New documentary on Book of Mormon witnesses

[Scott Lloyd]

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2019/02/witnesses.html

Being produced by the Interpreter Foundation with the involvement of some solid scholars, including the late Richard Lloyd Anderson. I’m excited for it. 

[Robert F. Smith]

Will they use Gedorge Lucas' Industrial Light and Magic for the special effects?

[Scott Lloyd]

11 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Will they use Gedorge Lucas' Industrial Light and Magic for the special effects?

I recall seeing the Church-produced film “The Three Witnesses” when I was a teenager. It would be regarded as cheesy by today’s standards, yet it had a lasting impact on my life, due to the account it depicts. I found that account compelling, to say the least, and I still do. 

Edited February 8, 2019 by Scott Lloyd

[Bob Crockett]

59 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I recall seeing the Church-produced film “The Three Witnesses” when I was a teenager. It would be regarded as cheesy by today’s standards, yet it had a lasting impact on my life, due to the account it depicts. I found that account compelling, to say the least, and I still do. 

Ditto.  The Lord called his Witnesses for a particular purpose and they have responded to the call magnificently.  

[Scott Lloyd]

I’m glad to say I’ve seen the gravesites of all three of the witnesses: Oliver Cowdery and David Whitmer in separate cemeteries in Richmond, Missouri, and Martin Harris in Clarkston, Utah. 

[blueglass]

Here's a talk by Elder Oaks about Martin Harris.  

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1999/04/the-witness-martin-harris?lang=eng

I'm not sure why Oliver lost his way and became a Methodist, but I'm glad he came back.  

I don't like that the latest book published by the church history dept says that David Whitmer doubted the Melchizedek priesthood ordination of Joseph Smith.  It's wrong that he turned on the church that way.

pg379 of Foundational Texts of Mormonism, "Gurley wrote that Whitmer told him: “I never heard that an angel had ordained Joseph and Oliver to the Aaronic priesthood until the year 1834[,] 5[,] or 6.”13 In other words, Whitmer believed that Joseph Smith made up the story in the mid-1830s; otherwise, Whitmer would undoubtedly have heard of it, given his early proximity to Smith."

 

[the narrator]

13 minutes ago, blueglass said:

Here's a talk by Elder Oaks about Martin Harris.  

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1999/04/the-witness-martin-harris?lang=eng

I'm not sure why Oliver lost his way and became a Methodist, but I'm glad he came back.  

I don't like that the latest book published by the church history dept says that David Whitmer doubted the Melchizedek priesthood ordination of Joseph Smith.  It's wrong that he turned on the church that way.

pg379 of Foundational Texts of Mormonism, "Gurley wrote that Whitmer told him: “I never heard that an angel had ordained Joseph and Oliver to the Aaronic priesthood until the year 1834[,] 5[,] or 6.”13 In other words, Whitmer believed that Joseph Smith made up the story in the mid-1830s; otherwise, Whitmer would undoubtedly have heard of it, given his early proximity to Smith."

 

The complete lack of any mention of John the Baptist nor the restoration of a Melchizedek priesthood before 1834 was a challenge for the editors of the Joseph Smith Papers, who ultimately decided to mostly ignore it in the introductory material rather than highlight the issue.

The reason Whitmer doubted it is because Joseph and Oliver apparently told nobody about it.

[blueglass]

54 minutes ago, the narrator said:

The complete lack of any mention of John the Baptist nor the restoration of a Melchizedek priesthood before 1834 was a challenge for the editors of the Joseph Smith Papers, who ultimately decided to mostly ignore it in the introductory material rather than highlight the issue.

The reason Whitmer doubted it is because Joseph and Oliver apparently told nobody about it.

Also from pg387 Foundational Texts of Mormonism, Barney writes of the appearance of Jehovah, Moses, Elias1, and Elias2 on 3-April1836 that "There is no extant record indicating that he, or Oliver Cowdery for that matter, ever thereafter referred to the event, privately or publicly—although Smith’s clerks later used his journals to draft his history and included the journal account in the history".  Barney writes that it is important for believers to recognize Smith's "idiosyncratic disposition to conceal his personal experience with heaven".  

[the narrator]

1 minute ago, blueglass said:

Also from pg387 Foundational Texts of Mormonism, Barney writes of the appearance of Jehovah, Moses, Elias1, and Elias2 on 3-April1836 that "There is no extant record indicating that he, or Oliver Cowdery for that matter, ever thereafter referred to the event, privately or publicly—although Smith’s clerks later used his journals to draft his history and included the journal account in the history".  Barney writes that it is important for believers to recognize Smith's "idiosyncratic disposition to conceal his personal experience with heaven".  

I think it's very understandable for Whitmer to think that these were later creations prompted by the incorporation of Rigdon's restoration theology, and the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

[blueglass]

5 minutes ago, the narrator said:

I think it's very understandable for Whitmer to think that these were later creations prompted by the incorporation of Rigdon's restoration theology, and the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

Yes, I suppose.  He really casts a lot of doubt on these angelic visitations.  Regarding the restoration of priesthood keys (sec110), David Whitmer says in The Des Moines Daily News, Oct. 16, 1886

"The great heavenly 'visitation,' which was alleged to have taken place in the temple at Kirtland, was a grand fizzle. The elders were assembled on the appointed day, which was promised would be a veritable day of Pentecost, but there was no visitation. No Peter, James and John; no Moses and Elias, put in an appearance. 'I was in my seat on that occasion,' says Mr. Whitmer, 'and I know that the story sensationally circulated, and which is now on the records of the Utah Mormons as an actual happening, was nothing but a trumped up yarn"

Maybe he was misquoted?  Or was this a tradition of the community of Christ (RLDS)?  It's unfortunate that Emma and Joseph's own surviving family doubted this crucial restoration of keys (3-April-1836).

[rpn]

Isn't it possible that his skepticism preventing him from seeing what others did see?

[the narrator]

3 minutes ago, rpn said:

Isn't it possible that his skepticism preventing him from seeing what others did see?

I think it points more to how visionary experiences became more visitationary experiences over time as people recall and share their memories with each other. (IMO, the same goes with the First Vision, which over time became more of a First Visitation, as well as the accounts of the 3 Witnesses, particularly Harris, whose changing accounts of seeing the gold plates become less visionary and more material over time.) Everyone does this in various fashions. For example, I have plenty of memories of really seeing things that were initially dreams, imagined events, and misremembered important elements.

For a few years I've been telling friends about a sacred experience I had blessing my baby son while my wife held him. Part of it involved a distinct memory of my 2-yr-old daughter running up and grabbing onto my leg as I was performing the blessing. I have an image of my mind of looking down and seeing her hold me, completing our whole family being a part of the blessing. I recently read the brief account of the blessing I wrote the day after it occured. My daughter didn't grab my leg. She ran up and held onto my wife's leg. Assuming this earlier account is correct, my memory of it was wrong. The craziest thing is that despite knowing my memory is wrong, that is still the memory I have of the event.

[Scott Lloyd]

14 hours ago, blueglass said:

Here's a talk by Elder Oaks about Martin Harris.  

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1999/04/the-witness-martin-harris?lang=eng

I'm not sure why Oliver lost his way and became a Methodist, but I'm glad he came back.  

I don't like that the latest book published by the church history dept says that David Whitmer doubted the Melchizedek priesthood ordination of Joseph Smith.  It's wrong that he turned on the church that way.

pg379 of Foundational Texts of Mormonism, "Gurley wrote that Whitmer told him: “I never heard that an angel had ordained Joseph and Oliver to the Aaronic priesthood until the year 1834[,] 5[,] or 6.”13 In other words, Whitmer believed that Joseph Smith made up the story in the mid-1830s; otherwise, Whitmer would undoubtedly have heard of it, given his early proximity to Smith."

 

I think the flaws in the individual Book of Mormon witnesses add credibility to the fact that they never denied their witness. If David Whitmer was pissed off at Joseph for this or that reason, and the testimony of the Nephite plates was a fraud, why would he maintain that fraud?

Edited February 9, 2019 by Scott Lloyd

[Burnside]

On 2/7/2019 at 5:48 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2019/02/witnesses.html

Being produced by the Interpreter Foundation with the involvement of some solid scholars, including the late Richard Lloyd Anderson. I’m excited for it. 

I wonder how Dr. Dan Peterson plans on making Oliver Cowdery a credible witness.

That will be interesting.

Dr. Peterson, being a co-founder of F.A.R.M.S., former ‘director’ of the Maxwell Institute and now founder and President of TheMormonInterpreter Foundation, all based on and promoting the dogma that the actual Hill Cumorah is somewhere in Mexico.

He and his promoted geography theory reject Oliver Cowdery’s statement about the Hill Cumorah being in New York as noted at JosephSmith papers. org

“At about one mile west rises another ridge of less height, running parallel with the former, leaving a beautiful vale between. The soil is of the first quality for the country, and under a state of cultivation, which gives a prospect at once imposing, when one reflects on the fact, that here, between these hills, the entire power and national strength of both the Jaredites and Nephites were destroyed.”

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1834-1836/90

This same dogma claims that when Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery returned to the Hill Cumorah and it opened up and they walked into a cave, that Smith and Cowdery were hallucinating or having a vision of a cave in Mexico, because the account contradicts Dr. Peterson’s promoted geography theory. It’s summarized at FairMormon here: https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Question:_Is_there_a_cave_in_the_Hill_Cumorah_containing_the_Nephite_records%3F

This recent article at the Interpreter in the very first paragraph calls the Hill Cumorah in New York as the “Palmyra Hill.” What?

https://www.mormoninterpreter.com/the-geology-of-moronis-stone-box-examining-the-setting-and-resources-of-palmyra/

If Dr. Peterson and his organization can’t accept Oliver Cowdery’s statement of the location of the final Jaredite and Nephite battles being in New York, I don’t see him and his organization qualified to make a film about the Three Witnesses.

And don’t forget. Oliver Cowdery was an Apostle. And your Priesthood Line of Authority goes through him.

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, Burnside said:

I wonder how Dr. Dan Peterson plans on making Oliver Cowdery a credible witness.

That will be interesting.

Dr. Peterson, being a co-founder of F.A.R.M.S., former ‘director’ of the Maxwell Institute and now founder and President of TheMormonInterpreter Foundation, all based on and promoting the dogma that the actual Hill Cumorah is somewhere in Mexico.

He and his promoted geography theory reject Oliver Cowdery’s statement about the Hill Cumorah being in New York as noted at JosephSmith papers. org

“At about one mile west rises another ridge of less height, running parallel with the former, leaving a beautiful vale between. The soil is of the first quality for the country, and under a state of cultivation, which gives a prospect at once imposing, when one reflects on the fact, that here, between these hills, the entire power and national strength of both the Jaredites and Nephites were destroyed.”

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1834-1836/90

This same dogma claims that when Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery returned to the Hill Cumorah and it opened up and they walked into a cave, that Smith and Cowdery were hallucinating or having a vision of a cave in Mexico, because the account contradicts Dr. Peterson’s promoted geography theory. It’s summarized at FairMormon here: https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Question:_Is_there_a_cave_in_the_Hill_Cumorah_containing_the_Nephite_records%3F

This recent article at the Interpreter in the very first paragraph calls the Hill Cumorah in New York as the “Palmyra Hill.” What?

https://www.mormoninterpreter.com/the-geology-of-moronis-stone-box-examining-the-setting-and-resources-of-palmyra/

If Dr. Peterson and his organization can’t accept Oliver Cowdery’s statement of the location of the final Jaredite and Nephite battles being in New York, I don’t see him and his organization qualified to make a film about the Three Witnesses.

And don’t forget. Oliver Cowdery was an Apostle. And your Priesthood Line of Authority goes through him.

I smell a sock puppet.

[rodheadlee]

1 hour ago, Burnside said:

I wonder how Dr. Dan Peterson plans on making Oliver Cowdery a credible witness.

That will be interesting.

Dr. Peterson, being a co-founder of F.A.R.M.S., former ‘director’ of the Maxwell Institute and now founder and President of TheMormonInterpreter Foundation, all based on and promoting the dogma that the actual Hill Cumorah is somewhere in Mexico.

He and his promoted geography theory reject Oliver Cowdery’s statement about the Hill Cumorah being in New York as noted at JosephSmith papers. org

“At about one mile west rises another ridge of less height, running parallel with the former, leaving a beautiful vale between. The soil is of the first quality for the country, and under a state of cultivation, which gives a prospect at once imposing, when one reflects on the fact, that here, between these hills, the entire power and national strength of both the Jaredites and Nephites were destroyed.”

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1834-1836/90

This same dogma claims that when Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery returned to the Hill Cumorah and it opened up and they walked into a cave, that Smith and Cowdery were hallucinating or having a vision of a cave in Mexico, because the account contradicts Dr. Peterson’s promoted geography theory. It’s summarized at FairMormon here: https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Question:_Is_there_a_cave_in_the_Hill_Cumorah_containing_the_Nephite_records%3F

This recent article at the Interpreter in the very first paragraph calls the Hill Cumorah in New York as the “Palmyra Hill.” What?

https://www.mormoninterpreter.com/the-geology-of-moronis-stone-box-examining-the-setting-and-resources-of-palmyra/

If Dr. Peterson and his organization can’t accept Oliver Cowdery’s statement of the location of the final Jaredite and Nephite battles being in New York, I don’t see him and his organization qualified to make a film about the Three Witnesses.

And don’t forget. Oliver Cowdery was an Apostle. And your Priesthood Line of Authority goes through him.

The geography thread is <<<<<<< that way. You have a CFR to respond to or retract your words.

[carbon dioxide]

On 2/8/2019 at 11:11 AM, the narrator said:

The complete lack of any mention of John the Baptist nor the restoration of a Melchizedek priesthood before 1834 was a challenge for the editors of the Joseph Smith Papers, who ultimately decided to mostly ignore it in the introductory material rather than highlight the issue.

The reason Whitmer doubted it is because Joseph and Oliver apparently told nobody about it.

Its a good thing I was not involved in all of this.  My general disposition is to keep most important things that happen to me to myself.  If I saw John the baptist, I might wait 30 years before mentioning it.  I don't keep a journal and I even have told very little of my life to my wife and kids.  Not that I am ashamed of anything but simply I keep things to myself.

Edited February 9, 2019 by carbon dioxide

[Scott Lloyd]

21 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

Its a good thing I was not involved in all of this.  My general disposition is to keep most important things that happen to me to myself.  If I saw John the baptist, I might wait 30 years before mentioning it.  I don't keep a journal and I even have told very little of my life to my wife and kids.  Not that I am ashamed of anything but simply I keep things to myself.

Indications are that Joseph Smith was of a similar disposition. Apparently, the now-canonized account of the First Vision was motivated by the need to debunk false rumors that had arisen regarding the Church (see Joseph Smith History 1:1).

When he returned home after his experience in the grove, he did not immediately tell his family what had happened. Instead, he demurred, saying to his mother, "Never mind, all is well -- I am well enough off. ... I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true" (see Joseph Smith History 1:20).