The Three Witnesses of the Book of Mormon

[Aaron Kim]

THE THREE WITNESSES

A Response to the Utah Evangel

by
Ogden Kraut

Ever since the restoration of the Gospel of Christ and the re-establishment
of His Church, there have been a multitude of anti-Mormon writers pouring
out their venom against it. Most of this opposition comes from apostate
Mormons. That is understandable because Christ also suffered most from
apostates. Nevertheless, there should be some response made in vindication.
Oliver Cowdery said it best:

Since then our opposer, have been thus kind to introduce our cause before
the public, it is no more than just that a correct account should be given;
and since they have invariably sought to cast a shade over the truth, and
hinder its influence from gaining ascendancy, it is also proper that it
should be vindicated by laying before the world a correct statement of
events as they have transpired from time to time. (Letters by Oliver Cowdery
to W. W. Phelps, p. 15)

This response is very brief in comparison to the volumes that could be
written in answer to the many publications by the anti-Mormons and
ex-Mormons. These people publish newspapers, books, pamphlets and produce
films and videos with a critical and negative attitude of the liberal left
wing of our "modern counterfeit Christians." their entire gospel is
anti-Mormonism. The following article comes from one such newspaper:

[2] The Three Witnesses
by Robert McKay

In the front of every Book of Mormon is found a statement called the
Testimony of Three Witnesses. It is signed by Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer,
and Martin Harris. The Testimony says in substance that these three men saw
an angel holding the gold plates from which the Book of Mormon was
supposedly translated.
The Mormon church claims that these three men were sober, steady
individuals who would not lie, who could not be easily fooled, and whose
word was reliable. The facts are otherwise. Rather than being unimpeachable,
these witnesses and their testimony are worthless in determining the truth
about the Book of Mormon.
Oliver Cowdery, the first the three witnesses, was not an upstanding
citizen. Among other things, he was a counterfeiter. A booklet published in
Warsaw, Illinois, states, "Joe (Joseph Smith) told me, that in Ohio he...and
Oliver Cowdery...were engaged in a bogus establishment" (The Adventures and
Experience of Joseph H. Jackson, pg. 15). A letter signed by 84 Mormons
declared that "Oliver Cowdery...united with a gang of counterfeiters"
(quoted in Senate Document 189, pg. 8). In 1838 Cowdery was tried before the
Far West (Missouri) High Council. The eighth charge against him was, "For
disgracing the Church by being connected in the bogus business." This charge
was "sustained" (History of the Church, Vol. 3, pgs. 16-17).
The LDS church claims that not one of the witnesses ever denied his
testimony. Yet a poem publishes in 1841 asks if it proves "Book of Mormon
not his (God's) word Because denied, by Oliver?" (Times and Seasons, Vol. 2.
pg. 482). Apparently Cowdery wasn't as sure of his statements as Mormons
would like to think.
David Whitmer was also involved in counterfeiting. His character is further
revealed by Joseph Smith's statement that Whitmer was a "dumb ass" (History
of the Church, Vol. 3. pg. 228). Whitmer himself declared, "if you believe
my testimony to the Book of Mormon...then I tell you that in June, 1838, God
spoke to me again by His own voice from the heavens, and told me to
`separate myself from among the Latter Day Saints (sic)...'" (An Address to
All Believers in Christ, pg. 27). According to this statement, if Whitmer's
testimony to the Book of Mormon is true then the LDS church has apostatized.
But the church denies that what Whitmer says here is true, thus casting
doubt on his testimony to the Book of Mormon.
The third witness, Martin Harris, was no better. It was Harris who lost the
116 pages of the book of Lehi, forcing Joseph Smith to start "translating"
all over again. Because of this incident. Harris was called "a wicked man,
Who...has broken the most sacred promises which were made before God"
(Doctrine & Covenants 3:12-13). An affidavit made in 1833 declares, "I have
been acquainted with Martin Harris, about thirty years... his moral and
religious character was such, as not to entitle him to respect among his
neighbors...He was first an orthadox (sic) Quaker, then a Universalist, next
a Restorationer, then a Baptist, next a Presbyterian, and then a Mormon"
(Mormonism Unvailed, pgs. 260-261). An official Mormon publication said of
Harris, "he changed his religious position eight times" after accepting the
Book of Mormon (Improvement Era, March 69, pg. 63). One of the groups he
joined was the Shakers, who had their own "latter day scripture." At one
point Harris claimed that he believed in the Shakers more strongly than he
did his own testimony to the Book of Mormon (Martin Harris - Witness and
Benefactor to the Book of Mormon, pg. 52).
All three of these witnesses were excommunicated from the Mormon church.
Joseph Smith wrote, "Such characters as...David Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery, and
Martin Harris, are too mean to mention, and we had liked to have forgotten
them" (History of the Church, Vol. 3, pg. 232).
Thus we see that the Testimony of Three Witnesses was signed by men who
were unreliable, who denied their testimony, and who were condemned by those
they aided. To hold these three men and their testimony up to the world as
proof that the Book of Mormon is of God is analogous to letting one
rattlesnake vouch for another. They cannot be trusted.
THE UTAH EVANGEL
Aug.-Sept. 1985

[3] To recap, then, Robert McKay's article makes the following charges
against the three witnesses of the Book of Mormon:

1. Oliver Cowdery denied his testimony of the Book of Mormon.
2. Oliver Cowdery was a counterfeiter.
3. David Whitmer was a counterfeiter.
4. David Whitmer was told by God to leave the Saints, inferring that the
Church had apostatized.
5. Martin Harris's "moral and religious character was such, as not to
entitle him to respect among his neighbors, . . . " and also that "he
changed his religious position eight times...."
6. The three witnesses were unreliable, denied their testimony, and were
condemned by those they aided. Their testimony is like "letting one
rattlesnake vouch for another. They cannot be trusted."

Oftentimes such accusations are false, overemphasized, or without real
proof, as is the case with the above charges. Without delving extensively
into the subject, here are a few explanations and clarifications that should
be considered in response to these charges by McKay.

Charge 1. Oliver Cowdery denied his testimony of the Book of Mormon.

In addition to the testimony given in the Book of Mormon, Cowdery made
similar positive statements even after he had left the LDS Church. The
following report was printed in 1910 by Judge C. M. Nielsen of Salt Lake
City. He stated that while he was traveling as a missionary in Minnesota
during the year of 1884, he met a wealthy farmer who became especially
interested in him because he came from Utah. The farmer stated that when he
was 21, an interesting event occurred at the time he was working on his
father's farm in Michigan. On one of his days off, he went to town where the
following incident occurred, as retold by Judge Nielsen:

"Near the courthouse I saw a great many people assembling and others
walking that way, so I went over to see what was up. There was a jam in the
courtroom, but being young and strong, I pushed my way close up to the
center, where I found the prosecuting attorney addressing the court and jury
in a murder trial. The prosecuting attorney was Oliver Cowdery, and he was
giving his opening address in behalf of the state. (After he was
excommunicated from the Church, Oliver Cowdery studied law, practicing in
Ohio, Wisconsin and then Michigan, where he was elected prosecuting
attorney.) After Cowdery sat down, the attorney representing the prisoner
arose and with taunting sarcasm said: `May it please the court and gentlemen
of the jury, I see one Oliver Cowdery is going to reply to my argument. I
wish he would tell us something about that golden [4] Bible that Joe Smith
dug out of the hill; something about the great fraud he perpetrated upon the
American people whereby he gained thousands of dollars. Now he seems to know
so much about this poor prisoner, I wonder if he has forgotten all about Joe
Smith and his connection with him.' The speaker all the while sneering and
pointing his finger in scorn at Cowdery in the hope of making him ridiculous
before the court and jury.
"Everybody present began to wonder if they had been guilty of making such
a mistake as choosing a Mormon for prosecuting attorney. Even the judge on
the bench began looking with suspicion and distrust at the prosecuting
attorney. The prisoner and his attorney became elated at the effect of the
speech. People began asking, `Is he a Mormon?' Everybody wondered what
Cowdery would say against such foul charges.
"Finally Oliver Cowdery arose, calm as a summer morning. I was within
three feet of him. There was no hesitation, no fear, no anger in his voice,
as he said: `May it please the court, and gentlemen of the jury, my brother
attorney on the other side has charged me with connection with Joseph Smith
and the golden Bible. The responsibility has been placed upon me, and I
cannot escape reply. Before God and man I dare not deny what I have said,
and what my testimony contains as written and printed on the front page of
the Book of Mormon. May it please your honor and gentlemen of the jury, this
I say, I saw the angel and heard his voice--how can I deny it? It happened
in the daytime when the sun was shining bright in the firmament; not in the
night when I was asleep. That glorious messenger from heaven, dressed in
white, standing above the ground, in a glory I have never seen anything to
compare with--the sun insignificant in comparison--and this personage told
us if we denied that testimony, there is no forgiveness in this life nor in
the world to come. Now how can I deny it--I dare not; I will not!'"
The man who related this to me was a prominent man in that state; he was a
rich man, a man who has held offices of trust from the people--a man of
respect, one when you look into his face you will not doubt. To strengthen
his statement this man, who knew nothing of "Mormon" history, said Oliver
Cowdery mentioned something he wanted me to explain--that the angel took
back a part that was not translated. We know this and that part of the gold
plates then withheld will be revealed at some future time.
"Since I heard Oliver Cowdery speak," continued my host, "I have not had
peace for these many years. I want to know more about your people. I felt
when I listened to Oliver Cowdery talking in the courtroom, he was more than
an ordinary man. If you can show us that you have what Oliver Cowdery
testified to, we shall be glad to receive it." (Liahona, August 30, 1910)

From this account it is very clear that even after Oliver left the Church,
he still did not deny his testimony of the Book of Mormon. Furthermore, he
had no intention of denying it in the future.

[5] Ten years after Oliver left the Church he returned to it. In October
1848 he arrived in Kanesville, Iowa, with his wife and daughter. He attended
a Church conference there and was invite to speak. Bishop Reuben Miller made
this verbatim account of Oliver's testimony:

"Friends and Brethren--My name is Cowdery, Oliver Cowdery. In the early
history of this Church I stood identified with her, and was one in her
councils. True it is that the gifts and callings of God are without
repentance. Not because I was better than the rest of mankind was I called;
but, to fulfill the purposes of God, He called me a high and holy calling.
"I wrote, with my own pen, the entire Book of Mormon (save a few pages) as
it fell from the lips of the Prophet Joseph Smith, as he translated it by
the gift and power of God, by the means of the Urim and Thummim, or, as it
is called by that book, `holy interpreters.' I beheld with my eyes and
handled with my hands the gold plates from which it was transcribed. I also
saw with my eyes and handled with my hands the `holy interpreters.' That
book is true. Sidney Rigdon did not write it; Mr. Spaulding did not write
it; I wrote it myself as it fell frown the lips of the Prophet. It contains
the Everlasting Gospel, and came forth to the children of men in fulfillment
of the revelations of John, where he says he saw an angel come with the
Everlasting Gospel to preach to every nation, kindred, tongue and people. It
contains the principles of salvation; and if you, my hearers, will walk by
its light and obey its precepts, you will be saved with an everlasting
salvation in the kingdom of God on high. Brother Hyde has just said that it
is very important that we keep and walk in the true channel, in order to
avoid the sand-bars. This is true. The channel is here. The holy Priesthood
is here.
"I was present with Joseph when an holy angel from God came down from
heaven and conferred on us, or restored, the lesser or Aaronic Priesthood,
and said to us, at the same time, that it should remain upon the earth while
the earth stands.
"I was also present with Joseph when the higher or Melchizedek Priesthood
was conferred by holy angels from on high. This Priesthood we then conferred
on each other, by the will and commandment of God. This Priesthood, as was
then declared, is also to remain upon the earth until the last remnant of
time. This holy Priesthood, or authority, we then conferred upon many and is
just as good and valid as though God had done it in person.
"I laid my hands upon that man--yes, I laid my right hand upon his head
(pointing to Brother Hyde), and I conferred upon him this Priesthood, and he
holds that Priesthood now. He was also called through me, by the prayer of
faith, an Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ."
In the early part of November following, Elder Hyde called a High Council
meeting in the log Tabernacle to consider the case of Oliver Cowdery; having
been cut off by the voice of a High Council, it was thought that, if he was
restored, he should be restored by the voice of a similar body. Before this
body Brother Cowdery said:

[6] "Brethren, for a number of years I have been separated from you. I now
desire to come back. I wish to come humbly and to be one in your midst. I
seek no station; I only wish to be identified with you. I am out of the
Church. I am not a member of the Church, but I wish to become a member of
it. l wish to come in at the door. I know the door. I have not come here to
seek precedence. I come humbly and throw myself upon the decisions of this
body, knowing as I do that its decisions are right and should be obeyed."
Brother George W. Harris, President of the Council, moved that Brother
Cowdery be received. Considerable discussion took place in relation to a
certain letter which, it was alleged, Brother Cowdery had written to David
Whitmer. Brother Cowdery again rose and said:
"If there be any person that has aught against me, let him declare it. My
coming back and humbly asking to become a member, through the door, covers
the whole ground. I acknowledge this authority." (Mill. Star 21:544-546)

At this conference Orson Hyde made a motion that Oliver Cowdery be received
back into the Church, which was seconded and carried unanimously. Shortly
afterwards Oliver was again baptized and confirmed a member of the Church.

Here again Oliver gave a strong confirmation of his previous testimony.
There were no qualms, side-stepping or excuses, which would have been the
case if he had previously denied that testimony.

After Oliver Cowdery had rejoined the Saints, he desired to journey out
west to Salt Lake City. However, a severe snow storm compelled him to remain
in Iowa for a couple of weeks. Samuel W. Richards was privileged to spend
much of this time with Oliver, and he wrote the following account of those
visits:

I had but the fall before returned from my first mission to the British
Isles, and was in the spirit of inquiry as to all matters of early history
and experiences in the Church, and soon found there was no reserve on the
part of Oliver in answering my many questions. In doing so his mind seemed
as fresh in the recollection of events, which occurred more than a score of
years before, as though they were but of yesterday.
To hear him describe, in his pleasant but earnest manner, the personality
of those heavenly messengers, with whom he and the Prophet had so freely
held converse, was enchanting to my soul. Their heavenly appearance, clothed
in robes of purity; the influence of their presence, so lovely and serene;
their eyes, that seemed to penetrate to the very depths of the soul,
together with the color of the eyes that gazed upon them, were all so
beautifully related as to almost make one feel that they were then
present....
Before taking his departure he wrote and left with the writer of this, the
following statement, which we believe to be his last living testimony,
though oft repeated, of the wonderful manifestations which brought the
authority of God to men on the earth:

[7] "While darkness covered the earth and gross darkness the people; long
after the authority to administer in holy things had been taken away, the
Lord opened the heavens and sent forth His word for the salvation of Israel.
In fulfillment of the sacred scriptures, the everlasting gospel was
proclaimed by the mighty angel (Moroni) who, clothed with the authority of
his mission, gave glory to God in the highest. This gospel is the `stone
taken from the mountain without hands.' John the Baptist, holding the keys
of the Aaronic Priesthood; Peter, James and John, holding the keys of the
Melchizedek Priesthood, have also ministered for those who shall be heirs of
salvation, and with these administrations, ordained men to the same
Priesthoods. These Priesthoods, with their authority, are now, and must
continue to be, in the body of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints. Blessed is the Elder who has received the same, and thrice blessed
and holy is he who shall endure to the end.
"Accept assurances, dear brother, of the unfeigned prayer of him who, in
connection with Joseph the Seer, was blessed with the above ministrations,
and who earnestly and devoutly hopes to meet you in the celestial glory.
(Oliver Cowdery, to Samuel W. Richards, January 13, 1849; see Improvement
Era 2:90-96)

Edward Stevenson also relates the following:

"I have often heard him <Oliver Cowdery> bear a faithful testimony to the
restoration of the gospel by the visitation of an angel, in whose presence
he stood in company with the Prophet Joseph Smith and David Whitmer. He
testified that he beheld the plates, the leaves being turned over by the
angel, whose voice he heard, and that they were commanded as witnesses to
bear a faithful testimony to the world of the vision that they were favored
to behold, and that the translation from the plates in the Book of Mormon
was accepted of the Lord, and that it should go forth to the world, and no
power on earth should stop its progress. Although for a time Oliver Cowdery
absented himself from the body of the Church, I never have known a time when
he faltered or was recreant to the trust so sacredly entrusted to him by an
angel from heaven." (Mill. Star 48:420)

Oliver Cowdery died on March 3rd, 1850, at Richmond, Missouri. Phineas
Young, who was present at his death, wrote the following:

"His last moments were spent in bearing testimony of the truth of the
gospel revealed through Joseph Smith, and the power of the holy Priesthood
which he had received through his administrations."

And . . .

Oliver Cowdery's half-sister, Lucy P. Young a widow of the late Phineas H.
Young, relates that Oliver Cowdery just before breathing his last, asked his
attendants to raise him up in bed, that [8] he might talk to the family and
his friends, who were present. He then told them to live according to the
teachings contained in the Book of Mormon, and promised them, if they would
do this, that they would meet him in heaven. He then said, "Lay me down and
let me fall asleep." A few moments later he died without a struggle.
(Biographical Encyclopedia, Jensen, 1:251)

In 1878 David Whitmer told Orson Pratt and Joseph F. Smith that:

"Oliver died the happiest man I ever saw. After shaking hands with the
family and kissing his wife and daughter, he said, `Now I lay me down for
the last time: I am going to my Savior;' and he died immediately with a
smile on his face." (Mill. Star 40:774)

As a witness to the Book of Mormon, Oliver died faithful to his testimony.
There are many accounts of that testimony given while he was a member of the
Church, after he left the Church, and when he returned. There are no
conclusive proofs that he ever denied his witnessing the golden plates. Any
accounts otherwise were based on rumor and are without verification.

Charge 2. Oliver Cowdery was a counterfeiter.

From all available research concerning Oliver's involvement in some bogus
money charge, there seems to be only rumors and accusations against him
without any definite proof. His name had been slandered by it, and it
somewhat dampened the reputation of the Church, but I can find no facts to
bear it out. Cowdery never went to prison for such a "crime"; there were no
trial or sentence held against him; nor has there since been any evidence to
prove his "guilt". It is difficult to defend or expose a charge which has no
evidence either for or against it.

But let's consider the type of characters who originated these charges--The
84 "Mormons" who signed the statement charging Oliver Cowdery as being
connected with counterfeiters were not those considered to be orthodox
Mormons. Many of these "Mormons" who testified in the Senate Document were
Sampson Avard, Reed Peck, George Hinkle, John Corrill and others of like
character. A statement by Nancy Rigdon sheds light on the character of
Sampson Avard:

I have heard Sampson Avard say that he would swear to a lie to accomplish
an object; that he had told many a lie, and would do so again. (Senate
Document 189, p. 40)

The same document contained testimony against Joseph Smith and all the
Twelve Apostles, accusing them of "high treason against the State for
murder, burglary, arson, robbery, and larceny." These were charges, too, but
proof was another thing.

[9] The key figure in pressing these counterfeit charges was Joseph H.
Jackson who published them in a booklet in Warsaw, Illinois. By his own
confession, he was a fugitive from the law, and had "committed the darkest
crimes", probably even being guilty himself of counterfeiting. The Warsaw
Signal, with its editor, T. C. Sharp, was a constant source of anti-Mormon
propaganda. Nearly every apostate had joined hands with the mobocrats and
anti-Mormons. These were the "men who had used their uttermost endeavors for
more than two years to incite the people to acts of mob violence against the
saints, . . ." (C.H.C. 2:235) Sometimes they would set fires to buildings
and blame the Mormons for it. From the little evidence available, it appears
that counterfeiting was another false charge against the leaders of the
Church.

In a special Nauvoo City Council session "Theodore Turley, a mechanic, who
being sworn, said that the Laws (William and Wilson), had brought bogus dies
to him to fix." (D.H.C. 6:435) They were apostates trying to bring about the
destruction of Joseph and Hyrum, along with most of the other leaders of the
Church. In that same meeting Hyrum Smith declared that he knew that "Jackson
was engaged in trying to make bogus, which was his principle business."
(Ibid., 6:435) Another witness, Lorenzo Wasson was sworn in and said,
"Joseph H. Jackson had told witness that bogus-making was going on in the
city; but it was too damned small business. Wanted witness to help him to
procure money, for the General (Smith) was afraid to go into it; and with
$500 he could get an engraving for bills on the Bank of Missouri, and one on
the State of New York, and could make money." (D.H.C. 6:436)

The City Council was aware of the bogus money being made in and around
Nauvoo and was trying to get evidence of who was responsible for it. Another
witness was called up by the name of Warren Smith, who stated:

F. M. Higbee came to him, and proposed to have him go in as a partner in
making bogus money. Higbee said he would not work for a living; that witness
might go in with him if he would advance fifty dollars; and showed him
(witness) a half-dollar which he said was made in his dies. (D.H.C. 6:447)

Joseph Smith, as Mayor of Nauvoo, wanted this counterfeiting press to be
dispatched as he did the press of the Nauvoo Expositor. Both were apparently
being operated by the same people. The Warsaw Signal newspaper was
constantly hurling malicious and slanderous attacks against the Saints,
occasionally inciting mob action against them. As a result, Joseph made the
following announcement:

Proclamation

By virtue of my office as Mayor of the city of Nauvoo, I do hereby
strictly enjoin it upon the municipal officers and citizens of said city to
use all honorable and lawful means in their power to assist me in
maintaining the public peace and common quiet of said city. As attempts have
already been made to excite the jealousy and prejudice of the people of the
surrounding country, by libels and [10] slanderous articles upon the
citizens and City Council, for the purpose of destroying the charter of said
city, and for the purpose of raising suspicion, wrath, and indignation among
a certain class of the less honorable portion of mankind, to commit acts of
violence upon the innocent and unsuspecting, in a certain newspaper called
the Nauvoo Expositor, recently established for such purposes in said city,
and which has been destroyed as a nuisance, according to the provision of
the charter. I further call upon every officer, authority, and citizen to be
vigilant in preventing, by wisdom the promulgation of false statements,
libels, slanders, or any other malicious or evil-designed concern that may
be put in operation to excite and ferment the passions of men to rebel
against the rights and privileges of the city, citizens, or laws of the
land; to be ready to suppress the gathering of mobs; to repel, by gentle
means and noble exertion, every foul scheme of unprincipled men to disgrace
and dishonor the city, or state, or any of their legally-constituted
authorities; and, finally to keep the peace by being cool, considerate,
virtuous, unoffending, manly, and patriotic, as the true sons of liberty
ever have been, and honorably maintain the precious boon our illustrious
fathers won.
In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of
said corporation at the city of Nauvoo, this 11th day of June,
1844. --Signed Joseph Smith, Mayor. (D.H.C. 6:449)

In the session of the City Council, Jackson was exposed as a counterfeiter
and a murderer. Brigham Young spoke at the trial of Sidney Rigdon and
declared:

John C. Bennett said in his exposure, he knew all of Brother Joseph's
secrets, and he would publish them. Joseph H. Jackson, says he has published
all Joseph's secrets, but nobody believes their tales, because they lie! And
if Sidney Rigdon undertakes to publish all of our secrets, as he says, he
will lie the first jump he takes.... Any man that says the Twelve are bogus
makers, or adulterers, or wicked men, is a liar; and all who say such things
shall have the fate of liars, where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Who is there that has seen us do such things? No man. (Times and Seasons
5:664)

The publishers of the Nauvoo Expositor were friends of Joseph Jackson and
they defended him when they wrote:

We have reason to believe, from our acquaintance with Mr. Jackson, and our
own observation, that the statements he makes are true; and in view of these
facts, we ask, in the name of heaven, where is the safety of our lives and
liberties, when placed at the disposal of such heaven daring, hell
deserving, God forsaken villains. (Nauvoo Expositor, June 7, 1844, p. 3)

[11] It is interesting to note the method they have of twisting things
around because as they were talking about fear for their "lives and
liberties", they themselves were in the process of plotting to kill Joseph,
Hyrum and others, and driving the Saints from the state in the middle of
winter.

Oliver Cowdery was aware of some others in and around Nauvoo that had made
an attempt to create bogus money according to Frederick G. Williams.

<Frederick G.> Williams, who vacillated between being a dissenter and a
faithful member of the Church, testified that Oliver had personally informed
him of a man in the Church by the name of Davis who would compound metal and
make dies which could print money that could not be detected from the real
thing. (A History of the Latter-day Saints in Northern Missouri from 1836 to
1839, BYU, 1965, p. 146)

Claims were made that Cowdery was an accessory and that he had a warrant
issued against him, but according to all available information, he was never
convicted or proven guilty.

Most of the counterfeit coins were turning up in Warsaw, as admitted by the
Warsaw Signal. Could it be that the bulk of counterfeiting was actually done
in Warsaw? Perhaps those who produced most of the counterfeit money actually
lived in Warsaw and were not Mormons at all. Or, could it be that the Mormon
apostates, anti-Mormons, and others used Nauvoo as headquarters for their
bogus operation? It would be an ideal place for it because if discovered,
they could blame the Mormon Church and its leaders.

There is a species of counterfeit, extensively circulated in this
community, called Nauvoo Bogus. They are half dollars, dated 1828. They are
a pretty good imitation of the genuine coin--so good, that some of our
business men have been imposed upon by them. It is said they are
manufactured in the City of the Saints. (Warsaw Signal, April 24, 1844, p.
2)

Only a few Mormons, or Mormon apostates, were actually involved or aware of
the bogus money, but the Mormons and their leaders were being charged with
the crime of originating it. Some Mormon people became innocent victims of
this bogus money, but it did not mean they were guilty of producing or
sanctioning it. (If you look along the edges of a dime, quarter or
half-dollar today, you will see that we too are the innocent victims of a
poor imitation of real money.)

Even if a Mormon had any association with someone who was or eventually
became connected with the bogus money, their names and reputation were
attached to counterfeiting by the Warsaw Signal. But how strange that all
the people in Warsaw found with most of the bogus money were never mentioned
by name--whether they were innocent or guilty.

[12] Some of those guilty of counterfeiting were eventually caught and
arrested.

We extract the following from the St. Louis Reviele:
Counterfeiters-- Mormon Certificates. Yesterday morning, a boy named
Theron Terrill was arrested, having in his possession twelve American half
and eight Spanish quarter dollars, all counterfeited in some sort of base
metal. On examination by the Marshal, he stated that many had been given to
him by one George Reader, with whom he had lived in former years, but who he
had only recently seen again. For a long time the boy maintained secrecy,
but, eventually, he yielded, and so told his story, Reader was caught and
arrested on board the Ospery, having taken passage for himself and the boy
to Nauvoo.... (Warsaw Signal, June 5, 1844)

It was also later discovered that John Long admitted that he had hidden
"two bogus presses" and stated that the presses belonged to Edward Bonney.
Governor Ford attended the trial of Bonney.

I, Thomas Ford, late Governor of Illinois, do certify that I was present
during the whole trial of Edward Bonney for counterfeiting, . . . I was
fully persuaded from the evidence adduced, that the prosecution was put on
foot, so far as Haight and the other witnesses against Bonney were
concerned, to be revenged on him for ferreting out and bringing to
punishment the murderers of Col. Davenport. And for the further object of
stopping Bonney from pursuing the residue of said murderers, then and yet at
large.--Thomas Ford, Jan. 6, 1847. (The Banditti of the Prairies, p. 259)

Another man called "Eaton" had been accused of making the bogus money, but
the final arrests of the guilty parties were announced in 1845:

Counterfeiters Arrested. Two of the Nauvoo Saints were arrested in
Burlington, Iowa, on the 20th ult., for passing counterfeit money. Their
names were Cyrus Chase and Rufus Adams, and each had passed on the same day
a $10 bill on the Lafayette Bank of Cincinnati. Other counterfeit money was
found upon them. They were both committed for trim. (St. Louis American,
Dec. 2, 1845)

However, Oliver Cowdery was never arrested, tried or found guilty of any of
these nefarious bogus operations. Neither were any of the other General
Authorities of the Church.

Charge 3. David Whitmer was a counterfeiter.

The same charge against Oliver Cowdery included David Whitmer, and evidence
is also lacking in his behalf.

[13]
Charge 4. David Whitmer was told by God to leave the Saints, inferring that
the Church had apostatized.

Church history records many interesting events connected with David
Whitmer. During some very trying times one of the Elders, William McLellin,
lost faith in the leaders of the Church, and "quit praying" and "quit
keeping the commandments of God" and "indulged himself in his lustful
desires." He was excommunicated from the Church at Far West. (D.H.C. 3:31)
From then on--

.. . . he took an active part in the persecution of the Saints in Missouri,
and at one time expressed the desire to do violence to the person of Joseph
Smith, while the latter was confined in Liberty prison. Subsequently he
attempted what he called a reorganization of the Church, and called upon
David Whitmer to take the presidency thereof, claiming that he was ordained
by Joseph Smith on the 8th of July, 1834, as his (the Prophet Joseph's)
successor. (D.H.C. 3:32)

The Prophet Joseph Smith wrote about these events while in Liberty Jail and
said:

But behold the words of the Savior: "If the light which is in you become
darkness, behold how great is that darkness." Look at the dissenters. Again,
"If you were of the world, the world would love its own." Look at Mr.
Hinkle--a wolf in sheep's clothing. Look at his brother John Corrill. Look
at the beloved brother Reed Peck, who aided him in leading us, as the Savior
was led, into the camp of His enemies, as a lamb prepared for the slaughter,
as a sheep dumb before his shearers; so we opened not our mouths.
But these men, like Balaam, being greedy for reward, sold us into the
hands of those who loved them, for the world loves his own. I would remember
William E. McLellin, who comes up to us as one of Job's comforters. God
suffered such kind of beings to afflict Job--but it never entered into their
hearts that Job would get out of it all. This poor man who professes to be
much of a prophet, has no other dumb ass to ride but David Whitmer, to
forbid his madness when he goes up to curse Israel; and this ass not being
of the same kind as Balaam's, therefore, the angel notwithstanding appeared
unto him, yet he could not penetrate his understanding sufficiently, but
that he brays out cursings instead of blessings. (D.H.C. 3:228)

Whitmer, like many of the men at that time, was severely tried and tested.
He was mortal and had weaknesses which led him into a wayward position
resulting in his being excommunicated from the Church. But during his trials
and temptations, he did not waver from nor deny his testimony of the Book of
Mormon and its truthfulness. It was in his darkness that he made the
following statement, as referred to in McKay's article:

If you believe my testimony to the Book of Mormon . . . then I tell you
that in June, 1838, God spoke to me again by His own voice from the heavens,
and told me to `separate myself from among the Latter Day Saints.... '

[14] This is a strong possibility, as when men get into that much darkness,
it is reasonable that God would not want them to remain any longer with the
Saints. If Joseph Smith likened Whitmer to "a dumb ass", then God certainly
would not want any of those in His Church! In fact, all these modern
Evangelist preachers who were once Mormons, claiming to be "Christians" but
acting more like dumb asses, were probably told by God to "separate
themselves" from the Latter-day Saints, as well. It would also be better for
them to leave the Saints alone, but they have done just as Joseph said they
would do--

Renegade "Mormon" dissenters are running through the world and spreading
various foul and libelous reports against us, thinking thereby to gain the
friendship of the world, because they know that we are not of the world, and
that the world hates us; therefore they <the world> make a tool of these
fellows <the dissenters>; and by them try to do all the injury they can, and
after that they hate them worse than they do us, because they find them to
be base traitors and sycophants.
Such characters God hates; we cannot love them. The world hates them, and
we sometimes think that the devil ought to be ashamed of them. (D.H.C.
3:230)

David Whitmer made the mistake of falling in with some of these dissenters
and he himself became confused on certain issues in the Church. However, he
never denied his testimony of the Book of Mormon. In fact, he strongly
refuted those rumors that he and the other two witnesses had ever denied
their testimonies of this sacred scripture:

It is recorded in the American Cyclopaedia and the Encyclopaedia
Britannica, that I, David Whitmer, have denied my testimony as one of the
three witnesses to the divinity of the Book of Mormon; and that the other
two witnesses, Oliver Cowdery and Martin Harris, denied their testimony to
that Book. I will say once more to all mankind, that I have never at any
time denied that testimony or any part thereof. I also testify to the world,
that neither Oliver Cowdery or Martin Harris ever at any time denied their
testimony. They both died reaffirming the truth of the divine authenticity
of the Book of Mormon. I was present at the death bed of Oliver Cowdery, and
his last words were, "Brother David, be true to your testimony to the Book
of Mormon." He died here in Richmond, Mo., on March 3d, 1850. Many witnesses
yet live in Richmond, who will testify to the truth of these facts, as well
as to the good character of Oliver Cowdery. The very powers of darkness have
combined against the Book of Mormon, to prove that it is not the word of
God, and this should go to prove to men of spiritual understanding, that the
Book is true. (Address to All Believers in Christ by a Witness to the Divine
Authenticity of the Book of Mormon, by David Whitmer, 1887, p. 8)

[15] In spite of all of Whitmer's straying from Church doctrines, his
difficulties with Joseph Smith, and being influenced by apostates, David
continued to bear a straight-forward testimony of seeing the plates. In 1878
Apostles Orson Pratt and Joseph F. Smith went to visit him and reported as
follows:

Orson Pratt: "Do you remember what time you saw the plates?"
David Whitmer: "It was in June, 1829, the latter part of the month, and
the Eight Witnesses saw them, I think, the next day or the day after (i.e.,
one or two days after). Joseph showed them the plates himself, but the angel
showed us (the Three Witnesses) the plates, as I suppose to fulfill the
words of the book itself. Martin Harris was not with us at this time; he
obtained a view of them afterwards (the same day). Joseph, Oliver and myself
were together when I saw them. We not only saw the plates of the Book of
Mormon, but also the brass plates, the plates of the Book of Ether, the
plates containing the records of the wickedness and secret combinations of
the people of the world down to the time of their being engraved, and many
other plates. The fact is, it was just as though Joseph, Oliver and I were
sitting just here on a log, when we were overshadowed by a light. It was not
like the light of the sun, nor like that of a fire, but more glorious and
beautiful. It extended away round us, I cannot tell how far, but in the
midst of this light about as far off as he sits (pointing to John C.
Whitmer, sitting a few feet from him), there appeared, as it were, a table
with many records or plates upon it, besides the plates of the Book of
Mormon, also the sword of Laban, the directors (i.e., the ball which Lehi
had) and the interpreters. I saw them just as plain as I see this bed
(striking the bed beside him with his hand), and I heard the voice of the
Lord, as distinctly as I ever heard anything in my life, declaring that the
records of the plates of the Book of Mormon were translated by the gift and
power of God." (Biographical Encyclopedia, Jensen, 1:266)

Before he died, David Whitmer made the following public announcement of his
testimony:

"Unto all Nations, Kindreds, Tongues and People, unto whom these presents
shall come:
"It having been represented by one John Murphy, of Polo, Caldwell County,
Missouri, that I, in a conversation with him last summer, denied my
testimony as one of the Three Witnesses of the Book of Mormon,
"To the end, therefore, that he may understand me now, if he did not then;
and that the world may know the truth, I wish now, standing as it were, in
the very sunset of life, and in the fear of God, once <and> for all to make
this public statement:
"That I have never at any time denied that testimony or any part thereof,
which has so long since been published with that book, as one of the Three
Witnesses. Those who know me best well know that I have always adhered to
that testimony. And that no man may [16] be misled or doubt my present views
in regard to the same, I do again affirm the truth of all my statements as
then made and published.
"`He that hath an ear to hear, let him hear;' it was no delusion; what is
written is written, and he that readeth let him understand.
"`And if any man doubt, should he not carefully and honestly read and
understand the same before presuming to sit in judgment and condemning the
light, which shineth in darkness, and showeth the way of eternal life as
pointed out by the unerring hand of God?'
"In the Spirit of Christ, who hath said: `Follow thou me, for I am the
life, the light and the way,' I submit this statement to the world; God in
whom I trust being my judge as to the sincerity of my motives and the faith
and hope that is in me of eternal life.
"My sincere desire is that the world may be benefited by this plain and
simple statement of the truth.
"And all the honor to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, which is
one God. Amen!
"DAVID WHITMER SEN., Richmond, Mo., March 19, 1881."
(Missouri Conservator, March 25, 1881)

A weekly Missouri newspaper called The Richmond Democrat printed the
following item concerning the death of David Whitmer:

"David Whitmer bore his long illness with great patience and fortitude,
his faith never for a moment wavering, and when the summons came he sank
peacefully to rest, with a smile on his countenance, just as if he was being
lulled to sleep by sweets music. Just before the breath left the body, he
opened his eyes, which glistened with the brightness of his early manhood.
He then turned them toward heaven, and a wonderful light came over his
countenance, which remained several moments, when the eyes gradually closed
and David Whitmer was gone to rest. On Monday last (Jan. 23, 1888), at 10
o'clock a.m., after awakening from a short slumber, he said he had seen
beyond the veil and saw Christ on the other side. His friends, who were
constantly at his bedside, claim that he had many manifestations of the
truths of the great beyond, and which confirms their faith beyond all shadow
of doubt. On Sunday evening, at 5:30 (Jan. 22, 1888), Mr. Whitmer called his
family and some friends to his bedside, and addressing himself to the
attending physician, said: `Dr. Buchanan, I want you to say whether or not l
am in my right mind, before I give my dying testimony.' The doctor answered:
`Yes, you are in your right mind, for I have just had a conversation with
you.' He then addressed himself to all around his bedside in these words:
`Now you must all be faithful in Christ. I want to say to you all, the Bible
and the record of the Nephites (Book of Mormon) is true, so you can say that
you have heard me bear my testimony on my death-bed. All be faithful in
Christ, and your reward will be according to your works. God bless you all.
My trust is in Christ forever, worlds without end. Amen.'"

[17]
Charge 5. Martin Harris's "moral and religious character was such, as not to
entitle him to respect among his neighbors. . . ", and also that "he changed
his religious position eight times...."

In answer to the last part of this charge, it is easy to understand why
anyone would wander around from church to church before becoming a Mormon.
That's like searching for a gourmet dinner in a 7-11 store. Then, when
Mormons somehow become disaffected with Joseph Smith or with the Church,
they again wander around without finding satisfaction in any of the
organized churches.

Any man on the brink of apostasy will experience feelings of doubt,
dissatisfaction and disappointment. The three witnesses of the Book of
Mormon were no exception; however, they never publicly denied their
testimony of the plates. Martin Harris made public and private statements
about the Book of Mormon, but they were not denials.

The following incident was recorded by David B. Dille, who visited Martin
Harris in 1853. Dille was on his way to fulfill a mission in Great Britain
and stopped enroute to see Harris.

"What do you think of the Book of Mormon? Is it a divine record?"
Mr. Harris replied and said, "I was the righthand man of Joseph Smith, and
I know that he was a Prophet of God. I know the Book of Mormon is true."
Then smiting his fist on the table, he said, "And you know that I know that
it is true. I know that the plates have been translated by the gift and
power of God, for His voice declared it unto us; therefore I know of surety
that the work is true. For," continued Mr. Harris, "did I not at one time
hold the plates on my knee an hour and a half, whilst in conversation with
Joseph, when we went to bury them in the woods, that the enemy might not
obtain them? Yes, I did. And as many of the plates as Joseph Smith
translated I handled with my hands, plate after plate."
Mr. Harris further said, "I took a transcript of the characters of the
plates to Dr. Anthon, of New York. When I arrived at the house of Professor
Anthon, I found him in his office and alone, and presented the transcript to
him, and asked him to read it. He said if I would bring the plates, he would
assist in the translation. I told him I could not, for they were sealed.
Professor Anthon then gave me a certificate certifying that the characters
were Arabic, Chaldaic, and Egyptian. I then left Dr. Anthon and was near the
door, when he said, `How did the young man know the plates were there?' I
said an angel had shown them to him. Professor Anthon then said, `Let me see
the certificate!'--upon which I took it from my waistcoat pocket and
unsuspectingly gave it to him. He then tore it up in anger, saying there was
no such thing as angels now--it was all a hoax. I then went to Dr. Mitchell
with the transcript, and he confirmed what Professor Anthon had said."
(Mill. Star 21:545)

[18] Edward Stevenson also recorded an interview with Martin Harris:

In the year 1869 I was appointed to a mission to the United States. Having
visited several of the Eastern States, I called at Kirtland, Ohio, to see
the first temple that was built by our people in this generation. While
there, I again met Martin Harris, soon after coming out of the temple. He
took from under his arm a copy of the Book of Mormon, the first edition, I
believe, and bore a faithful testimony, just the same as that I heard him
bear 36 years previously. He said that it was his duty to continue to lift
up his voice, as he had been commanded to do, in defense of the Book that he
held in his hand, and offered to prove from the Bible that just such a book
was to come forth out of the ground--and that, too, in a day when there were
no prophets on the earth--and that he was daily bearing testimony to many
who visited the temple. (Mill. Star 44:79)

Martin Harris, like Oliver Cowdery, eventually came back into the Church.
When he arrived in Utah, the Deseret News published the following:

He is remarkably vigorous for one of his years, his memory being very
good, and his sight, though his eyes appear to have failed, being so acute
that he can see to pick a pin off the ground.... He has never failed to bear
testimony to the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon. He says it is
not a matter of belief on his part, but of knowledge. He with the other
witnesses declared, and their testimony has accompanied every copy of the
book, that "an angel of God came down from heaven, and brought and laid
before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates, and the engravings
thereon." This declaration he has not varied from in 41 years .... We are
glad to see Martin Harris once more in the midst of the Saints. (Des. News,
Aug. 31, 1870)

During his lifetime, Martin frequently related his unwavering testimony;
and up to the time of his death, he was still actively bearing testimony of
the Book of Mormon.

Brother Martin visited many of the wards, continuing to bear his testimony
both of what he had beheld with his own eyes, and verily knew to be true. He
publicly said that many years ago, in Ohio, a number of persons combined and
sought to get Martin to drink wine for the purpose of crossing him in his
testimony. At the conclusion they asked him if he really believed the
testimony that he had signed in the Book of Mormon to be true. He replied
no, he did not believe it, but, much to their surprise, he said he knew it
to be true!
Soon after receiving his blessings in the house of the Lord, he went to
Smithfield, Cache Valley, and lived with his son until he left this mortal
life. Just before he breathed his last, he sat up in his bed, holding the
Book of Mormon in his hand, and bore his last testimony to those who were
present. <Salt Lake City, November 30, 1881> (The Three Witnesses, by
Preston Nibley, p. 133)

[19] William Homer visited Martin Harris at the time of his death and made
the following statement:

The next day, July 10, 1875, marked the end. It was in the
evening--milking time--and Martin Harris Jr., and his wife, Nancy Homer
Harris, had gone out to milk and do the evening chores. In the house with
the stricken man were left my mother, Eliza Williamson Homer, and myself,
who had had so interesting a day with Martin Harris at Kirtland. I stood by
the bedside holding the patient's right hand and my mother at the foot of
the bed. Martin had been unconscious for a number of days. When we first
entered the room, the old gentleman appeared to be sleeping. He soon woke up
and asked for a drink of water. I put my arm under the old gentleman, raised
him, and my mother held the glass to his lips. He drank freely, and then he
looked up at me and recognized me. He said, "I know you. You are my friend."
He said, "Yes, I did see the plates on which the Book of Mormon was written;
I did see the angel; I did hear the voice of God; and I do know that Joseph
Smith is a Prophet of God, holding the keys of the Holy Priesthood."
This was the end. Martin Harris, divinely chosen witness of the work of
God, relaxed, gave up my hand. He lay back on his pillow, and just as the
sun went down behind the Clarkston mountains, the spirit of Martin Harris
passed on. --Signed, William Harrison Homer. (Imp. Era, March 1926)

Edward Stevenson adds another statement about an interview with Martin
Harris:

At an evening visit of some of my friends at my residence in Salt Lake
City, to see and hear Brother Harris relate his experience (which always
delighted him), Brother James T. Woods, who is now present while I am
writing this article, reminds me that himself and G. D. Keaton were present
on that occasion, and asked him to explain the manner in which the plates
containing the characters of the Book of Mormon were exhibited to the
witnesses. Brother Harris said that the angel stood on the opposite side of
the table on which were the plates, the interpreters, etc., and took the
plates in his hands and turned them over. To more fully illustrate this to
them, Brother Martin took up a book and turned the leaves over one by one.

On the afternoon of his death he was bolstered up in his bed, where, with
the Book of Mormon in his hand, he bore his last testimony to those who were
present. Brother Harris was over ninety years of age at the time of his
death, and had always enjoyed good health. Bishop Rigby, who preached his
funeral sermon, placed the Book of Mormon on his breast, while he lay in his
coffin, and it was buried with him. --Signed, Edward Stevenson. (Mill. Star,
June 21, 1886)

A prayer and final resume of Martin Harris's life and testimony were
published in the Deseret News at the time of his death, including the
following excerpt:

[20] Notwithstanding these great favors shown to this remarkable man he
had, like all of Adam's race, his imperfections. He did not follow up his
brethren in all their persecutions in the states of Missouri and Illinois,
but remained for many years in Ohio; this gave rise to many conjectures that
Mr. Harris had apostatized. But it can truly be said that Mr. Harris never
faltered nor swerved in the least degree from the great testimony given in
the Book of Mormon. (Des. News, July 17, 1875)

Martin Harris and the other two witnesses had their faults and weaknesses.
They may have differed in some of their beliefs, and they did not all return
to the Church, but they never publicly denied their testimony as printed at
the beginning of the Book of Mormon.

Now to answer the first part of Charge No. 5, McKay took this quote from E.
D. Howe's book Mormonism Unveiled:

"I have been acquainted with Martin Harris about thirty years. .... his
moral and religious character was such, as not to entitle him to respect
among his neighbors...." (pp. 260-261)

Howe was a master anti-Mormon. Getting a character reference of Martin
Harris from him would be like asking the Mafia for a character reference of
the Police Department. Talk about one rattlesnake vouching for another!

In spite of his personal weaknesses, Martin Harris was a man of veracity as
a witness to the Book of Mormon. He displayed weakness by continuing to ask
Joseph for the manuscript of 116 pages even after the Lord had forbid it.
However, after losing the manuscript, the Lord later permitted him to assist
in the work.

He contributed much time to the restoration, and gave $3,000 towards
publishing the first edition of the Book of Mormon. When the United Order
was first established, Martin Harris was the first one called of God by name
to set an example before the Church in laying his money before the Bishop.
(see D. & C. 58:35)

In 1835 he assisted in electing, ordaining and instructing the first quorum
of Twelve Apostles in this dispensation. He was active in the Church all the
while the Saints were in Kirtland.

When the Saints moved to Missouri, Martin chose to remain in Ohio. This
display of weakness caused him to become influenced by the Strangites, an
offshoot of the Mormons. However, his venture with them in 1846 didn't last
long.

After residing in Kirtland for many years, he left to emigrate to Salt Lake
City in 1870. His years in Kirtland did not prove "his moral and religious
character was such, as not to entitle him to respect among his neighbors."

[21] An Elder making a visit to New York said:

I found there an aged gentleman, 74 years old, who knew Martin Harris, and
said that he was known in that neighborhood as an honest farmer, having
owned a good farm three miles from that place. (see Mill. Star 44:78)

Martin tells about his relationship with his neighbors in Ohio during an
incident previously referred to in this section:

He <Martin Harris> said that on one occasion several of his old
acquaintances made an effort to get him tipsy by treating him to some wine.
When they thought he was in a good mood for talk, they put the following
question very carefully to him: "Well, now, Martin, we want you to be frank
and candid with us in regard to this story of your seeing an angel and the
golden plates of the Book of Mormon that is so much talked about. We have
always taken you to be an honest, good farmer and neighbor of ours, but
could not believe that you ever did see an angel. <Martin went on to tell
them he did not believe it, he knew it.> (Biographical Encyclopedia, Jensen,
p. 274)

Because Martin visited with other churches in Ohio after becoming a Mormon,
it is an indication of his good moral and religious character. When people
refuse to associate with churches or religion, then there can be justifiable
doubts about their character.

Charge 6. The three witnesses were unreliable, denied their testimony, and
were condemned by those they aided. Their testimony is like "letting one
rattlesnake vouch for another. They cannot be trusted."

In his article of the three witnesses, Robert McKay tries to set a pattern
for judging the validity of these men at witnesses. He casts doubt upon
their testimony of the Book of Mormon by casting aspersions upon their
character and judgment. By exposing and exaggerating upon their moral and
ethical weaknesses, McKay assumes that their testimony of the Book of Mormon
is such that "they cannot be trusted."

Every crafty lawyer will attempt to discredit the testimony of a person by
attacking their character and by exposing any personal weaknesses or
failings. If a lawyer can destroy, or make the appearance of destroying, the
integrity and character of a person, then he can assume to destroy their
testimony as well. Such lawyers care nothing about validity. Truth is
immaterial to men who are so avid in the defense of their own case. However,
this means of judging is certainly not correct nor wise.

As has been mentioned several times already in this response, in spite of
the human weaknesses evident in each of these three witnesses, they never
did deny their testimonies of the Book of Mormon.

[22] Testimony of Bible Witnesses

If we were to use McKay's method of logic for doubting men's testimonies,
we could apply it to anything else--even the Bible itself. For instance,
let's use this anti-Mormon tactic by applying it to three of the witnesses
of Christ. We will judge the testimonies of John the Baptist, Simon Peter,
and Judas Iscariot by examining the imperfections of their characters as a
means of determining the credibility of their testimonies.

John the Baptist

The first consideration of John the Baptist could be concerning his
background. He was not educated in the "approved" theological schools of his
day. In fact, John was living "in the uninhabited country bordering on
Antipas' realm." He lived like a recluse, even away from the house of
Israel. In the Qumran scrolls there is evidence that the only contact John
had with the outside world was with the Essenes. Most ministers of today
must be students of some Christian seminary to qualify as a minister of
Christ, but not John. How could he qualify as a critic against the great
Pharisees and the Roman empire?

I am sure that if Oliver Cowdery had come out of the wilderness the way
John did, and wore a hairy camel's hide and ate locusts and wild honey, it
could have been used as further ammunition and "evidence" to discredit
Cowdery's testimony. The anti-Mormons would have said he was some kind of a
nut!

The Lord once spoke of John in the following terms:

For I say unto you, Among those that are born of women there is not a
greater prophet than John the Baptist.... (Luke 7:28)

However, if this would have been said (in a revelation in the Doctrine and
Covenants) about Oliver Cowdery, the anti-Mormons would certainly question
the source of that revelation or else Oliver's abilities as a prophet. There
was not a greater prophet than John the Baptist, yet nowhere in scripture
did he ever make a prophecy!

Continuing further, there is also the question of John's identity. When
John was approached by a party from Jerusalem, he was asked, "What then? Art
thou Elias? And he saith, I am not." (John 1:21) But Jesus was telling
people, "if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come."
(Matt. 11:14) Didn't John know who he was?

In a very short time John lost confidence in Christ and "hesitated for a
time in his wholehearted support of Jesus's claims for Himself because Jesus
did not appear to be exactly the kind of Messiah he had expected."
(Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, 3:645) John, the first and
foremost witness of Christ, began to doubt his own testimony!

[23] From the Mandean sources of historical works (a sect still existing
today, and who claim their perpetuation from John the Baptist), there is a
recorded rivalry between John and Jesus. They claim that Jesus first came
under the ministry of John, but as Jesus rose in fame and honor, John's
diminished and he supposedly resented it.

Whatever John's feelings were towards Jesus, it appears that he had serious
doubts that Jesus was the Messiah. When John was sent to prison "he sent two
of his disciples, And said unto him (Jesus), Art thou he that should come,
or do we look for another?" (Matt. 11:3) This was John--the one who was
first to herald the announcement of Christ, who was the "forerunner" of the
Messiah, who baptized Jesus and heard the voice of God declaring that Jesus
was the "Only Begotten Son". According to the scriptures, John went to
prison and lost his head still wondering if Jesus was the real Messiah!

Based upon McKay's own method and criteria of determining a valid
testimony, he certainly should not believe in the "witness" called John the
Baptist.

Simon Peter

Simon, or Peter, was another "witness" for Christ and a leader of the
Twelve Apostles. Peter, or "Rock", was the name given to him by Jesus. But
he was "not always stable and reliable as his name implies." He was very
well aware of his own weaknesses and once exclaimed, "Depart from me, for I
am a sinful man, O Lord." (Luke 5:8) The anti-Mormons would say that the
Lord could never use such sinners, but He did--He chose Peter as a chief
apostle.

In the New Testament we read that Jesus spoke to Peter saying: "And I say
also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my
church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." (Matt. 16:19)
Peter did not prove to be as stable as a rock, nor did the church prove
stable. Within a few hundred years the Church had suffered destruction,
apostasy and a complete departure from its original doctrines. Ignatius, in
his letter to the Romans, affirms that Peter actually held positions in the
Roman Catholic Church before his death. Marcarius of Magnesia states that
Peter was crucified in Rome after being a leader of the church there for
only a few months. The Roman episcopal lists make Peter the first Bishop of
that city. The film Quo Vadis portrays the story of Peter leaving his duties
in the church to save his life, but enroute he had a revelation that said,
"I had a disciple who was imprisoned and was to be put to death. He is
escaped, and is free. l go to die, a second time, for him." Peter cried out,
"Lord, go not; I will return and die!" He went back the next day, and
according to Origen, Peter was crucified upside down.

Regardless of the statements of the apocraphal writers about the apostasy
of the church from the time of Peter, the Protestants began to protest an
apostasy. They denounced the corruptions of the Catholic Church. The church
[24] was shattered into a thousand little pieces, all claiming to be right
and the others all wrong. It doesn't seem right to blame Peter for the mess
the Protestants brought about, but the scriptures said that Peter was given
the responsibility to keep the church from the gates of hell. It is evident
that the gates of hell have swallowed up nearly all of Christianity. Thus,
did Peter fail?

Following the conversion and baptism of Cornelius at Caesarea, Peter had to
return to Jerusalem to answer criticisms for the way he had conducted his
ministry. (see Acts 11:1-18) Paul also reprimanded Peter for the way he
handled his calling in the ministry. Paul said, "But when Peter was come to
Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed." (Gal.
2:11) Poor Peter was getting chastised from the Lord, the disciples, and now
even Paul. Consider the following incidents showing that Peter was not
always as solid as a "rock":

1. Jesus told Peter, "Thou savourest not the things that be of God, but
those that be of men." (Matt. 16:23)
2. Jesus upbraided him for being a man "of little faith" and having "doubt".
(Matt. 14:31)
3. At one of the most critical periods in the life of Christ, Peter was
caught sleeping on the job and was chastised for it. (Matt. 26:40, Mark
14:37)
4. Both Mark and Luke mentioned the time of the transfiguration when Peter
carried on a conversation and didn't know what he was talking about. (Mark
9:5; Luke 9:33)
5. At the essential washing of the feet, Peter's impetuousness nearly cost
him his chance of ever remaining with the Savior. (John 13:8)
6. After the crucifixion, Peter apparently left the ministry. He said to the
other disciples, "I go a fishing," which even influenced the others to
follow him. (John 21:3)
7. Three times the Lord had to admonish Peter that if he loved Him, he
should "feed my sheep". (John 21:15-18)
8. Peter was over-confident, and boastful for he said though all men would
deny the Lord, he alone would remain faithful. Jesus said that before the
rising of the sun, he would be offended in Him. (Matt. 26:33-34)
9. Though Peter held the keys of the ministry of Christ, he took up a sword
and cut off a man's ear, for which he was rebuked by the Lord. (Matt. 26:52)
10. The most tragic scene in the life of Peter is when he denied knowing the
Savior. This was verified by all four Gospel writers. (Matt. 26:69-75; Mark
14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62; John 18:25-27)
[25]
11. Peter not only denied knowing Jesus once, but three times! In his third
denial he became so infuriated that he cursed and swore! (Matt. 26:74; Mark
14:71)
12. The most shocking rebuke Peter ever received was towards the end of his
ministry. Jesus "turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan:
thou art an offence unto me...." (Matt. 16:23) What had happened to the
Rock? Had it turned into a Prince of Darkness? When Jesus called Peter a
Satan, that was certainly much worse than Joseph calling Whitmer a dumb ass!

Scholars of the Zondervan Publishing House summarized Peter's weaknesses
best when they stated that his life--

.. . . illustrates, however, the danger of misdirected and superficial
enthusiasm. Some of the sharpest rebukes in the New Testament were directed
at him. His positive traits are inspiring and challenging; his negative
traits are a warning. Enthusiasm and devotion must be tempered by a balanced
and informed perspective. Peter could be overconfident in his enthusiasm, at
time bordering on the arrogance (as in the Upper Room)." (Zondervan
Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible 4:739)

If the Lord would have given a revelation in the Doctrine and Covenants
calling either Cowdery, Whitmer or Harris "Satan", then McKay would have a
more valid argument than the one he proposes. How could McKay ever
acknowledge the testimony of a man the Lord called "Satan"?

Judas Iscariot

There is little doubt that Judas, called Iscariot, became a Christian in
good faith and with good intentions. He aspired, and probably qualified, to
occupy the position of one of the Twelve Apostles--the highest position of
trust among the disciples of Jesus. However, he began to display certain
weaknesses of the flesh. The first incident of his mortal failings is
recorded thus:

Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed
the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair; and the house was
filled with the odour of the ointment. Then saith one of his disciples,
Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, which should betray him, Why was not this
ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor? (See Matt.
26:6-13; Mark 14:3-10; John 12:1-8)

The Apostle John was very certain in explaining that Judas was not really
interested in caring for the poor, but rather to satisfy his own avarice.
When Judas was complaining about the costly oil to be sold, John wrote:

This he said not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief,
and had the bag, and bare what was put therein. (John 12:6)
[26] According to John, Judas wanted the money turned over to him to give to
the poor, but his intentions were to steal it for himself. Judas was a
thief, and he could and perhaps should have been sent to jail. He was
stealing from all the other disciples and even from Jesus, too! That's worse
than Oliver's supposed bogus money scandle.

Judas became a "thief", yet Jesus did nothing, or at least very little, to
disfellowship or excommunicate the man for his thievery. Jesus was usually
the first to recognize the weaknesses of men and to help them overcome. All
through the New Testament we read of the mercy and forgiving nature of the
Gospel message. Personal weaknesses were tolerable to Christ and forgivable;
but when men turn traitor, they commit wilful, intentional and deliberate
sins, causing trouble or harm to those they once called friends. It was
these unrepentant evils which persisted in Judas that debased him and
resulted in his becoming a traitor. When men expose themselves to the spirit
of unrighteousness, they soon become servant to the master of all
unrighteousness. Judas, like most traitors, became an aspiring spirit,
undoubtedly considering himself better or more intelligent than the other
disciples.

From the scriptures we can ascertain that the plot and execution of
betrayal were ingeniously carried out with minutest detail. It was the
craftiest lawyers, the learned Pharisees, and the wisest sages of the Jews
that tried and failed so many times to trap the Messiah. Not until Judas
performed the act of a traitor was Christ brought into a position to be
murdered.

The Prophet Joseph Smith once said:

I am exposed to far greater danger from traitors among ourselves than from
enemies without, although my life has been sought for many years by the
civil and military authorities, priests and people of Missouri; and if I can
escape from the ungrateful treachery of assassins, I can live as Caesar
might have lived, were it not for a right-hand Brutus. I have had pretended
friends betray me. All the enemies upon the face of the earth may roar and
exert all their power to bring about my death, but they can accomplish
nothing, unless some who are among us, who have enjoyed our society, have
been with us in our councils, participated in our confidence, taken us by
the hand, called us brother, saluted us with a kiss, join with our enemies,
turn our virtues into faults, and, by falsehood and deceit, stir up their
wrath and indignation against us, and bring their united vengeance upon our
heads. All the hue and cry of the chief priests and elders against the
Savior could not bring down the wrath of the Jewish nation upon his head,
and thereby cause the crucifixion of the Son of God, until Judas said unto
them: `Whomsoever I shall kiss he is the man; hold him fast.' Judas was one
of the Twelve Apostles, even their treasurer, and dipped with their Master
in the dish, and through his treachery, the crucifixion was brought about;
and we have a Judas in our midst, (Life of Joseph Smith, by George Q.
Cannon, p, 430)

In fact, there always have been Judases in the midst of the Mormons.

[27] Even though Judas was acknowledged to be an Apostle of Christ--a most
high and holy calling--sin overtook him and rather than fulfilling his
calling as an Apostle, he became an adversary. At the Last Supper, Jesus
said, "Ye are not all clean" (John 13:11), because He was aware of how far
Judas had transgressed. Though He washed their feet, He knew their hearts
and He saw filth in the heart of Judas. It would not wash away. The
traitorous character of Judas was not discernable to the other Apostles, but
Jesus knew he would betray Him.

Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders
of the people, unto the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas,
and consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him.
Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went unto the chief
priests, and said unto them, What will ye give me, and I will deliver him
unto you? And they covenanted with him for thirty pieces of silver. And from
that time he sought opportunity to betray him. (Matt. 26:3-4, 14-16)

The Scribes and Pharisees were eager to take advantage of the offer by
Judas. "And when they heard it, they were glad, and promised to give him
money." (Mark 14:11) If greed for money was the reason that Judas acted the
traitor in the betrayal, it was a most paltry sum, for Judas sold Christ for
the price of a slave. (Ex. 21:32) So, "they took the thirty pieces of
silver, the price of him that was valued." (Matt. 27:9) In our money, this
is about $18.00.

Judas was aptly described by Christ as "a devil" (John 6:70), and also a
"son of perdition" (John 17:12). These two names were the worst possible
titles that Christ could put upon a mortal being.

The Gospel writers and the apostles also referred to him as, "Judas
Iscariot, which also was the traitor...." (Luke 6:16) The appellation was
earned and well attached to Judas, for it was his most famous act. Betrayal
or traitorous acts are all solemn and saddening. Those who forsake or turn
against their family leave broken hearts; those who betray the confidence of
an organization prove to be unworthy of trust by any other company; and he
that betrays or acts as traitor to his country is often worthy of death. But
the sin of betrayal to God is more serious, more terrible and worse in the
final judgment than man has conceived of.

Within the character of Judas we have an Apostle, or witness, of Jesus
Christ. Also within this person is a thief, a traitor, a liar, a betrayer
and a man who initiated the death of the Savior. However, the fact that he
had been a thief and worse during his ministry did not negate his work or
testimony of Christ. His early ministry was performed with good intention,
in faith and with certain testimony. His acts of sin were done in the hour
of temptation. His failure as an Apostle did not destroy his work of the
ministry--it only destroyed himself.

Oliver Cowdery, Martin Harris and David Whitmer also had their personal
weaknesses, but they never turned traitor to their testimony, nor did they
ever deny or betray Christ.

[28] CONCLUSION

To reiterate then, McKay makes this observation concerning the three
witnesses to the Book of Mormon:

The Mormon Church claims that these three men were sober, steady
individuals who would not lie, who could not be easily fooled, and whose
word was reliable. The facts are otherwise. Rather than being unimpeachable,
these witnesses and their testimony are worthless in determining the truth
about the Book of Mormon.

Yet, on the other hand, McKay would want you to believe that John the
Baptist and Simon Peter were "sober, steady individuals who would not lie,
who could not be easily fooled, and whose word was reliable." The facts are
otherwise. Using the same criteria, these witnesses and their testimony,
(according to McKay's reasoning) are worthless in determining the truth
about Christ and the Bible.

McKay, who was once a Mormon himself, summarizes his article by saying:

Thus we see that the testimony of Three Witnesses was signed by men who
were unreliable, who denied their testimony, and who were condemned by those
they aided. To hold these three men and their testimony up to the world as
proof that the Book of Mormon is of God is analogous to letting one
rattlesnake vouch for another. They cannot be trusted.

According to the assumptions made by Robert McKay, one would probably
consider the witnesses of Christ to be "unreliable, who denied their
testimony, and who were condemned by those they aided." Shall we also say
that "to hold these three men and their testimony up to the world as proof"
that the Bible is of God, would be "analogous to letting one rattlesnake
vouch for another?"

If Cowdery, Harris and Whitmer, who once claimed membership in the L.D.S.
Church, but left it and thus became "unreliable and who denied their
testimony," were to be likened to rattlesnakes, then let us include all the
other Mormon apostates who became anti-Mormon writers. But since there are
so many variations and kinds of Mormon apostates, they can't all be
classified as rattlesnakes--we should brand them as Cobras, Cottonmouths,
Diamondbacks and Sidewinders!

But these three witnesses of Christ--John, Peter and Judas--also displayed
weaknesses and faults in their characters, just as did Oliver, Martin and
David.

Consider these three witnesses of Christ--John died with a message of doubt
about the identity of Christ. Peter denied knowing Jesus just before His
crucifixion, and Judas died right after betraying Christ.

[29] On the other hand, consider the three witnesses of the Book of
Mormon--all three on their deathbed bore testimony to their witness of the
Book of Mormon plates and the angel who showed them.

But as the personal weaknesses of the witnesses of Christ did not
invalidate their testimony of Christ, neither did the personal weaknesses of
the witnesses of the Book of Mormon invalidate their testimony of the Book
of Mormon.

If men "cannot be trusted" who lived about two hundred years ago because
they exhibited weaknesses and failings, then men who lived 2000 years ago
"cannot be trusted" because they displayed similar weaknesses.

If McKay scorns the testimony of the witnesses of the Book of Mormon
because of frailties in their character, he should consider in the same
light these other three witnesses of Christ and their frailties. On this
basis, how could Robert McKay ever swallow the story of Christianity?

It seems so strange to me that the anti-Mormons can be so zealous in
discovering any discrepancy, error or human weakness in the background of
the Latter-day Saints, yet they can gloss over the same things in the Bible!
Is this an occasion where they see a sliver in another's eye, but miss the
beam in their own?

But, did the testimony of these witnesses of the Book of Mormon as well as
the witnesses of Christ become invalid because of personal failings?
Absolutely not! God has no one but imperfect beings to work with, and His
mercy extends beyond the meager limits so often set by mortal men. Too often
men misjudge the things of God by their condemnation of the men who bear
that message. Oliver Cowdery perhaps said it best:

But in reviewing the lives and acts of men in past generations, whenever
we find a righteous man among them, there always were excuses for not giving
heed or credence to his testimony. The people could see his imperfections;
or, if no imperfections, supposed ones, and were always ready to frame an
excuse upon that for not believing. No matter how pure the principles, nor
how precious the teachings--an excuse was wanted, and an excuse was had.

One of two reasons may be assigned as the cause why the messengers of
truth have been rejected--perhaps both. The multitude saw their
imperfections, or supposed ones, and from that framed an excuse for
rejecting them; or else in consequence of the corruption of their own
hearts, when reproved, were not willing to repent but sought to make a man
an offender for a word, or for wearing camels' hair, eating locusts,
drinking wine, or showing friendship to publicans and sinners!
When looking over the sacred scriptures, we seem to forget that they were
given through men of imperfections and subject to passions. It is a general
belief that the ancient prophets were [30] perfect--that no stain or blemish
ever appeared upon their characters while on earth, to be brought forward by
the opposer as an excuse for not believing. And that even our Saviour,
the great shepherd of Israel, was mocked and derided, and placed on a
parallel with the prince of devils; and the prophets and apostles, though at
this day looked upon as perfect as perfection, were considered the basest of
the human family by those among whom they lived. (Letters by Oliver Cowdery
to W. W. Phelps, pp. 12-14)

Good men, wayward men, and bad men all may give a true testimony. On one
occasion even the devils bore testimony of Jesus. When Jesus came into the
country of the Gergesenes, he met "two possessed with devils", who spoke to
him and cried, "What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God?," and
asked to be cast into a herd of swine. (Matt. 8:28-31)

If good men, bad men, and devils alike confess the truth, we should be
willing to acknowledge it. John, Peter, Judas, Oliver, Martin and David all
bore valid testimonies, even though they displayed the frailties of mortal
men. The Mormons, more than anyone else, know the honor and calling of John
the Baptist even after his death. Oliver Cowdery's last breath of life was a
testament of seeing John the Baptist in glory. Peter's burst of denial was
not said in sincerity but in grief. As evidence that the Lord made no issue
of it, Peter was the first man to witness the resurrection of Christ. Judas
was a witness of the miracles of Christ and stood by Him during most of His
ministry, but he became an apostate who opposed what he once professed as
true. Let his life be a warning to those who become traitors to their faith.
How many Latter-day Saints have become traitors to their faith, acting as
Judas by writing and preaching against Mormonism and selling their betrayal
for pieces of silver?

Christians should be engaged in doing good, promoting the doctrines of
Christ, and administering to the needs of others. The real Gospel of Christ
is not negative, as anti-Mormon literature demonstrates, but its message
aims high, exalts men, and proclaims freedom and truth.

One Mormon beautifully describes true Christianity and Priesthood:

This, then, is true priesthood--to be images of the living God, exhibiting
in our characteristics His brightness and His strength; to be girt and
endowed with the purity of His nature; to be insullied in heart and mind; to
stand by the strength of redeeming, saving qualities; to bless, and bless,
and bless again, notwithstanding ingratitude in some--building, sustaining,
and protecting all the time; to fight all spirits of division and all
principles of death; to help the weak, the downtrodden, and the helpless,
till helping becomes our natural food, working on all principles that yield
nourishment, support, and strength--till our very presence is as the sun,
cheering and blessing all. So shall God increase within us, refreshing our
own spirits, and watering all around, and the characteristics of the Holy
Priesthood will grow out from us like the branches of a fruitful tree that
yield shelter, shield, and fruit. (Mill. Star 20:641-644)

[31] We are grateful to the men who were witnesses of Christ and those who
were witnesses to the Book of Mormon. Understanding both their frailties and
testimony helps us overcome our own weaknesses and failings. The tolerant
mercy we extend to others, we hope the Lord will extend to us. It is a great
consolation to know the mercy and kindness of God towards weak fallible
mortals. And how loving He is to continue to work with and for us in spite
of so many failings. In that hope and faith we anticipate the day when we
shall see and hear for ourselves the testimony of many others besides those
"Three Witnesses" in the Kingdom of God.

--
Listen to Zion Redemption's Radio hosted by Art Bulla and Aaron Kim on
Sunday from 3 to 4 (pst). Just go to
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/hostpage.aspx?host_id=3513 All are invited to
call in live, email at art@artbulla.com, or by MSM artbulla@hotmail.com.
This show is dedicated to the redemption of Zion, revelations of Jesus
Christ, authority, Priesthood, Kingdom of God, doctrine discussed pertaining
to the salvation of Ephraim and Manasseh. During non broadcast hours you can
also listen to archived shows.

My Testimony of a Living Prophet:
http://www.artbulla.com/zion/Aaron's%20Page.html

Aaron Kim

www.artbulla.com

 

[Phil]

Aaron Kim wrote:
> THE THREE WITNESSES
>
> A Response to the Utah Evangel
>
> by
> Ogden Kraut
>
> Ever since the restoration of the Gospel of Christ and the re-establishment
> of His Church, there have been a multitude of anti-Mormon writers pouring
> out their venom against it. Most of this opposition comes from apostate
> Mormons. That is understandable because Christ also suffered most from
> apostates. Nevertheless, there should be some response made in vindication.
> Oliver Cowdery said it best:
>
blah blah blah ...
>

Yawn,
and it's no wonder religion is the ultimate tool of mental child abuse
and indoctrination. Your mommie and daddie must have really hated you to
cram all that trash into your minuscule brain.

How did they ever do that?

--
"Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool."

 

[john p]

On Sep 14, 2:55 pm, Phil <pilot...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Aaron Kim wrote:
> > THE THREE WITNESSES
>
> > A Response to the Utah Evangel
>
> > by
> > Ogden Kraut
>
> > Ever since the restoration of the Gospel of Christ and the re-establishment
> > of His Church, there have been a multitude of anti-Mormon writers pouring
> > out their venom against it. Most of this opposition comes from apostate
> > Mormons. That is understandable because Christ also suffered most from
> > apostates. Nevertheless, there should be some response made in vindication.
> > Oliver Cowdery said it best:
>
> blah blah blah ...
>
> Yawn,
> and it's no wonder religion is the ultimate tool of mental child abuse
> and indoctrination. Your mommie and daddie must have really hated you to
> cram all that trash into your minuscule brain.
>
> How did they ever do that?
>
> --
> "Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool."
> -- Voltaire


Don't speak falsehoods. It was his boyfriend --a pretend prophet --
who did the cramming.

 

[Aaron Kim]

"Phil" <pilot22a@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:13em4g359alie30@corp.supernews.com...
> Aaron Kim wrote:
>> THE THREE WITNESSES
>>
>> A Response to the Utah Evangel
>>
>> by
>> Ogden Kraut
>>
>> Ever since the restoration of the Gospel of Christ and the
>> re-establishment
>> of His Church, there have been a multitude of anti-Mormon writers pouring
>> out their venom against it. Most of this opposition comes from apostate
>> Mormons. That is understandable because Christ also suffered most from
>> apostates. Nevertheless, there should be some response made in
>> vindication.
>> Oliver Cowdery said it best:
>>
> blah blah blah ...
>>
>
> Yawn,
> and it's no wonder religion is the ultimate tool of mental child abuse and
> indoctrination. Your mommie and daddie must have really hated you to cram
> all that trash into your minuscule brain.
>
> How did they ever do that?

My parents aren't religious at all. I was led by the Lord by the Holy Spirit
that the Book of Mormon is true a few years ago. Like Paul said no man knows
the things of man but by the spirit of man and no one knows the things of
God but by the Spirit of God.

> "Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool."
>

 

[checker@flapper.com]

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 22:25:27 -0700, "Aaron Kim" <aaron@artbulla.com>
wrote:

>
>
>"Phil" <pilot22a@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:13em4g359alie30@corp.supernews.com...
>> Aaron Kim wrote:
>>> THE THREE WITNESSES
>>>
>>> A Response to the Utah Evangel
>>>
>>> by
>>> Ogden Kraut
>>>
>>> Ever since the restoration of the Gospel of Christ and the
>>> re-establishment
>>> of His Church, there have been a multitude of anti-Mormon writers pouring
>>> out their venom against it. Most of this opposition comes from apostate
>>> Mormons. That is understandable because Christ also suffered most from
>>> apostates. Nevertheless, there should be some response made in
>>> vindication.
>>> Oliver Cowdery said it best:
>>>
>> blah blah blah ...
>>>
>>
>> Yawn,
>> and it's no wonder religion is the ultimate tool of mental child abuse and
>> indoctrination. Your mommie and daddie must have really hated you to cram
>> all that trash into your minuscule brain.
>>
>> How did they ever do that?
>
>My parents aren't religious at all. I was led by the Lord by the Holy Spirit
>that the Book of Mormon is true a few years ago.

At least you were led by SOME STRANGE SPIRIT, although not by the
Lord.

God never contradicts Himself (lies). Your god seems to do that a
lot.
>Like Paul said no man knows
>the things of man but by the spirit of man and no one knows the things of
>God but by the Spirit of God.

Paul also said:

1 Thess 5:19-23

19 Do not quench the Spirit. 20 Do not despise prophecies. 21 Test all
things; hold fast what is good. 22 Abstain from every form of evil.


NKJV

He told us that SCRIPTURE was how we do that:

2 Tim 3:16-17

16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in
righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly
equipped for every good work.
NKJV

If you TEST the so-called "proof-test" that smitty gave in his bom,
the "pray to see if it is true" test. . .you find the "test" only
works some of the time, about 50%.

IF you TEST the bom by the BIBLE (that we already KNOW to be
SCRIPTURE), the bom fails misurably, the d&c fails even worse, and the
worst of smitty's fiction, the pgp (supposedly "translated from a
common funeral papirus, proven to be a sham) is the worst failure of
all!

But some (like YOU) can be led to believe anything at all!
Like PT Barnum once said, "There's a sucker born every minute!"
>
>> "Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool."
>>