DiscussMormonism.com

“DCP to Gemli” wrote: You haven't even been willing to engage the claim from multiple eyewitnesses of a 40-45 pound set of entirely tangible metallic plates being observed and handled under entirely mundane circumstances

This topic came up in another discussion and I think it’s worthy of its own thread. Dan thinks it’s one of those “you have to climb under over and around” facts.

Is there any secular consensus on the plates’ physical existence?

I think this is why Dan fights so hard against the word “magic.” Joseph was taking people out to find buried treasure and the guardian always slipped into the earth with the treasure just before they were able to reach it.

If Joseph was able to fool people into believing that kind of magic was real, he could have also been able to fool people into believing they saw plates when there were none.

I see no problem in accepting that something resembling Joseph's claimed metal plates existed.

But as has been pointed out on other threads (mostly, I think, by Res & Kish), that's about as far as the expertise of the witnesses can take the apologists, and, really, it seems like a pretty trivial point.

I believe a tile brick existed.

malkie wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 14, 2022 6:21 pm

drumdude wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 14, 2022 5:56 pm

This topic came up in another discussion and I think it’s worthy of its own thread. Dan thinks it’s one of those “you have to climb under over and around” facts.

Is there any secular consensus on the plates’ physical existence?

I think this is why Dan fights so hard against the word “magic.” Joseph was taking people out to find buried treasure and the guardian always slipped into the earth with the treasure just before they were able to reach it.

If Joseph was able to fool people into believing that kind of magic was real, he could have also been able to fool people into believing they saw plates when there were none.

I see no problem in accepting that something resembling Joseph's claimed metal plates existed.

But as has been pointed out on other threads (mostly, I think, by Res & Kish), that's about as far as the expertise of the witnesses can take the apologists, and, really, it seems like a pretty trivial point.

I think it would be much easier to fool the witnesses with a prop of some kind than without. But I wouldn't say the latter is impossible. I attended a show by Penn & Teller during which they led me to see all kinds of things that I didn't actually see. Both human perception and memory are highly malleable, which is why eyewitness testimony is considered unreliable. I agree with you, Malkie, that I think of it as a trivial point.

drumdude wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 14, 2022 5:56 pm

“DCP to Gemli” wrote: You haven't even been willing to engage the claim from multiple eyewitnesses of a 40-45 pound set of entirely tangible metallic plates being observed and handled under entirely mundane circumstances

These types of “entirely mundane circumstances”?

…we knelt down again, and had not been many minutes engaged in prayer, when presently we beheld a light above us in the air, of exceeding brightness; and behold, an angel stood before us. In his hands he held the plates which we had been praying for these to have a view of. He turned over the leaves one by one, so that we could see them, and discern the engravings thereon distinctly…

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/man ... s?lang=eng

Did Kyler Rasmussen actually say, “… donkey-kick that narrative full on in the nads.”? I wonder what were the odds, statistically speaking, that he’d eventually post on the Internet “donkey-kick that narrative full on in the nads”, and why does that prove the Book of Mormon true?

- Doc

We already know he created the B of M verbally by dictating a work of fiction by looking at a rock in a hat (the same rock he was scamming people with claiming he could see buried treasure in the bowels of the earth) with no gold plates present. Whatever plates may have existed were nothing but a prop to fool people.

Gadianton wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 14, 2022 6:34 pm

I believe a tile brick existed.

This. I think there was likely some facsimile that people were allowed to heft, but real golden plates that had ancient writing on them? No--that's not believable at all. DCP's arguments are about as stupid as they come; he's basically resorting to dumb semantic games: Gemli will say: "There's no evidence for the plates!" To which DCP replies, "There is, but you won't look at it!" Meaning that the "evidence" is just the witnesses' testimonies, which have roughly the same validity as witnesses of UFO abductions or Bigfoot.

Doctor Scratch wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 14, 2022 9:37 pm

Gadianton wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 14, 2022 6:34 pm

I believe a tile brick existed.

This. I think there was likely some facsimile that people were allowed to heft, but real golden plates that had ancient writing on them? No--that's not believable at all. DCP's arguments are about as stupid as they come; he's basically resorting to dumb semantic games: Gemli will say: "There's no evidence for the plates!" To which DCP replies, "There is, but you won't look at it!" Meaning that the "evidence" is just the witnesses' testimonies, which have roughly the same validity as witnesses of UFO abductions or Bigfoot.

Ah but they were upstanding members of their community and never recanted their story in the face of every reason to do so!

One of the things I usually think about nowadays when it comes to the witnesses, and the things they saw, is the case of Helen Duncan.

Here's a link to photographs, taken with flash photography and with Helen Duncan's permission and knowledge, of the ectoplasm, and phantoms from one of her sessions. Remember while looking at these photos, the believers/followers of Duncan "knew" these were true spiritual manifestations, and even testified under oath on her behalf.

When someone believes something, it doesn't necessarily take anything elaborate to reaffirm that belief.