If you found out that the Golden Plates never existed, would you still be a Mormon?

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Well, if they had a tactile hallucination, then Joseph Smith was in the wrong business and needed to set up a mass distribution system for those mushrooms.

I was re-reading the testimony of the witnesses after I read this thread. Isn't it interesting that the three witnesses claim only have seen the plates, whereas the eight witnesses claim to have not just seen but also handled the plates. Why would the eight get to handle them but not the three?

Also the three claim to have been shown them by an angel and say that they saw them by the power of God, not man. The eight say they were shown them by Joseph Smith. Interesting differences.

Thoughts anyone?

[ChinoCoug]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

I was re-reading the testimony of the witnesses after I read this thread. Isn't it interesting that the three witnesses claim only have seen the plates, whereas the eight witnesses claim to have not just seen but also handled the plates. Why would the eight get to handle them but not the three?

Also the three claim to have been shown them by an angel and say that they saw them by the power of God, not man. The eight say they were shown them by Joseph Smith. Interesting differences.

Thoughts anyone?

Givens said that it was a progression. FIRST JS couldn't show them to anyone. THEN he could show them to people. THEN he could let'em touch'em.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Interesting results. All this time I was under the impression that AA was LDS.

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

I think this is an interesting issue.

Personally, I'm so completely in love with Mormonism that I couldn't envision myself attending another Church for the rest of my life, especially since I've compared Mormonism to other forms of Christianity. There are all kinds of cultural or social behaviors that Mormons exhibit that annoy me from time to time, but I also enjoy silly Mormon things (like garments) and view them as cultural quirks.

So as far as I'm concerned, I'm converted whether the Church is 100% true or not.

I just feel like Mormonism is superior (for me), no matter whether Joseph Smith was 100%, 50%, or 0% legit. So, I choose to have faith that he was 100% legit, while also being open to various possibilities.

Okay, so there is something on which we agree. You are describing being Mormon as something outside of belief, something almost ethnic in a way. Like you and Venkman, I love and cherish my Mormon heritage, my Mormoness. That would be very hard to turn my back on.

I can relate to your position in a way. The older I get and the more things I see and experience, the more fantastic and almost unbelievable the Church's founding narrative becomes. But then I experience something in my own life tied directly to a gospel principle that goes beyond logical explanation, and suddenly those claims, while fantastic, don't seem so distant again.

I am experiencing something in my life right now along those lines that I may or may not share in the future. It really gives me pause.

Thank you for sharing.

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Interesting results. All this time I was under the impression that AA was LDS.

But as he has so strongly noted in the past, he isn't Mormon. That made me laugh.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

I was re-reading the testimony of the witnesses after I read this thread. Isn't it interesting that the three witnesses claim only have seen the plates, whereas the eight witnesses claim to have not just seen but also handled the plates. Why would the eight get to handle them but not the three?

Also the three claim to have been shown them by an angel and say that they saw them by the power of God, not man. The eight say they were shown them by Joseph Smith. Interesting differences.

Thoughts anyone?

Yep, I've always thought that was fascinating. Growing up I just assumed that the Three got to handle the plates, and it wasn't until later I discovered the same thing you did. I don't know if I call it a progression, though. Maybe there was a reason the Lord wanted some witnesses that could testify from different perspectives.

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by Tex

Yep, I've always thought that was fascinating. Growing up I just assumed that the Three got to handle the plates, and it wasn't until later I discovered the same thing you did. I don't know if I call it a progression, though. Maybe there was a reason the Lord wanted some witnesses that could testify from different perspectives.

Or maybe Joseph realized 3 witnesses with a spiritual witness wouldn't suffice?

Quinn and Palmer both write some interesting things about the 3 witnesses that SEIQ has comented on in the past. Suffice to say Harris was quoted as saying that his experience with the plates was visionary, Cowdrey was a known seeker like Joseph and believed in the mystic.

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Yep, I've always thought that was fascinating. Growing up I just assumed that the Three got to handle the plates, and it wasn't until later I discovered the same thing you did. I don't know if I call it a progression, though. Maybe there was a reason the Lord wanted some witnesses that could testify from different perspectives.

What about the part where one of the three witnesses wasn't able to get the vision that the other two were getting? I seem to recall something to this effect. "I saw the vision. You didn't see it? You must not be worthy if you didn't see what I saw. Keep trying."

[SeattleUte]

Can I assume that only category 3 contains people who may believe in the Golden Plates?

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Can I assume that only category 3 contains people who may believe in the Golden Plates?

If you're not a Mormon, then I think it's understood that you don't believe in the Golden Plates.. If you're a Mormon, then you ought to be able to fit into one of the other three categories.