Evidence and Mormonism

[hauslern]

Petersen seems to argue that the testimony of the Book of Mormon witness is sufficient evidence for the existence of the gold plates. Could there be other reasons for why they maintained their statement?

[Philo Sofee]

The witnesses may be sufficient for him, but in that case, why his life work in apologetics attempting to show there is so much else? He could have done something actually useful for all those years. And, the other idea that struck me rather forcefully is sufficient for whom?! If all he is thinking is his own belief, then sure, but is he satisfied with that? Is that all he will ever bring up and discuss with non-Mormons? Why all the frantic search for all kinds of "evidences" and all the lies about Alma, Nahom, and other issues which have truly been shown to be wrong, yet he attempts to maintain them anyway? NONE of his actions indicate he really believes the witnesses are sufficient in any manner. The reason is simple, he is once again doing the apologetic two step for believers who are beginning to doubt. For the rest of us we all already have a very firm and true testimony that the witnesses alone are nowhere even near sufficient.

[hauslern]

Phil DanP 'holds certain beliefs (Book of Mormon Book of Abraham) lacks good evidence for them" Why do Givens and Skousen maintain Smith got the interpretations of the facsimiles wrong? They now shift to the view that the contents of the Book of Abraham given by revelation. Search for content in the Book of Abraham that can be confirmed by other sources that Smith would have not had access to? The report about Abraham's signature was false/rubbish. Why did the scribes produce all those manuscripts with Egyptian symbols placed along side the words?

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

The witnesses may be sufficient for him, but in that case, why his life work in apologetics attempting to show there is so much else? He could have done something actually useful for all those years. And, the other idea that struck me rather forcefully is sufficient for whom?! If all he is thinking is his own belief, then sure, but is he satisfied with that? Is that all he will ever bring up and discuss with non-Mormons? Why all the frantic search for all kinds of "evidences" and all the lies about Alma, Nahom, and other issues which have truly been shown to be wrong, yet he attempts to maintain them anyway? NONE of his actions indicate he really believes the witnesses are sufficient in any manner. The reason is simple, he is once again doing the apologetic two step for believers who are beginning to doubt. For the rest of us we all already have a very firm and true testimony that the witnesses alone are nowhere even near sufficient.

Man, you hit the nail on the peckerhead.

- Doc

[hauslern]

Have William Davis and Dan Vogel produced sufficient evidence that Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon? Was Smith really that uneducated? What was available to him to use as sources?

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dmB ... sp=sharing

[Rivendale]

Have William Davis and Dan Vogel produced sufficient evidence that Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon? Was Smith really that uneducated? What was available to him to use as sources?

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dmB ... sp=sharing

It takes a long time to see what the sources are. Terryl Givens likes to call him an eclectic collector. The best evidence of him actually stealing at this point in history is Adam Clark's commentary on the Bible. But you have a litany of things like Book of the Hebrews, The Late War, Swedenborg, and many others. And no he was not that uneducated. He couldn't write very well that is the reason for the scribes but he had a sound knowledge of the Bible.

[honorentheos]

Petersen seems to argue that the testimony of the Book of Mormon witness is sufficient evidence for the existence of the gold plates. Could there be other reasons for why they maintained their statement?

I recall past discussions on the old MAD board where Dan cited the witness testimonies as essentially tipping the balance decidedly in favor of the plates being real involving an angelic visitation. And from this bit of fairy cake, the foundation for the restoration can be assumed secure as well.

Those past discussions brushed aside the stories of the witnesses after their expulsion from the Church in Missouri when Smith and Rigdon assumed full control of the church. Of note, David Whitmer based his leadership of a new religious body on the witness event and proclaimed polygamy showed Smith had fallen. Whitmer gave that statement equal weight to his claims of the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. Of the two claimed it seems the latter has stronger evidence given the way polygamy has been more of an albatross around the neck of the leadership for half of the Church's existence. Whether or not Cowdery disavowed the witness statements is brought up based on the lyrics of an old hymn published in the Times and the Seasons. What I believe is not in dispute is he largely hid his past involvement with the church in attempts to make a new, better life for himself. His return, as it is toted, largely came about due to his falling on hard times and his brother in law, Phineas Young serving as peacemaker between Brigham and Oliver. What is never clear is if Cowdery was informed of polygamy being codified among the Church elite at that point. There are hints that the reconciliation may have even begun due to the succession crisis following Joseph's death where the support of the returning Witnesses may have tipped the balance in favor of the apostles over other contenders. But between letters it seems Young's control had solidified enough, and at least David Whitmer had flat out refused to be part of it, that Oliver lost any leverage he may have had with Brigham and was left to scramble to get enough support to make a trip he proves too ill to complete in time. It's a bit of a sad story, all told.

And therein lies the story of the Witnesses I would love to see truly told. The one where their roles as leaders of the Church evolved and eventually were deposed with malice, only to have their stature polished up and elevated long after their respective deaths.

[honorentheos]

Have William Davis and Dan Vogel produced sufficient evidence that Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon? Was Smith really that uneducated? What was available to him to use as sources?

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dmB ... sp=sharing

It takes a long time to see what the sources are. Terryl Givens likes to call him an eclectic collector. The best evidence of him actually stealing at this point in history is Adam Clark's commentary on the Bible. But you have a litany of things like Book of the Hebrews, The Late War, Swedenborg , and many others. And no he was not that uneducated. He couldn't write very well that is the reason for the scribes but he had a sound knowledge of the Bible.

I would argue the best evidence for coauthor status is the fact what we have today wasn't produced until Oliver Cowdery arrived. And many of the claims for a miraculous production ignore that Smith and the previous scribes worked for about a year and produced 116 pages that were lost. Oliver is quoted as saying he was the scribe for all but a very limited number of pages of the manuscript which seems supported by the attempts to recreate the original manuscript. Some see that as supporting the translation requiring a miracle. I think it shows without Cowdery, Smith couldn't complete the project.

Timeline source for consideration:

http://www.eldenwatson.net/Book of Mormon.htm

[Rivendale]

Petersen seems to argue that the testimony of the Book of Mormon witness is sufficient evidence for the existence of the gold plates. Could there be other reasons for why they maintained their statement?

I recall past discussions on the old MAD board where Dan cited the witness testimonies as essentially tipping the balance decidedly in favor of the plates being real involving an angelic visitation. And from this bit of fairy cake, the foundation for the restoration can be assumed secure as well.

Those past discussions brushed aside the stories of the witnesses after their expulsion from the Church in Missouri when Smith and Rigdon assumed full control of the church. Of note, David Whitmer based his leadership of a new religious body on the witness event and proclaimed polygamy showed Smith had fallen. Whitmer gave that statement equal weight to his claims of the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. Of the two claimed it seems the latter has stronger evidence given the way polygamy has been more of an albatross around the neck of the leadership for half of the Church's existence. Whether or not Cowdery disavowed the witness statements is brought up based on the lyrics of an old hymn published in the Times and the Seasons. What I believe is not in dispute is he largely hid his past involvement with the church in attempts to make a new, better life for himself. His return, as it is toted, largely came about due to his falling on hard times and his brother in law, Phineas Young serving as peacemaker between Brigham and Oliver. What is never clear is if Cowdery was informed of polygamy being codified among the Church elite at that point. There are hints that the reconciliation may have even begun due to the succession crisis following Joseph's death where the support of the returning Witnesses may have tipped the balance in favor of the apostles over other contenders. But between letters it seems Young's control had solidified enough, and at least David Whitmer had flat out refused to be part of it, that Oliver lost any leverage he may have had with Brigham and was left to scramble to get enough support to make a trip he proves too ill to complete in time. It's a bit of a sad story, all told.

And therein lies the story of the Witnesses I would love to see truly told. The one where their roles as leaders of the Church evolved and eventually were deposed with malice, only to have their stature polished up and elevated long after their respective deaths.

Here is Dan's new one. https://youtu.be/dptmzeZl1_k

[drumdude]

The plates become much less impressive when you learn about the rock in the hat and the book of Abraham.

Back in the 1950s it might have been a decent argument. In 2022? Laughable.

Joseph used a rock in a hat, and the work we have of his translation efforts on the papyrus is complete trash.