Original Signed "testimony Of The Eight Witnesses"?

[sheilauk]

Probably for the same reason that He didn't take back the handwritten original and printer's manuscripts.  The Dead Sea Scrolls and Papryi are copies of copies probably of more copies and so on.  Certainly the Dead Sea Scrolls are not the original letters and books and the papryi we have in existence appears to be a copy of a text.  Where are the original books and letters?  As far as I know, there is not one document known to exist that was actually written by Paul, the Gospel Writers, Moses, the Judges, Peter etc.  Copies of Sacred Texts remain, so that we will know what was said.  Originals do not, so that we act upon Faith.

[why me]

Probably for the same reason that He didn't take back the handwritten original and printer's manuscripts.  The Dead Sea Scrolls and Papryi are copies of copies probably of more copies and so on.  Certainly the Dead Sea Scrolls are not the original letters and books and the papryi we have in existence appears to be a copy of a text.  Where are the original books and letters?  As far as I know, there is not one document known to exist that was actually written by Paul, the Gospel Writers, Moses, the Judges, Peter etc.  Copies of Sacred Texts remain, so that we will know what was said.  Originals do not, so that we act upon Faith.

We also do not have any witnesses to Christ's life outside the gospels. We have no information about Mary and Joseph. And we have no information about Christ from outside sources. We have no witnesses of the event. One would think that somewhere there would be a first hand account of what happened with Jesus. But none exists. So, was this event actually so important for the people of judea? Maybe not since no accounts exist from that time. And the gospels were written decades after the event. How accurate are they?

 

But with the book of mormon we have 11 witnesses who never retracted their testimony. And yet, many people have a hard time believing them but they are willing to believe the bible which has no witnesses of its truth.

[why me]

Why would God take the plates and leave the Dead Sea Scrolls? Or not take the Papyri either?

And what exactly did the scrolls prove? Not much. Do they confirm the existence of god? I don't think so.

[cdowis]

How many people would want their families to live a lie? Look at oliver giving his final testimony to wife and child. Why do such a thing? How could a man allow his wife and daughter to live a lie? And we can ask the same for the other witnesses. And we need to remember that many mormons were suffering in the 30's and 40's and yet, these witnesses (the ones who were alive) continued to bear their testimony. All would have needed to be psychopaths to do such a thing.

 

The antis respond, "They were afraid of the Danites."

[jkwilliams]

And what exactly did the scrolls prove? Not much. Do they confirm the existence of god? I don't think so.

 

Would plates confirm the existence of God or just the existence of plates?

[cdowis]

Probably for the same reason that He didn't take back the handwritten original and printer's manuscripts.  The Dead Sea Scrolls and Papryi are copies of copies probably of more copies and so on.  Certainly the Dead Sea Scrolls are not the original letters and books and the papryi we have in existence appears to be a copy of a text.  Where are the original books and letters?  As far as I know, there is not one document known to exist that was actually written by Paul, the Gospel Writers, Moses, the Judges, Peter etc.  Copies of Sacred Texts remain, so that we will know what was said.  Originals do not, so that we act upon Faith.

 

The Evangels respond, "There are many copies extant and they are fairly consistent among themselves.  This indicates that they are consistent with the originals."

[cdowis]

Would plates confirm the existence of God or just the existence of plates?

 

It would bring up the question of where JS obtained these gold plates -- from an angel?

[jkwilliams]

The Evangels respond, "There are many copies extant and they are fairly consistent among themselves.  This indicates that they are consistent with the originals."

 

Is there some reason to sow doubt about the New Testament?

[Tacenda]

The Evangels respond, "There are many copies extant and they are fairly consistent among themselves. This indicates that they are consistent with the originals."

I believe they are originals and would put them in the same camp as the BoM plates, thank you very much! Edited February 28, 2014 by Tacenda

[why me]

I believe they are originals and would put them in the same camp as the BoM plates, thank you very much!

We don't have the originals. Only copies.

 

http://www.annarbor.com/news/university-of-michigan-st-paul-ancient-letters-ipad/

 

But notice this from the link:

 

The Greek text is continuous, with "no word division, no punctuation, no nothing," according to Verhoogt, but the app's English translation allowed for slight editing, such as simple punctuation.

And although biblical text is derived from the letters, the app's translation of the text is more literal than what you would read in a modern Bible.

 

I believe that the original book of mormon did not have such divisions, punctuations etc. Coincidence?

[why me]

Is there some reason to sow doubt about the New Testament?

We need to remember that christians who are not so friendly to mormons often fail to use their own arguments against the bible. Sometimes it is important to put the record straight. The book of mormon is a second witness to christ. One would think that other christians would welcome such a book.

[DBMormon]

What is sad about all this is that some members are taken in by the critic arguments over the fact that we have only a printer's copy with the same handwriting. The members who are shocked by this don't seem to understand that the whole point is nonsensical since the witnesses never denied what was stated in the book of mormon about their testimony. They obviously knew that it was in the book of mormon.

 

The witnesses are a strong testimony of the truthfulness of the book of mormon.

Which was my point exactly

[DBMormon]

I'm not anti witnesses but I have struggled a little with the fact that their monumental experiences did not lead them to more of a profound devotion to the church.

I have had what I would call profound experiences and yet my doubts get the best of me at times.  I can completely relate to their having left the faith in spite of spiritual experiences.

[AndyDnom]

did any of the three or eight witnesses also witness to the Strang Plates?

[Bob Crockett]

did any of the three or eight witnesses also witness to the Strang Plates?

Strang would show his plates to anybody who would drop by. They were not a secret or mystical.

He was nothing more than a copycat.

Edited March 2, 2014 by Bob Crockett

[knowone]

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 dont think a signature matters.  they are listed in every bom printed & that still states what they believe.  you dont need every bom signed by hand by each witness for their testimony to be valid.  my testimony is solid & it doesnt require my signature.  i give it out freely however, whenever.