I just watched a youtube video where a church spokesperson says part of the case for the book of mormon was the testimony of 11 witnesses.

Ok church here are a few things to consider along that track.

34 Egyptoligist examine the Joseph Smith papyri and came to the conclusion Joseph was wrong. Thats three times your number for the BOM.

Over 1100 people have come forward about the ills and harm of child interviews. A practice the church claims is vital. That's 100 times as many witnesses as for the BOM.

$100,000,000,000.00 stashed away for a rainy day. The church claims it still needs money from the members, even if the members go hungry or forego medical care. That's almost 10,000,000,000 dollars for each of your witnesses.

So without archaeological, DNA, linguistic, metallurgical or fossil proof we're supposed to take the word of 11 dead guys that you're right?

How come there were no disinterested third party witnesses ?
All of the so-called "witnesses" were associates of Joe Smith.

But they were all from only two families, with the exception of Martin Harris.

The Smiths (including cousin Oliver Cowdery).

The Whitmers (including Hiram Page -- husband of Catherine WHITMER)

Also the "witnesses" did not give independent accounts of what they witnessed. Instead they simply let Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery list them under a single statement that was apparently prepared by Oliver Cowdery in collaboration with Joseph Smith.

The witnesses were never subjected to any objective questioning or cross examination by any third party. As a result, they were never separately tested on any relevant details.

Various word choices and references indicate that they did not see anything physical, but rather saw the golden plates with "spiritual eyes" and by the "power of God". In other words, they imagined something based on what Joseph Smith told them and decided that this was a vision that they had witnessed. Martin Harris was slow-witted and didn't know that he was supposed to just imagine seeing an angel in his head, so it took a long time for Joseph Smith to separately coach him. Eventually Martin got tired and declared that he was seeing what Joseph Smith wanted him to see.

Mormons often try to make a big deal out of the fact that none of the Witlesses ever expressly retracted or denied what was said in the two witness statements (the Three Witnesses and Eight Witnesses). But that's an extremely weak argument. There would be no incentive for them to subsequently deny the statements that they had previously endorsed. Later denial would have been the equivalent of either (1) confessing that they had previously lied, or (2) admitting that they were foolish men who had been manipulated by Joseph Smith. Neither position would have been good for their reputations. They had no incentive to later deny their witness "testimonies" even if they actually knew that the testimonies were false.

Everything indicates that the Witness testimonies were essentially the equivalent of a group of investors in a small business publicly putting out a statement endorsing the product that their small business is selling. How much faith would you put in product endorsements made by the very people who stand to gain from the sale of the product?

“Witlesses ever expressly retracted or denied what was said in the two witness statements”

Joe and his money digging pals were literally thick as thieves.

Interesting, Dave. Even Judge Judy would have discounted the eleven witnesses' testimony for the reason you cited.

And when I am far on the road to conviction, and eight men, be they grammatical or otherwise, come forward and tell me that they have seen the plates too; and not only seen those plates but "hefted" them, I am convinced. I could not feel more satisfied and at rest if the entire Whitmer family had testified.

Mark Twain

Dave the Atheist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How come there were no disinterested third party
> witnesses ?
> All of the so-called "witnesses" were associates
> of Joe Smith.


Exactly. "Let's get together some of my family and my friends and have them be witnesses." That makes them suspect right there, without even knowing anything else.

Of the three witnesses, all three left the church, and all three died apostates.
Of the eight witnesses, three renounced the church; and three of the remaining five were members of the Smith family.
Quoted from memory from an anti-LDS tract years ago (I think a Chick tract, but can't say for sure); but I have no reason to doubt it.

I read (can’t find a picture of the signatures) that they are all signed by the same person. Hmmmm

I know 11 people who say they saw Big Foot. And two who say they smelled him.

I searched 8 witnesses signatures and a few pictures popped up. Anyone can see all 8 witnesses signatures were by the same hand.

The J W S and H are all distinct and quite distinct.

I never saw this before.

Thank You

Do a little more research. The page you were looking at was from the printer's manuscript.

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Book_of_Mormon/Witnesses/Signatures_on_their_testimonies#Question:_What_is_the_Book_of_Mormon_.22printer.27s_manuscript.22_and_why_is_it_entirely_in_the_handwriting_of_Oliver_Cowdery.3F

Ok. So where's the original or did an angel take that too?

The church tells so many lies it's hard to believe anything they say without proof.

Heartless Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ok. So where's the original or did an angel take that too?

From church sources - The original manuscript was placed in the cornerstone of the Nauvoo House. Years later, it was removed and found to have been mostly destroyed by water damage.

> The church tells so many lies it's hard to believe anything they say without proof.

Very true. Then again, I've been coming to RfM off and on for 20 years now and feel EXACTLY the same about statements made here.

The Original version of the 8 wit. stmnt (in 1st Edition of the BoM) was that Joey was the AUTHOR of the BoM, (I've seen one);

later editions read that Joey was the TRANSLATOR.

I wrote to the ch historian & asked: which / how many of the 8 assented to the change, when was it made?

Reply: We Don't Know.

IOW, it appears to me that ChurchCo made this alteration, each entitled to judge if it's significant or trivial.

me: I say this kind of alternation(s) has become SOP for them.

"we're supposed to take the word of 11 dead guys that you're right?"

That's correct! In a court of law it takes one or two witnesses to substantiate a claim and a jury decides if there is enough evidence. That's far more flimsy than 11 lifelong witnesses. To deny this fact is to deny the rationality of our whole legal system, and understanding of logic.

If 11 people say something is true (and don't recant through their lifetimes) then it must be true. This is why I believe in bigfoot, ghosts, and aliens.

"34 Egyptoligist examine the Joseph Smith papyri and came to the conclusion Joseph was wrong." Wrong about what? they don't have most of the evidence to make a judgement. 90% of the evidence burned up in the Chicago fire of 1890s. They are obviously guessing.

What makes you think ANY of the evidence burned up in the Chicago fire? The papyri were thought to have been burned up, until they were found in New York.

We can read hieroglyphics now. JS left a "dictionary", where individual symbols were expanded in paragraphs of horse hooey. One symbol = one paragraph is not how hieroglyphics worked.

Apologist claims that the relevant parts of the papyri were destroyed are very lame. The diagrams in the BoA were preserved. Claiming that the diagrams and the text associated with the diagrams were on two different documents, and the document with the explanation was destroyed, and the text on the same document as the diagram was completely unrelated - really?

That's got to be one of the worst "the dog ate my homework" stories ever. And the papyri are still 2,000 years too young to have been written by Abraham.

The evidence is overwhelming that JS made the whole thing up. Not even LDS Inc tries to claim it was an actual translation any more. They tried moving the goalposts, and now just pretend the BoA doesn't exist.


As for the credibility of the BoM witnesses, see Mark Twain, above. I don't think anyone since has improved on his analysis.

macaRomney Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If 11 people say something is true (and don't
> recant through their lifetimes) then it must be
> true. This is why I believe in bigfoot, ghosts,
> and aliens.

By that logic, then, the Book of Mormon is true. If you honestly believe what you're saying, why on earth are you here?

And all of them except Cowdery later accepted James Strang's claim to lead the church, based on the Voree plates.

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, I'm a BOM witness!"

If there was ANY proof for the BOM then Joseph Smith would have let an independent newspaper reporter examine ANY of the artifacts. Here:

1. Where is the stone box and stone lid and location where the BOM was found? - None
2. Where is the sword of laban? None
3. Where is the lihona ? None
4. Where is the Shield? None
5. Where is the Urman and Thummim - ? None
6. Where is the golden plates? None
I find it interesting that Joseph Smith says that the so-called gold plates were NOT made of Tin. I think Joseph Smith actually DID make some plates out of tin and conveniently so-called sealed the majority.

Oregon asked:

> 5. Where is the Urman and Thummim - ? None

Again, where in hell are these Urine and Thingums?

And the vanished golden plates?

"Taken into heaven" is lame.

A fairy tale a la Grimm.

Weave us a more believable one, you old-time Mormon flim-flammer men who seem to have as their idol the pirate Captain Kidd.

In my several times great grandfather's journal he talks about a claim the Joseph melted down two standing brass candlesticks to make some plates covered with chicken scratchings and sealing most of it so he didn't have to ebgrave them.

I am not sure the source of these claims but your comment is the only other one I've read that even comes close to his claim written in the 1840s.

I can submit to what they claim they saw and touched. However they did not translate. So how could they know what it was that they were seeing and touching? They can only testify to what they were told by one person. No one asked that question of if they could verify the translation. So what they did testify of was the truth from a certain point of view.

@Heartless, I also read from someone's journal that mentioned Joseph Smith actually burying these - made plates in a field or the like. The candlesticks are interesting and it makes very possible sense. Yes I agree, why to engrave more than is needed and make up the claim the rest are Sealed.