DCP equates the Witnesses of the plates to witnesses of the Lincoln assassination

[drumdude]

I was trying to think of similar events/supernatural experiences in history where a few people testified to something that Daniel would clearly not believe in. Is this testimony of the witnesses something that happened a lot throughout history or is it unique to Mormonism?

[dastardly stem]

Witnessing is an action that requires an object and an audience.

To what and to whom is one witnessing?

If I am witnessing to other "Christians" that I believe I saw an angel, that is one thing. I think it is fair in the context to represent my beliefs in what I experienced to likeminded people. And, I think that for its time the Book of Mormon witnesses make a fair amount of sense.

Now, fast forward to a world of secular scholarship where a plurality of beliefs and unbelief rule the day. What exactly do the witnesses of the Book of Mormon say in this age? And to whom?

Do the Book of Mormon witnesses authenticate Joseph Smith's translation?

No.

The ancient date of the plates?

No.

The historicity of the peoples who are credited with writing what Joseph Smith claimed they wrote?

No.

The witnesses should only be given credit for those things to which they are testifying and are able to testify of. Their testimony ought to be weighed within its own tradition, not against practices and views with which it has little or nothing in common.

The Lincoln assassination is an absurd comparison. That is, unless someone is claiming there were people who believed Lincoln was cut down by an angelic sword, which an angel showed to these people before leaving with said sword and returning to heaven.

THAT would be a fair comparison, but I am completely unaware of such a claim.

Excellent post, Kish.

I agree. I wonder what this emphasis on the witnesses gains Mormonism in the long run. Won't such emphasis cause more people to ask these questions exposing the witnesses as useless in terms of the claims? It feels like a pretty big strategic mistake to me.

[Xenophon]

I was trying to think of similar events/supernatural experiences in history where a few people testified to something that Daniel would clearly not believe in. Is this testimony of the witnesses something that happened a lot throughout history or is it unique to Mormonism?

It's been brought up probably 1,000 times but I think the Cottingley Fairies are one of my favorite ones to highlight even if the comparison isn't 100% perfect. Here we had photographic proof of the spiritual, direct witnesses that (at least until 80's) never recanted their story, countless "experts" that attested to the unfalsifiable nature of the pictures.

[huckelberry]

A witness testimony might be interpreted differently by different people. Here is a curious event in Bahia history:https://bahaipedia.org/Martyrdom_of_the_B%C3%A1b

Sam Khan approached the Bab: 'I profess the Christian Faith and entertain no ill will against you. If your Cause be the Cause of truth, enable me to free myself from the obligation to shed your blood.' To this the Báb replied: 'Follow your instructions, and if your intention be sincere, the Almighty is surely able to relieve you from your perplexity.'

The Báb and His disciple were suspended by ropes from a nail in the wall, the head of Mirza Muhammad-'Ali resting on the breast of the Báb. Seven hundred and fifty soldiers were positioned in three files. Roofs of the buildings around teemed with spectators.

Each row of soldiers fired in turn. The smoke from so many rifles clouded the scene. When it lifted the Báb was not there. Only His disciple could be seen, standing under the nail in the wall, smiling and unconcerned. Bullets had only severed the ropes with which they were suspended. Cries rang out from the onlookers: 'The Siyyid-i-Báb has gone from our sight!'

A frantic search followed. The Báb was found, sitting in the same room where He had been lodged the night before, in conversation with His amanuensis. That conversation had been interrupted earlier in the day. Now it was finished and He told the farrash-bashi to carry out his duty. But the farrash-bashi was terror-stricken and ran away, nor did he ever return to his post. Sam Khan, for his part, told his 158 superiors that he had carried out the task given to him; he would not attempt it a second time. So Aqa Jan Khan-i-Khamsih and his Nasiri regiment replaced the Armenians, and the Báb and His disciple were suspended once again at the same spot. The Nasiri regiment fired. The bodies of the Báb and His disciple were shattered, and their flesh was united. ”

[drumdude]

A witness testimony might be interpreted differently by different people. Here is a curious event in Bahia history:https://bahaipedia.org/Martyrdom_of_the_B%C3%A1b

Sam Khan approached the Bab: 'I profess the Christian Faith and entertain no ill will against you. If your Cause be the Cause of truth, enable me to free myself from the obligation to shed your blood.' To this the Báb replied: 'Follow your instructions, and if your intention be sincere, the Almighty is surely able to relieve you from your perplexity.'

The Báb and His disciple were suspended by ropes from a nail in the wall, the head of Mirza Muhammad-'Ali resting on the breast of the Báb. Seven hundred and fifty soldiers were positioned in three files. Roofs of the buildings around teemed with spectators.

Each row of soldiers fired in turn. The smoke from so many rifles clouded the scene. When it lifted the Báb was not there. Only His disciple could be seen, standing under the nail in the wall, smiling and unconcerned. Bullets had only severed the ropes with which they were suspended. Cries rang out from the onlookers: 'The Siyyid-i-Báb has gone from our sight!'

A frantic search followed. The Báb was found, sitting in the same room where He had been lodged the night before, in conversation with His amanuensis. That conversation had been interrupted earlier in the day. Now it was finished and He told the farrash-bashi to carry out his duty. But the farrash-bashi was terror-stricken and ran away, nor did he ever return to his post. Sam Khan, for his part, told his 158 superiors that he had carried out the task given to him; he would not attempt it a second time. So Aqa Jan Khan-i-Khamsih and his Nasiri regiment replaced the Armenians, and the Báb and His disciple were suspended once again at the same spot. The Nasiri regiment fired. The bodies of the Báb and His disciple were shattered, and their flesh was united. ”

What an incredible story. How has Daniel not produced a film about this miraculous event yet?

[Moksha]

Did the witnesses get a good look at the plates?
How would seeing them with their spiritual eyes differ from normal seeing?
Did they see Reformed Egyptian writing on the gold plates?
Did Jesus disguised as a deer appear to Martin Harris on the same day?

[Rivendale]

Peterson's double standard in relation to witnesses is glaring. 8 witnesses closely related to Joseph, witnessed what Joseph wanted them to witness. And that's rock solid proof of what they witnessed. A plethora of witnesses to the fact that the Church has an institutionalised child sex abuse problem, well, Peterson isn't convinced there's any real problem whatsoever. The man is intellectually dishonest.

I have thought along the same lines. The bias is crystal clear. And he will go all out to learn anything about the Book of Mormon witnesses, but is perfectly comfortable remaining in ignorance concerning the child sexual abuse ones. I don't see a man here wanting to get to the bottom of things to acquire the truth of them. I see a Mormon apologist paid (in whatever way) at the work of deception.

It is much more than that. Apologists routinely take the word of a witness when it favors their position but then discard it when it is critical. Oliver Cowdery is a prime example. Accepting his witness of the divine nature of the Book of Mormon but hand waving this confession away.

Even before the middle of January, Joseph had said “publickly” in Kirtland that Oliver “had confessed to [Joseph] that [he, Oliver] had willfully lied” about Joseph,

[drumdude]

Did the witnesses get a good look at the plates?
How would seeing them with their spiritual eyes differ from normal seeing?
Did they see Reformed Egyptian writing on the gold plates?
Did Jesus disguised as a deer appear to Martin Harris on the same day?

Wow, I had no idea about the deer story.

“He told a gentleman in Palmyra, after one of his excursions to Pennsylvania, while the translation of the Book of Mormon was going on, that on the way he met the Lord Jesus Christ, who walked along by the side of him in the shape of a deer for two or three miles, talking with him as familiarly as one man talks with another.” –John A. Clark letter, August 31, 1840 in EMD, 2:271

Pretty cool, right? Well, there’s more! Martin was a very superstitious guy, and was a lot more interesting than church lesson manuals had us believe.

His experience with Deer Jesus is just one of many fascinating Martin Harris anecdotes. For more accounts and details, check out Mormon Think’s site, and this excellent blog post from Zelph on the Shelf.

He once mistook a sputtering candle as a sign of the devil while reading scriptures.

He freaked out in the night, thinking that a large creature was on his chest.

He prophesied that all other religions would crumble or convert to Mormonism within four years. He consented to have his hand cut off if proven wrong.

He changed religions — a lot! 13 times in total, both before and after Mormonism.

He saw the devil as a sleek-haired fellow with four feet and the head of a Jack-ass.

I haven't seen Witnesses, did any of these stories make it into the film?

[Dr Moore]

Doesn’t everything Peterson writes make sense when you realize it’s all a devotional?

[PseudoPaul]

The body of Lincoln was available for examination by disinterested parties. Can the same be said for the plates?

Also, Joseph Smith got people to sign an affidavit falsely claiming that Joseph Smith was not involved in polygamy. That's a huge red flag, on top of the red flags of the plates witnesses signing something they didn't write, having an interest in the outcome of the Book of Mormon, being closely related to the parties involved, and so forth.