WITNESSES CRASHES AND BURNS!

[Sledge]

Gemli's point resonates well. As far as I can see the movie is pushing two main points regarding the validity of the Book of Mormon.

1. The witnesses maintained their support for the Book of Mormon throughout their lives.
2. Someone (the reporter) said David Whitmer seems like a pretty honest person, at least late in his life.

Neither point addresses the credibility of the witnesses. The main problem with the witnesses and why they aren't useful (granted believers have no choice but to see them as useful) is they are products of their 19th century superstitious environment. Anyone watching the movie, particularly i they have a skeptical mind at all, will see the glowing faces, as the supposed angel appeared to them and be like, those poor dupes. Of course the additional problem is the experience they each had in the woods comes off, as they tell, far more as an inner experience.

Stem, have you read Anderson’s book?

[Gadianton]

Neither point addresses the credibility of the witnesses

.

We disagree. (as DCP is fond of saying).

See my PM.

[Sledge]

Oh. Donnie Yen is joining the cast of John Wick 4! Loved the Ip Man films.

[honorentheos]

You don't really need to actually see the movie, as long as you have seen it with your spiritual eyes you can give it a review.

Excellent.

[hauslern]

DanP rallies the troops to get them to write rave reviews of the movie to counter the negative ones
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... -help.html

[honorentheos]

We are holding steady at an 85% audience score!

So of the people who a) went to see a movie in a theater after a year without in-theatre viewing and b) chose to make that movie a low-budget docudrama with a PG rating about a niche Mormon topic, 17 of every 20 who were then willing to post a review - often for the very first time in their lives - gave it a stellar 5 out of 5 rating?

You don't say.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Particle M, who has exactly zero previous movie reviews has not only taken up the apologetic banner and posted a 5-star review, but also left this FAIR-sian bit of headscratching testimony:

Being faithful to history is being faithful to faith. This film delivers a more comprehensive cross-section of events than previous adaptations. The perspectives and portrayals, although dramatized, are raw and authentic. They breathe life into a tapestry of texts, and does so very well. A superb production in every regard, and quite consistently, from casting and acting, costumes and scenery, and soundtrack and audio. Only minor critiques would I offer. Woven together are threads of a complex history. The combined witness of the three witnesses bolster the primary witness, Joseph Smith, who would have otherwise remained a lone witness of the Book of Mormon and more. God follows his own laws: "In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established." In the case of the Book of Mormon, the number of witnesses is multiplied beyond the requisite minimum, providing ample corroboration. The film underscores the fact that, despite their divergent lives, the witnesses never denied what they saw and heard. Controversies are neither omitted nor sanitized. Only the threads most relevant to the experiences of the witnesses are developed, so the film may seem a bit patchy at times, which only corresponds to the innate patchy nature of history. Those familiar with more of the story can further appreciate the people and the many challenges they faced as they grew into their living faith, as opposition is never far from sublime truth. You too may have a spiritual experience. 4.5 stars for production value and cinematics. 5 stars for inviting the Spirit to witness of truth--more than once! Also see the supporting website: witnessesofthebookofmormon.org

- Doc

[Tom]

Besides movie cricket (Sean Means), have any movie critics reviewed this film?

Box Office Mojo doesn’t have any data on the film.

[Sledge]

Everyone is a critic!

[Kishkumen]

DanP rallies the troops to get them to write rave reviews of the movie to counter the negative ones
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... -help.html

Since others have rallied their troops to give the film unfairly low ratings, I don’t blame him.