Decent Post on Proof and Evidence at Sic et Non

[_lulu]

Did the 8 ever make any statements outside of the "Testimony of the 8 Witnesses" regarding seeing the plates?

Yes. You could consult Anderson's book on the witnesses, which is available for a reasonable price through Amazon.

Thanks.

I either need to drop off of MD or

1. get more book shelves
2. accomodate myself to a digital reader
3. give up on productive work
4. learn speed reading
5. all of the numbered above

[_Chap]

There is discussion of witness-related issues, and quite a few extensive quotations and links to online material here:

http://www.mormonthink.com/witnessesweb.htm#sumof11

[_lulu]

There is discussion of witness-related issues, and quite a few extensive quotations and links to online material here:

http://www.mormonthink.com/witnessesweb.htm#sumof11

Thanks and very interesting

"John Whitmer claimed,
'I now say, I handled those plates; there were fine engravings on both sides. ...they were shown to me by a supernatural power' (History of the Church, Vol. 3, p. 307)"

Interesting:
1. Supernatural power
2. engravings on both sides (those would have to be some thick leaves, what would thumbing the edges feel like?)

[_marg]

Marg, the next time a crazy street preacher harasses you and follows you around yelling in your face about the end of the world, I think it would be perfectly reasonable for the police officer to whom you complain to say, "Stop complaining about him. The issue is the end of the world, not this guy."

Darth, Stem isn't going around harassing.. in this case Kish, and my point to Kish wasn't that Kish was complaining ..it was that he was making too many personal attacks of Stem in his arguing relative to the issue. So I don't see how your analogy is supposed to work.

I haven't gotten into the arguments of this thread...I've only read some posts. I've read a few of your posts and I really like the reasoning in them (well except for this one because I'm not following your point if you have one) ..I didn't notice you making personal attacks but when I read Kish's the other day as I said I saw too many...at least in my opinion.

[_Chap]

Marg, the next time a crazy street preacher harasses you and follows you around yelling in your face about the end of the world, I think it would be perfectly reasonable for the police officer to whom you complain to say, "Stop complaining about him. The issue is the end of the world, not this guy."

Darth, Stem isn't going around harassing.. in this case Kish, and my point to Kish wasn't that Kish was complaining ..it was that he was making too many personal attacks of Stem in his arguing relative to the issue. So I don't see how your analogy is supposed to work.

I haven't gotten into the arguments of this thread...I've only read some posts. I've read a few of your posts and I really like the reasoning in them (well except for this one because I'm not following your point if you have one) ..I didn't notice you making personal attacks but when I read Kish's the other day as I said I saw too many...at least in my opinion.

I think the point Darth J is addressing is that several of us on this board are coming to a consensus that stemelbow is not really the naïve and folksy guy he seems to be, but is in fact someone quite clever, who is deliberately creating a large number of repetitive and distracting posts with the aim of increasing the noise to signal ratio when topics uncongenial to LDS are being discussed. That is a decision I have come to slowly and with some reluctance, after reading many of his posts. He is probably a troll on a mission.

In the same way that the nuisance-value of the crazy shouting street preacher is the issue, rather than his message, I believe it is now reasonable to address the nuisance-value of stemelbow, since dialog with him is notably fruitless - something which I believe is intentional on his part. Naturally, his defense is (if I may use words of which he is tediously fond) to 'whine' and 'pout' that he is being personally attacked.

[_stemelbow]

So to the question,

Did Joseph Smith have metallic plates that appeared ancient with writings on them? No one here can say definitively that the testimony of the 8 is evidence that supports a positive response to that question?

If you all maintain that there is no evidence for any LDS claims, then so be it. I'll take that as the very unreasonable type of thinking you all seem to object to, quite often.

[_Chap]

So to the question,

Did Joseph Smith have metallic plates that appeared ancient with writings on them? No one here can say definitively that the testimony of the 8 is evidence that supports a positive response to that question?

If you all maintain that there is no evidence for any LDS claims, then so be it. I'll take that as the very unreasonable type of thinking you all seem to object to, quite often.

Asked and answered:

... In the last analysis, I'd say that Smith prepared some kind of props as part of an effort to persuade his relations to sign a statement that he had ready for them, saying what he wanted them to say they had seen. Exactly how he did that, and just what the props would have looked like under a close examination by someone free to handle them as they wished, I can't be sure.

Even then, there is said to be evidence that some of them took quite a bit of persuading (though that is something I have only seen stated on this board).

Seems pretty reasonable to me.

Since I am now fairly convinced that (suddenly grammatical and unfolksy) stemelbow is probably a troll, I do not undertake to discuss this matter further.

[_Kishkumen]

So to the question,

Did Joseph Smith have metallic plates that appeared ancient with writings on them? No one here can say definitively that the testimony of the 8 is evidence that supports a positive response to that question?

If you all maintain that there is no evidence for any LDS claims, then so be it. I'll take that as the very unreasonable type of thinking you all seem to object to, quite often.

No one is contesting the claim that he had metallic plates with scratchings on them that had the appearance of an ancient record to the eyes of semi-literate rubes on the American frontier. Why bother to contest that?

[_stemelbow]

No one is contesting the claim that he had metallic plates with scratchings on them that had the appearance of an ancient record to the eyes of semi-literate rubes on the American frontier. Why bother to contest that?

The poitn has nothing to do with whether anyone is contesting it. It was a claim by Joseph Smith. He felt, and apparently felt God was behind him on this, that there needed to be evidence that he truly did have such plates. Why did he feel the need? I suppose because people didn't believe he had them and he feared people in the future would not believe he had them. He worked to supply evidence.

That no one does contest the claim, indicates the evidence works in this case.

[_stemelbow]

Asked and answered:


Seems pretty reasonable to me.

Since I am now fairly convinced that (suddenly grammatical and unfolksy) stemelbow is probably a troll, I do not undertake to discuss this matter further.

Thanks Chap. I think your effort to demonize, attack, and promote some silly conspiracy theory was very helpful. So was your non-answer. No yes or no from you--just a "well I would like to say yes, but if I do then it'll make me look foolish or something so I will just throw out some weird explanation that amounts to a 'beats me'". Nice. In the end it's really easy. Is there evidence of this claim by Joseph Smith? Kish and DJ say no one disputes the claim. They don't seem to realize no one disputes it because there is plenty of evidence for it, it seems.