....^gosh, I hate that gif!
Okay, I admitted to perhaps being overly sensitive. I tried to take down the tone. I tried to point out that I intended lighthearted humor and nothing more. What did CP3S do? He points out that walkingdork is other posters (plural) that I've "freaked out over" for not being PC.
The day CP3S admits he's ever even contributed in some small way to the contention I've seen him take part in on so many occasions will be highlighted and underlined in my calendar. However, just to make him happy, let's address all his questions:
CP3S said in what sounded like a mocking tone:
Wow, so eleven men who lived over a hundred and fifty years ago...
True, they did live that long ago.
may or may not have claimed they saw these plates,...
Their names are signed as witnesses to having seen the golden plates.
but they certainly didn't deny it,...
true
and are never recorded to have done so even after they had falling outs with Joseph Smith. This counts as strong evidence?
Likely it would have been recorded, as there were strong anti-Mormon feelings at the time and many sought to discredit the Church. Logically, the statement of one opposed to the Church is just as questionable as one seeking to uphold the Church, as both are presenting a biased and possibly deliberately dishonest view. In fact, there is at least one recording of someone recanting (that I'm aware of), but that story is brought into question on a number of points, perhaps most notably that the witness, who could have lived a happy life forever apart from the Church, sought out the rebaptism and swore on his deathbed of the veracity of the Book of Mormon and the plates. The witness is Oliver Cowdery, one of the Three Witnesses, and the following is taken from the website I use frequently, which in turn is quoting historical documents.
"There is a wealth of evidence which demonstrates that Oliver never denied his testimony. As a lawyer, while writing to Phineas Young, Oliver said:
- I have cherished a hope, and that one of my fondest, that I might leave such a character, as those who might believe in my testimony, after I should be called hence, might do so, not only for the sake of the truth, but might not blush for the private character of the man who bore that testimony. I have been sensitive on this subject, I admit; but I ought to be so—you would be, under the circumstances, had you stood in the presence of John, with our departed Brother Joseph, to receive the Lesser Priesthood—and in the presence of Peter, to receive the Greater, and looked down through time, and witnessed the effects these two must produce,—you would feel what you have never felt, were wicked men conspiring to lessen the effects of your testimony on man, after you should have gone to your long sought rest.[1]
Surely Oliver's concern for his testimony included his testimony as a witness.
Eventually Oliver left the law practice he had started after leaving the Church, and journeyed to Kanesville, Iowa, with his wife and daughter and finally reunited with the Church in 1848. Before he was baptized he bore his testimony to the congregation that had gathered for a conference.
- I wrote, with my own pen, the entire Book of Mormon (save a few pages) as it fell from the lips of the Prophet Joseph, as he translated it by the gift and power of God, by the means of the Urim and Thummim, or as it is called by the book, Holy Interpreters. I beheld with my eyes, and handled with my hands, the gold plates from which it was transcribed. I also saw with my eyes and handled with my hands the Holy Interpreters. That book is true. ...It contains the everlasting gospel, and came forth to the children of men in fulfillment of the revelations of John, where he says he saw an angel come with the everlasting gospel to preach to every nation, kindred, tongue and people. It contains principles of salvation; and if you, my hearers, will walk by its light and obey its precepts, you will be saved with an everlasting salvation in the kingdom of God on high.[2]
Oliver rejoined the Church and prepared to journey to Utah to unite with the main body of the Latter-day Saints but he died while living temporarily in Richmond, Missouri. Oliver Cowdery had contracted tuberculosis. In March 1850, while on his deathbed, Oliver used his dying breaths to testify of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. Lucy P. Young, his half-sister, was at his bedside and reported:
- Oliver Cowdery just before breathing his last, asked his attendants to raise him up in bed that he might talk to the family and his friends, who were present. He then told them to live according to the teachings contained in the Book of Mormon, and promised them, if they would do this, that they would meet him in heaven. He then said, ‘Lay me down and let me fall asleep.’ A few moments later he died without a struggle.[3]
In November 1881, over 30 years after Oliver's death, his former law partner Judge W. Lang claimed in a letter that Oliver had admitted that the Book of Mormon was a fraud. Lang's letter claimed that the Book of Mormon was derived from the Spalding manuscript by Oliver, and that Sidney Rigdon and Joseph Smith approved the final draft. This claim cannot be considered credible for a number of reasons, among them the fact that the Spalding manuscript bears no resemblance to the Book of Mormon (something even the critics agree with), and the fact that Sidney Rigdon was never associated with Joseph Smith prior to the publication of the Book of Mormon. The basis for Lang's claim seems to be the standard Spalding theory of Book of Mormon authorship. For additional detail regarding this claim, see: Did Oliver Cowdery admit to his law partner that Book of Mormon was a hoax?."
No, it may not be the strongest evidence possible, but if you continue reading at that link, you will see similar stories for all of the Three Witnesses, all three of whom fell away from the Church.
Other plausible reasons for the 11 never to deny the existence of the plates even if they never really did actually see them: Admitting they are fake would be admitting their own dishonesty in the matter and devaluing the credit of their word in all matters,...
To have these 11 men so concerned with their reputation when many of them had already been disassociated with the Church, some for the rest of their lives, is unlikely. Could I not just as easily postulate that they would have a great deal of motivation to distance themselves from the movement, even going so far as to admit deceit or provide later reasons for doubting? For instance, Jacob Whitmer, one of the 8 witnesses, was excommunicated and run out of town by some Mormons. Would it not seem perhaps more likely that regardless of the repercussions to his reputation, he would have something during the course of his life to say regarding the gold plates to discredit them and thus undermine the organization that had so wronged him? He never did. David Whitmer (one of the Three) and John Whitmer (one of the Eight) both left the Church. But both continued to be associated with Mormonism in some form, believing that David Whitmer was to succeed Joseph Smith instead of Brighma Young, and forming a small group that has since gone defunct and/or was absorbed by another still extant group. The year before his death, David Whitmer took the time not merely to try to preserve his reputation, and clearly not to gain power considering the very small numbers in his congregation, published a pamphlet entitled "An Address to All Believers in Christ." In this pamphlet, he affirmed that he indeed did see the gold plates. Why would this man spend his entire life pursuing the truth in Mormonism? He originally was not even interested in leading a church and had to be encouraged by another man who claims that Joseph Smith had said such a thing. He was never successful. But you are right, his reputation was never in doubt by community members after his dissociation with the Church. But does this speak more to his desire to preserve this reputation, or more to his consistency of character before and after exiting the primary body of Mormonism?
followed by a potential backlash from those followers they led astray.
David was the most prominent of all the witnesses never to return. He would have felt no backlash if he had simply stayed away. He had already experienced all the problems he would have, and the Church and the majority of Mormons of any sort or schismatic had moved on to Salt Lake Valley, Utah, or elsewhere. He could have lived a life without harassment, but continued to speak out about his testimony, and even his separation was justified with his testimony of the golden plates. Other witnesses sought to unify with some group, even if not the primary group, and most (possibly all, I'm not positive) still living who did not stick with the primary group following Brigham Young found their way to David Whitmer's church.
They may also have feared violent action taken the others who were still members of the movement.
At least one experienced intimidation, as I mentioned before, but they all continued in Mormonism and tried to draw others to their brand. But they were all in a position to completely isolate themselves from Mormonism completely if they had wanted to and would have felt no repercussions, as most of Mormonism had moved far away.
These are just a couple of plausible explanations, there could be any number of others.
Yes, they are plausible. If it has not been disproved, it is quite plausible. I'm sure I could come up with far more plausible reasons to doubt than you just did. But on the other hand, the fact that the majority spent their last actions or words testifying in some way of their belief in the truthfulness of Mormonism and the Book of Mormon, and the rest at a minimum have not even a single reliable mention* of their testimony being untrue, provides a pretty convincing and consistent testimony of a single belief, regardless of what divergent roads they all subsequently took: the plates they testified to having seen were real.
*As a note, let me pre-empt any catch of my cautious wording: the only other contemporary questioning of the reliability of these witnesses (that I'm aware of) was a former leader of the Church named Stephen Burnett stated that Martin Harris (one of the Three Witnesses who wasn't even part of the following experience) stated that the Eight Witnesses did not actually see the plates and hesitated to sign their names to the testimony. That his word is any more reliable that Martin's ongoing testimony throughout his life is unreasonable, considering this man was an embittered ex-member (who doesn't seem to worry about his safety when speaking against the Church) when he made this statement.
Now, as if this isn't enough, let's go through a quick end-life biography on all 11 men:
Oliver Cowdery - one of the Three; excommunicated in 1838; joined the Methodists; rejoined the primary LDS Church in 1848; bore his testimony upon rejoining to a congregation (quoted above); bore his testimony with his dying words (quoted above) in 1850.
David Whitmer - one of the Three; excommunicated in 1837; became a prominent member of his locality, becoming mayor of Richmond, MO; tried twice to re-establish what he saw as the fallen Mormon Church; swore to the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon in 1887; died in 1888; ordered his testimony of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon placed on his tombstone.
Martin Harris - lost a great deal of money funding the printing of the Book of Mormon; excommunicated in 1837; followed several LDS schismatic groups but did not remain with them; rejoined the Church in 1870; testified in several cases of its truthfulness: "Gentlemen," holding out his hand, "do you see that hand? Are you sure you see it? Or are your eyes playing you a trick or something? No. Well, as sure as you see my hand so sure did I see the Angel and the plates" (1871) "No man heard me in any way deny the truth of the Book of Mormon [or] the administration of the angel that showed me the plates" (1872). On his deathbed: "The Book of Mormon is no fake. I know what I know. I have seen what I have seen and I have heard what I have heard. I have seen the gold plates from which the Book of Mormon is written. An angel appeared to me and others and testified to the truthfulness of the record, and had I been willing to have perjured myself and sworn falsely to the testimony I now bear I could have been a rich man, but I could not have testified other than I have done and am now doing for these things are true."; died in 1875.
Christian Whitmer - brother to David Whitmer; died in 1835, still a faithful member of the Church.
Jacob Whitmer - brother to David Whitmer; excommunicated in 1838; became associated with David's Church of Christ; died in 1856, apparently never having denied his testimony, only affirming.
Peter Whitmer, Jun. - brother to David Whitmer; died in 1836, still a faithful member of the Church.
John Whitmer - brother to David Whitmer; excommunicated in 1838; began recording a history of the Church in 1839, which he continued for some years later; purchased a great deal of abandoned Church land in Far West, MO; briefly associated with a
schismatic group led by James J. Strang (now largely defunct); joined his brother David's Church of Christ briefly; never denied his testimony, and I believe even became dissociated with his brother's organization.
Hiram Page - lived with the Whitmer family for a time; excommunicated in 1838; became associated with David Whitmer's Church of Christ; died in 1852, apparently still holding to his testimony.
Joseph Smith, Sen. - father to the famous (infamous) prophet Joseph Smith, Jr.; died in 1840, strong in the faith, never denying the plates.
Hyrum Smith - brother to the prophet Joseph Smith, Jr.; died just before Joseph Smith did in Carthage Jail, Carthage, Illinois (shot in the face on June 27, 1844); died firm in the faith in spite of the knowledge of potential threats to his life.
Samuel H. Smith - brother to Joseph and Hyrum; first LDS misisonary; provided the Book of Mormon to a man named John P. Greene, who shared it with a man named Brigham Young, thus that copy of the book led to Young's conversion, and Young became the second prophet of the Church; retrieved Joseph and Hyrum's bodies after their martyrdom and had to flee the region on horseback; died a month after they did in July 1844 from "bilious fever," some attributing it to internal injuries suffered from his flight out of Illinois, but regardless of the cause, he was firm in the faith.
The point to all this is not to prove anything, as I don’t intend to. This took me well over an hour to compose, and hour I should not have used this way because I’ve got tons of homework to do. However, I wanted you to feel like I would take the time to answer your questions without wimping out. In the future if I provide a link, it would be far easier if you’d simply use that link. I don't run from confrontation, my friend, but I do ask for respect. I don't expect to prove anything to anyone in any case, so why should I try? If I give you a link, you can read as much as you like and draw your own conclusions instead of just reading mine and trying to disprove them. Regardless, I hope you realize that you may have oversimplified the case with your off-the-cuff "plausible explanations." Your statement that Mormon apologetics is not truly scientific is both accurate and fine with me. As I said, to me it is supportive of what I believe. If you are going to call into question the beliefs of a rational religious person, you will have to realize that we are consciously allowing for a spiritual component to affect our judgment that a purely scientific person will not. We already are aware of this difference, and there is no need to try and point it out. Legitimate questions get legitimate answers, but I will not prove a darn thing to you. Again, next time, instead of criticizing my intelligence, maturity, or any such thing (you don't know me at all), reflect on the time I've put into this post, the time I could put into others, and bear in mind how 95% of this is not copied and pasted, but based on my own research, wording, and conclusions. Give a religious man some credit. I can't take this long to reply to everyone, and if the links I provide don't satisfy, press me further. But I can't always give you everything you need. There are thousands of such little questions with no research, and I'm aware of many of them. I simply don't have time to put into posts like this.
Surely if you are going to believe something so unlikely, something that contains in its text a history of America that is so abundantly at odds with what the objective world knows of America's history, you are basing it on stronger evidence than 11 men who are said to have seen the original plates and never denied it. Right?
Yes, obviously. But it's nice to learn a bit more about these characters, eh?
