Who Else Saw The Plates Besides Smith?

[pnewton]

Now I’m certain, in this case, that God DID protect the plates in the best and most secure method possible. He took them back and kept them.

(shrug) There is no way that Joseph could have, at the time, kept them safe.

If they truly were divine, if Joseph Smith knew this and if he had faith in God what would have been the problem. God could not have protected the plates and Joseph Smith? Have you every read the stories of men of faith like Joshua, Gideon, Moses, David, etc. Numbers mean nothing to God. So did Joseph Smith lack faith or did he know the whole thing was a scam?

 

[Bill_Pick]

“one of the few?”

(grin)

Well, figure that at least 14 million Mormons are on the planet right now. Figure that perhaps a third again more people have actually read the book, making a further 4 or 5 million people (that’s a number I pulled out of the air, by the way, but seems fairly reasonable, considering the number of antis’ I come up against who claim to have read it) . Not counting, of course, everybody who has read it who is actually, y’know, DEAD.

While you might consider upwards of 18 to 19 million people ‘a few,’ I think that, just perhaps, you might have a slightly skewed perception of the definition “few.”

I’m just sayin’, is all.

. Martin Harris took down the translation as Joseph gave it to him. A blanket flung across a rope divided the room where the two men worked. According to David Whitmer this is how the translation was done. Joseph would place a seer-stone into a hat, and putting his face into the hat, drew it tightly around his face to exclude the light. In the darkness a spiritual light would shine. The writing would appear on something like parchment. The English translation was given beneath the strange writing, or the Reformed Egyptian as Smith called it. (An Address to All Believers in Christ by David Whitmer) . Martin Harris confirmed the use of the seer-stone. He said sentences would appear and were read by Joseph, and Martin would write them down. This means then that Smith never did translate the strange writing. God simply supplied the English and Joseph dictated what he saw to Harris. The Golden Plates were not used at all! No mention is made of the Urim and Thummim, the two magic stones found in the stone box along with the plates. Joseph said these had to be used to translate the plates. Smith claimed he did not use them for the first one hundred and sixteen pages of the Book of Mormon. After Harris lost these pages, Joseph simply used a seer-stone he found in a well. What happened to the Urim and Thummim? Mormon authorities believe they were taken back to the next world by an angel.

 

[Bill_Pick]

…does the specific group you associate with have a name, BOMC?

Diana (who is wondering, if the neither the bible nor the Book of Mormon ever mentions building places to hear someone preach, what all the references to Temples and synagogues were all about, or King Benjamin’s tower…{that’s a BOM reference})

BOM It is quite dull. The book does not reach the literary and dramatic heights of the Christian Bible. The religious theme running throughout the work is the problem of good and evil and repentance. Its story is that of a people who thrive materially, become proud, fall away from God and sin, repent and convert. There are difficulties with the work, serious enough to cast a reasonable doubt upon its authenticity as a book from God equal to the Christian Bible. Here are just a few: . It has been estimated that almost ten percent of the Book of Mormon is a direct quote or paraphrase from the King James translation of the Bible. “About one-eighteenth of the Book is taken directly from the Bible: about three hundred passages - namely large portions of Isaiah, the entire sermon on the Mount (according to Matthew), and a few verses from St. Paul.” (The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge Vol. 8 p. 12)
King James Bible The Book of Mormon
“the same yesterday, and today and forever”. (Hebrews 13:8) “the same yesterday, today and forever.” (II Nephi 27:23)
“Work out your own salvation with fear”. (Phil. 2:12) “Work out your salvation with fear”. (Alma 34:37)
“O wretched man that I am”. (Romans 7:24) “O wretched man that I am”. (II Nephi 4:17)
“Marvel not that I said unto thee, ye must be born again”. (John 3:7) “Marvel not that all mankind must be born again”. (Mosiah 27:25)
“There standeth one among you whom ye know not”. (John 1:26) “There standeth one among you whom you know not”. (I Nephi 10:8)
“I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end”. (Rev. 21:6) “I am the alpha and the omega the beginning and the end”. (III Nephi 9:18)
The only reasonable explanation for these parallels and hundreds more is that the Book of Mormon is not a translation of a set of ancient gold plates but a literary work of modern times. It was written long after the King James version was made in London in 1611 A.D. Again, how could a translation directly given to Smith by an all-intelligent God contain the following glaring errors: the existence of the cow, ox, *** and horse on the American continent around 600 B.C. when the Nephites arrive. Scholars are certain that such animals did not exist at that time in the Americas. The Book of Mormon also describes the use of the mariner’s compass which was unknown in those days. (See: Encyclopedia Brittanica ed. 1974 Vol. 4, p. 1039 “Mariner’s Compass” and Vol. 8 p. 1088 “Horse”) . Joseph Smith declared that the Book of Mormon contained the fullness of the gospel message from heaven, yet no where in the Book did I find their doctrines of celestial marriage, baptism for the dead, the Adam-God and universal salvation. . The Book of Mormon also contains a number of absurdities. Here is just one of them: “Now immediately when the judge had been murdered: he being stabbed by his brother, by a garb of secrecy: and he fled and the servants ran and told the people, raising the cry of murder among them.” (Helaman (9:6)
How can one be murdered by a garb of secrecy? . None of the acceptable masters in the fields of history, ethnology, archaeology and Bible studies thinks the Book of Mormon is worth any serious study. For example, in the field of archaeology, Mormon experts have not been able to find, after years of searching, scientific evidence to verify the contents of the Book of Mormon such as language (Reformed Egyptian), cities and names of prominent people. I have not met one LDS who is aware of this fact. Mormon missionaries and one Mormon Bishop told me that the Book of Mormon has been proven true by archaeological evidence. The Mormon scholar, Bruce McConkie, writes: “Since its (the Book of Mormon) publication many archaeological discoveries have been made, particularly in Central and South America, which bear out the known facts relative to the ancient book of Mormon civilizations.”
(Mormon Doctrine 1966 p. 99)
Ross T. Christensen, Mormon anthropologist, contradicts McConkie: “The statement that the Book of Mormon has already been proved by archeology is misleading.” (Newsletter, University Archaeological Society, BYU Jan. 1960)
The Mormon publication, Dialogue: “The bare facts of the matter are that NOTHING, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, HAS EVER SHOWN UP IN ANY NEW WORLD EXCAVATION which would suggest to a dispassionate observer that the Book of Mormon, as claimed by Joseph Smith, is a historical document relating to the history of early migrants to our hemisphere.”
(Dialogue, Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol. 8, No. 2 1973)
. The Bureau of American Ethnology (scientific study of the races of people) of the Smithsonian Institute in Washington, D. C. simply ignores the Book of Mormon as of any value in this particular field. The sciences of anthropology and archaeology will not accept the testimony of the Book that the American Indians are of Jewish ancestry. The Indians are considered to be mongoloids and most scientists hold that such people came to the Americas by crossing the Beiring Straits and not by sailing from Palestine. . These are just a few of the many difficulties one encounters in a serious study of the Book of Mormon. Yet, Smith supposedly a true prophet from God, could categorically state: “The Book of Mormon is the most correct of any book on earth and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts than by any other book.”
(History of the Church Vol. 4, p. 461)

 

[BOMC]

Bill, are you there? Are you reading or just typing? Where is your response to my rebuttal of your copy/paste?

Do not confuse the consistency of the Holy Spirit with plagiarism by man.

Why not speak of the things NOT contained anywhere else - not the Bible, not Spaulding’s MS, etc.? Are you afraid because they speak of Jesus?

Let’s see, how did a man who never even read the Bible, who rarely attended church, was not baptized, come up with more names for Jesus than the New Testament? Ooh, such an “evil man,” such an “evil book” HELP:crying:

.

 

[Bill_Pick]

It’s a double bind. Like your mother telling you, “you must love me”. Love is spontaneous and cannot be enforced. Mormonism is full of double binds. Have faith, but if you don’t then pray for it, but you need faith in order for you prayer to be heard.

As to feelings, it is more serious than portrayed around these parts. Mormonism essentially co-opts your feelings, defining their meaning for you. If you are joyful and peaceful, God is with you. You see it coming from Mormons here, now and then.

Mormons are conditioned to never say a bad word about Mormonism, and especially its leaders. You can site all the facts in the world about the authenticity (or lack thereof) of the BoM, but it is very uncomfortable for a devout LDS to think along these terms. Facts that are against the BoM are viewed as badmouthing. Non faith-promoting. Therefore, not of God. Feelings of uneasiness are an indication that the Holy Spirit is telling you its wrong.

For those that do venture in the world of facts, Mormon apologists have provided “answers”. Which, usually go in circles, and have no logic to them whatsoever. But if it calms the feelings of uneasiness? phew! Everything is ok.

THE LDS CHURCH UNDERGONE ITS OWN GREAT APOSTASY?

Yes it has both as to doctrine and membership, and this Church is not yet 150 years old. A. There are many groups claiming to originate from Joseph Smith and they seem hopelessly divided. They accuse each other of being heretical and of espousing doctrines that are not of Joseph. For example of the Reorganized LDS Church denies the doctrines of a plurality of Gods, polygamy and baptism for the dead, all major teachings of the Utah Church.

B. The best known of the many groups and the one with the largest membership are the Mormons with their headquarters in Salt Lake City. The Reorganized Church has its center in Independence, Missouri. All of Joseph’s descendants belong to this group.

C. Some of the other groups include: Church of Christ, Temple Lot; Church of Jesus Christ; Church of the First Born; Order of Aaron; the Strangites; the Bickertonites.

D. Smith’s teaching about a continuous guidance for the Church in order to keep it together in doctrine and practices by means of constant revelations (modern day revelation, the Mormons call it) from heaven, has actually failed Joseph Smith’s Church. It has experienced a falling apart and a disunity Smith never counted on. Many Mormons have left their church, while many more remain in, yet smoke, drink and reject polygamy even in theory. Thus the Utah Church exists as just one group out of the hundred or more (estimated) groups that base their beliefs on the teachings of Joseph Smith. Today the Mormon Church can be seen as part of a great apostasy that occurred in the Church of Jesus Christ, Latter Day Saints.

 

[BOMC]

You have only shown that Isaiah was copied, and improvised.

That’s right, Joseph’s going to fabricate a 600 page book, then add little words to Isaiah that mean nothing? Is your head hurting yet? :banghead:

Do you even know why we are discussing Isaiah? The theory that Joseph “plagiarized” or simply “copied” from the Bible is baseless. Just say “you’re right” and try another one.

When are you people going to realize that every theory you repeat is an excuse not to read TBOM - the words of Jesus Christ:

And we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins. (2 Nephi 25: 26)

And if there were preaching which was sacred, or revelation which was great, or prophesying, that I should engraven the heads of them upon these plates, and touch upon them as much as it were possible, for Christ’s sake, and for the sake of our people. (Jacob 1: 4)

Ever stop to think what spirit is trying to keep you from TBOM, the words of Jesus?

Now if TBOM was about something cultist, or deceptive, or plain evil I could understand your reluctance, however, with the Book of Mormon, you have no justification.

.

 

[BOMC]

Today the Mormon Church can be seen as part of a great apostasy that occurred in the Church of Jesus Christ, Latter Day Saints.

Bill, who is plagiarizing now? You need to reference your quotes even if it is from your own book. Pathetic.

.

 

[PaulDupre]

No, I only respect what verses are identified within TBOM as pertaining to TBOM.

So does Jesus’ reference to his “other sheep.” He said that it applies to TBOM.

.

“Jesus” said that in the BOM. But the BOM is a 19th century work of fiction, so it is neither authoritative nor credible.

God love you,
Paul

 

[RAR]

That’s great!
Of course Paul was referring to disciples from Jerusalem who demanded that Gentiles be circumcised as they were, something Paul knew was under the old law.
.

That seems oddly dismissive and more than a little shortsighted.

Gal 1:8 is quite profound and heavy handed when you consider Christ’s words to Peter when he left him the keys to the Church. The Church has fought heresy since Christ’s ascension. The same goes for today even if we have concepts like “political correctness” that make calling it that unpopular.

RAR

 

[MelanieAnne]

That seems oddly dismissive and more than a little shortsighted.

Gal 1:8 is quite profound and heavy handed when you consider Christ’s words to Peter when he left him the keys to the Church. The Church has fought heresy since Christ’s ascension. The same goes for today even if we have concepts like “political correctness” that make calling it that unpopular.

RAR

Yes and one of the big heresies is the Book of Mormon heresy where they deal with the “heresy” issue by calling everyone else a heretic or “apostate”.

 

[PaulDupre]

When are you people going to realize that every theory you repeat is an excuse not to read TBOM - the words of Jesus Christ:

Ever stop to think what spirit is trying to keep you from TBOM, the words of Jesus?

We’ve read it; some of us have read it many times. We’ve come to the same conclusion that most have come to: the BOM is a 19-century work of fiction - a pious fiction to be sure, but fiction nonetheless.

Now if TBOM was about something cultist, or deceptive, or plain evil I could understand your reluctance, however, with the Book of Mormon, you have no justification.

It is deceptive - it tells a story that is not true and claims it as historical fact. And its teaching on infant baptism (among others) is just plain wrong.

The BOM has some nice stuff in it, that’s true. So do all the books written by Billy Graham and Dale Carnegie. So do the writings of Confucious, Lao Tzu and many others. That doesn’t make any of them ancient scripture. The BOM story, the historical claims it makes and the events and persons surrounding its publication are simply not credible. No matter how much you like the book, it is not from God.

God love you,
Paul

 

[BOMC]

That seems oddly dismissive and more than a little shortsighted.

Gal 1:8 is quite profound and heavy handed when you consider Christ’s words to Peter when he left him the keys to the Church. The Church has fought heresy since Christ’s ascension. The same goes for today even if we have concepts like “political correctness” that make calling it that unpopular.

RAR

The point was for them not to receive another gospel the what he Paul had taught. People see so much of Paul in TBOM they think it was “plagiarized.” Which is it? Like Paul’s, or not like Paul’s??? Gee

.

 

[RAR]

The point was for them not to receive another gospel the what he Paul had taught. People see so much of Paul in TBOM they think it was “plagiarized.” Which is it? Like Paul’s, or not like Paul’s??? Gee

.

Yes, and Joseph Smith was selling a new gospel. People of humility would recognize that to preach a new gospel would have been little more than a power grab. Joseph should have run.

Of course, Joseph said nothing of the Catholic Church in his “History” so he might not have known what the true gospel was because of the religious tumult around him.

Christ’s Church exists today… as it was, is now, and ever shall be. Amen.

RAR

 

[BOMC]

We’ve read it; some of us have read it many times. We’ve come to the same conclusion that most have come to: the BOM is a 19-century work of fiction - a pious fiction to be sure, but fiction nonetheless.

And Catholics have a great company of numbers. The only person we need to be on the same page with is Jesus and the Father, so why don’t you ask either of them, and tell me what answer you get.

I have hundreds of testimonies of the answer they received when they asked. Don’t be afraid, just ask!

It is deceptive - it tells a story that is not true and claims it as historical fact…So do all the books written by Billy Graham and Dale Carnegie

Really? That statement proves you haven’t read TBOM, or if you have, you must have skipped around with a twisted anti reference book as your guide. Did you miss these parts?

15 And it came to pass that Nephi—having been visited by angels and also the voice of the Lord, therefore having seen angels, and being eye-witness, and having had power given unto him that he might know concerning the ministry of Christ, and also being eye-witness to their quick return from righteousness unto their wickedness and abominations;
16 Therefore, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts and the blindness of their minds—went forth among them in that same year, and began to testify, boldly, repentance and remission of sins through faith on the Lord Jesus Christ. (3 Nephi 7)

Wonderful isn’t it! What spirit would keep you from reading about Jesus? Think.:banghead:

The BOM story, the historical claims it makes and the events and persons surrounding its publication are simply not credible. No matter how much you like the book, it is not from God.

Actually Paul, we have very specific details of where Book of Mormon events took place at www.bookofmormongeography.info
and in fact, we identify the place where our Lord descended in a cloud of angels and glory, that any with discernment can go and experience for themselves. Check it out Paul.

.

 

[Bill_Pick]

I see trying to depart with a blessing of peace backfired, and you think I was a “troll?” The more I testify to the truth of The Book of Mormon, the more evidences and witnesses that you read, will stand against you as God is my witness.

You want more “proofs” of something that IS to be received by faith…I’ll do my best.

And, so we’re all on the same page, this is a “Non-Catholic” forum, AND the thread is specifically asking about the gold plates of TBOM - not the RCC.

If you thought otherwise - leave. I answered the question were there other witnesses sufficiently well, yet dumb, dumb, and dumber had no response. The fact you are unable to acknowledge what was presented shows how silly you are.

So, respond to the additional witnesses I cited, or move on. OK? It clearly rattles your cage or you wouldn’t be spending your time. That’s good, that’s God at work.

.

Ross T. Christensen, Mormon anthropologist, contradicts McConkie:

“The statement that the Book of Mormon has already been proved by archeology is misleading.” (Newsletter, University Archaeological Society, BYU Jan. 1960)
The Mormon publication, Dialogue:

“The bare facts of the matter are that NOTHING, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, HAS EVER SHOWN UP IN ANY NEW WORLD EXCAVATION which would suggest to a dispassionate observer that the Book of Mormon, as claimed by Joseph Smith, is a historical document relating to the history of early migrants to our hemisphere.”
(Dialogue, Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol. 8, No. 2 1973)
. The Bureau of American Ethnology (scientific study of the races of people) of the Smithsonian Institute in Washington, D. C. simply ignores the Book of Mormon as of any value in this particular field. The sciences of anthropology and archaeology will not accept the testimony of the Book that the American Indians are of Jewish ancestry. The Indians are considered to be mongoloids and most scientists hold that such people came to the Americas by crossing the Beiring Straits and not by sailing from Palestine.

. These are just a few of the many difficulties one encounters in a serious study of the Book of Mormon. Yet, Smith supposedly a true prophet from God, could categorically state:

“The Book of Mormon is the most correct of any book on earth and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts than by any other book.”
(History of the Church Vol. 4, p. 461) [See Q 14-G Notes]

 

[PaulDupre]

The point was for them not to receive another gospel the what he Paul had taught. People see so much of Paul in TBOM they think it was “plagiarized.” Which is it? Like Paul’s, or not like Paul’s??? Gee

No, the point is that the New Testament quotes in the BOM are anachronistic. You don’t see that in the bible. Sure, there are quotes and paraphrases from the OT in the NT, but the NT writers were familiar with the OT - they had read it and/or heard it proclaimed in the synagogue all their lives. What you have in the BOM is quotes and paraphases from the NT 600 years before the NT was written.

If, for instance, I and II Nephi were written 600 years before the NT, Nephi could not possibly have read it. Therefore the quotes and paraphrases from the NT are certainly anachronistic - not to mention the unabashedly Protestant beliefs and practices cited 600 years before Christ and 2200 years before the Protestant heresy and references to “the bible” which did not exist in 600 BC. It makes no sense whatsoever unless it was written from a 19-century Protestant perspective.

God love you,
Paul

 

[BOMC]

Yes, and Joseph Smith was selling a new gospel.

We have already established the point that the gospel Joseph taught was not derived from TBOM - another proof he did not write it, or he would have made sure his gospel was in it.

.

 

[BOMC]

Ross T. Christensen, Mormon anthropologist, contradicts McConkie… These are just a few of the many difficulties one encounters in a serious study of the Book of Mormon. Yet, Smith supposedly a true prophet from God, could categorically state:

“The Book of Mormon is the most correct of any book on earth and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts than by any other book.”
(History of the Church Vol. 4, p. 461) [See Q 14-G Notes]

Actually, you can avoid most difficulties altogether by staying away from any of Joseph Smith’s churches. They obscured TBOM and they mock it every day since they don’t follow any of its teachings, including Joseph, he did not follow TBOM either.

LDS Professor Richard L. Bushman:

Despite the effort that went into the translation, Joseph Smith did not make the book the foundation of the church. (Richard L.Bushman, Joseph Smith and the Beginnings of Mormonism, University of Illinois Press, 1984, p. 142.)

You don’t trust Joseph, so why are you defending what he said after he went beyond the call of God?

We all know what the true keystone of the Mormon Church is - eternal/plural marriage or D&C 132. It’s the pinnacle of their whole system, without it, EVERYTHING crumbles - no temples, no endowments, no priesthood, no word of wisdom, no tithing, nothing.

.

 

[BOMC]

No, the point is that the New Testament quotes in the BOM are anachronistic. You don’t see that in the bible. Sure, there are quotes and paraphrases from the OT in the NT, but the NT writers were familiar with the OT - they had read it and/or heard it proclaimed in the synagogue all their lives. What you have in the BOM is quotes and paraphases from the NT 600 years before the NT was written.

Precisely the point, thank you! Why would Jesus teach a different gospel to the Nephites as he did the Jews? Same Sermon on the Mount, etc.

If, for instance, I and II Nephi were written 600 years before the NT, Nephi could not possibly have read it.

Had you actually read Nephi and not dabbled you would know that most certainly he saw the future, and in great detail. There was nothing “anachronistic” about it. I do not doubt for one minute that Nephi heard, saw or read many future things. Do not limit God, Isaiah didn’t, he saw the future and wrote about it, the same as John did.

Protestant beliefs and practices cited 600 years before Christ and 2200 years before the Protestant heresy and references to “the bible” which did not exist in 600 BC.

Be more specific. They followed the Law of Moses until Jesus arrived and told them to stop those things. Are you referring to baptism, repentance, or faith in Jesus by name???

.

 

[PaulDupre]

Really? That statement proves you haven’t read TBOM, or if you have, you must have skipped around with a twisted anti reference book as your guide. Did you miss these parts?

Your use of ellipses to distort what I wrote is very dishonest. You have lost any shred of credibility with me.

I read the BOM several times when I was a TBM. I served a mission and was married in the temple. I was very active and held many callings including Gospel Essentials teacher and Gospel Doctrine teacher. I have never used anti-Mormon materials - it is not necessary. I use only the materials and statements published by the LDS Church.

Wonderful isn’t it! What spirit would keep you from reading about Jesus? Think.:banghead:

As I’ve told you, I have read the BOM several times, and taught it several times as well. I came to the conclusion that most people come to - it is a fraud as Joseph Smith was a fraud.

Actually Paul, we have very specific details of where Book of Mormon events took place at www.bookofmormongeography.info
and in fact, we identify the place where our Lord descended in a cloud of angels and glory, that any with discernment can go and experience for themselves. Check it out Paul.

Oh please…that website sounds like Martin Harris - only those with the eyes of faith can discern the BOM geography. If the story was real with many millions of highly technological Nephites and Lamanites, there would be archeological traces of it that could be verified without the eyes of faith. All civilizations leave artifacts behind - all non-fictional civilizations, that is . If archeologists found Jericho and Troy (cities much older than the BOM cities) then why haven’t they found Zarahemla or Bountiful? It’s not like there hasn’t been a good deal of digging done in North and South America, especially by Mormons.

God love you,
Paul