of The Book of Mormon were blessed by the gifts of the Spirit, and the people IN The Book of Mormon received them. How about your Catholic congregations? Any gifts of the Spirit manifest - ever??
Please excuse the interuption…

Most of you understand that BOMC is not a member of the CoJCoLDS, and that assuming that he shares the same beliefs as does the CoJCoLDS is like assuming that the Catholics and the Unitarians believe the same things because they both claim to be Christian.

Yes, BOMC is a Mormon, because he believes in the Book of Mormon. However, assuming that all Mormons believe as he does is committing a fallacy of composition. We don’t all believe as he does. In fact, I think it’s safe to say that his opinions differ from those of the CoJCoLDS in several significant ways; do not assume that “Mormons” as a class all agree with him, or that he agrees with us in all things.

Please return to your regularly scheduled debate…
 
.Yes, what part of my statement that none of them recanted their story even after they had left the church seemed to have escaped your attention, Bill?

As well, you are making some pretty sweeping statements…not to mention taking a whole lot of stuff out of context.

For instance, Martin Harris left–you forgot to mention that he came BACK. They hold a pageant in his honor every other summer in Cache Valley, where he spent the last years of his life. (Mormons will hold pageants, plays, musicals and performances for any excuse at all…😉 )

You also neglected to mention that Martin Harris left the place where the other two (Oliver Cowdery and David Whitmer) were, because he was feeling guilty about something; he saw the plates later, and in a different manner. Cowdery, who left and came back a year and a half before he died, and Whitmer, who left the church and did NOT come back, were adamant to the end of their days that they were shown the plates by an angel.

However, it is the eight witnesses who testified that they were shown the plates by Joseph Smith Jr.

They wrote this:
Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come: That Joseph Smith, Jun., the Author and Proprietor of this work, has shewn unto us the plates of which hath been spoken, which have the appearance of gold; and as many of the leaves as the said Smith has translated we did handle with our hands; and we also saw the engravings thereon, all of which has the appearance of ancient work, and of curious workmanship. And this we bear record with words of soberness, that the said Smith has shewn unto us, for we have seen and hefted, and know of a surety that the said Smith has got the plates of which we have spoken. And we give our names unto the world, to witness unto the world that which we have seen. And we lie not, God bearing witness of it.

Not one of them ever recanted that statement, even though several of them left the church or were excommunicated, as well. In fact, the Whitmer family became rather strong enemies of the church; the sort of ex-member that some of us are familiar with. Even so, they went to their graves insisting that they had, indeed, seen and handled those plates that 'had the appearance of gold."

But, as I have written elsewhere, those plates could be handed over to the finest forensic experts, and authenticated every way it is possible to authenticate them, and it would still be insufficient proof that Mormonism is ‘true’ to someone who prefers that it not be true.

After all, look at Judas; he was with Jesus constantly; we may never know why he did what he did. There are a great many theories about that. The bottom line, though, is that even though he was with Christ all the time, witnessed the miracles and HAD to know Who Christ was, he still did what he did. Why? Because he had a different idea about things and refused to accept that which was in front of him until it was too late.

Peter had a problem with that, too. Look at what HE did…and Thomas.

In fact, look at all the apostles…when all that Christ asked of them was to stay awake with Him in the garden of Gethsemane? People will refuse to believe in the face of overwhelming evidence, but will believe the most empirically unprovable things upon the witness of the Holy Ghost given quietly to their hearts.
what about the lawyer asking them if they saw the plates with their eyes and the response they did not see them as they see the pencil box? Is that true? were they questioned by a lawyer and what did they say? Were they undewr oath? It means a lot because if they had visions regarding the plates they could have visions of handling the plates.

I know nothing about your faith and your church, so I am taking two inconsistencies and trying to see which is in my opinion right.
 
what about the lawyer asking them if they saw the plates with their eyes and the response they did not see them as they see the pencil box? Is that true? were they questioned by a lawyer and what did they say? Were they undewr oath? It means a lot because if they had visions regarding the plates they could have visions of handling the plates.

I know nothing about your faith and your church, so I am taking two inconsistencies and trying to see which is in my opinion right.
What lawyer and who asked? I am not being evasive; I need to know what specific incident you are talking about so that I can go look.
 
Funny isn’t it. Someone begins a thread asking a simple question, people then post attacks on the Mormon Church and I separate TBOM from that church and provide further witnesses than most have heard, and you call that an attack?

I’ll give you points for not running and hiding like the others after the facts were given. An acknowledgment however, of how profound those testimonies are would be appropriate, like RAR did.

P.S. Regarding giving praise to Jesus in these forums, that is not a demand, it is a request, and so far no one has it in them to do so.

P.S.S. It is about praising God, nothing else.
same question to you as to other denominations, if jesus died for our sins why would he wait all those years to deliver the bom to smith? It does not seem like what god would do, I find starting my church on the rock of Peter at his time more believable.
 
What lawyer and who asked? I am not being evasive; I need to know what specific incident you are talking about so that I can go look.
Go back to the start of this thread and there is historical posting about questioning I assume under oath but readily admit to not knowing. you will find it in the first several pages of the thread
 
same question to you as to other denominations, if jesus died for our sins why would he wait all those years to deliver the bom to smith? It does not seem like what god would do, I find starting my church on the rock of Peter at his time more believable.
Given that I think He did both, I don’t quite understand the problem. Besides, God is God…He’ll do what He wants to do.
 
“The most perfect book ever written” is the claim by JS. This statement (according to LDS teaching) must be true as the golden plates were taken up by an angel. The interpertation was done by a seer stone that JS put in a hat and then covered his face with the hat. The seer stone would then glow or shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing. One character at a time would appear, and under it was the interpretation in English. Brother Joseph would read off the English to Oliver Cowdery, who was his principal scribe, and when it was written down and repeated to Brother Joseph to see if it was correct, then it would disappear, and another character with the interpretation would appear. Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God and not by any power of man. So no error can possibly be in the BOM according to the above, yet there is error and here is a listing of some:

In studying the Book of Mormon, one soon finds numerous historical, geographical, and scientific errors. First, in Mormon 9:32 the Book of Mormon claims to have been written in Reformed Egyptian, but Egyptologists say this language does not exist. Second, in Alma 7:10, Jerusalem is called a land or country when it is a city. In Alma 46:15 the saved in America take on the name Christian in 73 B.C. In the Bible, believers are not called Christian until 50 A.D. in Acts 11:3. Nephi 17:7 teaches that leprosy occurred in America in 34 A.D. but no cases of leprosy here are known until 1758. Mormon 9:2 and other references teach that the Indians had official records, scrolls, and other writings, but historical research shows no such records were kept. (Mormon 5:23, 3 Nephi 9:18, 12:18)
Not only are there historical errors, but there are false teachings as well. Alma 24:16 teaches that burying swords deep in the earth will keep them bright. Basic science proves that burying steel objects causes decay and rust. 2 Nephi 13:24 teaches that baldness is caused by sin. Other absurdities include the teaching that God curses Indians with dark skin and anyone who marries an Indian will be cursed (2 Nephi 5:21 Jacob 3:3-9, Mormon 5:15-17, Alma 3:6-10). However, when Indians accept the Mormon teaching, they will become white and delightsome. (2 Nephi 30:5-7)
There appear to be internal contradictions also. In 3 Nephi 9:18, Jesus allegedly preached to the Nephites who fled Jerusalem in 600 B.C. with concepts communicated in the Greek language. But the Nephites are said to have written and spoken in Reformed Egyptian. Therefore, they would have no knowledge of Greek since Alexander, who lived in the 4th century, had not Hellenized the world yet. Jesus preaching to the non-Greek Nephites declaring, “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” would have not made any sense. Moreover, Joseph Smith and the Mormons claim the gold plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated had no Greek or Latin in them.{26} However, Alpha and Omega are Greek, not Egyptian terms. Even stranger is that the French word “adieu” is used as a farewell in Jacob 7:27. Probe
 
This isn’t about Mormons, it’s about THE Book of Mormon Witnesses and THE Book of Mormon.

Paul’s churches had a plethora of GIFTS - do you know what those are? And the early followers of The Book of Mormon were blessed by the gifts of the Spirit, and the people IN The Book of Mormon received them. How about your Catholic congregations? Any gifts of the Spirit manifest - ever??
Yes, often.
 
He did…but He sent them prophets to guide them in the mean time; He didn’t leave them alone.

…and yes, Christianity did spread rather quickly,which is actually proof of my point, not yours. It spread very quickly in the ‘old’ world. It was known pretty much everywhere in Europe and Asia within a couple of centuries, if not earlier than that.

But no matter how you spin it, if you are correct, it didn’t reach the ‘new world’ for fifteen hundred years. I don’t think God would do that.

Diana (waiting to see if anybody is seeing the irony in all this…)
what evidence do ypou have that the people of the new world, any tribe, any at all, prior to what is considered european discovery, of whichever brand you suscribe to, had been given the word of Jesus or knew who Jesus was or had the gospel-other than by circular reasoning and TBOM?

Thanks, this question leaped out at me from this debate and I’m quite certain the authorities in your religion have faced and answered it before.

As for the 1500 years and TBOM/catholic debate there are areas of the world where until very recently Christ was not taUGHT BY EITHER, and how does TBOM explain it not being provided to theeuropeans?
 
BEOWULF???

Hwaet???
That there ever were a set of golden plates from God which Smith dug out of the earth seems very doubtful. Here are some facts one must consider before making a decision as to their actual existence. . Smith’s mother, Lucy, never saw the plates for Joseph warned her that to look at them meant instant death. . Emma, Smith’s wife, claimed she “saw” the plates but they were covered by a cloth. . Martin Harris, who was Joseph’s secretary in the writing down of the translation, never got the chance to really see the plates although the two men worked in the same room. Joseph gave Harris the same warning: that the wrath of God would strike him down if he tried to see the plates. Joseph claimed that one day he received a revelation from God that he must have three witnesses to prove the authenticity of the plates. (Doctrine & Covenants Sec. 5). Joseph chose Oliver Cowdery, Martin Harris and David Whitmer. He took the three men out into the woods where supposedly an angel showed them the plates. . Martin Harris was later questioned by a lawyer: “Did you see the plates with your bodily eyes?” Harris replied: “I did not see them as I do that pencil case, yet I saw them with the eyes of faith.” (The Confusion of Tongues, Chas. W. Ferguson p. 371) All three men told different stories as to what actually happened in the woods. All three later quarreled with Smith and left the church. Joseph described them as liars, forgerers, slander-bearers and thieves. Joseph even claimed that in July of 1828 he had received a revelation from God in which the Almighty described Martin Harris as wicked. (Doctrine & Covenants Sec. 3) Joseph’s assessment of the integrity of the three divinely appointed witnesses comes as a great surprise
 
what evidence do ypou have that the people of the new world, any tribe, any at all, prior to what is considered european discovery, of whichever brand you suscribe to, had been given the word of Jesus or knew who Jesus was or had the gospel-other than by circular reasoning and TBOM?
The Book of Mormon is our evidence that this was done. there is no circular reasoning there…as long as the reason you believe in the Book of mormon isn’t just because the Book of Mormon says so.

THAT would be circular reasoning.

You do realize that you have just asked me the equivalent of "what evidence do you have that Moses struck a rock and caused a fountain to leap out of it, or parted the Red Sea, or that Joshua took down the walls of Jericho by blowing horns and marching around the city, other than by circular reasoning and the Bible?
Thanks, this question leaped out at me from this debate and I’m quite certain the authorities in your religion have faced and answered it before.

As for the 1500 years and TBOM/catholic debate there are areas of the world where until very recently Christ was not taUGHT BY EITHER, and how does TBOM explain it not being provided to theeuropeans?
and where, precisely, is there an area in Europe or Asia that has not had missionaries of some type appear a WHOLE lot sooner than 1492?
 
That there ever were a set of golden plates from God which Smith dug out of the earth seems very doubtful. Here are some facts one must consider before making a decision as to their actual existence. . Smith’s mother, Lucy, never saw the plates for Joseph warned her that to look at them meant instant death. . Emma, Smith’s wife, claimed she “saw” the plates but they were covered by a cloth. . Martin Harris, who was Joseph’s secretary in the writing down of the translation, never got the chance to really see the plates although the two men worked in the same room. Joseph gave Harris the same warning: that the wrath of God would strike him down if he tried to see the plates. Joseph claimed that one day he received a revelation from God that he must have three witnesses to prove the authenticity of the plates. (Doctrine & Covenants Sec. 5). Joseph chose Oliver Cowdery, Martin Harris and David Whitmer. He took the three men out into the woods where supposedly an angel showed them the plates. . Martin Harris was later questioned by a lawyer: “Did you see the plates with your bodily eyes?” Harris replied: “I did not see them as I do that pencil case, yet I saw them with the eyes of faith.” (The Confusion of Tongues, Chas. W. Ferguson p. 371) All three men told different stories as to what actually happened in the woods. All three later quarreled with Smith and left the church. Joseph described them as liars, forgerers, slander-bearers and thieves. Joseph even claimed that in July of 1828 he had received a revelation from God in which the Almighty described Martin Harris as wicked. (Doctrine & Covenants Sec. 3) Joseph’s assessment of the integrity of the three divinely appointed witnesses comes as a great surprise
…and where did you get this quote from, Bill? Care to attribute it correctly? Since this is not the first time you have copied and pasted this precise work, I’m sure you are able to tell us where it came from.

As well, I would like to know what it has to do with my comment regarding Beowulf?
 
The Book of Mormon is our evidence that this was done. there is no circular reasoning there…as long as the reason you believe in the Book of mormon isn’t just because the Book of Mormon says so.

THAT would be circular reasoning.

You do realize that you have just asked me the equivalent of "what evidence do you have that Moses struck a rock and caused a fountain to leap out of it, or parted the Red Sea, or that Joshua took down the walls of Jericho by blowing horns and marching around the city, other than by circular reasoning and the Bible?

quite right thayt many parts of the bible only have support for their existence in the Bible. However, there are numerous parts of the Bible as well as Jewish texts that have been supported by archaelogy. One would not expect to have archelogical evidence of certain or all aspects of the Bible, but there should be of some and there is. Likewise if there is a claim that certain civilisations existed in a certain location with certain beliefs and ways of life is it not reasonable for there to be archealogical proof of that existence?
]

there are areas of the south seas of south america of many places where there were no missionaries before 1492.
 
The Book of Mormon is our evidence that this was done. there is no circular reasoning there…as long as the reason you believe in the Book of mormon isn’t just because the Book of Mormon says so.

THAT would be circular reasoning.

You do realize that you have just asked me the equivalent of "what evidence do you have that Moses struck a rock and caused a fountain to leap out of it, or parted the Red Sea, or that Joshua took down the walls of Jericho by blowing horns and marching around the city, other than by circular reasoning and the Bible?

thats a good question the people you are talking about are not con men their are men of God big big big diff. but thank you for the post

and where, precisely, is there an area in Europe or Asia that has not had missionaries of some type appear a WHOLE lot sooner than 1492?
 
i’m reading Jesuit Relations. In 1610 Jesuits began a mission to the Natives of North America in Nova Scotia.

puffin.creighton.edu/jesuit/relations/

They met Native males who had beards, their skin color wasn’t that much different than that of Frenchmen. They had a few customs resembling those of Christianity. The Jesuits began to wonder about the fabled Irish settlement of Norumbega. They had maps of that area, and the locations of the rivers were a match. SOMETHING had happened, but they couldn’t get thier minds quite wrapped around it. They were often frustrated at the difficulty of learning the Native language.

Also, there was this guy:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Brendan
 
and where, precisely, is there an area in Europe or Asia that has not had missionaries of some type appear a WHOLE lot sooner than 1492?
Vietnam - first missionaries arrived the beginning of the 16th century. They weren’t very successful until the Jesuits arrived in the 17th century.

Indonesia - Dominican missionaries arrived with the conquest of Indonesia by the Portuguese in the early 16th century. The islands were then conquered in 1605 by the Calvinist Dutch who expelled the Catholic Church for the next 300 years

China - Jesuit missionary St Francis Xavier arrived 1552

Philippines - “Discovered” in 1521 by Magellan. Augustinian friar arrived 1564, missionary efforts well under way by 1571.
 
Vietnam - first missionaries arrived the beginning of the 16th century. They weren’t very successful until the Jesuits arrived in the 17th century.

Indonesia - Dominican missionaries arrived with the conquest of Indonesia by the Portuguese in the early 16th century. The islands were then conquered in 1605 by the Calvinist Dutch who expelled the Catholic Church for the next 300 years

China - Jesuit missionary St Francis Xavier arrived 1552

Philippines - “Discovered” in 1521 by Magellan. Augustinian friar arrived 1564, missionary efforts well under way by 1571.
and this has to do what with the plates, are you still just dancing
 
and this has to do what with the plates, are you still just dancing
No, Bill it proves the point that Jesus was not taught or exposed to many parts of the world in/during the time spand we say, round about proves a point that was made.
 
No, Bill it proves the point that Jesus was not taught or exposed to many parts of the world in/during the time spand we say, round about proves a point that was made.
sorry i was thinking the thread was about smith and the so called plates
 
sorry i was thinking the thread was about smith and the so called plates
the thread is about the plates, the questions got expanded, ie I asked why no archelogical evidence of the past civilisations etc actually you have to go back through all of them to be able to understand how it got there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top