Are the Eight Witnesses to the Book of Mormon Credible? w/ LDS Discussions Ep. 53

Introduction and Episode Overview

John Dehlin 0:00 Hello everyone, and welcome to another edition of Mormon Stories podcast, LDS Discussions Edition. It is May 1, 2024, and today we are continuing our amazing Mormon Church truth claims series called LDS Discussions. And we're going to be doing at least a two parter on the eight Witnesses to the Book of Mormon. For now, the working title of this episode is what did the Eight Witnesses actually See? We. We're going to be finalizing what the actual titles are for these two episodes after we record them, but we know we've got enough slides for at least two episodes. For those who don't know, we're talking about the eight Witnesses to the Book of Mormon following an episode or two on the three witnesses to the Book of Mormon. And this whole LDS discussion series is a 50 plus episode series now that we've recorded over a year or two based on the amazing work of Mike from the ldsdiscussions.com website where Mike did a meticulous job of reviewing Mormon Church truth claims. And we've covered so many great things. You all love it. Mike at some point needed to take a break from original research, and so we've brought Julia Sanders on to continue some of that research as well. And. And with that, we are wanting to remind everyone that you can consume the LDS discussion series wherever you get your podcasts. On Spotify, on Apple Podcasts, you can view it on video and Spotify, but also There is a YouTube playlist where you can watch them all in succession. We want to remind you that this series is enjoyed best if you start from the beginning and then watch them all in sequence, because we will be referring to past episodes. But you know, we welcome you no matter where you are and we're. We know that so many of you love this series. So without any further ado, I'm going to invite back Julia Sanders, who is the researcher and the primary guide for today's episode. Hey, Julia.

Julia 2:13 Hi.

John Dehlin 2:14 How was Scotland?

Julia 2:15 It was so good. I got engaged.

John Dehlin 2:17 What?

Julia 2:18 Yeah.

John Dehlin 2:19 Congratulations. Congratulations to America.

Julia 2:24 Yeah, my old BYU Idaho roommate.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:27 Wow.

Nemo 2:28 Congratulations.

John Dehlin 2:29 Congrats. We're excited for that. Thanks for planning this episode.

Julia 2:34 Yeah.

John Dehlin 2:35 We also have Mike the. The granddaddy, the Godfather, LDS discussions. Hey, Mike.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:42 Hey, everybody.

John Dehlin 2:43 Thanks for joining us.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:45 It's good to be here and it's good that Julia is doing all the work. It's so easy.

John Dehlin 2:50 And last but not least, we have the amazing. Well, the. Okay, Nemo. Nemo the Mormon. That's an inside.

Nemo 2:58 John's just salty that he did get to hang out with me and Julia in Oxford. The Other week and RFM and I hung out with John's just. He's got fomo and Mike told me that he had to take a break from me. He didn't say it was the research. He said he couldn't bear to work with me, so he had to take a break.

John Dehlin 3:14 Mike's always got it headed in for you, Nemo. He's never really hidden that, so.

Nemo 3:20 No. Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 3:20 It's like Nemo's like nails on the chalkboard to me.

John Dehlin 3:23 I'm surprised. Like the Beatles, they are.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 3:28 The behind the scenes footage is just crazy.

John Dehlin 3:30 Nemo's the Yoko Ono of our group, basically. All right, well, today we've got a lot to cover and Julia, should we. Should we dive right in?

Julia 3:43 Yeah.

John Dehlin 3:44 So do you want to give just for those. Your Book of Mormon had three witnesses and then eight witnesses. Any super quick context that we want to share or. Or is that just going to be what we kind of talk.

Julia 3:56 We kind of talk about the context in it. Okay. Yeah. So the last one, we talked about the three witnesses and. And how there was inconsistencies with the. With those witnesses. So now we're covering the eight.

John Dehlin 4:07 All right. Anything else anyone wants to say before we dive in or. Everyone. Good.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 4:12 I'll add just in the last episode, I said the three witnesses don't matter. I still believe that from a historical standpoint, they matter because of how the church props it up as a faith for everything. But I will say I think the eight witnesses are more important than the three witnesses, which is something I wouldn't have said until I kind of went through this recently. So I actually think this episode is more insightful into how Joseph Smith is doing things than the three witnesses. And I'll explain that as we go. But I just want to throw that out at the beginning because I actually do find this to be better than the three witnesses from kind of getting a glimpse into how Joseph Smith does things. And to that note, I'll say that part of what I'm thinking is two of the. Two of the favorite overview topics from the website that we did episodes for are the 116 pages and the transfiguration of Brigham Young. And I felt like both of those topics give you an insight into church history that you can't get from a lot of the more covered topics. And I feel like this one kind of falls into that same group. So I've just given that as a little teaser.

John Dehlin 5:09 Wow, that's high praise. That's high praise for Mike, everybody. I don't think it gets better than that, really.

Nemo 5:16 And I just want to say before we start that today's episode is brought to you by chocolate covered peanuts. And if you want to eat the same snacks that I'm eating while you enjoy this episode, go get yourself some chocolate covered peanuts. Unless you're allergic, in which case, please don't do that.

Setting the Stage for the Eight Witnesses

John Dehlin 5:31 Well, without any further ado, Julia, where do we begin?

Julia 5:36 Yeah, so. So I just want to give a little bit of background. So, as we discussed previously, the three witnesses are referred. Referenced four times in the Book of Mormon, and that's ether. Second Nephi in a couple of chapter or in chapter 11, 27, and then another time in 27. The only reference in the Book of Mormon to the Eight Witnesses comes from 2nd Nephi 27, verses 12 through 13 that reads, the eyes of none shall behold it, save it be that three witnesses shall behold it by the power of God besides him to whom the book shall be delivered. And they shall testify to the truth of the book and the things therein. And here's the reference. And there is none other which shall view it, save it be a few according to the will of God to bear testimony of his word unto the children of men. Okay, so, yeah, so what's interesting is that the three Nephites, or the three, excuse me, the three witnesses was referenced in the Book of Mormon, but the only reference is save it be a few. Like, that's the only time the eight witnesses are discussed. And so it seems like an afterthought to me rather than like, if you think of the Book of Mormon as a 19th century text, Joseph Smith is writing it. And it seems like the eight witnesses ideas came later.

Nemo 6:40 Yeah, I'm not going to take seriously anything that starts to say only certain people get to see X, Y and z. Because John 1:18 is no man has seen God at any time. The only begotten son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. And then you've got the Book of Mormon full of people that see God or see the finger of God or Joseph Smith sees God directly. So it's like, you know, I'm not taking it too seriously about who gets to see God and who doesn't, and declarations that only certain people are going to get C plates and. Yeah, yeah. And where my brain went.

John Dehlin 7:12 But clearly there aren't the scriptural specific predictions of a number of people, that sort of thing.

Julia 7:20 Okay, yeah. Nowhere does it say eight people shall see it.

John Dehlin 7:24 Yeah, okay. All right.

Historical Summary of the Eight Witnesses

Julia 7:27 Okay. So the summary of the eight witnesses in volume one, the summary of the, the story of the eight witnesses is summarized in this manner. So this is from the eight, the seven volumes. Soon after these things had transpired, the following additional testimony was obtained. And then they go on to like copy and paste the testimony of the eight witnesses. B.H. roberts notes that Lucy Mack Smith's history gives further details. So I just think that's interesting is in, in all these seven volumes, that's the only reference that they really give. That's the only background that they give. And so I just thought that was really interesting. Whereas with the three witnesses we have all the story of them going to the woods and things like that. And this is all we have for the eight witnesses.

John Dehlin 8:04 Wow. That's it.

Julia 8:06 Yeah. As far as the, the volume, the, the history of the Church, the seven volumes. So.

John Dehlin 8:13 Huh. That's almost nothing. Wow.

Julia 8:15 I know, I know. So if you need, if you want to learn more, kind of going to Lucy is what BH Roberts is saying to do. And then of course these witnesses that we're going to talk about, the other testimonies kind of give a little bit more detail. But I just was thought, I just thought that was really interesting that here we're writing the whole history of the church and that's all that they give. So I guess it wasn't as important as Mike thinks that they are to

John Dehlin 8:36 them writing at the time.

Julia 8:39 Yeah.

John Dehlin 8:40 Which may. May bolster Mike's point.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 8:42 Oh yeah, yeah. And I'm gonna to say that it's not that I think they're important in terms of history. I think that it gives us, I think this gives us a better glimpse into what Joseph Smith is doing. So that's why I think it's more important as, as far as like, I guess for the point of the, the whole stuff on the website and in this, these episodes it was like putting that puzzle back together and trying to see where the pieces fit. And all of these clues give us that the 116 pages episode, I think personally is the, one of the best episodes, one of the best overviews on the website because it gives you insights into how Joseph Smith reacts when he loses control of a situation. It gives you insights into how he's creating the Book of Mormon because we know that the order of dictation. So you could see all of those clues at the beginning of the book that the end of that, the middle of the book doesn't know all of that stuff. And this to me follows a little bit of similar pattern in terms of the way that these eight witnesses, the story rolls out, it shows you where Joseph Smith is insecure. It shows you where he's confident.

John Dehlin 9:38 And.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 9:38 And I think that gives us a little bit more insight. Whereas the three witnesses is more like, yeah, we went out, we saw a vision. I don't believe, as we talked about in the last episode, that the stories are very inconsistent. And there's not a. There are very few believing Mormons that if they heard these stories from another religion, would say, oh, yeah, that religion is true. They'd say, these guys are making it up. And I would argue this one with the eight is a lot less credible in terms of, like, you know, that kind of visionary stuff. But it also gives you a better window into what Joseph's doing. So I'm rambling a bit, but I. I want to just clarify. The reason I think it's more important is you kind of like how the sausage is made more than anything else.

John Dehlin 10:13 Well, you're the godfather, Mike, so we want your. We want your candid views here.

Nemo 10:17 So is what you're saying essentially that if we're looking at the three and eight witnesses as Joseph's attempts to increase the credibility of his claims, then the eight witnesses is a lot less thorough an attempt than the 3 and open

John Dehlin 10:30 up to more or less credible? Less credible, yeah.

Nemo 10:33 Less credible, perhaps.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 10:34 Yeah.

John Dehlin 10:37 Oh, go ahead, Michael.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 10:38 I might be off a little bit here, but the history of the church was written in what, 1837? 1838. Right. Somewhere in there. And at that point, the three witnesses were all run out of town. Right. Because that was one of the things we talked about is how they weren't there to correct any of the stuff in the history so Joseph Smith could write their history. Forum. We talked about that with how he made all those changes to the Charles Anson story with Martin Harris. Right. I think with the eight witnesses, there are some of them that are still there at the time. Obviously, Hiram Smith is. I don't know about the others. So I also wonder if that's part of the reason Joseph Smith isn't going to take any liberties there, because there are people in the church at the time that maybe if they saw that, they could say, yeah, that's not how it went down. Whereas with the three witnesses, there's no one there to correct them.

John Dehlin 11:18 Got it.

Julia 11:18 Okay, that's a good point. Yeah.

John Dehlin 11:21 All right, what's next, Julia?

Julia 11:24 Okay, so B.H. roberts. So he explains further, and this is the same volume one. He explains the differences between the three and eight witnesses. Mike, do you Actually want to read this one because I think this goes along with what you were saying.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 11:34 Yeah. So this is from BH Roberts in volume one of the History of the Church. He says the difference between the testimony given the three witnesses and that given to the eight is that the former was attended by a splendid display of glory and power of God and the ministration of an angel, while the latter was attended by no such display, but was a plain matter of fact exhibition of the plates and by the prophet to his friends. And I want you all to remember that last sentence because that is to me that is gives the game away. And we'll go through that as we go through this episode. But that, that sentence right there tells you why this is such a big problem as we go through these. These different accounts.

John Dehlin 12:11 So no angel, Is that what it's saying?

Nemo 12:14 Yeah, yeah.

Julia 12:15 So Mike, you're saying that the. The separating it from the supernatural angel coming, showing you these things and making it a matter of fact, whatever it be at Roberts is saying that that's more credible. Is that what you're saying?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 12:27 I'm just saying it's actually more problematic in a way. And so because it's. Because we're being told by the church that this one is a physical event. It's like saying to you, Julia, there is a. A mug on your table that if you walk in, you can see. And if you call your neighbor over, they could come in and see. There's no need for a spiritual being to bring that mug down to you. Right. Because of that, it shows you how little confidence Joseph Smith has in the credibility of these plates. Because if it's truly a matter of fact visit, you would bring the local reporters, you'd bring the governor, you'd bring like a local mayor. All these people, all the people that have said, Joseph Smith, you're a con man, he'd be like, let's check it, let's go. And yeah, as we'll see, he doesn't do that because he knows full well that anyone could is not part of that magic worldview. Would walk in there and be like, yeah, misus is a prop set of plates that can't pass ph physical inspection. So because of the church wanting this to be such a physical experience, to me, it shows you even more, based on how Joseph Smith acts with them, that he knows that they aren't what he claims them to be.

Nemo 13:32 Because it leaves it open to the phys. The laws of physical evidence then.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 13:36 Because, yeah, I mean, well, I don't want to go through all of it now, because we got the whole episode to go through. But, like, it's one of those things where as someone taking them, I'm thinking of myself taking the discussions. And if I had had the thought of, like, actually looking at the names on the eight witnesses and going, why in the world, if this is a physical experience, that they bring someone that wasn't part of your. Part of the two families? But you don't think about it because you're not thinking in that mindset. But if you think about it critically, you're like, this makes zero sense. And it actually shows you. Joseph Smith knows full well. Just like replicating the 116 pages, he knew he could not do it, but because it was an oral dictation, he knows full well if he brings people in who aren't already trying to help Joseph Smith in what he's doing, they're going to look at that like, yeah, you made it up. I mean, it's really easy.

Julia 14:21 Well, and I think I referenced this in the last episode, and we will talk about it later. But James Strang does what you just said. So James Strang finds these vory plates, and he has his witnesses, his four witnesses with him to help him dig it up, and they find it. But then he carries it with him and he shows everybody these. These little plates. But Joseph Smith doesn't do that. He never shows the plates to just anybody. It's these very specific people.

John Dehlin 14:44 Interesting.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 14:45 There's a reason. Yeah.

Julia 14:47 Yeah.

John Dehlin 14:47 All right, let's keep going.

Reading and Analyzing the Official Testimony

Julia 14:51 Okay. So going over the testimony of the eight witnesses, Nemo, do you want to just go ahead and, like, run through that and read it?

Nemo 14:57 Yep. Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues and people unto whom this work shall come, that Joseph Smith, Jr. 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 he has 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. Christian Whitmer, Jacob Whitmer, Peter Whitmer, Jr. John Whitmer, Hiram Page, Joseph Smith Senior, Hyrum Smith, Samuel H. Smith.

John Dehlin 15:57 Now, really quickly, I know you're going to be covering this, but like four Whitmers that, you know that they're all brothers to David, I'm assuming, or his dad.

Julia 16:07 And then Hiram Page is the brother in law.

Nemo 16:11 Yeah.

John Dehlin 16:12 And he. So he's also sort of a Whitmer. And I know. And then Joseph Smith's dad, his brother, two of his brothers. Okay, so Smiths and Whitmers basically just missing whimmers. Yeah. All right. I know you're going to talk about that, but I just wanted to do my own analysis. And saying they saw it, hefted it, and with their own hands. So that's almost like Pre addressing this later concern about spiritual eyes. They're. They're trying to say this was physical, not. Not visionary. Right. Yeah.

Julia 16:48 Right.

John Dehlin 16:49 Okay.

Nemo 16:50 The selling point of the eight witnesses isn't that just there's now numerically more people that seen it. It's that they've seen it in a way that the three witnesses didn't even see it. They've handled it. They've interacted with it physically.

John Dehlin 17:00 Okay, now that we've probably stolen your thunder completely.

Julia 17:03 Oh, no, that's totally fine.

John Dehlin 17:04 What's next?

Julia 17:05 So that's really good. So, yeah, just. Just handling with their hands. That has the appearance of gold. So everyone's seeing gold. And the word hefted is interesting to me. And we'll cover that later because hefted just means to carry. It's the same language that William uses. Anyway, so I just wanted to just give everybody what that is up front and then we'll go and talk about it.

Nemo 17:22 It invokes a certain sense of heaviness. I would.

Julia 17:24 Yeah, true. Yeah.

John Dehlin 17:27 Okay.

Julia 17:28 Yeah. Okay. So let me. Okay, so about the statements. In both of the witness statements, there was no date. There was no date given or time of day or location for the event. Each of the witnesses signed an already written statement. Originally, as you can see, the witness statements were published at the end of the book, whereas today they are published at the beginning. So those are just things to note.

John Dehlin 17:47 And that's similar to the three witnesses who. Who didn't watch that episode. Okay.

Julia 17:51 Yeah. And since its original publication in 1830, the witness statements have been edited. It originally said Joseph Smith Jr. The author and proprietor of this work. And then eight years later, in 1837, it was changed to read Joseph Smith Jr. The translator of this work.

John Dehlin 18:07 Do we know the history of what led to that change?

Julia 18:11 I don't. I don't know exactly what Led to that change. But he was changing the Book of Mormon text during this time. And this is around the Kirtland Safety Society bank, although I think that might have been the year later. But like, so people are leaving. So.

Nemo 18:22 Yeah, sorry, 1837 is the SEC is the second edition of the Book of Mormon. And it's where it changes things from the Mother of God to the mother of the Son of God and things like that.

Julia 18:32 Changing theology.

Nemo 18:33 Joseph Smith's view of theology and worldview changes during that time. And then he will go on to do the 1838 account of the first vision the next year, which then has two personages appearance him rather than just one. So this is. It changed at the same time as a lot of Joseph's theology was also changing.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 18:51 Yeah, the apologetic.

John Dehlin 18:54 Oh, go ahead, Mike.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 18:56 I was gonna say, I think the apologetic response there is that for Joseph Smith to get the copyright for the Book of Mormon, he had to be listed as the author. So the argument there is. And I don't know if this bears weight, but when I read it, I was like, yeah, it's fine. They basically say that Joseph Smith had to call himself the author in order to get protection for that text. Because otherwise you can't write like God's the author. And a copyright application, they'd be like, yeah, you can't get that. So I think that's the response. Nemo jump.

Nemo 19:21 Can I ask that would challenge that, but I don't know the answer to it. And this is a good one for people to put in the comments and let us know is Muslims believe the Quran in Arabic to be the literal word of God. So God is the author, not the Prophet Muhammad, not even the Angel Gabriel. It's. It's God is the author. So what have Muslims done? What is the copyright status of the Quran in Arabic? That's my question to the audience.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 19:46 Yeah, I mean, in all fairness, like, I could publish a Bible, no one's gonna, you know, no one's gonna sue me on behalf of God. But I do think with the Book of Mormon, because it was so unique to Joseph Smith, he wanted to protect it. So that. That the thing that he thought he was going to be able to sell. And you know, we have those accounts where Martin Harris was really disappointed in how poorly it sold and they had to lower the price. You know, so there is that element of Joseph Smith wanting to protect his work, which of course I can believe it's his work. And so, yeah, I bet you the Quran. I bet you could publish a Quran and no one's going to come after you. But again, there's not one person today trying to profit off of it, so. Interesting you could spell profit there with an F4PH. It kind of works both ways.

John Dehlin 20:26 Okay. All right. That's interesting, those changes. I'll just say we need to really. We probably ought to do a LDS discussions episode on the Kirtland hubub. That dust up. That was 3738. I know we've covered Kirtland Bank. Right. But I mean, maybe not like just that whole Grant Palmer insiders view kind of stuff. Julie, I know I sent you that book, but we should all get it. Seems like we should do an episode on what happened in Kirtland in 37 and 38 that led to all these changes.

Nemo 21:00 I'll write a free book.

John Dehlin 21:01 Okay.

Nemo 21:02 All right.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 21:04 Are you talking about the changes in theology? Covered that a lot.

John Dehlin 21:08 Like that was a really important.

Nemo 21:10 But 37, 38 were important years for a lot of changes in the church, I think is what they were saying.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 21:14 But I don't think. I don't think that the Kirtland Safety Society thing had anything to do with Joseph Smith changing the idea of the Godhead, because that was coming. We went through that. That was, that was an evolution.

Julia 21:23 But that did cause a lot of the wimmers to leave the church, I guess, is what I was getting at.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 21:27 Yeah. And that's. And that's the thing. I mean, I think a lot of people at the time are also going, why is Joseph Smith changing these really basic concepts about the priesthood, about the Godhead? And it's because he was. He was still figuring it out, which again, as we've already covered. So watch those episodes on the first vision and the priesthood restoration. It shouldn't be happening if Joseph is getting personal visitations, which is kind of the same almost line of thought with what we're going to see here where it's like, if you could see these plates. There's a lot of problems with the story if they're really on a table, as we're being told.

Nemo 21:54 So isn't.

Julia 21:56 Isn't the testimony of the three witnesses. Doesn't that one kind of talk about a trinitarian type God? Am I mistaken in that?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 22:03 I think we were talking about that. Yeah. Like a modal Book of Mormons. What modalist. And I know it's kind of like it's similar to trinitarian view, but yeah, I mean, at the time of these witness statements, they are 100.

Julia 22:13 I just wonder why he didn't edit those ones. I just wonder why he didn't edit that.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 22:17 Yeah, I mean, there's, there's a lot of stuff in the Book of Mormon. I think he probably didn't get it, I think because that's one of the arguments for apologists. Like, well, if he was truly changing the Godhead, he would have made more changes. It's like. Well, it just depends on how thorough he was. I mean, at the time, he's also, as we talked about, embroiled in all sorts of stuff. It's not like he was sitting there going through the Book of Mormon. He didn't even talk about it in his, in his.

Julia 22:35 Right, right.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 22:36 You know, sermons and stuff. So it's just. Yeah, I, you know, it. I don't know. I guess all of those things to me are tells. But I guess you can also go to that point that the apologists go, why don't you change this then? If you, if you think that's what he's doing. And we covered that a bit because it's, you know, it gets silly to basically say, well, yeah, he made those changes, but since he didn't change this, it doesn't matter. It's like, no, it still matters. It's still pretty, pretty obvious what he's doing, especially in context of everything else.

Julia 23:02 Right.

Nemo 23:02 Yeah.

John Dehlin 23:04 Well, I only mentioned it because I. I think it was Marlon Judson that said Kirtland has. Has been the biggest apostasy in the history of the church. And so clearly a lot of stuff happened to lead to that apostasy. Maybe that would be a good episode, the Kirtland to see. Yeah, Factors led to it. Okay. All right, we'll put that down.

Julia 23:25 Yeah. Okay. So, like, John referenced almost all of them, with the exception of Martin Harris, all of the witnesses were related to the Whitmers or the Smiths. So you have Oliver Cowdery, who was married to Elizabeth Ann Whitmer, and you have David Whitmer, Christian Jacob Peter Whitmer, John Whitmer. Hyrum Page was married to Catherine Whitmer. And then you have Joseph Smith, Senior Hyrum Smith and Samuel Smith.

The Whitmer and Harris Families as Witnesses

John Dehlin 23:45 And tell us why that matters, Julia.

Julia 23:47 It's. I guess it's just interesting to me because, like, we talked about the background of the people before, where the Whitmers were, the Wimmers, the Smiths and Martin Harris. They were all in this magic worldview mindset. They all believed in seer stones, divining rods. Joseph Smith's family were treasure diggers. Martin Harris, like, he's believed. He believed in some really kooky things, like he thought he was talking to Jesus, who was in the form of a deer. He thought he had a devil sitting on his chest at one point. Like, everyone's just in this magic worldview. So having. Having them all be witnesses is kind of problematic to me because they're all. They all come from the same stock.

John Dehlin 24:21 Yeah. For me, it. It speaks to the issue of a possible conspiracy and. Or undue influence, you know, because obviously, the more families, the more conspirators, the more people involved, the more the chance at credibility. Right. The more insular, the more chance of a conspiracy in one way or another.

Nemo 24:42 Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

John Dehlin 24:46 Okay. And Mark. I love Mark. I think I asked you to include this. The Mark Twain quotes, one of my favorite.

Julia 24:52 And I noticed that not him. So one of the books that I. What is the other book you sent me? The gold plates.

John Dehlin 25:00 Yeah.

Julia 25:02 Can't remember his name, but he used Mark Twain as a bolstering of testimony. And I was like, no, no, no. This whole Mark Twain wrote. Wrote a book called Reffing it, and it's just almost satirical. He's just like, making fun of the members and the doctrine of the Church, but he was using it as credibility anyway. But okay, so in his book Reffing it, and this was published in 1871, Mark Twain stated, and when I am far on the road to conviction and eight men, be they grammatical or otherwise, come forward and tell me that they have seen the plates too, and not only seen those plates, but hefted them, I am con. I am convinced. I could not feel more satisfied and at rest if the entire Whitmer family had testified.

John Dehlin 25:40 That's so brilliant.

Nemo 25:43 Very cutting.

John Dehlin 25:45 I mean, he even said not only see the plates, but hefted them. And he put hefted in quotes, grammatical or otherwise. Savage, man. He's almost British, I think.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 26:01 Mm.

Nemo 26:02 We all claim him. We claim a lot of stuff.

Julia 26:06 Yeah.

John Dehlin 26:08 Oh, man, that's so good. All right, okay.

Julia 26:11 So we talked about this one in the last episode. But of all the signatures are in the handwriting of Oliver Cowdery. And while one could argue that the original three NA Witnesses statements that was signed was in the original manuscript and not what was in the printer's manuscript, which is pictured here, there is little evidence that such a document existed. So the church says that of the nearly 500 pages placed in the Nauvoo House cornerstone, portions of 232 pages survive. The church now possesses most of those fragments and leaves others are in private hands. Their owners graciously allowed those pieces to be photographed and included in this volume or in the volume that. And this is me talking because I purchased it and I tried looking for the. Any kind of original statement, and it doesn't exist. So regardless, having individuals. Individuals sign a collective statement written by someone else is not as credible as having them make their own personal witness statements. So I just thought that's interesting to point it out. So, like, I don't know where it would be if the church has it or if the church does not have the. The original signed document, but we just don't know anything about that.

Nemo 27:12 Could I be annoying and British for a moment?

Julia 27:14 Sure.

John Dehlin 27:16 Americans love anything else.

Nemo 27:23 Americans love the Declaration of Independence, which was a document written and then signed by a bunch of men. Right. But not written by each of them. So would an argument be that, you know, that document carries weight and heft even though it was prepared and then signed by individuals. What's difference between that and the witness statements?

Julia 27:42 Well, I think that. I think that's. The declaration's awful. I don't like it.

John Dehlin 27:46 Wait, the declaration, just to make sure I understand that has people's individual signatures, right?

Julia 27:51 Yeah, it has their individual signature, but

Nemo 27:53 it's a collective statement signed by the individuals which. Julia was making the point. Even if they did all sign it themselves, the fact that it's a collective statement, not individual witness statements, makes it slightly less credible.

Julia 28:03 I do think that's a little bit

Nemo 28:04 different and being facetious because it's a

Julia 28:05 different type of document, right? It's a different type of document. Yeah.

Nemo 28:08 No, I'm just. I'm just being facetious.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 28:10 No, and it's. It's also. Yeah. I mean, it's also one that was. Was witnessed by a lot of people that could actually, you know, right at the time that it happened. Yeah.

Nemo 28:16 But yeah, me bringing that up doesn't help the church in any way.

John Dehlin 28:20 But you know, salty about that revolution Nemo still. Sal.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 28:25 Yeah. Say, what's the reason that we needed to write that in the first place? I can't remember. Oh yeah, because you guys didn't like people.

John Dehlin 28:34 We didn't like to America like Thanos is inevitable.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 28:39 That's right.

Nemo 28:42 This is what the people come to these episodes for. Right, Julia.

Julia 28:44 Sorry. Okay, so the sort. I just want to point out that the sources that we are about to go over are by no means every source available on this topic. What I am sharing are the sources that do not align with the testimony of the three and eight witnesses. Some of them that I share. Do align. So that's. That's. I'm just going to put that out there. I'm not like. So I'm just saying that I'm not. This is not a compilation of all of all that's available.

John Dehlin 29:08 Okay.

Julia 29:08 So don't come after me if I'm missing things.

John Dehlin 29:11 Yeah. Julia's still in grad school, basically.

Julia 29:13 Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So before I get started with what was said about the eight witnesses, I wanted to add a source that I summarized in the last episode, and I just wanted to give it fully here, so hopefully that's okay. So this source is about Oliver Cowdery denying his testimony. The Book of Mormon. So this source comes from a man named G.J. kean, and it was signed on April 14th of 1885. And so actually, does someone else want to read this? John, do you want to read this? His quote?

Oliver Cowdery and Early Corroboration

John Dehlin 29:39 Yeah, absolutely. Okay. We accordingly waited on Mr. Cowdery at his residence in Tiffin and there learned his connection from him with that order and his full and final renunciation thereof. We then inquired of him if he had any objection to making a public recantation. He replied that he had objections, that in the first place it could do no good, that he had known several to do so and they always regretted it. And in the second place, it would have a tendency to draw public attention, invite criticism, and bring him into contempt. But said he nevertheless, if the church require it, I will submit to it, but I authorize and desire you and the church to publish and make known my recantation. We did not demand it, but submitted his name to the church and he was unanimously admitted a member thereof. At that time, he arose and addressed the audience present, admitted his error and implored forgiveness, and said he was sorry and ashamed of his connection with Mormonism. He continued his membership while he resided in Tiffin and became superintendent of the Sabbath school and led an exemplary life while he resided with us. So that's clearly scandalous to Mormons. And I guess Mormons are going to say those are like evangelical anti Mormons that are making this up. Is that.

Julia 31:16 I guess so like with all. With Oliver Cowdery specifically. I know this isn't about. That's for the episode before, but like people say that the three witnesses didn't deny, but it really does seem like Oliver Cowdery did deny because we have witnesses here from this other church that says, yeah, he was totally willing to deny. We didn't require it because he. Because Mark. Because Oliver's giving reasons why. Why he shouldn't because people will get angry with him, it'll bring negative publicity like things like that, that it just would be too much trouble for him. But he said he would be willing to submit. And then even in the Times and Seasons they published that Oliver Cowdery had denied his testimony of the Book of Mormon. And then there's other things that, like. Like his is just really problematic to me to say that none of the witnesses denied. It really does seem like Oliver Cowdery

Nemo 31:57 did well to put this in context for, you know, believing members watching, imagine how you would feel about someone who said, yeah, I'd be willing to deny my testimony of the Book of Mormon. I'd be willing to deny my testimony of Jesus Christ in the Atonement. I'd be willing to deny that. Just even them being willing to deny that would have you thinking they never really had it in the first place, and would have you thinking, oh, they were never sincere. Like, be honest with yourself, and then apply the same to Oliver Cowdery.

Julia 32:23 Yeah.

John Dehlin 32:23 And so since later he did affirm his testimony, I guess the. I guess the position would be he got excommunicated. He was salty. He was part of a community that he wanted to be embraced in. He renounced it. But then later, maybe things didn't work out with that community, and he realized, like Richard Bushman, his only real relevance is in a. His. His highest, true, most significant relevance is within a Mormon context. And so he rejoined or reaffirmed his statement until he died because it was in his best interest to do so, not necessarily because he. He really believed it. Is that. Is that the theory?

Julia 33:03 Yeah.

Nemo 33:04 And again, people could. You could flip it the other way, Right? You could say, oh, what if John de Lynn said he went back to the church? And then you could say, oh, no, then John realized you'd never have the sort of impact and influence as he would have as a ex Mormon commentator. So then he comes back to the ex Mormon space, but he doesn't. He's not really an ex Mormon. He still believes the church is true. You could. That logic swings both ways.

John Dehlin 33:24 Okay. Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 33:26 I mean, all right, ultimately it's speculation, right? I mean, he rejoins the church in 1848, dies in 1850. So, I mean, I think at that point, you're just trying to get into his head. But, you know, obviously we do have multiple documents or ultimo. Multiple accounts that are at least indicating that Oliver is either willing to do it, or in the times and season, that he did kind of renounce it and so, you know, you have to. You can't throw it all out. I guess what I would say, I don't. I don't know that I buy in totally that he was going around saying he was willing to. To, you know, kind of completely renounce the church, but at the same time, you know, there's something to it. It's just trying to figure out what that is.

Julia 34:07 Yeah.

John Dehlin 34:08 Okay.

Nemo 34:09 That then we use to teach those who assume they know why people have left the church and why people's reasons are for. For not having the testimony that they say they used to have. You don't necessarily know what those reasons are. So maybe be open and nice.

John Dehlin 34:22 What we know for sure is that as active believing Mormons, all of us who were at one point, we were never, ever, ever informed by the church that there were. There was at least one statement by Oliver Cowdery renouncing, you know, his testimony. We were all told that all three witnesses never. What?

Julia 34:43 Never. Never left the church or never denied their testimony.

John Dehlin 34:45 Never denied their testimony. So we certainly didn't have informed consent in that.

Julia 34:50 Whether there's a lot of weight it doesn't. Like we can at least be informed about these things.

John Dehlin 34:54 Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. Okay.

Individual Witnesses and Their Personal Accounts

Julia 34:58 Okay. So now we're going to talk about the eight witnesses. So two of the. So I want to just kind of outline this. Two of the eight witnesses never gave any personal accounts of their witnesses, of their witness to the golden plates. And aside from John Whitmer, the rest are limited. So with Christian Whitmer, there's nothing. There's nothing else except for the signed statement. With Jacob Whitmer, there's two that come from his kids, Peter Whitmer, there's no other testimony. John Whitmer, actually, he. I think he was the most interviewed of the eight witnesses. There are nine at least. And then Hiram Page, there's one other very limited account which we'll talk about. And then Joseph Smith Sr. There's only one. And then Hyrum Smith, there was five, which are also kind of limited. And then Samuel Smith, there are two. So there's just not a whole lot to go on. I think the three witnesses, everyone put the weight on the three witnesses and not on the eighth, it seems to me.

Nemo 35:45 Okay, interesting.

John Dehlin 35:47 That's good to know. Interesting.

Julia 35:49 And then we kind of talked about this earlier. The Widmers believed in seer stones. David Wimmer had two seer stones, which. These are the. His pictures of his seer stones of his own. And then his brother, Jacob Wimmer had his own Seer stone. And then, of course, Hyrum Page also had a seer stone, which we'll talk about in a couple seconds of what the problems were with Hiram Page's seer stone. But this is just to summarize that these. This is the magic, magic worldview of these families. So I just wanted to put that out there too.

John Dehlin 36:17 Got it. That's important context, for sure.

Julia 36:19 Yeah. Oh, okay. So it's this one. So does someone want to read the story that comes? This story comes. I just pulled off of lostmormonism.com they posted an article rendition of Hiram Seer Stone along with his story Nemo. Do you want to read this story?

Nemo 36:33 Absolutely. In September 1830, Hiram Page unearthed a black stone, which he then began using as a seer stone to receive revelations for the Church of Christ. Page looked at the stone. It contained a sentence on paper to befit it. As soon as he wrote one sentence, another sentence came on the stone until he wrote 16 pages. Oliver Cowdery and the Whitmer family believed that the revelations received from the stone, probably about church government and the location of Zion, were direct communications from God. These revelations challenged Joseph Smith's exclusive authority. Troubled, Smith prayed and received revelation regarding this stone, now canonized as Doctrine and Covenants, Section 28. Smith declared the stone to be an actual supernatural seer stone that was consecrated for use by the devil, and any revelations received from it were given by the devil. Page was convinced to destroy both the stone and the revelations. The stone was ground to powder, and all the revelations burned. The events of this story established the doctrine that only the prophet could receive revelations for the whole church and that any communication from God out of harmony with the prophets was from the deceiver. From this point onward, Joseph Smith secured his place as the sole revelator for the entire church.

John Dehlin 37:50 That's fascinating, fascinating story. That part about Joseph Smith literally declaring the stone of the devil created by the devil. That's. That's like the. That's almost like the self, where he's, like, walking along and it's like, oh, there's bones. That's self. Like, do Mormons today really believe that Joseph got inspiration from God? That the stone that his challenger was using at some point in history, spiritual Satan, who doesn't even have a body, is somehow sitting there, somehow holding a stone that he can't even physically hold because he's not a resurrected being, but that somehow he performed some magical incantation on the stone to make it evil so that then Hiram Page would find it and then produce false testimony like that. That have to.

Nemo 38:45 They have to. Because Joseph Smith had to nuke this. He had to just destroy it entirely. Because the problem was, not only was Hiram Page running around saying it, but the people that Joseph was relying on for credibility were believing it. So Joseph can't undermine those individuals. Otherwise he undermines his own credibility for the Book of Mormon. So. So he's just got to nuke the stone because he can't go after Hyrum Page, because Hyrum Page is one of the witnesses to the Book of Mormon. So all he can do is go after the stone and hope that people don't go, well, hang on. If Hyrum was deceived by that, what else could he have been deceived by? Yeah, if Joseph says he's been deceived.

Julia 39:19 Wait, can you put the slide back up? I want to see what. What year that was. So September of 1830. So there's another story. So there's another story in the same year where Joseph's given. He gives the men instructions to go and sell the copyright for the Book of Mormon in Canada. And he looks in his stone and hat and he says he receives this revelation from the Lord. And the Lord says that he'll prepare a way that they should get money from it, and then it will help Joseph's family. And then David Wimmer in his address to all believers in Christ, he says that they failed in their mission and they come to Joseph and they say, why did we fail? You received this revelation from God in God's words. And Joseph's like, yeah, that's really confusing. So he gets his stone and hat, and then he receives another revelation saying, some revelations are from God and some are from the devil, and this one was from the devil. So Joseph's also saying that his own stone can give him revelations in the words of God that are of the devil.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 40:08 But.

Nemo 40:09 But that's so problematic because Joseph Smith was not able to tell that it was from the devil and sent off to Canada and acting on that revelation. So how does anyone trust him from then on? How does anyone trust anything he says? Because you're like, well, do we know if it's from the devil or from God? And it's the same problem now with sometimes prophets speak as men and sometimes prophets speak for God. How are we to know? No one's given us a metric by which we're to know. No one can give us a consistent way in which we can tell whether they're speaking for God or speaking as a man. So we should just really distrust everything they say is just their own words because we have no way of knowing if it's from God or not. And it's the same with Joseph.

Julia 40:47 Yeah, yeah.

John Dehlin 40:48 Also, this is also giving me David Whitmer vibes, because as we've covered in previous episodes, David Whitmer publishes this pamphlet to all believers in Christ where he's like all that knocking, Melchizedek priestess stuff that Joseph claimed later that never happened. Like, you know, so we're supposed to believe David Whitmer when, you know, we're putting him as a witness to the Book of Mormon but not believing him. You know, when he. When he says the Melchizedek priesthood was made up after the fact, we're supposed to believe Hyrum Page is a credible witness to the Book of Mormon, but then when he uses a Seer Stone to produce prophecy or revelation that challenges Joseph Smith, we're supposed to believe he's deceived by Satan. Isn't there a little inconsistency there?

Julia 41:30 Right.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 41:31 Yeah, it's more than that. I mean, Hiram. Yeah. Hiram Pages is literally, we're told, is a witness to the Book of Mormon. And so we're supposed to say you got to believe his experience. And then when he has this experience with the. With the Seer Stone, we're like, well, don't believe that's real. And then not only that, but then you've got. I think it's like two of the three witnesses. The three. Two of the three witnesses that believe Hiram Page is really getting it. So if they believe Hiram Page is getting revelations, of course they believe in Joseph Smith. So if Hiram Page is making it up, Joseph Smith's making it up. These people all believe this stuff. And they have.

John Dehlin 42:04 No.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 42:05 I don't want to call them gullible because they come from a world view, but they're. These witnesses are not reliable. And you could see it over and over and over again because they believe all sorts of crap that we know is just absolutely made up.

Nemo 42:15 That's what you have to say. You can't say that if Hiram's making it up, then Joseph's making it up. Because it could be that they believe Hiram and Joseph, but Joseph's right and Hiram's wrong. But what you have to say is their ability to discern their belief in something is not good evidence of its truthfulness. That's what we can take away from that. Yes.

Julia 42:34 Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 42:34 And so. So when Hiram Page says, I got this, this revelation. Check this out. And they're like, yeah, that's from God. And they're clearly wrong. And then Joseph Smith's like, dude, you're seeing an angel right now. They're showing you plates. Check it out. This is awesome. They're like, yeah, but you know that to the most point, they have no power of discernment, much like today's leaders, which is why the only. Like, to Nemo's point, there's no. There's no. Would you say, matrix to how to. To know if it's a man.

Nemo 43:00 Metric.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 43:00 I mean, metric. That's good. So the metric is if. If you don't have to denounce that they're speaking as a prophet. The moment you denounce it, it's a man. I mean, that's. That's ultimately what it is. It's always watch general conference and then go to church the next Sunday. Like, oh, my goodness, we got such great guidance from our prophetic until we need to move on to something else. And it's like, well, that was just. Dude, Russell Nelson was like almost 100 by that point. He wasn't even there. That's what they'll say in 10 years, but right now they'll do that because right now it's safe to. To get behind it. But, yeah, this, this Hiram Pacer is another one. When I talk about why I like the Eight Witnesses, this is a story that gives you such great insight into how Joseph Smith has to react when he loses control. And in this case with the eight Witnesses, he has control. And that's why he can control what they. What they. What they write in their statement. He can kind of control what they're seeing, what they. What they think they're seeing. And then Hiram Page kind of takes his control away. So Joseph Smith goes and gets a very convenient revelation to get out of it. And that's why I love all of these kind of like, things that we don't talk about that often, but give you a lot of insight.

Nemo 43:58 It's almost like basic social psych, right? To see this. Joseph Smith's a leader figure, and then you see this other upstart trying to essentially take over. And. And I mean, you see it with primates, right? You look at silly colonies of primates, you've got the one who's in charge, and then you've got some young upstart comes up and challenges him. And that one's got to put down the. The older chimp or whatever has got to put down the young upstart. He's trying to take over. And it's. You see the same thing playing out here, the same sociality playing out is Joseph Smith's got to put down the threat to his authority. He's got to do it in a way that maintains his credibility.

Julia 44:30 I also think this speaks to. I also think this speaks to Joseph Smith's trying to get rid of this, the stone in general, because the stone is what's having the power, and the stone was what gave Hiram power. So if he can get rid of the stones and. And have the. Have him be the conduit of speaking to God, then that gives him the power. And so I also think it's interesting in the history of the Church, Joseph Smith completely washed out all the use of the Seer stone. It only says. It only alludes to the Urim and Thummim. And so I think Joseph knew from the beginning, he's like, I. I have to get rid of this and give myself the power.

John Dehlin 45:02 Yeah, fascinating. Fascinating. Yeah. All right, that's good to know.

Julia 45:07 Okay, so now we're going to talk about John Waymer's testimony. So despite the fact that the witness statement is ambiguous about holding and inspecting the plates, a few of the witnesses said they handled the plates. And then he says, I desire to testify to all that will come to the knowledge of this, of this address, that I have most assuredly seen the plates from whence the Book of Mormon is translated and that I have handled these plates and know of a surety that Joseph Smith Jr. Has translated the Book of Mormon by the gift and power of God, and in this thing, the wisdom of the wise most assuredly has perished. Therefore know ye, oh, inhabit, O ye inhabitants of the earth, wherever this address may come, that I have in this thing freed my garments of your blood, whether you believe or disbelieve. So he's saying that he sees the plates and he handles them. And so, yeah, that's not phrase at

Nemo 45:55 the end is really weird. Yeah, it is weird where he's like. He's like. Because what he's doing there is. He's basically intimating that, you know, essentially if you're punished for being a non believer, whatever this punishment may be, that will cause your blood to be spilled, I'm not responsible anymore because there's this idea that he has a responsibility to testify of this thing is this religious idea, more broadly, that you have a responsibility to those around you to make sure they believe too, so that they're safe from the punishment that you think is going to happen to them. And it's your job to convince them that that punishment is impending so that they then get into the arc of safety that you are representing, whatever that is. So you've got that here. He's like, it's not on me if you believe me or disbelieve me. I've done my job. I've told you. That's. That's just strange to me.

Julia 46:42 Yeah.

John Dehlin 46:44 But otherwise, it's a pretty straight up affirmation. What was in the. The witness statement, Correct.

Julia 46:50 Yeah. And again, John was the one that was the most. John Whitmer was the one that was most interviewed, and he's the one that we have most of these from the. The positive affirming statements that he did see the plates or that they did. Yeah, got it.

John Dehlin 47:03 Okay, cool.

Stephen Burnett Letter and Spiritual Seeing Claims

Julia 47:05 And so there's another one. This is a letter from Stephen Burnett to brother Johnson. So. And then we talked about this in the three witness statements. Mike, do you want to read this letter?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 47:15 Yeah. So he wrote, when I came to hear Martin Harris state in public that he never saw the plates with his natural eyes, only in vision or imagination, neither Oliver nor David. And also that the eight witnesses never saw them and hesitated to sign that instrument for that reason, but were persuaded to do it. The last pedestal gave way, in my view. Our foundation was sapped and the entire superstructure fell in heap of ruins. I, therefore, three weeks since, in the stone chapel, renounced the Book of Mormon. After we were done speaking, Martin Harris the rose. And said he was sorry for any man who rejected the Book of Mormon, for he knew it was true. He said he had hefted the plates repeatedly in a box with only a tablecloth or a handkerchief over them, but he never saw them. Only as he saw a city through a mountain. And said that he never should have told that the Testimony of the 8 was false if it had not been picked out of him, but should have let it passed as it was.

Julia 48:10 Yeah. So we have this. We talked about this before, and this is more talking about Martin Harris denying that they saw the plates, that he saw them, but it also has that sentence about the eight witnesses never saw them, and they hesitated to sign the instrument for that reason, but then they were persuaded to sign. And so that's the important part here. So because I said earlier that Martin

John Dehlin 48:28 Harris is saying that the eight witnesses said they never saw the plates and were pressured to sign the statement.

Julia 48:36 Yes.

John Dehlin 48:37 And that's Stephen Burnett quoting Martin Harris.

Julia 48:40 Right.

John Dehlin 48:43 Which is around that Kirtland apostasy time. Right?

Julia 48:45 Exactly.

John Dehlin 48:46 Yeah. Interesting.

Nemo 48:47 And then Martin Harris Gets up and does a hagrid and goes, I shouldn't have said that. And you know, you'll be sorry if you deny the Book of Mormon, because I know it's true and I shouldn't have said that it wasn't, or I shouldn't have said what I said about the witnesses. But saying I shouldn't have said that isn't saying I was wrong to have said that or what I said wasn't true. He's just saying he shouldn't have said it.

Julia 49:10 Right.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 49:10 And that's so key because a lot of apologists will say Martin Harris clarified later, blah, blah. No, he clarified that he was. He was sorry. He told everybody he's sorry. He said the quiet part out loud. So, yeah, he does not. He does not deny what he said. All he's saying is, like you said, I shouldn't have said that. Yeah, that's all it is. And so this, this letter is from Believing. These are believing members trying to figure out what to do. They're. They're basically meeting to try to figure out because they've all been basically upset with Joseph Smith because he's making all these horrible mistakes like the Kirtland Safe Society. And they're trying to figure out if the Book of Mormon should still be believed because they know Joseph Smith has no power from God. Because, I mean, you know, it speaks for itself. So that's why Martin Harris is trying to persuade them to still believe in the Book of Mormon. But as this is happening, this, this statement about the witnesses is coming out, and the people who were believing members, who are not sure if they want to be, are seeing this and going, yeah, I'm out. Just as if I was in the missionary discussions. And the missionary is like, yeah, so these eight people, they, like, never really saw it, but they signed it. And they're all in two families. But you could believe might be like, like if you're watching Shark Ticket, like, with that, I'm out. But they don't tell you that you don't have those details. So once these guys got the details, they're like, yeah, this is, this is nonsense.

Julia 50:24 Yeah. And I mentioned earlier that, about the, the signing of the, the witnesses. So the church, we have never seen the document. They've never produced it. We don't know if it exists. There are statements like this one that say that they did sign. This one says that they were pressured to sign. So I don't, I don't think that. I don't think we can say for sure that this that such document does not exist. But what I'd like to know is what happened to this document, the Church? To my knowledge, unless someone can find it and share it, to my knowledge, the Church has never given any whereabouts of this statement. They. Even in the books, even in the original manuscript that I have, it doesn't say, oh, it was destroyed or it's gone. It just. It just is silent on the topic of what happened to the original, the signed statement. So.

Nemo 51:05 Yeah, but I think. I think almost doesn't matter whether. I mean, it does to an extent matter if there was one, because it could lend more credibility if there's a physically signed document with all their own signatures. But at the same time, if there's coercion involved, as we can see some evidence of, then doesn't matter if they put pen to paper or someone else did. If they were coerced, they were coerced. Right.

Julia 51:25 Yeah, I guess that's a good point. Because if it didn't, if they were able to produce it, would that make a lot of difference? Probably not. Yeah.

Nemo 51:33 Because anyone can hold a spiritual gun to your head and make you sign a piece of paper.

Julia 51:36 Right. Well, John C. Bennett.

John Dehlin 51:42 All right, that's a fascinating statement that none of us were made aware of in When We Were.

Nemo 51:47 Yes.

Julia 51:47 Right, right. Okay, so this is another one. So John Wimmer reportedly said to Theodore Turley in April 30, 1838, I handled those plates. They were fine engravings on both sides. I handled them. They were shown to me by a supernatural power. And I pulled this one out because I thought it was really interesting, because he's saying. He's saying that they were shown to him by a supernatural power. But as we know with the story of the eight witnesses, Joseph Smith just had the plates with him because the translation process was still underway. He still had them. So there's. And then even BH Roberts said that there was no supernaturalness about it. They just went to the woods. Joseph uncovered the plates and showed them. So I'm. It's curious to me why John Widmer would say that. Why would he allude to supernatural power? Any thoughts on that?

Nemo 52:33 What's that, 1839? Is that like, starting to become in vogue now as they're sort of. As the three witnesses and others are all explaining there. You know, he's hearing his brother talk about the supernatural powers by which he was shown, and he's kind of leaning into that narrative. Perhaps.

John Dehlin 52:51 But why that is the way memory works is. You. As you're storing it and Retrieving it. And then history happens. You're always adding and removing things from your memory. So maybe he just remembers the three witnesses stuff and then adds it in a later account.

Nemo 53:08 And maybe he's retreating, like you can retreat into the unprovable. So he realizes that his testimony is a physical one and it is about physically handling some plates. But if he can retreat into a space of supernatural powers, then it's much harder for people to disprove, perhaps.

John Dehlin 53:26 Or he's trying to make it sound cooler.

Nemo 53:28 Yep.

Julia 53:28 Maybe.

John Dehlin 53:29 Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's interesting nonetheless.

Nemo 53:32 Yeah, yeah.

Julia 53:35 Testimony. So. So Hiram's testimony was published in the Times and seasons in 1839. Hyrum Smith gave us his testimony of the gold plates. He says, I thank God that I felt a determination to die rather than deny the things which my. Which my eyes had seen, which my hands had handled, and which I had borne testimony to wherever my law has been cast. So that's.

John Dehlin 53:56 That's consistent.

Julia 53:57 Yeah, it's consistent, but it's also very brief. There's not. He doesn't elaborate.

John Dehlin 54:01 It's on message.

Nemo 54:03 Yeah, it's on message. And he did die ultimately for his beliefs. I mean, there's. There's more complex reasons as to why he was in jail in the first place, but, you know, he did die for it. So.

Julia 54:16 Yeah.

John Dehlin 54:17 Okay. Yeah.

Lucy Mac Smith and Hiram Page Testimonies

Julia 54:20 So. So this is from Lucy Mac Smith. So in her book, written in 1844, Lucy Mac Smith gave more of a background for the eight witnesses, like B.H. roberts alluded to. She says they all, that is the male part of the company, repaired to a little grove where it was customary for the family to offer up their secret prayers, as Joseph has been instructed that the plates would be carried there by one of the ancient Nephites. Here it was that those eight witnesses recorded in the Book of Mormon looked upon the plates and handled them, of which they bear witness in the following words. And then she quotes the eyewitness statement. And then she says, after the witnesses return to the house, the angel again made his appearance to Joseph and received the plates from his hands. And so actually thinking about this, now she's saying that. And I haven't heard this before, other. Outside of her, I think she's saying that an angel. So this is during the translation process because it hasn't been completed. So she's saying, even though Joseph has the plates, the angel comes to the grove with the plates. They see them. I guess they don't see the angel, though. So I guess maybe he just drops them off. The witnesses See them. And then Joseph gives the plates back to the angel. And then I guess Joseph gets the plates back again and finishes the translation. So maybe that's what. What he meant by supernatural power helped him see.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 55:35 Yeah, yeah.

Julia 55:38 But it's also really confusing. This whole thing is confusing.

John Dehlin 55:41 Why does God need to send an angel to drop off plates? Why can't drop off physical plates? Why can't God just make the plates appear and then make them disappear? Why does he need to send an angel to make them appear and disappear?

Julia 55:54 Right.

John Dehlin 55:54 Isn't that a little weird?

Julia 55:56 Right? Joseph had them. He could have just carried them, which is what I always thought was the case. And I think other ones have said it's the case.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 56:02 Yeah, yeah, absolutely. This is comical in a lot of ways. Once you think about, like, if you actually try to picture this happening, it's like they're like, Joseph, you've been using the place of transit. Hell. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But David's going to bring it. That's my favorite angel. And then David comes in and Joseph's like, thanks, David, I'll take it from here. And then they finished. And then Joseph's like, david, David, need these. I need these picked up, man. And then David's like, sorry, dude, here. It's like, it's. It. I. I don't mean to sound obnoxious or offensive, but when you think about this, it makes zero sense because this is a. This is the problem with the church wanting this to be a physical event. They want this to be a completely physical event, but then they try to mix in this other stuff because there's so many inconsistencies and none of this makes sense.

Nemo 56:46 Yeah, I got slightly distracted during that discussion because I saw something on that slide. Can you throw that slide up again, please?

John Dehlin 56:52 Yes.

Nemo 56:52 It's a slightly tangential point, but it's interesting that they talk about. It was customary for the family to offer up secret prayers in a little grove. Right. And we have the sacred grove. But it's just come to me that idol worship groves of trees were forbidden to Jews because that's where idol worship happened. And if you look at second Nephi and the Isaiah verses, second Nephi, 12:13, yea, and the day of the Lord shall come upon all the cedars of Lebanon, which is a reference to cedar groves that were used for idol worship. So it's actually quite strange to me all of a sudden, just think about it, that the crowning event of Mormonism, the first vision, happened in a grove of trees when biblically, groves of Trees were not a place you want to be hanging out in.

Julia 57:38 That's super interesting. I hadn't heard that.

Nemo 57:40 Sorry. That just. That just came to mind.

Julia 57:42 But also, as you're speaking, it's kind of off topic, but she's saying one of the ancient Nephites, and I'm not sure if she's referencing an angel. Well, she does say angel, so maybe that's what it is, because I was thinking maybe one of the three. Because there's stories of the three Nephites throughout the church history. But anyway. But she says angel, so. But that's interesting about the Groves.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 58:01 Yeah, yeah, yeah.

John Dehlin 58:03 And just generally, why is Lucy's story different, you know?

Julia 58:06 Right. Or, like, what?

John Dehlin 58:07 Yeah, she's pretty central, right?

Julia 58:10 Oh, yeah, she's right there.

John Dehlin 58:12 Yeah. Yeah. Okay. It's good to know.

Julia 58:14 Okay, so this is from Hiram Page. And this is the. So a letter from Hiram Page was published in the Ensign of Liberty in March of 1847. Aside from the site, this signed statement, this is the only other time Hiram Page testifies of seeing the plates. Mike, do you want to read this testimony?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 58:31 Yeah. It says, as to the Book of Mormon, it would be doing injustice to myself and to the work of God of the last days. To say that I could know a thing to be true in 1830 and know the same thing to be false in 1847. Okay. To say my mind was so treacherous that I had forgotten what I saw. To say that a man of Joseph's ability who at the time did not know how to pronounce the word Nephi doubtful, could write a book of 600 pages as correct as the Book of Mormon without supernatural power. And to say that those holy angels who came and showed themselves to me as I was walking through the field. To confirm me.

John Dehlin 59:09 Sorry, I. Good.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 59:11 To confirm in. To confirm me in the work of the Lord of the last days, three of whom came to me afterwards and sang a hymn in their own pure language. Pure language. Adamic language, which we know is. Yeah, we don't need to go into that. Anyways. Anyways. Yes, it would be treating the God of Heaven with contempt to deny these testimonies with too many others to mention here.

John Dehlin 59:32 Now. It could have been their nature, their ancient Native American language. It doesn't need to be the Adamic language. Right?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 59:37 I guess that's true. I guess the chul.

Julia 59:39 Oh, their own language.

John Dehlin 59:41 Didn't you just tell us, Julia, that there were no angels, that it was just plates?

Julia 59:45 So I think he's referencing a different time. So he says, and to say that those holy angels who came and showed themselves to me as I was walking through the field. And so to confirm to me. So even. Even Oliver Cowdery says that an angel visited him before he even sees the plates. And so, like, I think he's referencing a different time, but then he also says three of whom came to me afterwards and sang a hymn. And again, I don't know if he means three ancient Nephites or, like, different angel.

Nemo 1:00:10 I know three of whom. So that's angels. So.

Julia 1:00:12 Right. I just don't know where the angels would originate. Would they be speaking Adamic language or would they be speaking.

Nemo 1:00:17 It would have to be pure Adamic language. How much of that do we have, by the way? The pure Adamic language? We've got some examples, but with Son

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:00:23 Armen is the son of Engelsman.

Nemo 1:00:28 Because I want to see if I could do one of the hymns in the hymn book into Adamic language and see how that goes.

John Dehlin 1:00:36 What do we make from this?

Julia 1:00:37 Okay, sorry, sorry. We're getting distracted. So all he says here, and we'll talk about in the next slide, all he says about seeing the. About his witness at the gold plates is he says what I saw. And so that's. That's all that we have to go off of. So skipping to this next. So this is from Marvin S. Hill, and he's a church historian. I think he passed away a little bit ago, if I'm getting my timeline correct. So he an active member of the church? He was a BYU professor, I think. So he says that with only a veiled reference to what I saw. Page does not say that he saw the plates, but that angels confirmed him in his faith. Neither does he say that any coercion was placed upon him to secure his testimony. Despite Paige's inconsistencies, it is difficult to know what to make of Harris affirmation that the eight saw no plates in the face of John Whitmer's testimony. The original testimony of these eight men in the Book of Mormon reads somewhat ambiguously, not making clear whether they handled the plates or the leaves of the translated manuscripts. Thus, there are some puzzling aspects to the testimonies of the witnesses. If Burnett's statement is given credence, it would appear that Joseph Smith extorted a deceptive testimony from the eight witnesses. But why should John Whitmer and Hyrum Page adhere to Mormonism and the Book of Mormon so long if they only gave their testimony reluctantly? It may be that, like the three witnesses, they expressed a genuine religious conviction, the particulars may not have seemed as important as the ultimate truth of the work.

Inconsistencies and Details in Witness Accounts

Nemo 1:02:06 No, I'm not buying that.

Julia 1:02:08 What are your thoughts?

Nemo 1:02:10 I'm not buying this idea that, oh, well, the details don't matter. It's about the broad message of the work. No, the details absolutely matter because it is by the details that we work out how truthful something is or not. You can't just go, oh, well, the spirit probably spoke to them, so it doesn't matter whether they lied to everyone about the Book of Mormon or not. It absolutely matters. But not least because it wasn't just individuals walking around saying they had a witness of something. It was individuals whose name went on paper and that is being used to try and further the religious work so that that is fraudulent if they are lying. And that behavior is not okay by the church's own standards of honesty. So you can't say it doesn't matter. And then as for this nonsense about the leaves of the plates, it's. It's clear to my reading, unless you're twisting English on its nut, that like, that the leaves are clearly referential to the plates and not just some leaves that could be the plates or could be paper.

Julia 1:03:08 Well, if you read it. And so I re. Put it here. So if you read the testimony of the. And we'll talk about that too. So he says in the testimony that Aba. It says as many of the leaves as the set Smith has translated. We did handle with our hands. So what is he saying? Because you could read it as, oh, we're just holding what Joseph Smith has already translated.

Nemo 1:03:28 It's in the same sentence as the plates which have the appearance of gold and as many of the leaves as Smith set translated. We did. So you're saying it's definitely about the place? No.

Julia 1:03:41 Well, definitely the place.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:03:42 There's no way.

Julia 1:03:44 Okay.

Nemo 1:03:45 I mean, fight back, Julia, please. Because, like, if I'm seeing this wrong,

Julia 1:03:48 because so many times it says we were shown them, we saw them. We were shown them. We. We've seen them. And then the only reference that seems to hint to touching them is the leaves, which I guess it could be the leaves. But it also is interesting that the set Smith is translated. Does that exclude the seal portion? Like, what does that mean? So you're saying that what they saw when they did have their witness, there was no sealed portion?

Nemo 1:04:11 No. So they're saying that what they did was they. They handled with their hands as so moving.

Julia 1:04:18 So they're like flipping through the pages

Nemo 1:04:20 as many as Smith had translated because

Julia 1:04:23 it just reads kind of ambiguously. Okay, that makes sense.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:04:26 This reads very, this reads almost intentionally ambiguous some points, but to Nemo, to what Nemo is saying. If you look at that sentence, there's really no way to, to carry that sentence to the end without leaves being the, the gold plates.

Nemo 1:04:38 And we also saw the engravings there on, there on what? The papers that Joseph translated. I don't think he put engravings on that.

Julia 1:04:45 That's true.

Nemo 1:04:46 Yeah. Right. Yeah. There's no way it's contained.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:04:49 I could see why, Yeah, I could see why an apologist would want, it would want to take that text because you can try to take that tiny dot of ambiguity and drive a, you know, a private jet through it or something. But yeah, you can't.

Nemo 1:05:02 Semicolons, man. Semicolons leave all kinds of wiggle room.

John Dehlin 1:05:06 The only problem, we also should mention that we covered in a previous episode is the problem with reformed Egyptian and you know, Joseph's misunderstanding that a symbol doesn't represent sentences when we now know the Egyptian symbol represents what a word, you know. And so yeah, we estimate the. How big, how tall would the plates have needed to be?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:05:33 Insane.

Nemo 1:05:34 We compared them to the Darius place. Right. Didn't we? And we worked out that if

John Dehlin 1:05:40 you

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:05:40 tablets are the ones that fair Mormon cites is one of the greatest evidences for the Book of Mormon. Until you look at the numbers and you're like this tells you without question that the Book of Mormon being on metal plates is completely made up because it would be impossible.

Nemo 1:05:53 But yeah, I remember what we said. We said a university dissertation's worth of words per plate would be missing. I think is. Is what we said. So that was 10,000 words.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:06:03 I said. I did the math. It was.

Julia 1:06:07 Weren't there witnesses that said that there. Weren't there witnesses that said that there was only 21 sheets. Like metal sheets.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:06:13 Yeah. Wasn't it like. I thought it was like 12 double sided or 18 or something. It was, it was.

Julia 1:06:16 Oh, maybe that's, maybe it was double sided.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:06:18 We did it in the episode in, in the Peer She Tablets, which fair Mormon cites is one of the greatest evidences for the Book of Mormon is 200 words on three tablets. And so I, I went through and I adjusted the size because I think the Peerage tablets were smaller. So I moved the size up to move the words up and even. Yeah, it was you like you would literally need, you would need 11 witnesses and they probably couldn't even carry all of the plates if, if they were actually made of gold or Metal. So yeah, it's like it's one of

Nemo 1:06:42 those things where thousands of words would be missing.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:06:45 Yes. And so to this article saying the details don't matter. Well, the details of the gold plates tell you that this is like cartoonishly bad as far as any claim of authenticity. And if you watch, you know, there's been podcasts done in recent months on the historicity of metal in ancient times that's like Book of Mormon central does. And they give it with such confidence. But they also use a lot of weasel words like this could mean. This could tell us. Well, this shows the technology might have been available and. But there's not a single, there's not a single example they give that fits both the density of the words, the time, the place. There's nothing that fits. The Book of Mormon in ancient times being on long records on metal plates just do not exist. They know it. And that's why these. All those weasel words and try to get around that. But yeah, this is, this gets really, really bad real quick if you're going to go that route.

John Dehlin 1:07:36 Yeah, okay, got it.

Julia 1:07:39 So again, reiterating with, with what Hiram Page, he's just all he says. It's just interesting that he only says what I saw. He doesn't go into any details about what happened that day. So I just thought that was interesting too, despite what Marvin Hill, his apologetics about it.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:07:54 But can I add one more thing real quick? I don't want to keep going back, but that the Marvin S. Hill thing where he basically says, hey, if they believed that the details don't matter. I want to see BYU or the church write publications that give that same space to every other religion because they won't. So that's just special pleading because I just want to make that note because you're not going to give that same grace, that same space to any other religion that you think isn't true. So just throwing that out there.

Nemo 1:08:19 Very good point.

Julia 1:08:20 Yeah. Okay, so this next one is my. Probably my favorite story of the witnesses. So this is, this comes in his book a history of Illinois from its commerce or commencement as a State in 1818-1847. Thomas Ford, Governor Thomas Ford, or I guess he's ex governor, gives some details concerning the Mormon Church. John, do you want to read this account?

Outside Perspectives and Conspiracy Theories

John Dehlin 1:08:42 Absolutely. So this is Thomas Ford, governor of Illinois, quote, the most probable account of these certificates is that the witnesses were in the conspiracy aiding the the imposture. But I have been informed by men who were once in the confidence of the prophet that he privately gave a different account of the matter. It is related that the prophet's early followers were anxious to see the plates the prophet had always given out. That they could not be seen by the carnal eye, but must be spiritually discerned. That the power to see them depended upon faith and was the gift of God to be obtained by fasting, prayer, mortification of the flesh and exercises of the Spirit. That so soon as he could see the evidences of a strong and lively faith in any of his followers, they should be gratified in their holy curiosity. So what I'm getting there is that Joseph Smith told people like the Bible says about God, you can't see the plates or touch the plates without divine intervention. And that, to me, screams of Joseph needing to explain why he can't just show them to people normally. He needs some excuse so that he can't just show them to people. So he makes up this idea that God and angels have to be involved. Right. Which contradicts, if I'm remembering right, the eight witnesses testimony itself. Right?

Julia 1:10:18 Yeah. Well, there's the absence of angels and some accounts, I guess, if you're. I guess with Lucy and one of John's there was supernatural.

John Dehlin 1:10:28 What else did y'.

Julia 1:10:29 All.

John Dehlin 1:10:29 You, Julie, are also.

Julia 1:10:30 So there's another slide with it where he finishes the story. Do you want to keep going with this one?

John Dehlin 1:10:35 He set them to continual prayer and other spiritual experiences to acquire this lively faith by means of which the hidden things of God could be spiritually discerned. And at last, when he could delay them no longer, he assembled them in a room and produced a box which he said contained the precious treasure. The lid was opened, the witnesses peeped into it, but making no discovery, for the box was empty. They said, brother Joseph, we did not see the plates. The prophet answered them, O ye little faith, how long will God bear with the wicked, this wicked and perverse generation? Down on your knees, brethren, every one of you, and pray God for the forgiveness of your sins and for a holy and living faith which cometh down from heaven. The disciples dropped to their knees and began to pray in the fervency of their spirit, supplicating God for more than two hours with fanatical earnestness, at the end of which time, looking again into the box, they were now persuaded that they saw the plates. I leave it to philosophers to determine whether the fumes of an enthusiastic and fanatical imagination are thus capable of blinding the mind and deceiving the senses by so absurd a delusion. And what comes to my mind is two things. One is that Martin Harris, how he couldn't see the angel of the plates until he withdrew and then he was later able to. So this speaks to Joseph's ability to convince people that they were able to see things that they couldn't really see. But what this doesn't account for is the eventual testimony that they handled them with their hands. Right. That it was a physical. So I. I don't mean to steal your thunder, Julia. What. What did you want to say? And then what did everyone else want to say about this account?

Julia 1:12:21 Well, this one seems like I almost didn't want to add this one. It's just really fun to hear because it's just a fun story. And we do see Joseph Smith behaving like this later with other revelations where he's with Sydney. And they're trying. They're like, in this. I don't know how to explain this, like, trying to see the same vision. Like, do you see this? Yeah, I see it. And that kind of thing. So, like, this sort of. This sort of speaks to that. It is very different from the other. The other from the witness statement and from what they said afterwards, because they did say that they saw and they handled. Whereas here they said he. And he's saying he's getting his source from people who were around Joseph. Men who were once in the confidence of the prophet. He doesn't give specific names. So it's very different. It's very out there as far as the sources and the testimonies of the witnesses. But it's just really interesting to me that this. This exists at all.

Nemo 1:13:09 I mean, it sounds like plausible behavior. I just don't know how much I credence I would put in Thomas Ford's story here because he doesn't even name his source and it's secondhand. So, like, that's how I would be fair about this. But it sounds like the sort of behavior that you would use to engender this kind of experience. So it doesn't sound unreasonable in that sense. Because forcing people to go through, you know, fasting, forcing people to go through long periods of prayer, potentially isolation with that prayer, mortification of the flesh. So the suppression of their desires, which is often like a reference for things like fasting and whatnot. Putting them in that position, showing them a box, them going, it's empty. And then essentially punishing them and making them for two hours pray and then going, right now, do you see it? What answer are they going to give you? But yes, we See it because we want the punishment to be over almost. You can kind of looking at it secularly, you could look at it like that. That's not to say Joseph Smith actually did this, but you can see how this pattern of behavior could be used. That's what I would say.

Julia 1:14:10 Yeah. And it also just makes me think of the three witnesses where Martin was very insistent, or it seems like he spoke about it the most. Where he says, we didn't actually see the plates. It was just a visionary state. And so it just kind of makes me think of that where it's. Yeah. I don't know how much credit to give this one, but it was worth putting it out here.

John Dehlin 1:14:28 Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:14:29 It's got details that make sense, but then a lot of them don't. And the. Like Nemo said and Julia said too. There's no names. I feel like if this was something that was really being said by people that were really close to Joseph Smith that were. You know, let's just be honest at this point, if they're telling it. If they really are telling it to forward, they're. They're pretty angry. Right. Why would they not publish it? Why would they not give it to a reporter? It does feel like this is something that should or would have some corroboration somewhere if it actually happened like that. So, like. Yeah, this almost feels like what. What, you know, we talk about, like the. The Hoffman forgeries, where you use details that you know are real and then you weave other stuff into it. It kind of feels like that where it's got details that make sense. Especially like you said, Julie, with the three witnesses, with Martin Harris removing himself because he's not praying hard enough or he's not in the right spiritual mindset. And then later, Joseph comes to him, they do it again, and all of a sudden he claims to see it. So you got that element. But also just. It feels too good to be true in terms of, like, being that descriptive. Where there's nothing else in any other contemporary writings that kind of have those same people telling those same stories.

Nemo 1:15:33 It's like the Bennett and the gun incident that we had.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:15:36 Yeah, yeah, It's a lot like that.

Julia 1:15:38 Right. Although I will say, was it. Was it the Burnett letter where he says that the eight hesitated to sign? And then Mark.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:15:46 He used the word persuaded in that one too. When you said persuaded in the Ford thing, when he says, basically they were persuaded, they saw it. That was. That popped in my head too, that in that letter from Stephen Burnett, he says that the eight had to be persuaded. So that word caught my eye.

Julia 1:15:58 But, yeah, so I guess you can see that that one's sort of similar. Reads a little similarly. Although, again, it's sort of like the Ben and Gun story. Yeah.

Nemo 1:16:08 Yep.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:16:09 And, you know, you could also have. When was the Ford one was in the 40s. Right. Like four.

Julia 1:16:14 It's on the slides.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:16:16 Yeah, I know. I'm trying to go back on my phone to look at the slides. I'm all off now, but, John, can

Julia 1:16:19 you throw it back up on the screen?

John Dehlin 1:16:21 Yeah, absolutely.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:16:23 Okay, so this is 1854. And. And so that Stephen Burnett account happened in 1838.

Nemo 1:16:28 Right.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:16:29 And so you wonder if that story starts circulating around the church, especially people who leave the church, then they tell the story and it gets all these other details, and then by the time Ford hears it and publishes it, he's heard the story that's been kind of recycled a bunch of times and had all these extra details, because it does have some of those elements of that 1838 Stephen Burnett letter. You just wonder if he's conflating all of these stories into something when he publishes his history. So that. That. That pops into my head, too.

Julia 1:16:55 Yeah, that's a possibility. Yeah.

Nemo 1:16:57 So for those who accuse us of just jumping on anything that might make the witnesses seem incredible. No, no, no. We're analyzing this stuff as best we can.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:17:05 Yeah, I want to get it right.

John Dehlin 1:17:08 Okay. All right.

Julia 1:17:11 Okay. So then you have. So. So then you have Samuel's testimony from 1863. So. Published in the Latter Day Saint millennial Star. On June 6th of 1863, the story of Phineas Young, the brother of Brigham Young's conversion, was printed. Anima, do you want to read this? And it goes on for a couple of slides.

Nemo 1:17:28 Yeah, sure. That's fine. While engaged in conversation with the family, a young man came in and walked across the room to where I was sitting, held a book toward me, saying, there is a book, sir, I wish you to read. The thing appeared so novel to me that for a moment I hesitated, saying, pray, sir, what book have you? The Book of Mormon, or as it is called by some, the Golden Bible. Ah, sir, then it purports to be a revelation. Yes, he said, it is a revelation from God. I took the book and by his request, looked at the testimony of the witnesses. Said he, if you will read this book with a prayerful heart and ask God to give you a witness, you will know of the truth of this work. I told him I would do so and then asked him his name he said his name was Samuel H. Smith. Ah. I said, you are one of the witnesses. Yes, said he, I know the book to be a revelation from God, translated by the gift and power of the Holy Ghost, and that my Brother, Joseph Smith Jr. Is a prophet, seer and revelator.

Julia 1:18:30 So I think the reason I point this out is just because he has a chance to speak to a convert or a potential convert about the Book of Mormon. And he. He's like, oh, you're one of the witnesses. And I think with me, if I was Samuel, I would have taken and launched into the story of what, you know, seeing the plates and handling them and. But he doesn't do that. He just says, I know the book to be a revelation from God translated by the gift and power of the Holy Ghost, and that Joseph Smith's a prophet. So he's just. I don't know, why would you sort

Nemo 1:18:58 of matter of fact that you would go, yeah, I am one of the witnesses. So this is what happened. I held the plates and I looked through them and I saw all the engravings. I've seen these genuinely ancient records and I know that my brother translated them and the resulting book is what I've asked you to read, just as simple as that. But his job as a witness of the reality of these plates, the crucial thing that Joseph Smith claimed to have, that set him apart, that he had these genuine ancient scriptures that he was then translating, he's failed to do. He's already into the gift and power of the God and by the Holy Ghost, you'll know the truthfulness of it. It's like, well, why do we need the Holy Ghost when you could actually just convince me that the plates are real and that you held them because.

Julia 1:19:41 Yeah, unless he's just relying on. Because he's holding the. The Scriptures. Unless he's just relying on his previous words from years ago or from. I guess it was more contemporary then.

Nemo 1:19:50 Yeah, Maybe he's like, I said it as best I could, then I got right.

Julia 1:19:53 Maybe he's. Yeah. Anyway, I just thought that was interesting.

Nemo 1:19:57 Yeah.

Joseph Smith Sr. Testimony and Physical Plate Descriptions

Julia 1:19:57 So this one is. This one is one of this. Probably the most interesting slide to me about this topic. This is Joseph Smith Sr's testimony and this is from 1870. So Joseph Sr. Gave it. Gave one other testimony of seeing the plates and it was published 30 years after he died. In the historical magazine, Interview with the Prophet of the Father. Excuse me. Interview with the Father of Joseph Smith, the Mormon prophet. Forty years ago, his account of the finding of the sacred plates, a man Named Fayette Latham, gives the following account. Mike, do you want to read this? This account?

Nemo 1:20:29 Yep.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:20:29 All right. So it says, Joseph persevered and brought the article safely home. I weight. It said Mr. Smith Senior, and it weighed 30 pounds. In answer to our question as to what it was that Joseph Smith had thus obtained, he said it consisted of a set of gold plates about 6 inches wide and 9 or 10 inches long. They were in the form of a book, half an inch thick, but were not bound at the back like our books, but were held together by several gold rings in such a way that the plates could be opened similar to a book. Under the first plate or lid, he found a pair of spectacles about 1 1/2 inches longer than those used at the present day. The eyes, not of glass, but of diamond. On the next page were representations of all the Masonic implements as used by the Masons at the present day. That's interesting. The remaining pages were closely written over in characters of some unknown tongue. The last containing the Alphabet of this unknown language.

Julia 1:21:22 Perfect. And I see that Nemo's holding up his Urim and Thummim.

John Dehlin 1:21:27 Go ahead, Nemo. Okay, so what do we think about Joseph Smith Senior's testimony?

Julia 1:21:33 So if you put it back up. So his. Then I drew a little. I had a little sketch of this. So Joseph Smith Sr. He's describing a very different set of gold plates than everyone else is describing. He's saying they're 30 pounds. They were 6 inches wide, 9 or 10 inches long. They were half an inch thick. There were several gold rings. I guess several. Could be three. And then he says under the first plate or lid, there was that Urim and Thummim, which I. I don't think that this account is anywhere else. And then he talks about the Masonic implements on the pages.

Nemo 1:22:05 So there was compasses and squares and.

Julia 1:22:08 Right. Which Masonry? So the ancient Nephites were Masons. And then the last containing an Alphabet of the unknown language. So there's. There's a. There's like a key of it. But he's also got the Seer Stone and the Urim and Thummim. So that seems sort of unnecessary.

Nemo 1:22:24 Why would the key be there?

Julia 1:22:26 Right. So.

Nemo 1:22:27 But then that.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:22:27 Why would the.

Nemo 1:22:30 Because like Joseph with the grammar and Alphabet, the Egyptian language, part of Joseph's translation process in later days was to try and produce an Alphabet so that he could then use that to translate documents. So. Yeah, that tracks as to what his father might have seen of later behavior.

Julia 1:22:45 Yeah. So I drew little sketches, the Interview was given.

John Dehlin 1:22:50 Yeah, it was published.

Julia 1:22:52 Yeah. The interview would have happened before 1842. Excuse me. Which is when Joseph Smith Sr. Died, so.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:22:58 And it was before. Oh, yeah. I guess it could have been after they got the Book of Abraham, before he died. Because it doesn't say, like, I did this on 1830. He's just saying 40 years ago. So it could be. It could be Joseph Smith senior conflating these different things, especially when you get into the Masonry, because that would have been later and all that. So that could be.

Nemo 1:23:15 And he's getting older.

John Dehlin 1:23:17 Why are these historians publishing accounts decades after the actual interviews happened? We had some of those, Right?

Julia 1:23:24 That's a great question.

Nemo 1:23:25 Because they're sent by Satan to deceive us, John.

Julia 1:23:29 They're just holding them.

John Dehlin 1:23:30 I mean, does that automatically mean we should just fully discount them? I'm sure that's what apologists would say.

Julia 1:23:35 I wouldn't discount them, but like, maybe taking them with a grain.

Nemo 1:23:38 Apologist would say that.

John Dehlin 1:23:39 Okay, all right, well, let's go ahead and show us the next slide if you want.

Julia 1:23:43 Yeah. Anyway, I just think his sizing is just really interesting. So in the top, little. So here's I've got a slide of little sketches of the plates that the other witnesses described and the ones that Joseph Smith Sr. Described for those listening. So the. The one on top is a larger set that we think of when we see. When we think of the plates, the ones depicted in the films. So the. The other witnesses said it was 6 inches by 8 inches. This is Lucy Smith. Martin Harris said it was 7 inches by 8 inches. Martin Harris said it was 4 inches thick. And then 6 inches thick. Two inches of that contained the Book of Mormon. And I think that was David Wimmer. I can't remember. David Wimmer says it was bound by 3D shaped rings. And he's quoting Mary Whitmer. And Martin Harris says that those rings were silver. David Wimmer says that the pages were as thick as parchment. And then Martin Harris says that it weighed 40 to 60 pounds. And Emma was able to move them from place to place as she was cleaning. Martin Harris's daughter could lift them and Catherine Smith found them very heavy. And then you have Joseph Smith Senior, who says that they were again 6 inches wide and 9 inches, 9 or 10 inches long, half an inch thick, held together by several gold rings. It weighed 30 pounds. And he gives no description of the sealed portion. So I. To me it's. Why is his. Why is this so different?

Nemo 1:25:00 And like, I got a ruler out just Because I was trying to work out, you know, what the difference is between thinking they're 8 inches long and 10 inches long. And I realized inches are quite. Quite the measure. So it's a good. Yeah, hold it up a good amount longer.

John Dehlin 1:25:13 Yeah.

Nemo 1:25:14 So you've got. There's 8 inches long.

John Dehlin 1:25:17 Yeah.

Nemo 1:25:17 Or there's 10 inches long. 8, 10. 8, 10. Quite significant difference.

John Dehlin 1:25:24 Can gold be shaped into paper that's as thin, I'm gonna say thin, as parchment? Is that even how gold works?

Nemo 1:25:33 You can have a gold out quite flat, I would imagine.

Julia 1:25:36 But if you're trying to engrave on both sides, that's. That's one of the things that really catches me because they. I think it was Emma, she said you can ruffle the edges of the pages or thumb the edges like you do a book, and you can hear the wrestling. I don't.

John Dehlin 1:25:48 Metal works.

Julia 1:25:49 Right. And especially if you're putting engravings on both sides, like, that really throws me off.

Nemo 1:25:53 I've. I've heard theories of like. Of a copper center and then gold over the top because the gold was malleable enough to engrave and blah, blah, blah. But then that's like. That's a compound material for a start, which is quite complex technology. And then it just. That would not give the paper, the. The pages, plates, the ability to rustle. It's that rustling. Paper doesn't rustle. Metal doesn't rustle. Like paper.

John Dehlin 1:26:22 Yeah, metal works. And by the way, 40 to 60 pounds, like, there's no way. Right.

Nemo 1:26:28 Well, the only metal that Russell's is aluminium. Aluminium Americans. Aluminium foil. Right. Tin foil, that. We would call it tinfoil here. Right. That can rustle.

John Dehlin 1:26:38 If you tried to engrave in that, it would rip immediately.

Nemo 1:26:40 Exactly at that point. So in order for it to be thin enough to rustle, it's too thin to do its job.

John Dehlin 1:26:47 Yeah. Were you gonna say something, like, about the weight, the alleged weight?

Julia 1:26:51 Well, I will say that. I will say this with Trent told in your episode that you did with Trent. Told who? I can't remember the exact 1380 he did. He did an episode showing about him creating the plates, and you've got them in your studio, John. But he says that whenever he hands them to people, they guess 50, 60 pounds. But he says, I think they're. I think he says they're 37 pounds or 35 pounds. And so I guess you could see it that way. But my thoughts are like, these are people that work on farms. They know what things weigh. Why is his guest so different? So I Guess, but many at the same time with. With Trent told. I mean, you can see it working that way where everyone guesses heavier, but it's really lighter. And so maybe Joseph Smith senior just really knew that it was only 30 pounds.

Nemo 1:27:32 The weight doesn't bother me so much as the massive difference in dimensions, particularly in the thickness. Even like thinking it's a couple of inches longer if you're. If you're many years later and you're thinking back that like, that's fine. But it's the fact that he describes it as being so much thinner than the others and the number of rings, those seem like sort of.

Julia 1:27:53 Yeah, there's a. There's a Mormon apologist, his name is Jonathan Neville, and he wrote a book called what Happened to the Gold Plates? Plates. And he speculates that there were two separate plates, two separate sets of plates or books. And this is one of the reasons why the eight witnesses is so different and why you have like. So the angel has.

Nemo 1:28:10 I love it when I just get to add things.

Julia 1:28:12 Right. And just say it's a really complicated. Right. It's a really complicated story. But if you want to, if you're interested in looking at that theory.

Nemo 1:28:18 No, no, no, Carry on, carry on. Sorry, carry on.

Julia 1:28:20 Oh, well, he says that so in this. So Joseph Smith has the small set of plates because that's what he's translating last. And so people speculate that the small set is actually the small inch, 10 inch by 1 inch thick. That's the plates. But the witnesses, all the rest of them describe a larger set. And so they speculate that Joseph, that Joseph has the small plates. The angel come and takes the big plates to the forest and shows them all the plates and then takes them back wherever he's takes. Wherever he takes them. So, so that's a. That's an apologetic theory that, that if you want to read more about. It's Jonathan Neville. So. Yeah, super interesting.

John Dehlin 1:28:56 Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:28:57 One thing about apologetics is when you, when you make a claim, I'm gonna grab. So I got my. One of my kids Nerf darts, right? So you make a claim and the answer isn't here because it's not. It's not true. The claim isn't true. You then make that. You make the target bigger. So you expand the universe. And so what that is doing is saying these don't add up. So we're just going to expand the universe and say, well, it could just be this. If you just go here and go there. And that's one of the things we've really tried to hammer on these episodes is that you can't do that because you're not allowing that space for anyone else or anything else, because you wouldn't. Because if you tell these stories to people who are, even if believers in the church, if you could tell these stories to them in a way that doesn't alert them that you're talking about the history of their own church, they're going to say, this is made up. This is ridiculously, absurdly made up. And so what the apologists are doing is they're trying to expand that universe to try to find a way to make it plausible. And you see that over and over

Nemo 1:29:52 with every topic is the heartland model versus the hemispheric model. Right. Is this idea of. They used to put in the Book of Mormon until about the 1920s, I think that, you know, this body of water is lake. So. And so, and this body of water is this and that the narrow neck of land is here. And then all of a sudden, BH Roberts and company, they're like, this doesn't work. And they have to, like you say, expand the universe. They go, right, well, where can we look for actual ancient civilizations, at least on the same continent? And so they have to go.

Julia 1:30:21 And sometimes they can shrink those, too. Where they say, it's the principal ancestors of the Native Americans. Oh, it's. It's just among the ancestors of the Native Americans.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:30:29 Yeah. So you're expanding the universe of belief, but you're shrinking the. The people. You're making the Book of Mormon people completely irrelevant in order to keep that bigger universe open. Which again, shows you just how.

Nemo 1:30:40 And at what point does the claim shrink to the point where it's no longer a unique claim. And I think that's what we're seeing in the church in modern days. They're becoming more and more mainstream Christian to the point of. Yeah, you're losing a lot of unique Mormon doctrines. And at what point then have you shrunk the church to the point where it's unrecognizable from another Protestant church?

Julia 1:30:56 Right.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:30:57 Yeah. Yeah, they're slow. Yeah, that's the. That's the internal battle for sure.

Nemo 1:31:01 Yeah.

John Dehlin 1:31:02 Yep.

Julia 1:31:03 Yeah. Yeah. Also his. His description of the. The lid with the seers or the Urim and Thummim underneath it. I didn't put that in the drawing, but, like, that's. I don't even know how to be

Nemo 1:31:13 Joseph's way of keeping the Urim and Thummim stored. You know, he just pops them inside the top cover of the book.

Julia 1:31:19 Another thing that's interesting is I found out recently that in Jane Manning James's diary, she talks about the. How Lucy Mack Smith still kept the Urim and Thummim with her throughout the rest of her life, I think. And she even produced them for Jane Manning James, although she kept them wrapped in a. Like a muslin handkerchief or something. And she was able to feel the two different rocks. Anyway, I just thought it was interesting that she. According to that.

Nemo 1:31:45 Taken back.

Julia 1:31:47 I don't know, according to one of the prophets. I think it was Joseph F. Or Joseph Fielding, he said that the angel took them back, but that doesn't account for.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:31:55 We're talking about the spectacles, right?

Julia 1:31:57 The spectacles that he was. Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:31:58 Oh, see, I thought you're talking about the Seer Stone, because they. Yeah, okay. Yeah,

Julia 1:32:04 right. Yeah. She felt the two rocks. Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:32:09 I thought When Joseph lost 116 pages, I thought, there's an account that says he never got the spectacles back after that. But it's been a while, so I'm not positive. But I thought that was part of the messiness. And that's why you can look at that account and say, from that point, the Book of Mormon, as we have it today, was done with a rock and a hat. Because I believe there's an account that says he never got the spectacles back. And I also believe there's no real reference to those being used or the. Whatever you want to call them, Nephite interpreters after the initial start with Martin Harris. But I know we're probably getting.

Julia 1:32:39 I should grab the time. I should grab that. Yeah, probably. But I should grab the timeline for that and see what. Like, try to track what happened to them, because people wonder what. Yeah, the German thumb.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:32:46 But, yeah, I don't think it's clear.

Julia 1:32:49 Yeah, I don't think it is either. Yeah.

Did All Eight Witnesses Actually View the Plates

John Dehlin 1:32:51 All right. Well, I think. I still think the metal pages don't work. The crinkle. And I don't think the weight. No, I don't think the weight matches with how heavy it would need to be to be gold. But to have enough pages to fit all the words.

Julia 1:33:04 Oh, that's true. Because if they're light enough, they're not going to be that heavy.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:33:07 Oh, my goodness.

Nemo 1:33:07 Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:33:08 So if anyone out there is watching this and you're really interested, look up Book of Mormon Central's podcast. They've done guests on other podcasts on their gold plates and look at the examples they give you and then realize what would have to happen. For a 270,000 word book to be in gold, it is impossible. Especially if you're talking double sided. It gets ridiculous. Like, just imagine you're denting out one side, you're engraving all these words, you flip the other page, then you look back at your first like, oh, crap, I just popped out that one. I mean, it's just. It. It's believable from a magical worldview point of view, but when you look at it today, you're like, there's this. There's no way. It's just. It gets absurd. And so watch their podcast and then kind of think of. Of what they're saying and what needs to happen for the Book of Mormon, because you can kind of see through what they're doing very quickly. It's just that on the podcast, they're not pushed back on that.

John Dehlin 1:33:53 Yeah, all right, all right, enough said. Let's keep going.

Julia 1:33:58 Yeah, but the way the weight and the thickness does prove a big problem.

John Dehlin 1:34:01 Yeah, I think.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:34:02 Yeah.

John Dehlin 1:34:03 Makes no sense. And also just the. These different accounts are really weighing up. Why are you guys laughing?

Nemo 1:34:10 Just because we're like, oh, let's move on. They were like, well, actually, no, there's more that's wrong with this.

John Dehlin 1:34:15 Okay, I'm guilty. But so many different accounts, so many different approaches. It's starting to seem problematic. Yes, I just wanted to make that observation.

Julia 1:34:25 Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

John Dehlin 1:34:27 Okay.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:34:27 Oh, also, I got.

Julia 1:34:31 Okay, so then John Wimmer. So according to an interview published in the deseret news on August 14th of 1878, all eight witnesses did not view the plates at the same time. They saw them in two groups of four, which is also something that I was never taught any at any point in my life. Do. Is there. Can you guys, like, play off of each other? I think it's. I think the. I think that it's an interviewer. And then he. I think it's John.

Nemo 1:34:56 John, do you want to interview me?

Julia 1:34:58 Okay, so, John, you've got the eyes.

John Dehlin 1:35:00 I'm I in. In Nemo's. Is he John Whitmer?

Nemo 1:35:03 Is that right, my baby?

Julia 1:35:05 Yes.

John Dehlin 1:35:05 Okay, so I'm the Deseret News, and you're John Whitmer.

Nemo 1:35:10 Indeed.

John Dehlin 1:35:11 So did you handle the plates with your hands?

Nemo 1:35:14 I did.

John Dehlin 1:35:14 So then they were a material substance?

Nemo 1:35:18 Yes, as material as anything can be.

John Dehlin 1:35:21 They were heavy to lift.

Nemo 1:35:23 Yes. And as you know, gold is a heavy metal. They were very heavy.

John Dehlin 1:35:28 How big were the leaves?

Nemo 1:35:30 So far as I recollect, 8 by 6 or 7 inches.

John Dehlin 1:35:34 Were the leaves thick?

Nemo 1:35:36 Yes, Just so thick that characters could be engraven on both sides.

John Dehlin 1:35:41 How were the leaves joined together?

Nemo 1:35:43 In three rings, each one in the shape of a D with the straight line towards the center.

John Dehlin 1:35:49 In what place did you see the plates?

Nemo 1:35:51 In Joseph Smith's house. He had them there.

John Dehlin 1:35:54 Did you see them covered with a cloth?

Nemo 1:35:57 No. He handed them uncovered into our hands and we turned the leaves sufficient to satisfy us.

John Dehlin 1:36:04 Were you all eight witnesses present at the same time?

Nemo 1:36:08 No. At that time Joseph showed the plates to us. We were four persons present in the room. And at another time he showed them to four persons more.

Julia 1:36:18 Okay, thank you. So I just think that's super interesting because you. Because I think in most of the visual aids and things like that, even we showed one earlier where all eight are together in the woods. And Lucy Mack Smith said that they went to the grove and you had said that you pointed out about the Jewish nature of doing that. So he. So we have some saying that it was in the woods, then John Wimmer saying it was in the house, but he doesn't know where the other one saw it. Also, why would Joseph Smith split it up? And also, if four are seeing them and then four are seeing them at a different time, why are they family?

Nemo 1:36:49 Only for the four witnesses.

Julia 1:36:52 But also, like, that seems kind of problematic to me with it signing all the same document because they're two different witnesses. Like, I don't know, I just think that's a little odd.

Nemo 1:37:01 I mean, there's a few things in there though, that are interesting. Like if you pull that back up, he talks about. He describes leaves again. So he said we turn the leaves sufficiently satisfy us. So that puts poo poo to that other guy's argument about how leaves. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Julia 1:37:16 So because he's referencing the actual pages of.

Nemo 1:37:18 Yeah. And he's there turning the leaves to satisfy us because we handled them. The plates uncovered and this weird sort of squirrely language. As material as anything can be. Like, what. What is he on about? Like, is he a philosopher? Like, what, what?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:37:37 That's.

Nemo 1:37:37 That's a really weird way to phrase it. If you're not trying to leave yourself wiggle room for pushback. You know, it's. You're hedging massively there. Like, if someone goes, well, okay, well where are they now? Or you really just saw them spiritually. He's like, well, yeah, you know, there's the spiritual and the material. They sometimes, you know, it's just. Do you get what I'm saying?

John Dehlin 1:37:58 Yeah, yeah, I thought that was a funny Question, did you see them covered with the cloth? Now wait, are you seeing them or are they covered with the cloth? But how do you. That was a weird question. And then, yeah, this 4 and 4 thing is almost as bad as the, as the depictions of the Book of Mormon translation. To me, if, if they were never in a forest and they were never altogether ate in a, you know, eight together, then all the church's art since the beginning have been deceiving all of us.

Nemo 1:38:27 And I want to point out where this was published. Deseret News. So church controlled newspaper. So this is an official church outlet. And again, one of the very few things that we have to go by in this minefield of when things are from God and when they're just some bloke's opinion is who's published it. And this is official church publication. So they are in some way endorsing this version of events in this newspaper

Julia 1:38:52 that is never picked up by any of the art that is also called for by the church.

Nemo 1:38:56 Because we know the church has absolutely no problem hiding versions or accounts of events that don't line up with the narrative that they want people to see. Just look at the first vision. Accounts that were ripped out and then put back.

Julia 1:39:08 Or even Lucy Mike Smith, who, like Brigham Young made everyone burn her original story or book and then he had to rewrite it. And even her, she says that an angel came and dropped them off or picked them back up. And here he's saying, no, they were just already in the house because Joseph had them. And also I don't understand why he does it in groups of four.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:39:29 Like, that's what I want.

Julia 1:39:31 These homes held all their family. Like there weren't big homes. But like.

Nemo 1:39:35 Well, we know that. I'm going to be facetious again. We know that Joseph Smith can fend off multiple attackers with a bad leg running for three miles, carrying heavy plates. So maybe he thought he could take four of them if they tried to steal them, but he didn't trust eight in one go. He thought they might mob him.

Julia 1:39:49 I keep forgetting that he had a limp and a lisp because of his broken tooth and, and a hurt thumb. I guess the rocket tooth happens later.

Nemo 1:40:00 I mean, send them off, you know.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:40:01 But it's also the same. Oh yeah. It's also the same thing as the three witnesses where Martin Harris has to go because he doesn't see it and then he sees it later and then they sign a statement as if they're all there. And so it makes you wonder what. I mean, we'll never know the answer to this, but it makes me wonder which four were left off the first time. Is it four people are like, dude, I'm not seeing crap. And Joe's just like, why don't you go outside? We'll get to you in a second. Go fast some more, and then I'll get you some Sacramento wine. Maybe you'll start seeing stuff. And so I just. I don't know. That's what I'm wondering. I'm like, why did he split him up? Because 4 weren't seeing it. Like, Martin Harrison see it? Or is he doing it where he's like, you four are good. I got through this. Okay.

Nemo 1:40:37 You got.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:40:37 You guys, guys. You guys believe this? Okay.

John Dehlin 1:40:39 Bring.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:40:39 You know, I joked.

Nemo 1:40:42 I joked that. Oh, you know, it was a. It was a Whitmer family only event for the first one.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:40:46 Yeah.

Nemo 1:40:46 But actually, there are two neat groups there. There is Smith's family, plus Hiram Page, and then there's the Whitmers. So it could make sense if I was. Again, we don't know who the groups were, but it could make sense that he can easily convince the Whitmer family to have the same experience, and then he convinces his own family and Hiram Page to have the experience.

Julia 1:41:07 So, like, maybe it's easier to lead if you're going with that theory. Yeah, Easier to lead through that experience with. With a smaller group.

Nemo 1:41:13 A smaller group and a group of people that are related because they're all invested in each other. Like in supporting each other through familial ties as well as through a shared magical worldview.

Julia 1:41:24 Yeah, that's true. And also, this kind of combats. This kind of combats Thomas Ford's account, secondhand account, where he says that they were all brought in and saw an empty box. Groups. Whereas John Wimmer's like, no, no, no. We weren't never all together. We were in groups of four. So that would kind of put less credit on Thomas Ford's account.

John Dehlin 1:41:43 Interesting.

Julia 1:41:44 Yeah.

Nemo 1:41:45 Either way, the Church clearly didn't view this as problematic because they published it in their own newspaper.

Julia 1:41:49 Right. Yeah. Why? Just. It's just interesting why the Church never depicts it that way. Why? Why. Why is it. Why is it always in the Grove with all eight or. That's what I've seen anyway. I don't think I've seen.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:42:00 Yeah, well, they got. They got to stick with what's in the Book of Mormon, so, I mean, you can't go away from that because all like, wait a second. That art shows different than what you were converting people with. I mean, that's, that really is what it comes down to. And it sounds a lot better to have eight people all believing at once as opposed to having to bring in two separate groups of force.

John Dehlin 1:42:16 So.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:42:17 Yeah.

Julia 1:42:18 Yeah. Okay, so I think we're, we can go on to the next slides. Okay. So this is another one of John Wimmer's testimonies as published in the Saints Herald. In August of, of 1878, Myron H. Bond interviewed John Whitmer. Old father Whitmer told me last winter with tears in his eyes that he knew as well as he knew he had an existence that Joseph translated the ancient. The ancient writing which was upon the plates which he saw and handled and which as one of the scribes he helped to copy as the words fell from the. From Joseph's lips by supernatural or almighty power. So this one just confirms. He's just. See, he also sees any. Handles the plates and then you have another one from Samuel. In 1883, Daniel Tyler recalled visiting Samuel Smith in Pennsylvania in the spring of 1832, which resulted in his own conversion. Daniel recorded Elder Samuel Smith read the 29th chapter of Isaiah at the first meeting and delineated the circumstances of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, of which he said he was a witness. He knew his brother Joseph had the plates, for the prophet had shown them to him and he had handled them and seen the engravings thereon. His speech was more like a narrative than a sermon. So this one again supports the original statement of the eight witnesses. And then with Jacob Whitmer, we've only got two from him and they're both from his kids and they read very similarly. According to Andrew Jensen, John C. Whitmer shared his father's testimony. My father, Jacob Whitmer was always faithful and true to his testimony in regard to the Book of Mormon and confirmed it on his deathbed. And then he has another kid in the same year. Jacob's. Jacob's other son, Captain David P. Whitmer, used almost the same language as Andrew as his other son. I got the name wrong. As his other son, John C. Whitmer. My father, Jacob Whitmer was always faithful and true to his testimony to the Book of Mormon and confirmed it on his deathbed. In fact, I think, are there different words or are they both the same? It's just interesting to me that two of his kids are using the exact same words. And these two testimonies are the only thing that we have from Jacob outside of the eight witness statement.

Nemo 1:44:24 They are Suspiciously similar.

Julia 1:44:27 Right.

Nemo 1:44:29 Almost word for word, in fact. So testimony to the Book of Mormon and in regard to the Book of Mormon and Kephodia's deathbed.

Julia 1:44:37 Yeah, but super close.

Nemo 1:44:39 Strikes me as rehearsed, some might say, between the two brothers.

Julia 1:44:44 Okay, so then we can go on to the eight witness statements or the. Excuse me. Other witnesses to the plates outside of the eight. Do we want to. Do we want to keep going?

Nemo 1:44:54 Is this a good place to pause?

John Dehlin 1:44:55 Yeah, yeah, I think this is a good place to pause because I think we've done a pretty good review of just an introduction to the eight witnesses and what they claim to see and what the differences were. I think it would be cool to have anyone who wants to share any. Any summaries of what we've discussed so far, and then we can. Yeah. End this one in under two hours. And then. And then try for a second and maybe a third episode if. If we need it. So, Mike, I'm curious if there's any summative comments that you want to make. And then we'll do Nemo, and then we'll do Julia.

Nemo 1:45:31 Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:45:32 So when we did the Book of Abraham episode, we talked about how the Book Abraham translation being wrong is such a big problem. And I talked about how there are a lot of apologists within the church, and I've been told this specifically by people that they've said if the Book of Abraham translation was correct, there'd be no need for faith. And I always kind of think that's a horrible argument because we are told that we have a God. The God of Mormonism is our heavenly Father who loves us so much. And his entire plan is to bring every one of us back to him that he possibly can. Right. Because he loves us so much. In the eight Witnesses, you can see that this God of Mormonism is only. Is missing every opportunity to get more people back to him. If. If the God of Mormonism is. Is true and the Book of Mormon is true, as I said at the beginning, the eight witnesses, because it's a physical event, because this is literally plates on a table that any person off the street can walk in and see. You would have a reporter, you'd have a governor, you'd have. Have all of the people that are telling us that Joseph Smith is a con man going in there and seeing him and going, holy crap. Joseph Smith was. Was not making it up. He's telling the truth. This is true. And they go out and you've got governors, you've got reporters saying, this is the Real deal, guys. But instead, the God of Mormonism chooses two families to go in there that are already believers, that are already believers in the magical worldview to do it. To me, that tells you beyond any doubt that Joseph Smith knows that he doesn't have plates with ancient engravings, that he is making this up, whether it's a prop set of plates or whether it's something else. Because if this could pass physical inspection, he would be showing people outside of his inner circle so that people would believe. And so I guess I would just summarize it by saying the reason I think this is more important is because we're seeing how the sausage is made, and we're seeing how unconfident Joseph Smith is that these could pass physical inspection. And because he's unconfident, you can see in the approaches he's taking to getting these witnesses that he's doing everything he can to. To make sure this doesn't get out beyond his inner circle that already believes this. And so for me, that's why it's important, and that's why the eight witnesses are really important. Just as 116 pages, it's showing us how Joseph Smith is trying to navigate building belief in him as a prophet while also not being willing to actually show what he's got going on.

Nemo 1:47:43 I mean, I disagree on some of those points there. Yeah, please do. Or I can certainly.

John Dehlin 1:47:49 That's why he hates you. Nemo,

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:47:52 what do you got? Nemo, what you got this time?

Nemo 1:47:54 I can certainly see the apologetic argument around. Yeah, well, I mean, you have to look no further than the temple to see what is the difference between secret and sacred. Right. So it wasn't that Joseph Smith was keeping these secret from people. He wasn't trying to hide them. They were just too sacred to show to people who. Who had not gone through the sufficient spiritual mortification of the flesh. They had not gone through the sufficient fasting and praying in order to be in the presence of such sacred objects. And this from a God who struck people down for touching something they weren't meant to. To. He struck people dead for touching something that everyone could look at, but they weren't allowed to touch. Right. You can't steady the ark or you'll be struck down. So there's scriptural precedent for an object so sacred that only certain people can interact with it, even if it is real. So that's. That's what I would imagine the apologetic pushback on those points would be.

Julia 1:48:41 But you could also push back on that and say, well, what about These other items that were, I guess, even more sacred than the Book of Mormon, like the Scrolls of Abraham, which is.

Nemo 1:48:49 Who says they're more sacred?

Julia 1:48:51 Well, they're older. They have more. There's more revelation in them that is new to us that the Book of Mormon doesn't contain. Like, I would argue that that's. That would be what you would want to hide, I guess, if you're going to go that route.

Nemo 1:49:01 I mean. But we're getting to the problem then, with the idea that the Book of Mormon contains the fullness of the gospel, because actually the Doctrine and Covenants of Abraham contained the fullness of the gospel. So, I mean, I'm not saying it's good. I'm just pointing the argument that, you know, could be made there.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:49:14 No.

Nemo 1:49:15 And once you retreat to sanctity, you, as the person telling that story, get to control what is sacred and why people shouldn't get to look at your stuff. Like the endowment ceremony. There's no reason people can't watch the endowment ceremony. There's no reason you couldn't have a balcony of people watching the endowment ceremony. But the church and the religious institution gets to decide that is too sacred for the people to see. And Joseph, you could make the same argument with those plates as to why. Yeah, to see them.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:49:40 I mean, the temple's a different discussion. Because I remember going through the temple the first time and beyond the stuff we talked about in the episode about the initiatory and being naked under a cloth, because it was before the 2005 changes, I remember leaving and being like, there's nothing to this. There's nothing new. And we won't get into what the actual video is. But that's why when people go, you learn something new at the temple. Every time I'm like, what do you learn? There's nothing. It's a video of the creation. But to go back to your point and to kind of piggyback off Julia, the Book of Abraham scrolls were showed to everybody because they were real. The gold plates can't pass physical inspection. So, yes, you could say an apologist will say, the local reporter, the governor, a mayor, they don't have faith. But this is a physical event. This is the corner the church puts himself in by saying, these are plates on a table. I don't need faith to know that this. I still have an image that this is a Nerf dart. I don't need plates to see that. I've got a cup here. So to then say that, well, Nemo can't look at this plate, this cup in person because he has no faith. It's just, it's an argument that is so stupid that you would never give it to anyone else. And so, yeah, I'm just being as blunt as I can here.

Nemo 1:50:46 Here.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:50:46 This is an argument that the church is making because they know full well that what that when they show the cards, the cards are saying Joseph's made it up. So, yeah, you can, you could retreat to that position, but I'm saying you would never. The church would never give that space to someone else. If someone else I'm just going to throw out, hypothetically, Hiram Page came out and said, I've got Revelation. The church isn't going to go, well, it's true because people believe it. They're going to say it's not true because it can't be because that infringes on us being the one true church led by Joseph Smith Smith. And so you're not going to give the same space to any other religion. You're going to. You're so you're engaging in special pleading. If those plates would have. Would pass special. Would. Would pass physical inspection. Joseph Smith would have showed them to people just as he showed the book, Abraham's scrolls. And it would have grown the church and it would have grown the church immensely to a point that it would have been the most important event in modern history. And the God of Mormonism, if he really wants everyone to come back to him, would have been like, Joseph, get those plates out as in front of many skeptical people and influential people as you can, because I want my children to come back to me. He wouldn't go, dude, just show them to the Whitmers, show them to your family and make sure that no one else can see them.

Nemo 1:51:54 It's just God's ways.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:51:57 Yeah, yeah. And I get that the apologetic is God's ways are not our ways, but I'm going to say that the God of Mormonism sucks at growing his church because the God of Mormonism made his prophet out to be a fraud in the Book of Abraham. Didn't show these plates to anyone, but people who already believed and who already were very gullible to worldviews and also believed a. A nut job that claimed he had his own seer stone that was giving revelation so bad that it had to be deemed from the devil. I'm just saying. And yeah, I'm being blunt here. The God of the Mormon Church is horrible at growing his church because he's doing all of these things in every way that Tells the world that. That his prophets making it up. And so I'm pushing back on what you're saying because I get what you're saying. I hear it all, all the time.

John Dehlin 1:52:37 I can hear. I can hear God of Mormon saying to Mike, scoreboard. 17 million members and growing most successful American founded church in the history of America, plus $250 billion. Checkmate. Mike. Mike.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:52:54 Well, I mean, yeah, if we're. If we're judging by money and we're judging by greed, then yeah, but I've been told that money and greed are not of God. So I mean, you know. And what, what are the. What are the Seventh Day Adventists?

John Dehlin 1:53:04 That was just by Jesus, like, you know.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:53:08 Well, what are the. The seven day of Venice? Don't they have more? They've got 22 million. Wasn't that started in the US and that was also started on a failed revelation? Right.

Julia 1:53:15 They have 22 million.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:53:17 They have 22 million.

John Dehlin 1:53:18 So a second. Second.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:53:20 So. So Seventh Day Adventist, which was. Was formed basically on a failed revelation. Right. They've got a bigger number. So does that mean that.

Julia 1:53:27 No, I mean like the, the bandwagon get into.

Three Options for Interpreting the Witnesses

John Dehlin 1:53:32 I. I want to get other everyone else in, but I just want to ask. Let's just say there's three options. Option one is that they really saw real plates. Okay, I'm assuming that no one here believes that. Option number two is that he showed them something and. Well, yeah, okay, there's gonna be four options. Option one is that this all really happened in some amalgam of what we've talked about, and that there are plates and there are angels, et cetera. Option two is that he showed them stuff, maybe fake plates, and created a genuine impression in them with physical artifacts that they were actually witnessing to something. A third is that he whipped them into some sort of spiritual testimony that. Where no actual physical stuff were ever seen. And then a fourth is that it was all made up and it was like a conspiracy that they were all in on to lie or that sort of undue pressure was applied so that they would sign agreements to things that never really happened. I want to go around the horn, Julia. One, two, three or four for you.

Julia 1:54:48 So I don't think that there's an actual ancient set of gold plates. There's too many problems with that.

John Dehlin 1:54:53 Not one.

Julia 1:54:53 So I think no. And I also think no to the last one, because these people went on to believe like they, they also, in their own testimonies, they don't say that they were coerced. They don't say that they were pressured. So I don't think that one is either. I think it's. I think it could be very likely that Joseph Smith made a prop set of plates. And what was your other option?

John Dehlin 1:55:08 So two is play is real artifacts. Three is all spiritual.

Julia 1:55:13 Well, and then just like with the three witnesses, which seems all spiritual based on. Based on everything that we went over last time, that one could be very likely as well. So I don't know between the two, whether it was all spiritual or there was a prop set of places.

John Dehlin 1:55:23 Two or three.

Julia 1:55:24 Yeah.

John Dehlin 1:55:25 Mike, what's your vote?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:55:27 I. I'm with Julia. I think the conspiracy thing, to me doesn't make sense because Joseph Smith runs him out of the church. If they were in a conspiracy, they would turn down him. And then obviously, there's no ancient plates. We've talked about how the fact that that just doesn't work in any possible way.

John Dehlin 1:55:42 So spirit, physical, eyes.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:55:47 I think he probably had a prop set of plates, and I think he probably also did what we saw with the vision with Sidney Rigdon, where it's like, I see this. Do you see this? And they're like, yeah, I see that. What do you see?

John Dehlin 1:55:57 Plates. They're seeing them with their eyes.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:56:00 They're holding them under. Under a cloth.

John Dehlin 1:56:02 No, but they said there's no cloth. Like, they're seeing them. They're touching them and they crinkle and they're gold and there's rings and they're reading Egyptian characters.

Nemo 1:56:14 The crinkle only comes from Emma, and that's from underneath.

Julia 1:56:17 Say it's as thin as sheet of parchment. Do they say that in one of them,

John Dehlin 1:56:24 make that tin?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:56:26 I don't think he did. I mean, I think that's different than

John Dehlin 1:56:29 people plates that don't have engravings that are super rough. Like.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:56:34 Yeah.

John Dehlin 1:56:34 What they're testifying to is seeing something that really looked like golden plates that hefted around £30. Right.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:56:44 I think there's so much ambiguity in those statements that it's hard for me to say, like, oh, yeah, they saw him on a table uncovered. Because I also think when you read those statements and when you read what Martin Harris says, I don't think that that statement is probably what happened. So I guess I'm kind of like, what Julia said. You have a little two, a little three. You got a little bit of that. Joseph may have had a prop set of plate. And then, you know, if you listen to Dan Vogel, does he did a podcast or not? He did an episode on YouTube on the three and the eight witnesses. And then I think it's on the eight witnesses. I think he talks about the studies that have been done on inducing spiritual hallucinations, inducing that vision. Joseph Smith does it. I mean, we've seen it throughout the history of the church. And so I'm saying that maybe you have a prop set of plate and maybe you have these people fast all day, and then you give them sacramental wine and all of a sudden they're loosened up, they're already believers in magical worldview. So you can use that prop set to basically initiate more. But, you know, at the same time.

John Dehlin 1:57:39 Four and then. Four, Right.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:57:41 Yeah, yeah, he would. And. But I also think when you have a signed statement that conflates.

John Dehlin 1:57:46 I don't see how he manufactured plates that. That reflect what they're saying they saw.

Nemo 1:57:54 No, well, this is where.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:57:55 I don't think you have to.

Nemo 1:57:57 Yeah, this. This is where you have language, spiritual

John Dehlin 1:58:00 eyes, not physical eyes and heads.

Nemo 1:58:03 So this is where you have language that spiritual eyes are what are needed to see what is truly upon the plates. Because what is upon the plates is so sacred that it's hidden from the natural eyes of men. And that's why the plates appear blank or whatever language you would like to use. And that's why he has to engage this spiritual element of it. So that they see the plates for what they really are, not as blank silver plates, but as the gold plates. Right. So that's. I agree with Mike. Mike, surprisingly, I agree with Mike a little bit to a little bit of three, that there is something there that they can physically get their hands on, but in the right conditions set up by Joseph Smith, to then believe it

John Dehlin 1:58:44 seems like two is impossible. But because he couldn't make up plates that would match those descriptions, like you

Julia 1:58:53 said,

Nemo 1:58:57 because the spiritual eyes do the. The rest of the lifting.

John Dehlin 1:58:59 Three, then it's three.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:59:01 Well, with three.

Nemo 1:59:02 With the Prop 2. Yeah, yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:59:06 Because the statement is so vague. You don't really know. It's not like the statement's like an eye. John Whitmer walked into the room and upon a tree stump was uncovered plates that were directly engraven with the Book of Mormon. And Joseph Smith showed me the Urim and Thummim light up with. With letters that pop off the hat. I mean, it's very vague. So it's all speculative.

Nemo 1:59:28 Those tin plates you've got, John, are quite dull. Right. Say. Say Joseph was using sheets of tin that were slightly thinner and he'd hammered in some ways. They got some slight ripples to them. And he polished them up. Right. Then he sat them in a room. Say they didn't go out to the Grove because we have a testimony that they went to his house. Right. So they're in a house by flickering warm orange candlelight, reflecting on the time of day. Depending on the time of day.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:59:53 Yeah.

Nemo 1:59:53 Reflecting off reflective surfaces with ripples in them. And that is a recipe for someone to say if they heard they glue, you know, the plates glue glowed with a heavenly glow and they were, you know, as fire or whatever. Right. They're a golden color. They do. I mean.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:00:10 Yep.

Nemo 2:00:11 Add to that some Sacramento wine, like Mike said, and some spiritual. Some cognitive preloading from Joseph Smith, expect to see and okay. Manufacturing experience. And

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:00:24 the Charles Anson visit was before this, right? It would have been before this because that was early in the process. Right. So the Whitmer family had the character's document because the one that the church has today that they got, I believe they just bought that from the Church of Christ. I think that was part of that deal. That was, they believe, written by John Whitmer.

Julia 2:00:39 Right.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:00:40 John or Jacob.

Julia 2:00:40 I think the character means that.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:00:42 Yeah, yeah. Which means that the Whitmer family would have been very familiar with the characters. So now to Nemo's point, you've got this set of prop plates, you've got a dimly lit room, you've got candlelight, you have all of these people who are familiar with the characters document, who are familiar with what they believe the characters look like. And Joseph Smith can guide them through. Like, you know, they now they know what to look for, they know what to visualize because they've looked at that document and then. And that's why I believe there's one account that talks about the engravings having like a black die or something. And I think Dan Vogel points out that the character's document is written, you know, kind of written in that black thing, the black ink. And so all of a sudden you would start to think, like, that's what I'm picturing. I'm picturing those character documents in black on the plates. I mean, that's why I think you can make a really good case that Joseph Smith could use a prop plate plus a visionary experience. There is an email just said they're already preloaded with the character's document to what those plates would look like. I don't see think it's that much of a stretch. These are the same people that are believing you can get revelations off a rock and a hat from Hiram Page and Joseph Smith. I. It's not that hard to. To believe that they would see it. It's also why he can't bring anyone else in the room.

John Dehlin 2:01:48 Julia. Wait, did. Did we all vote? Who didn't vote?

Julia 2:01:54 The Nema vote. Oh, he said a little bit about Nemo.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:01:57 Voted all three of. All three of us said two and three.

John Dehlin 2:02:00 Okay. All right. I think it's three, but I don't know which is.

Julia 2:02:05 Just remind me what three is. That's just the visionary one.

John Dehlin 2:02:08 Spiritualized.

Nemo 2:02:09 There are no plates.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:02:11 Yeah.

Julia 2:02:11 Yeah. I have no idea like they're having. And I think it was one of the. Was it the Lucy Harris? Somebody had gathered witnesses, and one of them said that the box is filled with lead sand. And then one of them said it was nothing, which I should have put those in there. Maybe I'll put it in the next time time. But. So, like, that was. That's interesting as well. Like, there was something. Whether it's just a box, like the. Because. Because Hiram has the box made, the little window box or something like that made for this purpose. So he could have put anything in there. So, like, as far as prop that could have been. That could mean a lot of other things besides something that looks like plates.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:02:50 Have you guys all seen Kung Fu Panda?

Julia 2:02:53 Yeah, I was thinking about that as you were talking.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:02:55 Is this where we've got. No. So, all right, so spoiler alert, Kung Fu Panda. There's this whole idea about having, like, this master scroll. And so Po by Jack Black, who's awesome, he finally gets it, and he opens it, expecting it to have, like, the. The magical spells of the world. And it's just. He just sees his reflection there. There's. There is no magic. There's no. You know, there are no noodles. Right. And so, yeah, you just wonder if these people are looking at blank plates. But Joseph Smith is telling them what they're seeing, and they're just going with it because they're from that worldview.

Julia 2:03:23 There's no secret ingredient.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:03:25 Yeah. There are no reformed Egyptian characters here. But you're looking at it and you're seeing it because, you know, Joseph's telling you that that's what's there.

Julia 2:03:31 I also wanted to point out something, too. So I'm reading Grant Palmer's book, An Insider's View of Mormon Origins. And he's talking. He lists the times that Joseph Smith is translating other ancient, supposedly ancient documents. And he talks about the Kinderhook Plates, the Greek Psalter, and other things like that. And every time Joseph sees those, he's like, oh yeah, I know exactly what this is. It's reformed Egyptian. And this is similar to the golden plate plates. Whereas we know that the Kinderhoek plates are a fraud. The Greek salter was something different. And so like Joseph, Joseph doesn't even recognize the characters on his own plates as opposed to other ones that are, that are, that are frauds. So I just thought that was interesting too, that he, even though he spends all these months with the plates, he

Nemo 2:04:10 doesn't recognize or he can claim that what he's seeing looks like the characters on the plates because no one's ever seen it and no one can prove that it doesn't look like that. So it's a way of him just co opting these other ancient languages or this made up Kinderhook scratchings into his worldview. He gets to draw it in because no one can prove that it isn't exactly like what he had.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:04:31 That's exactly what it is. He's got a language that nobody can. It's unfalsifiable because it's what he created for the Book of Mormon, having reformed it. Like we talked about in the episode way back when, if Joseph Smith had said, this is a set of plates written in Hebrew, which is what it would have been written in. Right. If it was from the old world, well, that you don't need spectacles. You could go to a scholar who can read it. So Joseph Smith needs it to be a language that can't be cracked. And so everything else has to funnel through Joseph Smith's charisma so that it can't be proven false. That's why, I guess I believe that there are people that's around Joseph Smith that he's choosing specifically because they are primed to believe that they're seeing these things that if you went to, like I said, a local reporter who would actually make a huge difference in growing the church, that local reporter is like, dude, these are like, there's nothing here. He's like, you're not looking through faith. It's like, well, no, I'm just looking. There's nothing here. Which is why I said at the start, if the church wants this to be a purely physical event, it opens up a lot of really bad questions.

Julia 2:05:36 Yeah.

Nemo 2:05:36 Yep.

Wrap-Up and Preview of Part Two

John Dehlin 2:05:38 All right, well, this is just all a teaser for part two, because we've got a lot more. Julia, what else, what else do we have in this presentation?

Julia 2:05:44 So I want to talk about the other witnesses. So there's Lucy Mack Smith even says she saw the plates you have Josiah stole. You have Mary Whitmer, David Whitmer's mother, who says she saw the plates. And so we're going to talk about those and then kind of summarize the inconsistencies through the eight and three witnesses, because at this point I think there's 12 that are. That are. That say that it was a supernatural event. So there's. Anyway, we'll just summarize those things and then talk about these other witnesses. So. Yeah.

John Dehlin 2:06:11 All right. Well, Julia, this has been so fascinating. And Mike and Nemo, it's always great to have you. So thanks for doing it. Thanks to everyone for tuning in. Please remember that you can check out the original LDS discussions essays@ LDSDiscussions.com that all of these episodes are provided in order either on Spotify and audio and video or on Apple Podcasts and audio only or on the YouTube on the Mormon Stories Podcast YouTube channel as the LDS discussions playlist. Again, we do try and be as neutral as possible, and we feel like watching them in succession is going to give you the best experience. We're going to be continuing the series over the coming year, hopefully. And yeah, we're just super excited to be doing this. If you value this content. We do pay Julia and Mike and Nemo for their participation. So if you value this content and you want to see continue and you're not a monthly donor, please become a monthly donor to the podcast so that we can keep paying these brilliant people to create more amazing content. If you are, you can go to mormonstories.org click on the donate button to become a monthly donor. And if you are already a donor, thank you so much. You're making all this possible really quick. Make sure and check out Nemo, the Mormon YouTube channel. Subscribe to his channel, subscribe to ours. And Julia can be found on Analyzing mormonism both on TikTok for as long as TikTok exists and on Instagram. Am I forgetting anything? Anyone?

Nemo 2:07:50 Mike's original stuff on LDS discussions. Is it Com?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:07:56 I think I meant yeah. Com. Yeah.

John Dehlin 2:07:59 All right, perfect. Thanks everyone. Come back for the next part on the eight Witnesses. Be kind to each other. Be good to each other. We'll see you all again soon on another episode of Mormon Stories podcast. Take care.

Transcript © 2026 John P. Dehlin. All rights reserved. Brief quotations are welcome with attribution and a link to mormonstories.org; all other use requires written permission.