What is your obsession with the golden plates? The point is, you don’t believe in the Ten Commandments because you have seen or touched them. You believe in them because you have a history that tells you of them; they are written about in a book that you accept as scripture. We have no, repeat, NO, independent verification of the existence of them outside the OT.
None.
Zip.
Nada.
yet you believe.
At the same time, we have eyewitness accounts from men who did see and touch the BOM plates, and you do not believe. My point is that neither set of documents can be proven empirically… and if you accept the one set as ‘real’ without that empirical proof, then you cannot demand such proof for the other. You must use other means to decide that they never existed.
I am posting a defense because I happen to believe that a: they existed and b:what was written upon them is very valuable.
…and I’m simply pointing out that you are using a double standard when you accept the Ten Commandments as having been written upon stone and given to Moses—and insist that the golden plates must be produced before you will so much as look at what was claimed to have been written upon them.
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 to a sincere inquirer. It is only fair to ask the following questions: How could God have chosen men of such evil character and reputation? Since Smith is supposed to be a true prophet of God, his evaluation of them had to be correct. How then could anyone take their testimony to the plates as trustworthy? Why is it that the three could not agree as to what actually took place in the woods? If they had been given a truly divine sign with the actual appearance to them of an angel from heaven, how could they have doubted Smith from that moment on? Cowdery and Harris were supposed to have returned to the Church. David Whitmer remained out. He claimed that he also was a true prophet from God and rejected Smith’s later revelations. (Read Mormonism, Shadow or Reality? the Tanners, pp. 52-59 for a careful documentation on the witnesses) . Next Joseph produced eight more witnesses although there is no evidence that he did so with divine approval. Perhaps he was worried about the unreliability of the first three of whom he had such a low opinion. Of these eight witnesses, four of them were Whitmers, relatives of the David Whitmer, one of the three original witnesses. The fifth witness was Hiram Page who had married a Whitmer daughter. The last three were Joseph’s own father and two brothers. This is surely too close a family circle to impress an honest investigator looking for impartiality among a group of witnesses. When Our Lord arose from the dead, the Bible states He appeared to many different people and at different times and places. Jesus offered sufficient and reasonable proof that He was alive again. . These eight witnesses stated they saw the plates. Were they the very same set of plates the first witnesses saw? If Martin Harris who was divinely chosen to see the plates had to admit that he did not see them with his bodily eyes but only with the “eyes of faith”, just how then did the other eight who were not chosen by divine revelation “see” the plates? Of the eight, five, the Whitmers and Page, turned against Smith and left the Church. . Lastly, in a sermon delivered by President and Prophet Brigham Young in the Tabernacle in Salt Lake City, June 5, 1859 the claim for the actual existence of a set of gold plates from God is further weakened: “Some of the witnesses of the Book of Mormon, who handled the plates and conversed with the angels of God, were afterwards LEFT TO DOUBT AND TO DISBELIEVE THEY HAD EVER SEEN AN ANGEL. One of the Quorum of Twelve, a young man FULL OF FAITH and good works, prayed and the vision of his mind was opened, and the angel of God came and laid the plates before him, AND HE SAW AND HANDLED THEM, and SAW THE ANGEL, and CONVERSED with him as he would one of his friends; but after apostacy, and has continued to contend this work. There are hundreds in a similar condition.”
(Journal of Discourses Vol. 7 p. 164)
From the facts an impartial investigator can only conclude that the evidence for the actual existence of a set of golden plates from God is just too weak to merit a reasonable acceptance of Joseph Smith’s claim for them.
Thanks friend.