- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I have been re-reading the Book of Mormon lately. The testimony of the three and eight witnesses is something that has piqued my interested. It’s really really hard to get people to lie for you. So, to get these 11 people to give their testimony they saw the plates at the hand of an angel (the three witnesses) and that they actually held the plates upon being shown by Joseph Smith (the eight witnesses) lends credence to the authenticity of the plates from which JS purportedly translated the Book of Mormon.
Testimony of the Three WitnessesQuote:Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come: That we, through the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, have seen the plates which contain this record, which is a record of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites, their brethren, and also of the people of Jared, who came from the tower of which hath been spoken. And we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true. And we also testify that we have seen the engravings which are upon the plates; and they have been shown unto us by the power of God, and not of man. And we declare with words of soberness, that an angel of God came down from heaven, and he brought and laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates, and the engravings thereon; and we know that it is by the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, that we beheld and bear record that these things are true. And it is marvelous in our eyes. Nevertheless, the voice of the Lord commanded us that we should bear record of it; wherefore, to be obedient unto the commandments of God, we bear testimony of these things. And we know that if we are faithful in Christ, we shall rid our garments of the blood of all men, and be found spotless before the judgment-seat of Christ, and shall dwell with him eternally in the heavens. And the honor be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God. Amen.
Oliver Cowdery
David Whitmer
Martin Harris
Testimony of the Eight Witnesses:Quote:
Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come: That Joseph Smith, Jr., the translator[1] of this work, has shewn unto us the plates of which hath been spoken, which have the appearance of gold; and as many of the leaves as the said Smith has translated we did handle with our hands; and we also saw the engravings thereon, all of which has the appearance of ancient work, and of curious workmanship. And this we bear record with words of soberness, that the said Smith has shewn unto us, for we have seen and hefted, and know of a surety that the said Smith has got the plates of which we have spoken. And we give our names unto the world, to witness unto the world that which we have seen. And we lie not, God bearing witness of it.Christian Whitmer
Jacob Whitmer
Peter Whitmer, Jr.
John Whitmer
Hiram Page
Joseph Smith, Sen.
Hyrum Smith
Samuel H. Smith
What do you think? Were the witnesses lying? If so, what would motivate them to make such declarations to the world if they were lying? Did they actually see the plates?No I do not believe that they were lying. I think that they were 100% convinced of their experience. I suppose the biggest factor in my current interpretation is that some of them reportedly expressed the experience as visionary in nature. This has been said using words like, eye of faith, spiritual eyes, impression, etc.
I believe that others watching this experience from a distance would not have seen an angel or golden plates. Indeed, I look at the vision from DC 76 as an example of how this might work.
Quote:“The vision was given at John Johnson’s home in Hiram, Ohio, where Joseph and Emma Smith were living at the time.
About twelve other men were in the room and witnessed Joseph and Sidney receiving this vision, but they did not see the vision themselves. Philo Dibble, one of the men present, recorded what he observed: “Joseph would, at intervals, say: ‘What do I see?’ as one might say while looking out the window and beholding what all in the room could not see. Then he would relate what he had seen or what he was looking at. Then Sidney replied, ‘I see the same.’
“Presently Sidney would say, ‘What do I see?’ and would repeat what he had seen or was seeing, and Joseph would reply, ‘I see the same.’
“This manner of conversation was repeated at short intervals to the end of the vision; and during the whole time not a word was spoken by any other person. … Not a sound nor motion [was] made by anyone but Joseph and Sidney, and it seemed to me that they never moved a joint or limb during the time I was there, which I think was over an hour, and to the end of the vision.
“Joseph sat firmly and calmly all the time, in the midst of a magnificent glory, but Sidney sat limp and pale, apparently as limp as a rag. Observing such at the close of the vision, Joseph remarked smilingly, ‘Sidney is not used to it as I am’” (quoted in Carter E. Grant, The Kingdom of God Restored, pp. 156–57).
I also have the understanding that the Golden Plates where not physically present for portions of the translation process. This leads me to conclude that the plates themselves (whether visionary or physical) were not needed in order to transmit the information from the Nephite peoples. Similar to the Papyri for the Book of Abraham, the Golden Plates (visionary or physical) could have been a catalyst for revelation.
My understanding is not the only way to look at it. There are statements that contradict my interpretation. Martin Harris, particularly, made multiple statements about seeing the angel and the plates “as sure as you see my hand” or ” just as plain as you see that chopping block.” I have my own reasons for discounting these statements from MH but they are out there and do tend to support a more literal interpretation.
I knew someone would have an alternate interpretation — how did you learn about Joseph and Sydney Rigdon being the only ones who saw the vision when there were others in the room? How were you exposed to that source? I’m amazed at the depth of knowledge some people have here. Also, do we have the original manuscripts of the Bible? No one ever questions that.
Quote:
I have my own reasons for discounting these statements from MH but they are out there and do tend to support a more literal interpretation.Care to share these reasons?
SilentDawning wrote:It’s really really hard to get people to lie for you. So, to get these 11 people to give their testimony they saw the plates at the hand of an angel (the three witnesses) and that they actually held the plates upon being shown by Joseph Smith (the eight witnesses) lends credence to the authenticity of the plates from which JS purportedly translated the Book of Mormon.
One issue I have with the witness accounts is that they were all people close to Joseph Smith. Random people may not lie for you, but people with close relationships or common interests often do (family members, business associates, political allies, etc).
Even assuming they were not lying, is their testimony reliable? There are many “witnesses” of Bigfoot and UFOs. Not to mention many visions confirming the beliefs of many different religious traditions. People tend to see and interpret things in a way that fits with their expectations and beliefs. I personally don’t think the testimonies of the three and eight witnesses carry that much weight without more concrete evidence to support them.
Arrakeen wrote:
One issue I have with the witness accounts is that they were all people close to Joseph Smith. Random people may not lie for you, but people with close relationships or common interests often do (family members, business associates, political allies, etc).
I agree with this point of view. I think Joseph, while likely a genius, was also a master manipulator and extremely charismatic (accounting for much of his success). Eleven people aren’t that many, especially if they’re close and/or are manipulated (including threats relating to their salvation – the church does it all the time). There are many more people who keep secrets relating to our national security, military, etc.
I also agree with Roy that their own descriptions seem to indicate the experiences were more spiritual than physical. That does not make them less “real.” The first vision was a vision, Joseph never referred to it as anything but a vision. God did not have to be physically present for it to be real.
I hate to rehash anti-Mormon arguments but a few points to consider… Three witnesses:
Oliver Cowdery— third cousin of Joseph Smith’s mother. Cousin math is always difficult for me, I’ll try to untangle it. Start with the first cousin of one of your grandparents. Now go to a grandson of that cousin. That grandson would represent Oliver Cowdery and your son would represent Joseph Smith (I think I got that right), so a distant relation. This may not be that big of a deal. I would suspect you don’t have to go back very far to find relations in rural America 200 years ago. Cowdery would later marry into the Whitmer family. David Whitmer became his brother-in-law.
David Whitmer— friend of Cowdery. Cowdery introduced him to Smith’s narrative about the golden plates. Cowdery convinced Whitmer to allow Smith to live on the farm while Smith translated. Martin Harris— the financier. From a purely secular view, being the financier erodes some of the trust that can be placed in Harris’ testimony because he had a financial stake in the claim. Harris provided the capital to print the BoM and there was a financial agreement for Harris to recoup his money through the sale of the BoM. Now, it could be easily argued that once the BoM failed to sell and once the mortgaged farm was lost, there was no longer any incentive for Harris to maintain a ruse, if that’s what he believed it to be. Real quick on the eight witnesses:
Christian Whitmer — brother of David Whitmer
Jacob Whitmer — brother of David Whitmer
Peter Whitmer, Jr. — brother of David Whitmer
John Whitmer — brother of David Whitmer
Hiram Page — brother-in-law of David Whitmer
Joseph Smith, Sen. — JS’s father
Hyrum Smith — JS’s brother
Samuel H. Smith — JS’ brother
Point being, all the witnesses were related through blood or marriage except for Harris. The Cowderys/Smiths would get looped into the Whitmer family through marriage but the marriage was in 1832 (after the witnesses were provided).
Other points to consider:
The witnesses didn’t write their own testimonies. One was written for them.
- The witnesses didn’t technically sign their names to the witnesses. Their names were ascribed to the testimony written for them.
I don’t know how much those points matter, I suppose the witnesses wouldn’t put their name to a statement they didn’t agree with. Still, you lose something of the experience when you don’t get to relate the experience in your own words.
For me personally, it doesn’t matter either way. The testimony of the 11 witnesses is good for those 11 people but I’d rather have my own testimony. It would be like someone telling me all about their latest ski trip. Hearing about their experience is fine and all, but I’d rather ski myself if I wanted to understand what it’s like to go skiing.
SilentDawning wrote:
I knew someone would have an alternate interpretation — how did you learn about Joseph and Sydney Rigdon being the only ones who saw the vision when there were others in the room? How were you exposed to that source? I’m amazed at the depth of knowledge some people have here.Also, do we have the original manuscripts of the Bible? No one ever questions that.
Quote:
I have my own reasons for discounting these statements from MH but they are out there and do tend to support a more literal interpretation.Care to share these reasons?
1) As far as JS and Sydney seeing the vision while others in the room did not see it. I think that this came from the D&C institute manual. During my mission, I studied as much of the church literature as I could get my hands on. This included Mormon Doctrine, the 5 or 6 volume Answers to Gospel questions, and other books that were outside of the typical “Missionary Library”. The fact that others were present for this vision but did not see it is well documented from church sources.
2) No original bible manuscripts exist. There are no original bible manuscripts but there are copies of manuscripts from later and earlier dates. Those that are of earlier dates are closer to the original than the later. Still, plenty of people question the bible. None of the gospels seems to have been written for decades after the death of Jesus. Very little of what was written can be corroborated by non bible sources. Going back to the old testament there is good reason to believe that entire books were intended to be more allegorical or mythological than literal history. They were written in a time when mythology mattered more than history.
3) My primary reason for doubting the MH statements about seeing the plates “as surely as seeing my arm” etc. is because these statements came after 1870. This means that more than 40 years had passed since MH had seen the angel and the plates. This is also after MH had been cut off from the church and had wandered around the various church factions for years. MH had a wife and children that stayed with the brigimite faction and went to Utah. In 1870 MH returned to the brigimite faction, was reunited with his wife and children, and was rebaptised. As an original witness to the gold plates and the BoM, MH in his old age in Utah had one job. This was to testify of the truthfulness of the plates. If he had to use hyperbole to “sell it” I think the powers that be (BY) were ok with that. In exchange, he was somewhat of a celebrity – given respect and admiration – and he was taken care of financially. MH was never an especially great witness to begin with but I have extra reason to doubt any statement that he made after 1870.
I agree that it would have been more supportive to have all witnesses provide personal statements. Harris further discredits his testimony with wilder assertions after the testimony of the angel, but comes back with stronger and more detailed testimony later in his life. Eh. Memory is fallible and definitely prone to change over time. It’s also relatively easy to create false memories and I suspect Joseph Smith kinda figured that out under the guise of spiritual enlightenment. I believe they believed it. That is all that matters to me, concerning them, when all is said and done. Jennifer Thompson firmly and adamantly believed Ronald Cotton raped her in that famous case in the 80’s, and confidently picked him out of a police lineup. She KNEW he was the man, but she was later proved wrong by DNA evidence. Memory research, particularly that from Elizabeth Loftus, shows us how fallible and unreliable our memories are, as well as how easy false memories can be constructed.
I can believe the 11 witnesses believed what was written in their group testimony and still doubt or question the veracity due to what seems to me overwhelming evidence against their assertions.
For myself, it would be more believable had they each written their own personal testimony and experience with the plates and angel. However, their reports would have likely not been exactly identical, which probably would have caused people at the time to be less accepting. We can now look at the different versions of the first vision and accept that Joseph remembered things differently, related the experience differently depending on his audience, or constructed a false memory of the event over time, but a few decades back these different accounts concerned at least once church historian enough that he (reportedly Joseph Fielding Smith) took steps to hide the evidence for a while.
Bottom line is that eyewitness testimony is very fallible. We know that now. Folks didn’t know that back then.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.