Vogel response to witnesses apologetics

[_LDS truthseeker]

Thanks, Joe! I also posted an announcement on MADD.

The 2nd account came from what was probably John Whitmer’s final interview before his death. It’s funny how all these witnesses who leave the church keep reaffirming their testimonies on their deathbed. What does that tell you? Anyway, this Q&A was published a few weeks after John’s death.

Q - I am aware that your name is affixed to the testimony in the Book of Mormon that you saw the plates?
A - It is so, and that testimony is true.
Q - Did you handle the plates with your hands?
A - I did so!
Q - Then they were a material substance?
A - Yes, as material as anything can be.
Q - Were they heavy to lift?
A - Yes, and as you know gold is a heavy metal: they were very heavy.
Q - How big were the leaves?
A - So far as I recollect, 8 by 6 or seven inches.
Q - Were the leaves thick?
A - Yes, just so thick, that characters could be engraven on both sides.
Q - How were the leaves joined together?
A - In three rings, each one in the shape of a D with the straight line towards the center.
Q - In what place did you see the plates?
A - In Joseph Smith’s house; he had them there.
Q - Did you see them covered with a cloth?
A - No. He handed them uncovered into our hands, and we turned the leaves sufficient to satisfy us.

http://www.moroni10.com/witnesses/John_Whitmer.html

I don't know Dan, this seems pretty convincing. John saw the plates and handled them.

Whitmer also said:

John Murphy interviewed David Whitmer in June, 1880.

When asked in 1880 for a description of the angel who showed him the plates, Whitmer replied that the angel "had no appearance or shape." Asked by the interviewer how he then could bear testimony that he had seen and heard an angel, Whitmer replied, "Have you never had impressions?" To which the interviewer responded, "Then you had impressions as the Quaker when the spirit moves, or as a good Methodist in giving a happy experience, a feeling?" "Just so," replied Whitmer. Whitmer interview with John Murphy, June 1880, in EMD5: 63.


Whitmer was a rube, just like the other yokels of the time.

[_Fence Sitter]

Some of the apologetic response on MAD seems to be unless you experience spiritual gifts you cannot write about them. I would suggest the the spiritual experiences described by modern Mormons are very different from that described by people in the 19th century.

If we still experienced these gifts the same way as the early Church members did Sunday School would be a lot different than today. Instead of half the members falling asleep while the other half recites the same rote responses to the same lessons they have heard a hundred times, we would have members jumping up talking in tongues while others interpreted, people would be sharing their experience with personal seer stones and diving rods, members would be comparing notes about dreams and talking about visitations from dead relatives and Sacrament meeting would not also be known as nap time. The criticism about needing to experience these gifts to be able to write about them cuts just as deeply to the modern Church as it does the critic.

Wesley's fear for Methodism has also come true for the LDS

I am not afraid that the people called the Methodist should ever cease to exist either in Europe or America but I am afraid, lest they should only exist as a dead sect, having the form of religion without the power.

[_Dan Vogel]

Why Me,

You should read the essay first.

I respond to this reported statement in detail in my essay. Briefly, it comes from a discredited source, P. Wilhelm Poulson, who questioned both David and John Whitmer. David complained about the accuracy of Poulson’s interview with him. He made David claim that after he and Cowdery had their vision they joined Harris and Joseph Smith and had another. Of course, this strengthened their testimony.

Poulson’s interview with John is wildly inaccurate, especially for its claim that the plates were show in the Smith home to four witnesses at a time.

The clue is in Poulson’s question about the cloth. Where did he get that question? No one was discussing it and he had no access to that information, except through Whitmer. I believe he reversed what Whitmer had actually told him.

[_ldsfaqs]

Just another anti-mormon strawman that they create and then try to destroy.
Dan misrepresents the facts and ignores many facts to make his judgments.

[_Equality]

Just another anti-mormon strawman that they create and then try to destroy.
Dan misrepresents the facts and ignores many facts to make his judgments.

Have you read the essay? Can you point to a particular fact or set of facts Dan "misrepresents" or is this yet another post where you make an outrageous accusation without any specific facts or evidence to back it up?

Seriously, where are the Mormon believers with integrity to call you out on your nonsense? If I were still a believer, I guarantee I would step up and say something to condemn your foolishness. You are an embarrassment to the apologetic cause. Has the church really driven out ALL the intelligent, reasonable people? I'm pretty sure there were still a few remaining when I left the church 6 years ago. But if this board's population of apologists and believers is any indication, the brain drain the church has been experiencing is nearly complete.

[_ldsfaqs]

Just another anti-mormon strawman that they create and then try to destroy.
Dan misrepresents the facts and ignores many facts to make his judgments.

Have you read the essay? Can you point to a particular fact or set of facts Dan "misrepresents" or is this yet another post where you make an outrageous accusation without any specific facts or evidence to back it up?

Seriously, where are the Mormon believers with integrity to call you out on your nonsense? If I were still a believer, I guarantee I would step up and say something to condemn your foolishness. You are an embarrassment to the apologetic cause. Has the church really driven out ALL the intelligent, reasonable people? I'm pretty sure there were still a few remaining when I left the church 6 years ago. But if this board's population of apologists and believers is any indication, the brain drain the church has been experiencing is nearly complete.

Just because I don't feel like taking the time HOURS to step by step prove my opinion doesn't mean my opinion isn't based on what I know and don't know.

And please, you don't believe Mormons are intelligent, because the moment Mormons start responding to Dan's article with the full truth and intellectual analysis is the moment you're going to say the same exact thing to them that you have just said to me.

So spare me your elitism.... This is a message board. I'm allowed to give my impression after skimming it, without having to also spend a few hours writing a proper analysis of it.

I've been doing this for years..... I know anti-mormonism better than the back of my hand. I know and easily see every factual lie and misrepresentation.

[_Equality]

Just because I don't feel like taking the time HOURS to step by step prove my opinion doesn't mean my opinion isn't based on what I know and don't know.

And please, you don't believe Mormons are intelligent, because the moment Mormons start responding to Dan's article with the full truth and intellectual analysis is the moment you're going to say the same exact thing to them that you have just said to me.

So spare me your elitism.... This is a message board. I'm allowed to give my impression after skimming it, without having to also spend a few hours writing a proper analysis of it.

I've been doing this for years..... I know anti-mormonism better than the back of my hand. I know and easily see every factual lie and misrepresentation.

In other words, you spouted off about misrepresentations without even having a single specific example in mind. Seems like you could show at least ONE misrepresentation in Dan's very well-sourced and carefully written response. Maybe you should just stay out of the deep end of the pool until you can swim without the floaties.

[_Themis]

Just another anti-mormon strawman that they create and then try to destroy.
Dan misrepresents the facts and ignores many facts to make his judgments.

LOL and ldsfaqs as usual presents no facts but assertions. To funny, even if predictable.

[_Themis]

The 2nd account came from what was probably John Whitmer’s final interview before his death. It’s funny how all these witnesses who leave the church keep reaffirming their testimonies on their deathbed. What does that tell you? Anyway, this Q&A was published a few weeks after John’s death.

Q - I am aware that your name is affixed to the testimony in the Book of Mormon that you saw the plates?
A - It is so, and that testimony is true.
Q - Did you handle the plates with your hands?
A - I did so!
Q - Then they were a material substance?
A - Yes, as material as anything can be.
Q - Were they heavy to lift?
A - Yes, and as you know gold is a heavy metal: they were very heavy.
Q - How big were the leaves?
A - So far as I recollect, 8 by 6 or seven inches.
Q - Were the leaves thick?
A - Yes, just so thick, that characters could be engraven on both sides.
Q - How were the leaves joined together?
A - In three rings, each one in the shape of a D with the straight line towards the center.
Q - In what place did you see the plates?
A - In Joseph Smith’s house; he had them there.
Q - Did you see them covered with a cloth?
A - No. He handed them uncovered into our hands, and we turned the leaves sufficient to satisfy us.

http://www.moroni10.com/witnesses/John_Whitmer.html

I don't know Dan, this seems pretty convincing. John saw the plates and handled them.

Whitmer also said:

John Murphy interviewed David Whitmer in June, 1880.

When asked in 1880 for a description of the angel who showed him the plates, Whitmer replied that the angel "had no appearance or shape." Asked by the interviewer how he then could bear testimony that he had seen and heard an angel, Whitmer replied, "Have you never had impressions?" To which the interviewer responded, "Then you had impressions as the Quaker when the spirit moves, or as a good Methodist in giving a happy experience, a feeling?" "Just so," replied Whitmer. Whitmer interview with John Murphy, June 1880, in EMD5: 63.


Whitmer was a rube, just like the other yokels of the time.

Opps. I wonder if whyme will now exit another thread after being pawned yet again.

[_Themis]

You can see God any time you want to Buffalo, if you humble yourself and truly seek him. Then you can know as surely as these gentlemen did that the Book of Mormon is true.

How would you know since you never sought God. Why is it that all the other religious kooks who claim seeing different Gods, aliens can't agree. Most of us have sought God, and even had spiritual expereinces. by the way hallucinations are common, even group ones happen. :)