lulu wrote:What was the motive for having the document prepared as the 8 testimony? Joseph Smith had been prosecuted before for fraudulant glass looking, a statement by 8 men who could testify in court might viciate the fraud element in future prosecutions.
Nope. Its all about the .... $$$$$$$. The most widely published book in history was and remains the Bible. Smith wanted to introduce a new testament to the Bible, bearing his copyright.
The testimony of the 8 was intended to provide legitimacy to the story.
lulu wrote:What was the motive for having the document prepared as the 8 testimony? Joseph Smith had been prosecuted before for fraudulant glass looking, a statement by 8 men who could testify in court might viciate the fraud element in future prosecutions.
Nope. Its all about the .... $$$$$$$. The most widely published book in history was and remains the Bible. Smith wanted to introduce a new testament to the Bible, bearing his copyright.
The testimony of the 8 was intended to provide legitimacy to the story.
by the way, nice, thorough summary.
Thanks, but we're saying the same thing. Future prosecution on fraud type charge, conviction, jail time? Less legit.
"And the human knew the source of life, the woman of him, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, 'I have procreated a man with Yahweh.'" Gen. 4:1, interior quote translated by D. Bokovoy.
lulu wrote: When signed? Unknown, no known holograph nor any historical references to a holograph
Who was present when it was signed? Unknown, no known holograph nor any historical references to a holograph
Was the declaration sworn? No.
Any explanation regarding the original? Historical record is silent regarding a holograph
Any evidence as to the original? No.
Did any of the 8 talk about the experience on any other occasion? Only 1 known, he said he saw the plates with his spiritual eyes.
Lulu is exactly right, but the reason I accept it as a fact that Joseph Smith showed some plates to his dad, his brother, etc. is that it's evidence (but not proof!) that Joseph Smith was running a con game. But stemelbow does not appear willing to indulge enough self-reflection to wonder why an "avowed critic has to admit there is evidence that Joseph Smith had metallic plates."
So how would an armchair apologist refute the conclusion that the circumstances of the Eight Witnesses' testimony is consistent with a con game? Why, by showing that their testimony cannot be relied upon, of course. Ironic, isn't it?
lulu wrote:What is the factual analysis that supports your assessment, Mr. Folksy?
Stemelbow wrote:My assessment was loosely based on the notion that their names are attached to a statement that attests to witnessing something. I get that they were all either relatives to each other or the party who made the initial claim of the plates existence, so I can't give it full weight. I get that it wasn't necessarily written by the 8 themselves. On those points I can't give it a full 10, but it appears to be more than an average piece since it convinces the avowed critic DJ no problem.
lulu wrote:When? Exact date unknown, before O. Cowdery wrote Printer’s Manuscript, after Joseph Smith met Whitmers
How long were they together? Unknown, might not have all been present together
What was said? Unknown.
Mental state? One witness says he saw with his spiritual eyes
Lighting conditions? Unknown
When was the testimony reduced to writing? Exact date unknown, prior to O. Cowdery finishing Printer’s Manuscript
Who wrote it? Unknown
Was it signed? Unknown, no known holograph nor any historical references to a holograph
Who signed it? Unknown, no known holograph nor any historical references to a holograph
When signed? Unknown, no known holograph nor any historical references to a holograph
Who was present when it was signed? Unknown, no known holograph nor any historical references to a holograph
Was the declaration sworn? No.
Any explanation regarding the original? Historical record is silent regarding a holograph
Any evidence as to the original? No.
Did any of the 8 talk about the experience on any other occasion? Only 1 known, he said he saw the plates with his spiritual eyes.
What was the relationship of each alleged signator with Joseph Smith? Smith and Whitmer families
Did anyone else see the plates? 3 other people claimed the plates were displayed to them by an angel, one of those said he only saw with spiritual eyes
What is the evidence that others saw the plates? A statement by 3 witnesses that shares the same problems as the Testimony of the 8 Witnesses
What was the motive for having the document prepared as the 8 testimony? Joseph Smith had been prosecuted before for fraudulant glass looking, a statement by 8 men who could testify in court might viciate the fraud element in future prosecutions.
Are such plates within the usual experiences of people? No.
What was the alleged provenance of the plates? An angel and peep stones helped Joseph Smith locate them, at first mystical powers kept him from taking them but later those powers permitted him to take them
Is such provenance within the usual experiences of people? No.
The evidence is not entitled to any weight regarding 8 seeing any plates.
Response nuttin'?
Hey, Mr. Folksy,
You have plenty of time for snark & personal inuendo but so little time for specific substantive exchange.
"And the human knew the source of life, the woman of him, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, 'I have procreated a man with Yahweh.'" Gen. 4:1, interior quote translated by D. Bokovoy.
You have plenty of time for snark & personal inuendo but so little time for specific substantive exchange.
What's to respond to? I agree with you for the most part. The piece of evidence can, in all possibility, raise many questions. In some cases those questions can discredit the data as evidence. In this case, it doesn't matter because even DJ the avowed critic has agreed Joseph Smith had plates and in some small way he gives credence to t he evidence in doing so.
Love ya tons, Stem
I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.
You have plenty of time for snark & personal inuendo but so little time for specific substantive exchange.
What's to respond to? I agree with you for the most part. The piece of evidence can, in all possibility, raise many questions. In some cases those questions can discredit the data as evidence. In this case, it doesn't matter because even DJ the avowed critic has agreed Joseph Smith had plates and in some small way he gives credence to t he evidence in doing so.
Did he agree Joseph had plates or did he agree that it is evidence that Joseph may have had plates? There is a difference.
Themis wrote: Did he agree Joseph had plates or did he agree that it is evidence that Joseph may have had plates? There is a difference.
I agree that there is a piece of text published in all editions of the Book of Mormon called the Testimony of Eight Witnesses, and that it says some things about what eight people, all relatives of Joseph Smith, say they saw, followed by a list of names. I agree that there is no known original of this document bearing actual signatures of the persons named.
I know with every fiber of my being that this is true.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Themis wrote: Did he agree Joseph had plates or did he agree that it is evidence that Joseph may have had plates? There is a difference.
It seems stem doesn't want to answer this question.
Darth will have to speak for himself, but I thought I remembered reading one of the threads he commented on that he agreed that Joseph more than likely utilized some type of "prop" which resembled plates. He has stated many times that he does not believe the plates are real, in the sense that they are a genuine ancient work. However, I think it is probably safe to say that, at least for a while, Joseph did have some type of "prop" which, at the very least, looked like the plates described.
Themis wrote:It seems stem doesn't want to answer this question.
Liz wrote:]Darth will have to speak for himself, but I thought I remembered reading one of the threads he commented on that he agreed that Joseph more than likely utilized some type of "prop" which resembled plates. He has stated many times that he does not believe the plates are real, in the sense that they are a genuine ancient work. However, I think it is probably safe to say that, at least for a while, Joseph did have some type of "prop" which, at the very least, looked like the plates described.
Agreed. That help ya, Themis? It's not that I don't' want to answer. It is true I didn't want to play your game. DJ agrees Joseph Smith had plates, or a prop he made. He also seemed to go back and forth a few times as to whether the testimony of the 8 works as evidence of the claim that Joseph Smith had plates. He wasn't very clear. It does seem he also thinks the testimony is evidence that the whole thing was a hoax, somehow. So, you never know with that guy. He is adorable though. I'll give him that.
Love ya tons, Stem
I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.