• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

I am a Christian!

Status
Not open for further replies.

emerald Dragon

Well-Known Member
Oct 27, 2003
1,023
74
39
Upstate New York
✟1,562.00
Faith
1 and only said:
Then let me ask - Do you believe:....

That you, as a woman, cannot go to heaven by your own means? You must be sealed to a husband who will call you from the grave by your secret name?
No person can get to the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom without being sealed, men included. Non-married people can still get into the Celestial Kingdom, though.

The Mormon statement of faith "As man is, God once was and as God is, man can become"?
This isn't doctrine, and will be revealed in time whether that prophet's speculation is true or not.

That your "Heavenly Father" came to Earth, and had a physical relationship with Mary, the result of which was the conception of Jesus?
No. Christ was born of a virgin, who concieved due to the power of the Holy Ghost.
That, following his ressurection, Jesus ascended into heaven? Or that he married several wives, sailed to America, and continued his teaching?
Unknown if Christ had a wife, He did not sail, but did teach those in the American continent.
That Jesus is god in human form and part of the Trinity (one God in three persons), or that he was a man who earned his way to godhood, a seperate entity than Heavenly Father?
Christ is God, Heavenly Father is God, the Holy Ghost is God, in three distinct forms, and Christ never had to "earn" His way to that place.

That Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon from gold plates written in an ancient, secret language, and (as instructed) he never showed them (uncovered) to another person?
He did translate the plates with the power from God, and he did show it to 11 other people.

That Joseph Smith was martyred, rather than dying in a prison break, with a gun in his hand?
he may have had a gun in his hand, I don't think so, but he wasn't trying to escape. He was martyered, as it is when a prophet of God is murdered.

God Bless,
Emerald Dragon
 
Upvote 0

Rescued One

...yet not I, but the grace of God that is with me
Dec 12, 2002
36,184
6,771
Midwest
✟128,057.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
emerald Dragon said:
1 and only said:
Then let me ask - Do you believe:....

That you, as a woman, cannot go to heaven by your own means? You must be sealed to a husband who will call you from the grave by your secret name?

No person can get to the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom without being sealed, men included. Non-married people can still get into the Celestial Kingdom, though.

NO EXALTATION WITHOUT MARRIAGE. Since marriage is ordained of God, and the man is not without the woman, neither the woman without the man in the Lord, there can be no exaltation to the fulness of the blessings of the celestial kingdom outside of the marriage relation. A man cannot be exalted singly and alone; neither canb a woman. Each must have a companion to share the honors and blessings of this great exaltation. Marriage for time and all eternity brings to pass the crowning glory of our Father's kingdom, by which his children become his heirs, into whose hands he gives all things.
If a man and his wife are saved in separate kingdoms, for instance, the celestial and terrestrial, automatically the sealing is broken; it is broken because of the sins of one of the parties. No one can be deprived of exaltation who remains faithful. In other words, an undeserving husband cannot prevent a faithful wife from exaltation and vice versa. In this case the faithful servant would be given to someone who is faithful.
(Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 2, p. 65)

LDS Apostle Erastus Snow preached the following on Sunday, Oct. 4, 1857:

Do the women, when they pray, remember their husbands?... Do you uphold your husband before God as your lord? "What!—my husband to be my lord?" I ask, Can you get into the celestial kingdom without him? Have any of you been there? You will remember that you never got into the celestial kingdom [during the temple ceremony] without the aid of your husband. If you did, it was because your husband was away, and some one had to act proxy for him. No woman will get into the celestial kingdom, except her husband receives her, if she is worthy to have a husband; and if not, somebody will receive her as a servant. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 5, p. 291 http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources/resurrectwife.htm)


BIBLE:

Matthew 22
23 The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him,
24 Saying, Master, Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.
25 Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased, and, having no issue, left his wife unto his brother:
26 Likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh.
27 And last of all the woman died also.
28 Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her.
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.
30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

Emerald Dragon said:
1 and only said:
The Mormon statement of faith "As man is, God once was and as God is, man can become"?
This isn't doctrine, and will be revealed in time whether that prophet's speculation is true or not.

Why is it that when LDS are uncomfortable or embarrassed by church teachings, they refer to those teachings as speculation? LDS prophet after LDS prophet believed and taught this! In this century, it is referred to as speculation.

Jesus is the light.
 
Upvote 0

Rescued One

...yet not I, but the grace of God that is with me
Dec 12, 2002
36,184
6,771
Midwest
✟128,057.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
emerald Dragon said:
1 and only said:
That Jesus is god in human form and part of the Trinity (one God in three persons), or that he was a man who earned his way to godhood, a seperate entity than Heavenly Father?
Christ is God, Heavenly Father is God, the Holy Ghost is God, in three distinct forms, and Christ never had to "earn" His way to that place.


"God himself was once a man as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned on yonder heavens!… I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may see… It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the character of God, and to know that we may converse with him as one man converses with another, and that he was once a man like us; yea that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did; and I will show it from the Bible."
(Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith
by Joseph Fielding Smith, p. 345-346 )

Bruce McConkie claimed: "Jesus kept the commandments of his Father and thereby worked out his own salvation, and also set an example as to the way and the means whereby all men may be saved" (The Mortal Messiah, Vol.4, p.434).

The Following taught in 1984:
Our Father Advanced and Progressed Until He Became God

President Joseph Fielding Smith said: "Our Father in heaven, according to the Prophet, had a father, and since there has been a condition of this kind through all eternity, each Father had a Father, until we come to a stop where we cannot go further, because of our limited capacity to understand" (Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 2, p. 47)


President Wilford Woodruff explained: "[God] has had his endowments a great many years ago. He has ascended to his thrones, principlaities and powers in the eternities. We are his children... We are here to fill a probation and receive an education" (Deseret News Weekly, 28 Sept. 1881, p. 546)

(Search These Commandments, Melchizedek Priesthood Personal Study Guide, copyright 1984, p. 158)
 
Upvote 0

Svt4Him

Legend
Site Supporter
Oct 23, 2003
16,711
1,132
54
Visit site
✟98,618.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Conservatives
This isn't doctrine, and will be revealed in time whether that prophet's speculation is true or not.
Do you believe it?

He did translate the plates with the power from God, and he did show it to 11 other people.
The plates were seen by whom again?

He may have had a gun in his hand, I don't think so, but he wasn't trying to escape. He was martyered, as it is when a prophet of God is murdered.

And how many Christian's have died with guns in their hands and have been said to be giving up their life for God? And what do you doubt, history? What was he doing with the gun, making sure no one escaped before they were martyered? That is just amazing that people will not believe truth, yet say they stand for it.
 
Upvote 0

Debi1967

Proudly in love with Rushingwind62
Site Supporter
Dec 2, 2003
20,540
1,129
58
Green Valley, Illinios
Visit site
✟94,055.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Blackmarch said:
And this furthers the discussion, how?
Blackmarch

Until you understand that it is not us that is propagating false doctrine and that we are not the harlot of the earth then anything we say is a useless discussion to begin with...

Then the true reasons for you to be here are clear you are here not to discuss the issues for better understanding, but simply to prostelytize us and convert....

You did not think that we did not know that did you??? Please give us at least more credit than that.

Pax Christi
Debi
 
Upvote 0

Swart

ÜberChristian
Mar 22, 2004
6,527
204
58
Melbourne
Visit site
✟32,187.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
happyinhisgrace said:
Swart, from what I have read in the past, the normal (or rather common) age for a woman to marry in the 1800's was 17-21. Can you post some references that say that it was common and acceptable in those days for a woman to marry at the age of 15 or 16 and also if you could post some references that 12-14 year old married quite often, or even more than we "would like to admit" i would really appreciate it.

My own grandmother married when she was 13 but that was because she lived with her grandmother and her grandmother couldnt' afford to take care of her so my great great grandmother basically sold my grandma to an older man. She was 13 and even according to her women did not marry that young in those days, which was about 80 or so years ago. We have a couple of women in our family line who were married off at 15 but that was into polygamy marriages, other than that, the youngest even over 100 years ago, was 17.
Being only an amateur historian, I have difficulty in producing concise quotable evidence, perhaps there is an expert in the house?

From what I have learnt in my travels, I understand the following to be correct:

1) Up until the time of Queen Victoria, the trends I have mentioned were fairly common in England, particularly for the lower classes and the nobility. The merchant class seems to be immune from this phenomena. The trends of marriage are often seen as an indicator of the persons social position when conducting family history research.

2) This trend is also common across most of Europe, increasingly so in Eastern Europe but less so in Southern Europe and in Scandinavia.

3) Information from all but the nobility generally disappears before the 16C, but this is still very strong in the 'medieval genealogical database' which nearly everyone who manages to trace their family history back to the 15C will get caught up in. This massive database of over 100,000 related nobilities of Europe shows the incredibly young age that women were married at and the incredibly amount of interbreeding. According to this database, Prince William and Winston Churchill are related via more than 1400 separate connections!

4) I have noticed this trend in my own FH - which I don't intend to post here. Not having any US ancestors, I can't categorically state what the US trend is/was.

What we can do is look at what is remarked upon as being unusual or shocking for the time. For example, Plural Marriage was considered a scandal and was widely reported. If one church leader took an 18YO plural wife and another took a 14YO first wife, what would be the reported scandal? The 18YO plural or the 14YO first wife? Under today's morality, the latter would be the scandal and the former would be a curiousity. 150 years ago, I suspect the reverse would be the case.

I'm still waiting for your references.
 
Upvote 0

Swart

ÜberChristian
Mar 22, 2004
6,527
204
58
Melbourne
Visit site
✟32,187.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
happyinhisgrace said:
Swart, from what I have read in the past, the normal (or rather common) age for a woman to marry in the 1800's was 17-21. Can you post some references that say that it was common and acceptable in those days for a woman to marry at the age of 15 or 16 and also if you could post some references that 12-14 year old married quite often, or even more than we "would like to admit" i would really appreciate it.
In 1619 the age of consent was 12 for a girl and 14 for a boy.
http://marriage.about.com/cs/teenmarriage/a/teenmarriage.htm said:
During the Middle Ages, the practice of youthful marriages continued and women married as early as fourteen. Men generally waited until they were more established in life which was usually when they were in their twenties or early thirties. In 1371, due to the plague, the average age at marriage for men was 24, and for women it was 16. By 1427, the average male of all classes did not wed til he was in his mid-30's, usually choosing a bride about half his age.

Rich girls seemed to marry at a younger age than poor girls.

It is obvious from a historical perspective that marriages of teenagers (at least teenage girls) were quite common. However, that trend has changed in most countries of the world. Today, young love is neither encouraged or readily accepted by society.
http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/historyonline/plife_overview.cfm said:
[size=-1]Secondly, women in the ancient world married at or even before puberty. In ancient Greece, the average woman married between the ages of 12 and 15. Men married much later, usually in their mid or late 20s. A very substantial age gap between husbands and wives made families very patriarchal. Women usually were not allowed out of the house unless chaperoned and covered in heavy robes.[/size]

[size=-1]Thirdly, the ancient world permitted a wide range of practices that we find abhorrent. The most startling practice was called "exposure." In ancient Greece and Rome, newborn children were left out of doors, so that handicapped babies - and many daughters - would die. These aren't the only practices that we would find inconsistent with traditional family values. Most ancient societies permitted divorce on demand, polygamy, and concubinage - the cohabitation of people who were not legally married. This was an earlier form of surrogate motherhood.[/size]

[size=-1]When, then, did the modern family emerge? When did romantic love become the basis of marriage? When did the emotionally-intense, child-centered nuclear family appear? When did mothers become the very center of family life? Surprisingly, the modern family is just 150 years old.[/size]

[size=-1]In colonial America marriages were not based on love. Ministers described romantic love as a form of madness and urged young men to choose their mates on the basis of rational consideration of property and family. Marriages were often quite brief. In colonial Virginia, an average marriage lasted just seven years. Till death do us part meant something quite different than it does today.[/size]

[size=-1]Families were large - too large to allow parents to give much attention to each child. The average woman bore between 8 and 10 children. Fathers, not mothers, were the primary parent. Child rearing advice books were addressed to men, not women.[/size]

[size=-1]In colonial America, children were sent away from home at very young ages. Children of just six or seven were sent to work as servants or apprentices in other peoples' homes. There was no adolescent rebellion when adolescents didn't live at home.[/size]

[size=-1]It was not until the mid 19th century that the family patterns that we call traditional begin to emerge. For example, it was only during the Victorian era that middle class women began to make motherhood and housekeeping self-conscious vocations. And it was only in the 19th century that modern household architecture with an emphasis on personal privacy emerged. It was only then that houses began to have hallways and separate bedrooms.[/size]
 
Upvote 0

happyinhisgrace

Blessed Trinity
Jan 2, 2004
3,992
56
52
✟26,996.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Swart said:
In 1619 the age of consent was 12 for a girl and 14 for a boy.
thanks for the info but if I'm not mistaken, in your previous posts, you were talking about the 1700's and 1800's?? Do you have any information on that time period that says that 15 and 16 was the common age for a woman to marry or even that 12 and 13 was common?
 
Upvote 0

unbound

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2004
2,068
37
52
✟24,931.00
Faith
Christian
No person can get to the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom without being sealed, men included. Non-married people can still get into the Celestial Kingdom, though.

God has already sealed me. His Kingdom is not divided. All we be in His presence.

This isn't doctrine, and will be revealed in time whether that prophet's speculation is true or not.

Its false, as already revealed in the bible.

No. Christ was born of a virgin, who concieved due to the power of the Holy Ghost.

Im glad LDS are distancing themselves from the rather perverted ideas of Brigham Young.

Unknown if Christ had a wife, He did not sail, but did teach those in the American continent

We hear nothing about if Christ had a wife. Add to that the teaching of Paul about it being better to not be married, because we can care more about the things of God, then the chances of Christ being married are probably zero.

Why didnt He also show up in Hawaii, Iceland, Japan, or Siberia? Those people are rather isolated. He should have made appearances there , also.


He did translate the plates with the power from God, and he did show it to 11 other people.

The way I hear it, he translated even when some of the plates were not present. Makes me wonder why he even needed them to begin with.

he may have had a gun in his hand, I don't think so, but he wasn't trying to escape. He was martyered, as it is when a prophet of God is murdered.

He got off a few rounds before he died. SOme of them hit thier targets. I wonder why Jesus didnt fight back?
 
Upvote 0

1 and only

Active Member
Dec 6, 2004
27
1
Earth
✟152.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
So, according to their own testimonies, all three witnesses describe a mystical, visionary, almost dreamlike experience in which they claim they saw an angel with the gold plates. And, contrary to the LDS church's portrayal, David Whitmer is the only one who saw the plates for the first time that day in the woods, since Oliver and Martin had apparently already seen them in a vision before that day. According to his own testimony, Martin Harris didn't see the angel with plates until he was alone in the woods three days later. This does not appear to be the factual, unquestionably objective event the Mormon church often portrays it to be.

Only three of the eight witnesses made separate statements that they had handled the plates. They were Joseph's two brothers, Hyrum and Samuel, and John Whitmer. Hyrum and Samuel's statements are further qualified by their brother William who, in an interview, also claimed to have handled the plates. He said, "I did not see them uncovered, but I handled them and hefted them while wrapped in a tow frock and judged them to have weighed about sixty pounds. ... Father and my brother Samuel saw them as I did while in the frock. So did Hyrum and others of the family." When the interviewer asked if he didn't want to remove the cloth and see the bare plates, William replied, "No, for father had just asked if he might not be permitted to do so, and Joseph, putting his hand on them said; 'No, I am instructed not to show them to any one.

It is very significant that Joseph Smith himself called into question the moral integrity of at least four of the eleven witnesses. In History of the Church, vol. 3:232 he wrote: Such characters as McLellin, John Whitmer, David Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery and Martin Harris, are too mean to mention; and we had liked to have forgotten them." Because they had dared leave the Latter-day Saint church, these men and others were later driven away after being accused of being "united with a gang of counterfeiters, thieves, liars and blacklegs of the deepest dye, to deceive cheat and defraud" (Senate Document 189, 1841, p. 9

Another thread of the traditional Mormon story that is seriously misrep- resented by the LDS church has to do with the discovery and translation of the supposed gold plates of the Book of Mormon. The testimony of those who were closest to Joseph Smith state uniequivocally that Joseph never used the plates while doing the translation, he used his seer stone in his hat to both discover and translate the Book of Mormon. (Richard Van Wagoner & Steve Walker, "Joseph Smith: 'The Gift of Seeing,'" in Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol. 15:2, Summer 1982, p. 53) If the plates were never used in the translation process, why the need for wit nesses?

exerpts from exmormon.org
 
Upvote 0
1 and only said:
So, according to their own testimonies, all three witnesses describe a mystical, visionary, almost dreamlike experience in which they claim they saw an angel with the gold plates. And, contrary to the LDS church's portrayal, David Whitmer is the only one who saw the plates for the first time that day in the woods, since Oliver and Martin had apparently already seen them in a vision before that day. According to his own testimony, Martin Harris didn't see the angel with plates until he was alone in the woods three days later. This does not appear to be the factual, unquestionably objective event the Mormon church often portrays it to be.

Only three of the eight witnesses made separate statements that they had handled the plates. They were Joseph's two brothers, Hyrum and Samuel, and John Whitmer. Hyrum and Samuel's statements are further qualified by their brother William who, in an interview, also claimed to have handled the plates. He said, "I did not see them uncovered, but I handled them and hefted them while wrapped in a tow frock and judged them to have weighed about sixty pounds. ... Father and my brother Samuel saw them as I did while in the frock. So did Hyrum and others of the family." When the interviewer asked if he didn't want to remove the cloth and see the bare plates, William replied, "No, for father had just asked if he might not be permitted to do so, and Joseph, putting his hand on them said; 'No, I am instructed not to show them to any one.

It is very significant that Joseph Smith himself called into question the moral integrity of at least four of the eleven witnesses. In History of the Church, vol. 3:232 he wrote: Such characters as McLellin, John Whitmer, David Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery and Martin Harris, are too mean to mention; and we had liked to have forgotten them." Because they had dared leave the Latter-day Saint church, these men and others were later driven away after being accused of being "united with a gang of counterfeiters, thieves, liars and blacklegs of the deepest dye, to deceive cheat and defraud" (Senate Document 189, 1841, p. 9

Another thread of the traditional Mormon story that is seriously misrep- resented by the LDS church has to do with the discovery and translation of the supposed gold plates of the Book of Mormon. The testimony of those who were closest to Joseph Smith state uniequivocally that Joseph never used the plates while doing the translation, he used his seer stone in his hat to both discover and translate the Book of Mormon. (Richard Van Wagoner & Steve Walker, "Joseph Smith: 'The Gift of Seeing,'" in Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol. 15:2, Summer 1982, p. 53) If the plates were never used in the translation process, why the need for wit nesses?

exerpts from exmormon.org
Ok your first problem was that you got your info from exmormon.org. They will say anything possible to make us look bad no matter how much truth is in it. And here is an interesting little fact, even though some of the witnesses left the church, why did they never recant what they had said. They still held fast with their testamonies. Now, if it had all been one big hoax why not just come out and tell everyone?
 
Upvote 0

happyinhisgrace

Blessed Trinity
Jan 2, 2004
3,992
56
52
✟26,996.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Apex said:
Ok your first problem was that you got your info from exmormon.org. They will say anything possible to make us look bad no matter how much truth is in it. And here is an interesting little fact, even though some of the witnesses left the church, why did they never recant what they had said. They still held fast with their testamonies. Now, if it had all been one big hoax why not just come out and tell everyone?
Just because something is on exmormon.org does NOT mean it is a lie.

Didn't JS call one of the "witnesses" a "liar" and a "scounderal"??? So, if your own churches first prophet and founder called him a liar, how sure can you be that he was telling the truth about seeing the plates in any form, whether spiritual or physical?
 
Upvote 0
happyinhisgrace said:
Just because something is on exmormon.org does NOT mean it is a lie.

Didn't JS call one of the "witnesses" a "liar" and a "scounderal"??? So, if your own churches first prophet and founder called him a liar, how sure can you be that he was telling the truth about seeing the plates in any form, whether spiritual or physical?
First where did Joseph Smith say this? And second, if he did say these things then why didnt the witnesses just come out and say they never really saw the plates and that everything was a lie? And I hope you arent trying to imply that Joseph, if he really did say that, was less of a man for it, after all, people here call us that every day. And why should we accept anything from exmormon.org? All they wish to do is demean us in any way possible. You wont accept anything from FARMS, FAIR, or Jeff Lyindsay and they dont even attack or belittle any one, they simply deffend our faith.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,117
6,145
EST
✟1,123,523.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Apex said:
Happy, could you please explain why the witnesses never took back their testamonie after they left the Church? And please just answer the question straight out, no pulling up more quotes or stuff like that.

Unless they left some verifiable written document stating why they did or did not do anything, nobody can say why they did not retract their so-called testimony.

The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It may well be that they were just glad to be out of the "church" and didn't want to bother with doing it.

Do you perhaps have some heretofore unknown writing by all the "witnesses" stating that although they lost faith in and left the "church" their so-called "testimony" of the alleged plates was still valid?
 
Upvote 0

Swart

ÜberChristian
Mar 22, 2004
6,527
204
58
Melbourne
Visit site
✟32,187.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
Book or Mormon Witnesses by Richard Lloyd Anderson.

Let's examine each of these men individually to establish their characters. I will start with Martin Harris because he was older. Oliver Cowdery was a young school teacher; not too many people paid attention to him. David Whitmer was a young farmer; he was not really very visible. But Martin Harris was visible. He had a large farm of multiple acres (perhaps a total of around three or four hundred), and that farm was a matter of business through the whole community. The townspeople knew who he was. They knew his reputation. So what did the members of the community think of Martin Harris?

The townspeople said two things about Martin Harris. The people who talked to him accused him of being a fanatic because he believed in the Bible. That sounds like a strange fact, but I think we see that in our own culture as well. We tend to look at people who are secular as pleasing; they don't really ruffle our feathers in any way. But religious people stir us up, challenging us to be better. Martin Harris had read the prophecies in the Bible that God would do a great work in the latter days, and he believed them. He was a believer, so sometimes he was accused of being religiously overdone.

Second, the townspeople said Martin Harris was honest. Every one of the individuals in Palmyra who commented on Martin's character said he was an extremely honest individual. In fact, one of the people who set the type for the Book of Mormon, Pomeroy Tucker, later wrote a book about the early Mormons in the community and said that Martin's usual honesty was a very puzzling thing to him. Tucker wondered, How could Martin Harris, who was such an honest man and an intelligent man, say that he had seen an angel and plates? Well, that's simple. Martin was being honest; it really happened.

When Martin Harris moved out of the community quite a few months after the book was printed, E. B. Grandin, whom Harris paid three thousand dollars to print the Book of Mormon, published his opinion of Harris in the local newspaper for the community to read. The statement almost sounds like a funeral eulogy. Grandin wrote: "Mr. Harris was among the early settlers of this town, and has ever borne the character of an honorable and upright man, and an obliging and benevolent neighbor. He had secured to himself by honest industry a respectable fortune--and he is left a large circle of acquaintances and friends to pity his delusion."

Martin Harris was born in 1783, which means he was middle-aged when he became a Book of Mormon scribe and witness in 1828. He mortgaged his farm to pay for the first edition of the Book of Mormon. Then in early 1831 he moved with the faithful Latter-day Saints to upper Ohio, and there he continued to contribute to the success of the restoration of the gospel in Kirtland, Ohio. Harris was extremely faithful for a time, but all three witnesses became disenchanted with the policies of the church, and in 1837 and the beginning of 1838, they were each excommunicated from the church because they simply were not in harmony with church leadership.

The Three Witnesses left the church because they disagreed with Joseph's policies, but they never once threw doubt upon their testimonies. (Even Peter and Paul, who had both seen visions, sharply disagreed on policy at times.) Had they not really seen the plates, when they were out of the church, the Three Witnesses would have disavowed their experience, and they would not have tried to keep ties with the church. All three witnesses left the church for a time, but two came back before their deaths to make peace with God, and they all continued to bear witness to the Book of Mormon and their vision of the plates to the end.

Let me give an example of Martin Harris's testimony. Just before his rebaptism in 1870, a relative, William H. Homer, who was passing through Kirtland went to Martin's house, and Martin Harris volunteered to take him, as he did many people, to the Kirtland Temple. In the temple Martin expressed some fairly bitter feelings toward some of the Latter-day Saints in Utah and even displayed a jealous spirit toward the leadership of the church, saying, "I should have been president of the Church." Then Homer asked Martin Harris, "'Do you still believe that the Book of Mormon is true and that Joseph Smith was a prophet?" Martin Harris, standing in the Kirtland Temple on a bright, winter day, pointed to one of the arched Gothic windows where the sun was streaming through it and said, "Do I see the sun shining? Just as surely as the sun is shining on us . . . I saw the plates; I saw the angel."

As a very old man, Martin went to Utah and spent the last five years of his life there in upper Cache Valley. When people in his community asked him about the plates of the Book of Mormon, he continued using physical objects like the sun to illustrate his testimony. One time he raised his hand and asked, "'Do you see that hand? . . . Are your eyes playing you a trick or something? . . . Well, as sure as you see my hand so sure did I see the angel and the plates." Martin Harris, like all the witnesses, was especially desirous at the end of his life to have people hear and repeat his testimony.

Now let's turn to Oliver Cowdery's life. Oliver was born in 1806 about a year after Joseph Smith. Later in his life, he said that the days he acted as scribe for Joseph were never to be forgotten. As he sat within the sound of the Prophet's voice, he could feel the Spirit of the Lord. Oliver always remembered the spirituality of that experience. The first thing he did of real significance in New York after the Church was organized was lead a mission west to Kirtland, where he and four other missionaries converted about one hundred people within a few weeks. As with Martin Harris, those who knew Oliver may not have agreed with his testimony, but they agreed that he was of admirable character. A vigorous leader of a Shaker community gave a candid impression of Oliver coming into his community. He recorded that Oliver claimed that "he [Oliver] had been one who assisted in the translation of the golden Bible, and had seen the angel, and also had been commissioned by him [the angel] to go out and bear testimony that God would destroy this generation. . . . [We] gave liberty for him to bear his testimony in our meetings. . . . He appeared meek and mild."10 That characteristic of Cowdery is reflected in other sources--he was a man of powerful witness, but he was also a man of great personal humility.

Another description of Oliver is given in a history of Seneca County written in about 1880 by P. W. Lang. After Oliver was excommunicated in Missouri, he returned to Ohio and became an attorney. And for ten years, when he was outside of the church, he was very active in all the community circles where an attorney would have circulated in those days. P. W. Lang, who apprenticed in Oliver's law office and whom Oliver tutored in law for two years, wrote this candid description of Oliver:
<snip>

He continued by saying, in essence, "I read law with Mr. Cowdery in Tiffin [Ohio] and was intimately acquainted with him from the time he came here until the time he left, which afforded me every opportunity to study and love his 'noble and true manhood.'"

So Oliver was a person respected by those inside and outside the church wherever he lived. Later in life Oliver returned to the church. As he came back in 1848, he stood in the church conference in Kanesville, Iowa--Winter Quarters, or Council Bluffs, as it was called at that time--and said that Sidney Rigdon did not write the Book of Mormon. He said, "I wrote . . . the entire Book of Mormon . . . as it fell from the lips of the Prophet [Joseph Smith]." He said, "I beheld with my eyes, and handled with my hands, the gold plates from which it was translated. I also beheld the Interpreters."12

Now let's turn to David Whitmer's story. David Whitmer was born about a year before Joseph Smith, at the beginning of 1805. After becoming a witness, David joined with his family in selling their rather well-to-do farm holdings in Seneca County, New York. They moved for a short time to Ohio and then moved quickly to Jackson County, Missouri, a tragic experience for them and about three thousand other Latter-day Saints because they were forced out of Jackson County at gunpoint. David was a strong personality and was very visible in helping to defend and protect the Mormon community. He was appointed president of the church in Missouri, for Joseph Smith had a great deal of confidence in him. But in 1838 David exerted his will, disagreed with Joseph Smith, and was excommunicated.

David stayed in Richmond, Missouri, for fifty years and became the most interviewed of all eleven witnesses of the Book of Mormon because he lived longer than any of them. David summed up the testimonies of all the witnesses, and he had an irreproachably honest character. He parlayed an investment of a team and a wagon into a whole livery business and became a prominent business man, providing transportation and rentals and even funeral transportation in Richmond, Missouri.

One proof that David was a distinguished and respected individual was that he appeared in an 1877 historical atlas of Ray County, Missouri, as one of twenty prominent members of the community. (From one point of view, those pictured had to be prominent; from another point of view, they probably had to have enough money to pay for the picture.) David is pictured on a page of the atlas with his nephew David P. Whitmer underneath him. David P. Whitmer was the son of Jacob, one of the Eight Witnesses of the Book of Mormon, and he was named after his uncle David. To the left of David Whitmer, on the top line, is Alexander Donaphen, who was a lawyer for Joseph Smith at one time and who actually saved Joseph's life by refusing to execute an order of the court-martial. So David's reputation in the community was appreciably strong. Everybody respected him. Time and again, Mormons and non-Mormons came into the community and interviewed David, and he insisted that he had seen the plates and the angel.

Let me give the flavor of two interviews with David Whitmer. First, Orson Pratt, who had known David as a fellow leader of the church before David left the church, visited David as an old man. Pratt was accompanied by Joseph F. Smith, who was then a young Apostle, but who later became president of the church from about 1900 to 1918. As these two men interviewed David, Joseph F. Smith wrote down what David said:

We not only saw the plates of the Book of Mormon but also the brass plates, the plates of the Book of Ether, the plates containing the records of the wickedness and secret combinations of the people of the world. . . . The fact is, it was just as though Joseph, Oliver and I were sitting just here on a log, when we were overshadowed by a light. It was not like the light of the sun . . . but more glorious and beautiful. It extended away round us . . . [We saw] many records or plates . . . besides the plates of the Book of Mormon, also the Sword of Laban, the Directors . . . and the Interpreters. I saw them just as plain as I see this bed (striking the bed beside him with his hand), and I heard the voice of the Lord, as distinctly as I ever heard anything in my life, declaring that the records of the plates of the Book of Mormon were translated by the gift and power of God.13
My favorite interview of David was done by James Henry Moyle, whose son, Henry D. Moyle, served as one of President McKay's counselors. On his way back to Utah after he completed his law school training in Michigan, James Henry Moyle stopped in Richmond to see David Whitmer. Henry was a young man, and he wanted to be certain that David had been telling the truth. He wanted to cross-examine him and see what kind of a man he was.

That Moyle was a man of great quality, is indicated by Gordon B. Hinckley's biography of Moyle, written while Hinckley lived in the Cottonwood area in Salt Lake City and knew Moyle. Moyle became one of the very first Latter-day Saints to succeed in national politics. Although his candidacy for senator and governor was unsuccessful in Utah, his party rewarded him with the post of undersecretary of the treasury in the cabinet in Washington, D. C. Later he was appointed as collector of customs in New York City for eight years. He was a very close friend of Franklin D. Roosevelt. Furthermore, Moyle was a singularly candid, intelligent, and honest man all his life.

Later, when Moyle talked about the David Whitmer interview in an address given in Salt Lake City, he said he wondered if it was possible that David Whitmer might have been deceived. Moyle stated:

I induced him to relate to me, under such cross-examination as I was able to interpose, every detail of what took place. He described minutely the spot in the woods, the large log that separated him from the angel, and that he saw the plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated. . . . I asked him if there was any possibility for him to have been deceived, and that it was all a mistake, but he said, "No." I asked him, then, why he had left the Church. [He answered by talking about the policies that differentiated him from Joseph Smith.] He said he knew Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, that through him had been restored the gospel of Jesus Christ in these latter days. To me this was a wonderful testimony.14
Did the Eight Witnesses also maintain their testimony to the end? Yes! David Whitmer quoted both the Three and the Eight Witnesses in a pamphlet published a year before his death in 1887. In this pamphlet, addressed to all believers in Christ, David tried to put his message and his own feelings about the Book of Mormon in such a way that they would be available to everybody. Toward the beginning of the pamphlet, Whitmer said the following in answer to articles in two encyclopedias that had reported him as having denied his testimony:

I will say once more to all mankind, that I have never at any time denied that testimony or any part thereof. I also testify to the world, that neither Oliver Cowdery or Martin Harris ever at any time denied their testimony. . . . I was present at the death bed of Oliver Cowdery, and his last words were, "Brother David, be true to your testimony to the Book of Mormon."

 
Upvote 0

Swart

ÜberChristian
Mar 22, 2004
6,527
204
58
Melbourne
Visit site
✟32,187.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
Der Alter said:
Unless they left some verifiable written document stating why they did or did not do anything, nobody can say why they did not retract their so-called testimony.

The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It may well be that they were just glad to be out of the "church" and didn't want to bother with doing it.

Do you perhaps have some heretofore unknown writing by all the "witnesses" stating that although they lost faith in and left the "church" their so-called "testimony" of the alleged plates was still valid?
http://www.helpingmormons.org/address.htm

Really need to read the whole thing.
 
Upvote 0

Svt4Him

Legend
Site Supporter
Oct 23, 2003
16,711
1,132
54
Visit site
✟98,618.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Conservatives
The Testimony of Three Witnesses
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, & to the Son, & to the Holy Ghost, which is One God. Amen.'

Signed: Oliver Cowdery & David Whitmer & Martin Harris

This appears in the front of every book of Mormon even today but without their signatures! 2 Nephi 27:12-13 in the Book of Mormon had predicted, "Wherefore, at that day when the book shall be delivered unto the man of whom I have spoken, the book shall be hid from the eyes of the world, that the eyes of none shall behold it save it be that the three witnesses shall behold it by the power of God, besides him to whom the book shall be delivered. And there is none other which shall view it. save it be a few according to the will of God." Notice the absolute statement "none shall behold it save it be the three witnesses" yet there were going to be a' few others afterwards!

1.Notice they state they were eyewitnesses to an angel delivering the plates

2. they saw the plates

3.they heard from God to bear witness and their witness is true

While Joseph was still "translating" the Book of Mormon., the Lord told him to have the three witnesses sign "Me Testimony of Three Witnesses" in the front of the Book of Mormon. (D.H.C Vol.I, pp.57 and 59, D and C I7:5-6). It says the witnesses saw the plates, and "we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God." They declared, "We know" because "his (God's) voice hath declared it unto us." As witnesses they could not read nor check the translation, but only repeat what they were told happened. They testified ..an angel" showed them the plates "by the power of God," and God's voice told them the translation was true.

"I, as well as all of my father's family, Smith's wife, Oliver Cowdery and Martin Harris, were present during the translation. . . . He [Joseph Smith] did not use the plates in translation"( Interview given to Kansas City Journal, June 5, 1881, reprinted in the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints Journal of History, vol. 8, (1910), pp. 299-300.)

What happened to the three main witnesses?
David Whitmer said in 1887: "If you believe my testimony to the Book of Mormon; if you believe that God spake to us three witnesses by his own voice, then I tell you that in June, 1838, God spake to me again by his own voice from the heavens, and told me to 'separate myself from among the Latter-day Saints...'" (Address to all believers in Christ, p.27, 1887) this voice he heard not being around J. Smith

William McClellin gained support of the three main witnesses.He previously served as one of the Church's twelve apostles, but departed from the Church believing that Joseph was a fallen prophet. He convinced David Whitmer to take charge of the new church, and Whitmer began to receive revelations in support of its new teachings. Nothing much became of this movement, and David Whitmer later formed his own church, based on the Book of Mormon, but not without teaching that Joseph Smith had led the Mormons deeply into error.

David Whitmer also testified that the entire Book of Mormon text came through Joseph's seer stone. This is the same stone he used for buried treasure with his dad and was found guilty of glass looking.

Oliver Cowdery:

Was excommunicated from the Mormon church and afterward joined the Methodist church..In 1841 the Mormons published a poem which stated "Or Book of Mormon not his word, because denied by Oliver".( Seasons and Times, Vol 2, p 482) ..The Mormon church then accused Cowdery of Adultery claiming he had joined "a gang of counterfeiters, thieves, liars, and blacklegs". .Joseph Smith listed Cowdery as among those, "too mean to mention" Before Cowdery died he said that the book of Doctrines & Covenants must be abandoned. Cowdery died, not in Utah, but at the home of fellow witness David Whitmer, who had also left the Mormon church. Whitmer makes it clear that Cowdery "died believing as I do to-day," which included a belief that Joseph was a fallen prophet, and that the Doctrine and Covenants contained false revelations (An Address to All Believers in Christ, 1887, pp. 1-2).

Martin Harris:

Was known for being very unstable religiously. Over his whole life he changed his affiliation over 13 times. He signed his name to a statement: "Testimony of three witnesses: We Cheerfully certify...The Lord has made it known to me that David Witmer is the man. David was then called forward, and Joseph and his counselors laid hands upon him, and ordained him to his station, to succeed him...He will be prophet, seer, Revelator and Translator before God." Signed Martin Harris, Leonard Rich, Calvin Beebe. This never really came to pass as Brigham Young became Joseph Smith's successor.

An early Mormon convert, Stephen Burnett sent a letter in which he explains why he decided to leave the Church:

...but when I came to hear Martin Harris state in public that he never saw the plates with his natural eyes only in vision and imagination, neither Oliver nor David & also that the eight witnesses never saw them & hesitated to sign that instrument for that reason, but were persuaded to do it, the last pedestal gave away...I therefore three weeks since in the Stone Chapel...the reasons why I took the course which I was resolved to do, and renounced the Book of Mormon.

The Mormons stated of Martin Harris and a few other men within the pages of the church's official newspaper at the time, "a lying deceptive spirit attend them...they are of their father, the devil...The very countenance of Harris will show to every spiritual-minded person who sees him, that the wrath of God is upon him." (Latter-Day Saint's, Millennial Star, Vol. 8 pp124-128.)After being excommunicated from the Mormon church he mother Ann Lee, the founder of the Shakers. Phineas Young, brother of future prophet Brigham Young, had stated that Martin Harris claimed his testimony for the Shaker faith was stronger than his testimony for the Book of Mormon.

Joseph Smith himself question the integrity of at least four of the eleven witnesses Such characters as McLellin, John Whitmer, David Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery and Martin Harris, are too mean to mention; and we had liked to have forgotten them." (History of the Church, vol. 3:232 ) eventually almost All of these men are accused of lying, stealing, no integrity, apostasy, and dishonest business activities.

But Apostle John A. Widtsoe does not agrees with their founder. Despite clear instability on these witnesses and certainly fertile imaginations, Apostle John A. Widtsoe states The Book of Mormon plates were seen and handled, at different times, by eleven competent men, of independent minds and spotless reputations, who published a formal statement of their experience. (Joseph Smith, Seeker After Truth, p. 338)

What about The Testimony Of Eight Witnesses

"BE IT KNOWN unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come: That Joseph Smith, Jun., the translator of this work, has shown 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 shown 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.

Signed: Christian Whitmer & Hiram Page & Jacob Whitmer & Joseph Smith, Sen. Peter Whitmer, Jun. & Hyrum Smith & John Whitmer & Samuel H. Smith

While the most perfect book states only three witnesses eight more men are able to give their testimony in the Book of Mormon, found directly under the "Testimony of Three Witnesses." This is the changing mind of the God of Mormonism (or of Joseph smith) Doctrine and Covenants 5:11,13-15 states there are to be "only" three witnesses ,

"And in addition to your testimony (Joseph), the testimony of three of my servants, whom I shall call and ordain, unto whom I will show these things.... And unto none else will I grant this power, to receive this same testimony among this generation, .... And the testimony of three witnesses will I send forth of my word." Smith must have felt it necessary to prove this by an additional eight since he may have seen some doubt in the first three.

"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." (Book of Mormon, Ether 5:3,4 also says three witnesses shall be shown "by the power of God.") this power of God was in vision not by the natural eyes.

Martin Harris was asked, "Did you see the plates with your natural eyes, just as you see this pencil case in my hand? Now say yes or no." He answered, "Why I did not see them as I do that pencil case, I saw them with the eye of faith. I saw them just as distinctly as I see anything around me - though at the time they were covered over with a cloth."

When Joseph showed plates to the eight witnesses he had them sign a testimonial. Apparently, showing the plates to his father and brothers did not require the power of God, but supernatural power was needed for showing them to the three witnesses.What makes this interesting is that All of the witnesses (except Martin Harris) were related to Joseph Smith or David Whitmer?

By 1847 not a single one of the surviving eleven witnesses were part of the Mormon church. Five of these witnesses joined The Church of Christ started by William McLellin, and Oliver Cowdery indicated he was supportive of this group, though he never joined. (D. Michael Quinn, The Mormon Hierarchy - Origins of Power, p. 188, Signature Books, 1994)

Yet Joseph Smith in May 1844 proclaimed this: "I have more to boast of than any man ever had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a church together since the days of Adam.… Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I." But his friends and relatives all apostatized.

Smith couldn't even keep his own witnesses together. When Jesus rose from the dead and the apostle Paul said to ask some of the 500 witnesses about the accuracy of his testimony (1Cor.15) do you think it would have had any weight if they all had a different story contradicting Paul?

Think about it, not only has there been no archeological proof of anything in their book, the original plates are gone, the earliest manuscript has been altered and all the ones that the book mentions as witnesses departed.

There's only one hope for a Mormon or anyone else to stand on the tried and true word of the Bible, this alone is GOD'S WORD.

Seems like some did change their testimony. Hmmm

http://www.letusreason.org/LDS14.htm
 
Upvote 0

happyinhisgrace

Blessed Trinity
Jan 2, 2004
3,992
56
52
✟26,996.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Apex said:
Happy, could you please explain why the witnesses never took back their testamonie after they left the Church? And please just answer the question straight out, no pulling up more quotes or stuff like that.
sorry, I don't read minds. I do know this though, just because they didn't retract their "testimonies" does not mean that they still believed. I could make a hundred guesses as to why they didn't retract but they would just be guesses.

The fact that they didn't publically say something to the effect of "oh, we were just kidding, we didn't really see them" does not prove that they did really see them but them leaving the lds church after claiming to have seen something like that certainly does weigh against the truth of them seeing the plates.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.