The "Witnesses" Movie as Outright Mopologetics

[_Lemmie]

Dr. Detroit • 2 days ago

Dan,

Is your film going to accurately portray Joseph walking and running with a limp?

I'm really looking forward to watching this.

−—
DanielPeterson Mod Dr. Detroit • 2 days ago

LOL. I know where you got that idea. It was nice of you to run over and share it with us.

—-
Dr. Detroit DanielPeterson • 2 days ago • edited

Dan wrote: "I know where you got that idea."

I got if from Church history. Again, I'm just curious if your film is going to accurately portray Joseph's limp?

Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (New York: Knopf, 2005), 21.

−—
DanielPeterson Mod Dr. Detroit • 2 days ago

Your disingenuousness is amusing, DD.

−—
Dr. Detroit DanielPeterson • 2 days ago

I take your refusal to answer the question to mean that your film will not be accurately portraying Joseph Smith's limp?

That's unfortunate, especially from someone who claims to value historical accuracy. Regardless, I can't wait to see the finished product. Good luck to you and your endeavors.

−—
DanielPeterson Mod Dr. Detroit • 2 days ago

DD: "I take your refusal to answer the question to mean that your film will not be accurately portraying Joseph Smith's limp?"

Do you have the precise data on Joseph Smith's limp that would allow us to confidently portray it?

We'll need all sorts of measurements regarding his gait, posture, pacing, stride-length, and so forth.

−—
Dr. Detroit DanielPeterson • 2 days ago

Dan wrote: "Do you have the precise data on Joseph Smith's limp that would allow us to confidently portray it? We'll need all sorts of measurements regarding his gait, posture, pacing, stride-length, and so forth."

Why would you need any of that to portray Joseph's limp? His limp has been adequately described by eye witness testimony.

Let's all hope and pray that you put the same precise data on Joseph Smith in your film that you are demanding about Joseph's limp.

−—
DanielPeterson Mod Dr. Detroit • 2 days ago

DD: "His limp has been adequately described by eye witness testimony."

Actually, it hasn't.

You're boring me, DD.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4686943295

Maybe someone can help with this. Peterson is arguing there is no eye-witness testimony of Smith’s limp, so he apparently won’t be including that in the chase of Joseph Smith, while he was carrying the plates.

But, isn’t the story about being chased with the plates also NOT verified with eye-witness testimony? In fact, If I recall correctly, didn’t his mother tell the story that he told her? So at best, second or third hand hearsay, right?

[_Kishkumen]

I am not aware of any witnesses to Joseph’s Great Plates Chase, in which he was dodging and avoiding unnamed pursuers.

[_fetchface]

I've done a little weighted running myself, the most analogous would be with a 53-pound kettlebell. The only reasonable way to do it that I can see would be to set the golden plates on the shoulder and run, which would still be quite difficult to balance if they shifted around since they have no good handle like a kettlebell. If you are really lucky, you could contort your arm in a way to hold onto one of the binding rings and make a flat-ish spot for the plates to rest on your shoulder.

Frequent stops/readjustments would probably be necessary due to plates shifting unless the binding rings were really tight, in which case you probably wouldn't be able to get a good grip on them. Lucy says it was wrapped in a linen frock, so if you twisted part of that you would get a handle, but you would have the load shifting around quite a bit inside, so balancing on the shoulder would be more difficult.

The arms would fatigue too fast to run 3 miles with them under the arm as was written in Lucy's account. Every stride would try to rip the plates from your arm. Having them firmly strapped to the torso would probably be best, but nobody has ever even suggested that he did that. Just forget about jumping over logs with an awkward load like that. It would fall right off your shoulder or out of your hands or whatever. Slowing down and stepping over the log would simply be quicker than to jump and have them slip around and have to readjust.

I can tell you that even the most fit/strongest people I know can't run very fast this way, and I know some beasts. I'm not one of the fittest, but I can run circles around them if you put a 50-pound vest on them, let alone a more awkwardly shaped 50+ pound weight. I don't think the physical demand of running with a 50+ pound load on one side of your body can really be understood by those who haven't tried it.

This definitely has the feel of a narcissist's tall tale. Very similar to the stories that my narcissist grandfather would tell about himself.

[_Kishkumen]

I can tell you that even the most fit/strongest people I know can't run very fast this way, and I know some beasts. I'm not one of the fittest, but I can run circles around them if you put a 50-pound vest on them, let alone a more awkwardly shaped 50+ pound weight. I don't think the physical demand of running with a 50+ pound load on one side of your body can really be understood by those who haven't tried it.

This definitely has the feel of a narcissist's tall tale. Very similar to the stories that my narcissist grandfather would tell about himself.

Yes. My guess is that the running with the plates is actually part of the overall miraculous nature of Joseph’s interaction with them. These plates really are like the magical treasures of his treasure digging experience. Stories like this show his miraculous mastery of the object God had formerly shocked him to keep out of his hands. Nothing about the plates can be read as simply mundane. This is where magic/miracle and the real world meet. He can run with this object because God gave him the power to do so. Of course this is not true, but we can make sense of why the story is told as it is if we contextualize it as part of the overall magical/miracle narrative.

[_Doctor Scratch]

I can tell you that even the most fit/strongest people I know can't run very fast this way, and I know some beasts. I'm not one of the fittest, but I can run circles around them if you put a 50-pound vest on them, let alone a more awkwardly shaped 50+ pound weight. I don't think the physical demand of running with a 50+ pound load on one side of your body can really be understood by those who haven't tried it.

This definitely has the feel of a narcissist's tall tale. Very similar to the stories that my narcissist grandfather would tell about himself.

Yes. My guess is that the running with the plates is actually part of the overall miraculous nature of Joseph’s interaction with them. These plates really are like the magical treasures of his treasure digging experience. Stories like this show his miraculous mastery of the object God had formerly shocked him to keep out of his hands. Nothing about the plates can be read as simply mundane. This is where magic/miracle and the real world meet. He can run with this object because God gave him the power to do so. Of course this is not true, but we can make sense of why the story is told as it is if we contextualize it as part of the overall magical/miracle narrative.

It seems to me that there is a missed opportunity to add to the mythology here. Roger Ebert famously recounted seeing Spielberg's E.T. at Cannes: "But when those bikes took off, what a terrific moment! I remember when I saw the movie at Cannes; even the audience there, people who had seen thousands of movies, let out a whoop at that moment." The image of E.T. helping Eliot pedal his bike through the sky, as their silhouettes pass before a luminescent, huge full moon, is one of the most iconic images in all of cinema.

So, why just have Smith running? Why not have God give him the power to levitate, just like the personages that Smith saw? And it doesn't have to be that, there could be all sorts of supernatural interventions. That is, I admit, something that has always puzzled me about the Mopologists, and about Mormonism in general, I'd say. Once you accept that the supernatural is real, why draw the line at what you're familiar with? The tension has long been this great tug-of-war between the supernatural and the historical, where the one has always *tried* to do the heavy lifting for the other. But there's no reason why this couldn't/shouldn't swing in the other direction. For example: What if the Mopologists began to defend the notion of demonic possession, with the priesthood being the only thing that offers a solution? I get that this is a redundant and derivative idea, but I think you get the point.

[_Lemmie]

Maybe someone can help with this. Peterson is arguing there is no eye-witness testimony of Smith’s limp, so he apparently won’t be including that in the chase of Joseph Smith, while he was carrying the plates.

But, isn’t the story about being chased with the plates also NOT verified with eye-witness testimony? In fact, If I recall correctly, didn’t his mother tell the story that he told her? So at best, second or third hand hearsay, right?

I am not aware of any witnesses to Joseph’s Great Plates Chase, in which he was dodging and avoiding unnamed pursuers.

That’s what I thought. Why is a scene based on hearsay being so prominently featured in a movie called “Witnesses”?

[_kairos]

Yes. My guess is that the running with the plates is actually part of the overall miraculous nature of Joseph’s interaction with them. These plates really are like the magical treasures of his treasure digging experience. Stories like this show his miraculous mastery of the object God had formerly shocked him to keep out of his hands. Nothing about the plates can be read as simply mundane. This is where magic/miracle and the real world meet. He can run with this object because God gave him the power to do so. Of course this is not true, but we can make sense of why the story is told as it is if we contextualize it as part of the overall magical/miracle narrative.[/quote]

It seems to me that there is a missed opportunity to add to the mythology here. Roger Ebert famously recounted seeing Spielberg's E.T. at Cannes: "But when those bikes took off, what a terrific moment! I remember when I saw the movie at Cannes; even the audience there, people who had seen thousands of movies, let out a whoop at that moment." The image of E.T. helping Eliot pedal his bike through the sky, as their silhouettes pass before a luminescent, huge full moon, is one of the most iconic images in all of cinema.

So, why just have Smith running? Why not have God give him the power to levitate, just like the personages that Smith saw? And it doesn't have to be that, there could be all sorts of supernatural interventions. That is, I admit, something that has always puzzled me about the Mopologists, and about Mormonism in general, I'd say. Once you accept that the supernatural is real, why draw the line at what you're familiar with? The tension has long been this great tug-of-war between the supernatural and the historical, where the one has always *tried* to do the heavy lifting for the other. But there's no reason why this couldn't/shouldn't swing in the other direction. For example: What if the Mopologists began to defend the notion of demonic possession, with the priesthood being the only thing that offers a solution? I get that this is a redundant and derivative idea, but I think you get the point.[/quote]


VG point- i could see the director filming Joseph Smith in a slomo OJ ( through the airport) dash, hopping logs, breaking through brush , knocking down assailants right and left fnishing his 3 mile run without breaking a sweat-all done through the power of God to propel His golden boy prophet onto the next
event in the scam. Where is Spielberg when you need him!

btw-there is a tale that Woody tried to lift the Tanner's set of golden/ lead plates and could not budge them off the table ala Mr. Burns of The Simpson's series-thus he became angered at them and screamed "i'll get you you f*@#ing anti-mormons"-i wished that had been filmed! But it is probably just a small, tall tale!

just sayin
k

[_I have a question]

I have some questions about the alleged villains who Joseph heroically managed to evade.
1. How did they know to lie in wait on the only day in four years where Joseph would get his hands on the plates?
2. How did they know to hide behind the exact trees that were in Josephs path as he fled?
3. Why didn’t they follow him to the spot where Joseph would retrieve the plates and jump here there?
4. Why didn’t they simply wait near his house?
5. Why didn’t they ambush Joseph together?
6. Why did they all simply give up and not chase Joseph home?
7. Why didn’t they shoot Joseph?
8. Why didn’t they hold Josephs family hostage?

Given the value of actual gold plates, had they existed I’d have expected far better criminal minds than the villains in the story to have had a go at getting their hands on the plates.

Also:
Why did God deliberately put Joseph and his family in harms way by making him take possession of such a valuable item when God Himself knew it was just an unnecessary prop in the production of the Book of Mormon?
Why all the complexity of plates, special spectacles, 4 years of waiting and subterfuge, when all that was actually needed was a common rock and a hat?
Why did God remove the agency of the witnesses by having an angel show them the plates?

How many witnesses would not have been enough for members? If if was found that there was only Joseph as a witness, would members stop believing?

In my opinion the witnesses are an irrelevance to belief in the Church. Members don’t believe the Church is true because 11 of Joseph’s relatives and friends (sort of) backed up his stories.

[_Kishkumen]

So, why just have Smith running? Why not have God give him the power to levitate, just like the personages that Smith saw? And it doesn't have to be that, there could be all sorts of supernatural interventions. That is, I admit, something that has always puzzled me about the Mopologists, and about Mormonism in general, I'd say. Once you accept that the supernatural is real, why draw the line at what you're familiar with? The tension has long been this great tug-of-war between the supernatural and the historical, where the one has always *tried* to do the heavy lifting for the other. But there's no reason why this couldn't/shouldn't swing in the other direction. For example: What if the Mopologists began to defend the notion of demonic possession, with the priesthood being the only thing that offers a solution? I get that this is a redundant and derivative idea, but I think you get the point.

Because he needed to give his first listeners something to see. That something was a dislocated thumb. According to Lucy Mack Smith's account, Joseph came back with a dislocated thumb, but it was only a little while after his return that he "noticed" it. No one else could have seen an angel carry him to his destination, if he were to claim that. But they could see a dislocated thumb, and that takes a narrow escape from physical attacks in order to explain.

[_Fence Sitter]

I have some questions about the alleged villains who Joseph heroically managed to evade..

1. The event did not happen as described.

2. The alleged villains were the same guys Joseph Smith had contracted with to hunt for treasure. These were his friends he claims were chasing him.

For any other questions see #1.

The entire narrative surrounding the production of the Book of Mormon is filled with one implausible story after another. Like all apologetic endeavors we find the defenders trying to defend each event in isolation, which by themselves are still hard to believe but defend able. Taken as a whole, they make alien abduction look like a hard science.