The "Witnesses" Movie as Outright Mopologetics

[_Gadianton]

The 11 witnesses of the Book of Mormon have less value than 11 Catholics who claim to have seen the Virgin Mary in a piece of toast.

LOL!

Careful, might get a letter from BYU.

[_Maksutov]

Y'know, I think we may be up to 8 "witnesses" to Trump's bribery. Wonder if Dan P has thought of that.

I'm still grieving that we didn't get to see the rest of the Book of Mormon on film. So many great special effects scenes.

[_Doctor Scratch]

I'm still grieving that we didn't get to see the rest of the Book of Mormon on film. So many great special effects scenes.

You know those cartoons that were interspersed between the different segments of Monty Python's Flying Circus? (I believe they were done by the great Terry Gilliam...) That is always what comes to mind for me when I think about God touching the rocks for the Jaredites.

[Guest]

It's interesting to see the sorts of comments that the "SeN" post has begun to elicit from the hardcore believers:

I suspect that because the Lord wanted those plates protected, He gave Joseph a boost in strength and vision. I know when I go to work in the Lord's cause, I always get a little boost. It has never bothered me that He was able to outrun those chasing him.

Back in the day, working with electron microscopes was an interesting experience. When one uses an E.M., one never looks at the specimen directly. Rather, sensors and computers process the electron stream to render an image on a video screen, sometimes not even in the same room as the actual E.M. I am quite content that it is possible for Joseph to have translated the squiggles on the plates of gold using seer stones with the plates covered. If humans can make an E.M. give an accurate image of an infinitesimally small specimen, I don't see why God cannot make seer stones that give an accurate translation of the writings on the plates.

(And notice how he capitalizes "He" in the final sentence of the first paragraph--an orthographical convention that's normally only reserved for God Himself. Oh, and did you know that Smithmas is right around the corner?)

Wonderful description. Over and over the original account is confirmed. All thanks.

the plates proved absolutely useless in the end.

Except they serve as a tangible physical object that is found throughout the historical record. Their existence demands an explanation form secular critics.

And, maybe best of all:

If you reject Smith's claims where did the plates come from?

Incidentally, it was actually the Gold Plates that first got me seriously questioning the Church. I must have been 10 or 11 or so, and I had a Sunday School teacher--a nice, albeit somewhat strange lady--who told us about the Gold Plates, and about how Joseph Smith & Co. would "not let anyone else see them!" Now, in my young mind, I was wondering: Why were they keeping this a secret? Something this consequential? My teacher felt that this secrecy was something that helps to confirm the story: "That's how we know that it's true!" she said. There is literally no evidence--beyond the Witnesses's say-so--that the Plates ever existed, and yet, as you can see on the thread, that doesn't bother the believers in the slightest. Shill... asks, "where did the plates come from," and you can really only reply, "What plates? Where are they?"

So, it really doesn't surprise me that this film project is paying massive dividends in terms of its entertainment value. And we haven't even seen it yet! The Mopologists are hanging their hat on this??? You really couldn't ask for more. Like Symmachus, I agree that Bill and Dan's Adventures in Anti-Mormon Zombie Hell would have been more appropriate and a smarter choice, but let's face it: "smart" hasn't exactly been the Mopologists' strong suit.

[_Maksutov]

I'm still grieving that we didn't get to see the rest of the Book of Mormon on film. So many great special effects scenes.

You know those cartoons that were interspersed between the different segments of Monty Python's Flying Circus? (I believe they were done by the great Terry Gilliam...) That is always what comes to mind for me when I think about God touching the rocks for the Jaredites.

And the Bronze Age submarines! Better than steampunk.

[_Holy Ghost]

I suspect that because the Lord wanted those plates protected, He gave Joseph a boost in strength and vision. I know when I go to work in the Lord's cause, I always get a little boost. It has never bothered me that He was able to outrun those chasing him.

Back in the day, working with electron microscopes was an interesting experience. When one uses an E.M., one never looks at the specimen directly. Rather, sensors and computers process the electron stream to render an image on a video screen, sometimes not even in the same room as the actual E.M. I am quite content that it is possible for Joseph to have translated the squiggles on the plates of gold using seer stones with the plates covered. If humans can make an E.M. give an accurate image of an infinitesimally small specimen, I don't see why God cannot make seer stones that give an accurate translation of the writings on the plates.

With God, all things are possible. Especially stupidity.

[_Dr Exiled]

This whole movie enterprise is incredibly annoying. Joseph Smith was an obvious conman and the lack of the plates being publicly displayed and publicly examined should cause the dupe pause. Yet, DCP, you parade the embarrassingly few witnesses as a positive. Then, you wonder why your academic colleagues quickly dismiss you.

Please DCP, take the advice you gave to Stem (David B) when you were responding to his post. You responded like you have done with other critics by saying that David B came to your site to challenge the faith of others, implying that this is somehow not acceptable. Yet, missionaries invade other people's space all the time and your stupid film is designed to invade other's space with it's most assured nonsense. Please have some self-awareness. Please follow the advice of Christopher Hitchens when he said that it is fine for Christians to have imaginary friends with whom they play, provided they remain in the basement of their homes when they want to escape to their imaginary worlds.

[_Symmachus]

Incidentally, it was actually the Gold Plates that first got me seriously questioning the Church. I must have been 10 or 11 or so, and I had a Sunday School teacher--a nice, albeit somewhat strange lady--who told us about the Gold Plates, and about how Joseph Smith & Co. would "not let anyone else see them!" Now, in my young mind, I was wondering: Why were they keeping this a secret? Something this consequential? My teacher felt that this secrecy was something that helps to confirm the story: "That's how we know that it's true!" she said. There is literally no evidence--beyond the Witnesses's say-so--that the Plates ever existed, and yet, as you can see on the thread, that doesn't bother the believers in the slightest. Shill... asks, "where did the plates come from," and you can really only reply, "What plates? Where are they?"

I had a similar experience when I was very young at the visitor's center (or something like it) in Salt Lake City, where there was a display encasing the Golden Plates among their many Disney-ish dioramas. As a little kid, I loved their Disney-quality because it made the stories I learned about in Primary and saw in the scripture cartoons seem quite real and thus very serious (I'm sure I'd have opposite feeling now). But it was a real letdown on learning that these plates under the glass weren't the actual plates, and not only that—but according to the missionary, the real plates were taken back by god, so we couldn't look at them anywhere. How convenient. I felt a prick of skepticism that escalated to stabs of it as I grew up.

I absolutely love this:

And their very existence constitutes powerful evidence against those who would dismiss the Book of Mormon as Joseph's subjective fantasy. THAT'S useful, too.

The very object whose existence can't be verified is irrefutable proof that some guy had said object. Ok.

That is kind of the apologetic argument in a nutshell: we cannot produce the evidence, but its on you to prove it wrong or insufficient if you don't accept the claims we base on this non-existent evidence.

[_Maksutov]

Incidentally, it was actually the Gold Plates that first got me seriously questioning the Church. I must have been 10 or 11 or so, and I had a Sunday School teacher--a nice, albeit somewhat strange lady--who told us about the Gold Plates, and about how Joseph Smith & Co. would "not let anyone else see them!" Now, in my young mind, I was wondering: Why were they keeping this a secret? Something this consequential? My teacher felt that this secrecy was something that helps to confirm the story: "That's how we know that it's true!" she said. There is literally no evidence--beyond the Witnesses's say-so--that the Plates ever existed, and yet, as you can see on the thread, that doesn't bother the believers in the slightest. Shill... asks, "where did the plates come from," and you can really only reply, "What plates? Where are they?"

Yes, why hide the plates but not the Book of Abraham papyri?

And why is it that we never talk about the "Caractors" and how obviously unrelated to Egyptian, Hebrew or any combination thereof? All of these holes are supposed to be plugged by pathetic testimonies accompanied by pious tears as required. So sad when not infuriating.

[_Kishkumen]

The wonderful thing about this film is that it will portray the witnesses as Joseph Smith only saw in his fondest wishes. In this way, fiction improves on history as it so often does. We can expunge all of the difficult aspects and stitch together a faith-promoting version that will overwhelm critical faculties and pesky, inconvenient written documents. This will probably be the most vibrant and memorable account of the 11 witnesses that has been or ever will be produced.