LoudmouthMormon Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 Hi folks,I rarely encounter a new criticism of my church or faith that I'm unable to quickly source after ten minutes of internet searching. This one has my google attention span stumped: Criticism: If you look on the church's website at the Testimony of the Eight Witnesses (Page 2 from the link), it's pretty obvious all the "signatures" came from the same hand. What's up with that? The obvious questions are: Did the eight ever get together to formally sign a statement, and if so, where is the proof?
Avatar4321 Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 I dont think it's obvious they are all the same signature at all. 1
Palerider Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 Hi folks,I rarely encounter a new criticism of my church or faith that I'm unable to quickly source after ten minutes of internet searching. This one has my google attention span stumped: Criticism: If you look on the church's website at the Testimony of the Eight Witnesses (Page 2 from the link), it's pretty obvious all the "signatures" came from the same hand. What's up with that? The obvious questions are: Did the eight ever get together to formally sign a statement, and if so, where is the proof? If you look carefully I would say that the signatures of the "Three Witnesses" are also signed by the same hand as well. Not that I believe any of this stuff, but I would venture that we are looking at what is probably the "original" that was sent to the printer for publication.It was probably written this way for clarification to ensure proper spelling, etc. If the church is actually trying to claim this as the original document signed by the three and then the eight witnesses then, yes, they do have a bit of a problem here...........among the many others......... 1
ALarson Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 Interesting question. It does appear that these signatures were all done by the same person (comparing the "W's" and other letters). Hopefully the original exists and the church has it.
CA Steve Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 I think you are looking at the printers copy version, so they would be in the same hand because it is a copy. 2
ALarson Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 I found this (but I'm not sure of the source): The original manuscript to the Book of Mormon was put in the cornerstone of the Nauvoo House and most of it rotted away. Though we have a small part of the original documents, the majority of it is gone. Just as with all manuscripts, without proper care it is very difficult to maintain/retain originals. We don't have any original signed testimony of the witnesses of the Book of Mormon. However, we do have the printer's manuscript where, in Oliver Cowdery's hand, he signed his own testimony in copying the testimony of the three witnesses in the printer's manuscript. 4
Tacenda Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 Hi folks,I rarely encounter a new criticism of my church or faith that I'm unable to quickly source after ten minutes of internet searching. This one has my google attention span stumped:Criticism: If you look on the church's website at the Testimony of the Eight Witnesses (Page 2 from the link), it's pretty obvious all the "signatures" came from the same hand. What's up with that?The obvious questions are: Did the eight ever get together to formally sign a statement, and if so, where is the proof?One thing that stands out is that these witnesses were related or acquaintances. Why wouldn't the Lord want JS to find unrelated or citizen's out in the community that didn't have ties to JS? 1
ALarson Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 One thing that stands out is that these witnesses were related or acquaintances. Why wouldn't the Lord want JS to find unrelated or citizen's out in the community that didn't have ties to JS?You're right about them being related and from two families (Smith and Whitmer): The Eight Witnesses were all members of the Whitmer or Smith families: Christian Whitmer, Jacob Whitmer, Peter Whitmer, Jr., John Whitmer, Hiram Page, Joseph Smith, Sr., Hyrum Smith, and Samuel Harrison Smith. Joseph Smith Sr. was Joseph's father, and Hyrum and Samuel H. Smith were his brothers. Christian, Jacob, Peter Jr. and John were David Whitmer's brothers, and Hiram Page was his brother-in-law.
why me Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 (edited) One thing that stands out is that these witnesses were related or acquaintances. Why wouldn't the Lord want JS to find unrelated or citizen's out in the community that didn't have ties to JS? When you get to the pearly gates, you can ask him. However, I do think that the people involved were people that he knew because he could trust them to keep their word about what they saw and felt with their hands. And that is what happened. No matter what their status in the church, they never denied their experience or testimony. Edited February 25, 2014 by why me
Popular Post why me Posted February 25, 2014 Popular Post Posted February 25, 2014 Hi folks,I rarely encounter a new criticism of my church or faith that I'm unable to quickly source after ten minutes of internet searching. This one has my google attention span stumped: Criticism: If you look on the church's website at the Testimony of the Eight Witnesses (Page 2 from the link), it's pretty obvious all the "signatures" came from the same hand. What's up with that? The obvious questions are: Did the eight ever get together to formally sign a statement, and if so, where is the proof?I think that they did. However, the eight knew that their testimonies were in the book of mormon. And they supported their statement throughout their lives. So, it really doesn't matter if we have the original copy or oliver's copy. What matters is that they never retracted their testimony recorded in the book of mormon. And the same applies to the three witnesses too. 6
ALarson Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 (edited) The obvious questions are: Did the eight ever get together to formally sign a statement, and if so, where is the proof?In doing some searching online, I can't find any "proof" that the 8 actually signed anything. But I've just done a brief search so far. It does appear that no original exists or survived. One has to wonder who wrote the testimony for them to all sign? Did they get together and compose it before signing it? I can see why one statement was needed rather than each of them writing out their own (in their own words) and then signing those. Are there quotes by any of them regarding the signing of the statement? I would think that would be proof that they did sign the written testimony. Edited February 25, 2014 by ALarson 1
LoudmouthMormon Posted February 25, 2014 Author Posted February 25, 2014 I think that they did. However, the eight knew that their testimonies were in the book of mormon. And they supported their statement throughout their lives. So, it really doesn't matter if we have the original copy or oliver's copy. What matters is that they never retracted their testimony recorded in the book of mormon. And the same applies to the three witnesses too.I'm thinking this is the valid response. But then the question becomes, so what are the existing sources of quotes from these people across their lives, where they indicate agreement with the BoM? Another valid response to a Christian critic, would be to ask them for similar proof that the gospels were written by people who actually believed all that stuff about Christ.
why me Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 I'm thinking this is the valid response. But then the question becomes, so what are the existing sources of quotes from these people across their lives, where they indicate agreement with the BoM? Another valid response to a Christian critic, would be to ask them for similar proof that the gospels were written by people who actually believed all that stuff about Christ.These quotations are online. However, we also have many of their death bed testimonies. This also says a lot about their experience with the book. Human nature would have dictated that if this were a fraud they would have given it up. Or as time passed they would begin to question their experience. We just need to read the exmormons on this board or on other boards to see that people do begin to doubt their spiritual experiences and eventually leave the faith. But for these witnesses, they could not deny their testimony written in the book of mormon even if they did leave the church. Interestingly, most had at least one foot in some sort of mormonism.
Popular Post Bob Crockett Posted February 25, 2014 Popular Post Posted February 25, 2014 (edited) The copy you reference was something that was intended for publication. As I will explain below, it is probably not likely that the witnesses ever signed physically a joint document. It was extremely common practice in the early 19th century to publish "affidavits" of character and so forth in a book, as well as attestations. Just take a look at all the affidavits and attestations offered by E.D. Howe (Hurlburt) or John C. Bennett. Bennett's book is almost half affidavits and attestations. I've read reams of works about Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, and letters, attestations and affidavits (none of which contain actual signatures) fill the many books. But it was the act of publication with the names thereon which constituted the attestation, not some separate document with handwriting. And, in the case of the witnesses, it was not an affidavit at all but merely an attestation, in which case it needn't have been sworn before a judicial officer. Theoretically, if a book comes out with a false attestation the purported witness would disavow the attestation. But none of the witnesses did so and, as such, confirmed and ratified their statements. By analogy, one of your children wants to publish a book of family letters pertaining to a deceased grandparent. You're not much of a writer, suppose, and your child prepares a letter on your behalf to be inserted in the book. You approve it in advance but there isn't any need to sign it. The book is published, you agree with the letter created for you which is attributed to you. The witnesses' statements were just that. A statement, to which they agreed could be published, and which was. Edited February 25, 2014 by Bob Crockett 7
David T Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 The earliest copy of the Testimony of Three witnesses is a copy from the Printer's Manuscript, and is signed by Oliver Cowdery. David Whitmer has said the original witnesses signed the original, but that doesn't appear to exist anymore - if it was appended to the Original Manuscript, that portion (like most of it) is no longer extant. Likewise, the earliest copy of the Eight Witnesses doc that exists is also from the Printer's manuscript, and is in the handwriting of Oliver Cowdery. It's unknown as to whether there was an earlier draft of this or not. See Joseph Smith Papers: Documents, volume 1, 378-387. 3
DBMormon Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 (edited) this is also a printers manuscript. I don't have a source but am certain of it as I came across this a few months back. Whose writing? I don't know. I also don't think their testimonies were ever signed to a paper but That should not be a big deal considering all of them stated verbally that they had attested to this testimony. And yes we can bicker over how they worded a statement here and there but they still openly affixed their names to the general story and never denied being a witness Edited February 25, 2014 by DBMormon 1
The Nehor Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 One thing that stands out is that these witnesses were related or acquaintances. Why wouldn't the Lord want JS to find unrelated or citizen's out in the community that didn't have ties to JS? I don't think it would serve any purpose. We already have wonderfully complex theories linking Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon before any record of their meeting. It would be simple enough for them to claim Joseph chose vetted witnesses. You grab a disinterested person, haul him out to the woods, and he sees an angel and gold plates. At that point he is very unlikely to be disinterested. He might embrace the gospel or run away from it or even fight it but shrug his shoulders, agree it happened and go about his daily life as if nothing had changed? Unlikely. If he fights it it is easy to lie. Plus I see no reason that God should reward the faithless with such an experience unless it was calculated to save them. His law of witnesses does not insist that witnesses be disinterested. That is a cultural idea I assume God does not feel bound by. 4
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 Hi folks,I rarely encounter a new criticism of my church or faith that I'm unable to quickly source after ten minutes of internet searching. This one has my google attention span stumped: Criticism: If you look on the church's website at the Testimony of the Eight Witnesses (Page 2 from the link), it's pretty obvious all the "signatures" came from the same hand. What's up with that? The obvious questions are: Did the eight ever get together to formally sign a statement, and if so, where is the proof?Not the same...note the different "J's" just to note on example.
MichelleD Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 Not the same...note the different "J's" just to note on example.I think we know that this is all in Oliver Cowdery's handwriting, don't we?
cinepro Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 (edited) One thing that stands out is that these witnesses were related or acquaintances. Why wouldn't the Lord want JS to find unrelated or citizen's out in the community that didn't have ties to JS? After the Lord saw what happened when he allowed uninterested people to see the original papyri for the Book of Abraham, I don't think He's regretted his decision to show the plates to a few close friends and relatives of JS and get them off the planet. Edited February 25, 2014 by cinepro
Bikeemikey Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 Not the same...note the different "J's" just to note on example.Actually, it appears the answer is it is the same and it's meant to be as its a printers copy.
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 Actually, it appears the answer is it is the same and it's meant to be as its a printers copy.Could be, maybe you have a better eye, but scribes always submit items that go to the press, including the BoM copy that went to press as there was more than one scribe.
Bikeemikey Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 Could be, maybe you have a better eye, but scribes always submit items that go to the press, including the BoM copy that went to press as there was more than one scribe.The fact it was written by one hand and signed by one hand has no bearing on the veracity of the document. The document was verified by the witnesses through their choice to not repudiate it either at its publication or later in life after separation from the church (in some instances). 1
canard78 Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 Interesting question. It does appear that these signatures were all done by the same person (comparing the "W's" and other letters). Hopefully the original exists and the church has it. They don't. I'm not sure there's even any record of it ever existing in the first place.
Wiki Wonka Posted February 26, 2014 Posted February 26, 2014 I think we know that this is all in Oliver Cowdery's handwriting, don't we? Correct. The entire printer's manuscript is in Oliver's handwriting, including the witness statements. This is the document that was taken to the printer. The original manuscript was mostly destroyed, including the witness statements (if they were there, they would have been at the end of the manscript, not the beginning). Here's a statement from David Whitmer in 1881 reaffirming his testimony as it was printed in the Book of Mormon. This is found in "David Whitmer Proclamation, 19 March 1881," Early Mormon Documents 5:69 : "That I have never at any time, denied that testimony or any part thereof, which has so long since been published with that book as one of the three witnesses.Those who know me best, well know that I have adhered to that testimony.—And that no man may be misled or doubt my present views in regard to the same, I do now again affirm the truth of all my statement, as then made and published." 1
Recommended Posts