Joseph used a hat to translate because his eyes were tired...

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Is reading too much to ask? I quite enjoy it.

People who read are usually willing to articulate some of what they read. Those who like to pretend to read never do.

They never read beyond a few sentences, yet they expect others to literally read thousands upon thousands of pages of apologetic material. It’s bananas.

- Doc

[Sledge]

You literally don’t know that. We don’t have statements on record to that effect, and so you have no idea what he said and to whom. We also have a very wealthy church willing to buy documents they believe are embarrassing or hurtful to its image, so we have no idea what’s been bought, what’s been destroyed (Joseph F. Smith, ftw on that one), what’s been lost, or what’s never been shared. That statement, that OC or whomever, nEvEr rEcAnTeD doesn’t acknowledge that they left in the first place. That’s hugely problematic because you’re trying to tell me that a dude that was set apart by this guy

just bumped and was like, “I’m out.”

What’s more likely? A guy who had angel hands on his dome goes into apostasy, or the story was bunk, regardless if you have a statement of disbelief or not? Don’t answer this, because you’re a fool and a troll, so whatever you fart out is pointless.

- Doc

Ahhhh the ‘ole argument from ignorance! That’s usually what happens when you try to argue against the power of the witnesses.

[Sledge]

rests on the notion that Oliver Cowdery would feel safe to expose the fraud.

That’s why it’s important that we have 11 witnesses.

[Themis]

rests on the notion that Oliver Cowdery would feel safe to expose the fraud.

That’s why it’s important that we have 11 witnesses.

Interesting thing is the kinder-hook plates have far more than 11 witnesses to their existence. Your logic would have us all believing they were really an ancient record as Joseph claimed.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

You literally don’t know that. We don’t have statements on record to that effect, and so you have no idea what he said and to whom. We also have a very wealthy church willing to buy documents they believe are embarrassing or hurtful to its image, so we have no idea what’s been bought, what’s been destroyed (Joseph F. Smith, ftw on that one), what’s been lost, or what’s never been shared. That statement, that OC or whomever, nEvEr rEcAnTeD doesn’t acknowledge that they left in the first place. That’s hugely problematic because you’re trying to tell me that a dude that was set apart by this guy

just bumped and was like, “I’m out.”

What’s more likely? A guy who had angel hands on his dome goes into apostasy, or the story was bunk, regardless if you have a statement of disbelief or not? Don’t answer this, because you’re a fool and a troll, so whatever you fart out is pointless.

- Doc

Ahhhh the ‘ole argument from ignorance! That’s usually what happens when you try to argue against the power of the witnesses.

tHe pOwEr oF tHe wItNeSsEs

- Doc

[Equality]

rests on the notion that Oliver Cowdery would feel safe to expose the fraud.

That’s why it’s important that we have 11 witnesses.

That has nothing to do with what you said. You asserted that if Oliver knew it was a fraud, he would have exposed it. I pointed out that your assertion rested on the premise that Oliver would have felt safe to expose the fraudulent enterprise. Saying there were "other witnesses" does not speak to the issue at all.

There are many reasons why co-conspirators (whether one or eleven) might find it in their self-interest not to expose a fraud they participated in. Can you think of any? Or are you arguing that whenever a co-conspirator has falling out with one or more of his fellow gang members the co-conspirator will publicly expose the gang's activities?

[Shulem]

rests on the notion that Oliver Cowdery would feel safe to expose the fraud.

That’s why it’s important that we have 11 witnesses.

How many witnesses will it take to witness the name of the king in Facsimile No. 3?

What is that name?

How many witnesses does it take to produce a name?

What's the name?

Okay, when Facsimile No. 3, was published the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve stood by it as a witness.

What's the name of the king?

[Sledge]

Shulem?

[Shulem]

tHe pOwEr oF tHe wItNeSsEs

- Doc

Is that King Pharaoh? What is the name of the king in Facsimile No. 3?

Oh, we can plainly see that the person above is a male. I see a penis. Some of the characters Joseph Smith described in his Facsimile No. 3 have vaginas but Joseph Smith said they have a penis. How do you feel about that? Mixing up a penis with a vagina is a serious thing. Wouldn't you say.

[Shulem]

Shulem?

Are you calling me or are you just making up names like Joseph Smith?