Do we believe Martin Harris...

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
_why me
_Emeritus
Posts: 9589
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:19 pm

Re: Do we believe Martin Harris...

Post by _why me »

Jason Bourne wrote:
MormonMendacity wrote:...when he added his name to the Testimony of the Three Witnesses
Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer and Martin Harris wrote:And we also testify that we have seen the engravings which are upon the plates; and they have been shown unto us by the power of God, and not of man. And we declare with words of soberness, that an angel of God came down from heaven, and he brought and laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates, and the engravings thereon; (Emphasis added)


...or do we believe him when he told John H. Gilbert
John H. Gilbert wrote:Martin was something of a prophet: — He frequently said that "Jackson would be the last president that we would have; and that all persons who did not embrace Mormonism in two years would be stricken off the face of the earth.: He said that Palmyra was to be the New Jerusalem, and that her streets were to be paved with gold. Martin was in the office when I finished setting up the testimony of the three witnesses, — (Harris — Cowdery and Whitmer) I said to him, — "Martin, did you see those plates with your naked eyes?" Martin looked down for an instant, raise his eyes up, and said, 'No, I saw them with a spiritual eye.' (Wilford C. Wood, Joseph Smith Begins His Work, Vol. 1, 1958, introduction.) (Emphasis added)


...or do we believe him when
Grant Palmer wrote:On 25 March [1838], Martin Harris told a public meeting that none of the witnesses had physically seen or handled the plates, that they had not seen the plates with their "natural eyes" (Stephen Burnett to Lyman E. Johnson, 15 April 1838, Joseph Smith Letterbook, 2:64-66) (Emphasis added)


So was he lying then or now?

During that year about 300 members had left the Church. Within a month after Harris made his statement, three of the apostles no longer believed in the Book of Mormon and two more were out of favor with the church. All three witnesses of the Book of Mormon and three of the eight additional witnesses had defected. (ibid.)


Why me wrote:
The problem here is very simple: What did Martin mean by spiritual eyes versus natural eyes? And here we have the problem. Such words, spiritual and natural are left open for interpretation. And unfortunately, we can only assume what he meant, if he said such words.


To put oneself in Martin's place when he would speak about the Book of Mormon is not a comfortable one. To have people well over a hundred years later to assume what he meant and to nitpick over his own words was not seen by him. If he said what is claimed...well...I can only speculate on his choice of words. And what is the point of that? He never denied his testimony of the Book of Mormon, regardless of spiritual eyes or natural eyes, his claim still stands...only his interpretation is now up for grabs. And lets face it, spiritual eyes, can have many interpretations.
[/b]
_Confed
_Emeritus
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:04 pm

Post by _Confed »

I wouldn't put too much stock in second hand accounts, especially those. Believe what you want, but if you've ever been quoted in a newspaper or on the Internet, you'll find that what a person said you said often is quite removed from what you thought you said. This is true especially if its maliciously reported. Of the three witnesses, Martin Harris was the one least able to defend himself from such reports. Best to read some of Oliver Cowdery's remarks. They sure sound like he was convinced of what he saw. Oliver's wife, Elizabeth Ann Whitmer Cowdery (1815-1892), said: "He always without one doubt…affirmed the divinity and truth of the Book of Mormon." David Whitmer says that when he died he was "the happiest man" he ever saw. That doesn't sound like it squares with Martin's alleged comments.
Southerners can never resist a losing cause.
_why me
_Emeritus
Posts: 9589
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:19 pm

Post by _why me »

Confed wrote:I wouldn't put too much stock in second hand accounts, especially those. Believe what you want, but if you've ever been quoted in a newspaper or on the Internet, you'll find that what a person said you said often is quite removed from what you thought you said. This is true especially if its maliciously reported. Of the three witnesses, Martin Harris was the one least able to defend himself from such reports. Best to read some of Oliver Cowdery's remarks. They sure sound like he was convinced of what he saw. Oliver's wife, Elizabeth Ann Whitmer Cowdery (1815-1892), said: "He always without one doubt…affirmed the divinity and truth of the Book of Mormon." David Whitmer says that when he died he was "the happiest man" he ever saw. That doesn't sound like it squares with Martin's alleged comments.

True enough brother. I have seen some misquotes on exer boards that were supposely said by a lds poster, to know that you speak the truth here. The witnesses are a thorn in the critics side for sure.
Post Reply