Mormonism Exposed (Hancock)/Chapter 17

The next question that demands our attention is, Were the engravings, or writings, on those p lates, claimed to be shown o Joseph Smith, Egyptian characters? In other words, was the writing on those plates in the Egyptian language? If they were such, it would be evidence in favor of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. On the other hand, if they were not true Egyptian characters but one conclusion could be reached, namely They were a miserable fraud. With the answer to this question Mormonism must either stand or fall. In the discovery of these plates and the inability of the learned to decipher them, Mormons claim to find a fulfillment of a prophecy of Isaiah, chapter 29. There, they claim, is a prophecy of "a voice speaking out of the ground"—of "a sealed book being given to a wise man who acknowledged his inability to read it." This it is claimed found a fulfillment in the taking of those plates out of the ground, and in presenting a copy of those characters to Prof. Anthon, who acknowledged his inability to read them. In answer to all that they have said, or may hereafter say, upon this point it is sufficient to show that their inspiration, in order to make their points in this, has been guilty of unmitigated lying. Mr. Smith, the inspired prophet of Mormonism, regarding the Anthon affair, says: "Some time in this month of February the afore-mentioned Mr. Martin Harris came to our place, got the characters which I had drawn off the plates and started with them to New York. For what took place relative to him and the characters, I refer to his own account of the circumstances, as he related them to me after his return, which was as follows: 'I went to the city of New York and presented the characters, which had been translated, with the translation thereof, to Professor Anthon, a gentleman celebrated for his ​literary attainments. Professor Anthon stated that the translation was correct, more so than any he had before seen translated from the Egyptian. I then showed him those which were not yet translated and he said they were Eygptian, Chaldaic, Assyrian and Arabic, and he said that they were true characters. He gave me a certificate certifying to the people of Palmyra that they were true characters, and that the transalation of such of them as had been translated was also correct. . . . I left him and went to Dr. Mitchell, who sanctioned what Professor Anthon had said respecting both the characters and the translation.'"

Let us remember this testimony of Martin Harris is fully endorsed by the prophet of Mormonism, and is found in one of their inspired books, Pearl of Great Price, Liverpool edition of 1851, p. 45. It is, hence, the testimony of Mormon inspiration. Let us now hear this same inspiration, as it spake through one of their chief apostles, Orson Pratt. In Divine Authenticity, p. 295, Pratt says, "In the year 1841 Professor Anthon wrote a letter to an Episcopal minister, in New Rochelle, Westchester county, near New York, in answer to an inquiry made by the minister in reference to the words and characters said to have been presented to him. Professor Anthon's letter was written with permission to publish, its avowed object being to put a stop to the spread of the fulness of the gospel contained in the Book of Mormon. We here give a short extract from it taken from a periodical entitled, 'The Church Record,' Vol. 1, No. 22: "Many years ago, the precise date I do not recollect, a plain looking country man called upon me with a letter from Dr. Samuel L. Mitchell, requesting me to examine and give my opinion upon a certain paper, marked with various characters, which the Doctor confessed he could not decipher, and which the bearer of the note was very anxious to have explained.

A brief examintion convinced me that it was a mere hoax, and a very clumsy one, too. The characters were arranged in columns, like the Chinese mode of writing, and presented the ​most singular medley that I ever beheld. Greek, Hebrew and all sorts of letters, more or less distorted, either through unskilfulness or from actual design, were intermingled with sundry delineations of half moons, stars and other natural objects, and the whole ended in a rude representation of the Mexican Zodiac."

Pratt accepts this as the true statement of facts, as all other Mormon preachers must do who accept their argument based upon the prophecy of Isaiah. Notwithstanding that in so doing they admit that Smith and Harris positively lied. Smith and Harris positively testify that Anthon was able to read the characters, and to decide as to their genuineness, and hence, as to the correctness of Smith's translation. They further testify that Harris, having obtained the testimony of Prof. Anthon as to the genuineness of those characters, and the correctness of Smith's translation, he went to Dr. Mitchell, who endorsed all that Anthon said. Thus stating, positively, that Anthon and Mitchell, both could read and translate the characters. If they had not been able to read and translate those characters they would not have been competent to decide as to the correctness of Smith's translation of them.

Bear this in mind, then hear the following from Orson Pratt. "After obtaining the Book of Mormon through the ministry of the angel 'out of the 'ground,' Mr. Smith transcribed some of the original characters upon paper and sent them by the hands of Martin Harris, a farmer, to the city of New York, where they were presented to Professor Anthon, a man deeply learned in both ancient and modern languages. Mr. Harris very anxiously requested him to read it, but he replied that he could not." It can now be seen that somebody has lied. We leave it for Mormons to say who it was. If they say that Smith and Harris lied, they condemn Smith as a lying prophet and as a consequence, an imposter. If they say Smith told the truth, they condemn their apostles and elders from Dan to Beersheba. They can take either horn of the dilemma they choose. A plate ​of these characters was recently sent to a number of Oriental scholars, and professional judgment was asked with regard to their genuineness. In answer to such request Chas. H. S. Davis, M. D. Ph. D., of Meriden, Conn., author of "Ancient Egypt in the light of Recent Discoveries," and a member of the American Oriental Society, American Philological Society, Society of Biblical Archaeology of London, Royal Archaeological Institute of Great Britian and Ireland, etc., Said: "I am familiar with Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyrian and Arabic, and have considerable acquaintance with all of the Oriental languages, and I can positively assert that there is not a letter to be found in the fac-simile submitted that can be found in the alphabet of any Oriental language, particularly those you refer to—namely, Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyrian and Arabic. A careful study of the fac-simile shows that they are characters put down at random by an ignorant person—with no resemblance to anything, not even shorthand."

President James B. Angell, of the University of Michigan, at Ann Arbor, said, "I have submitted your letter and enclosure to our Professor of Oriental languages, who is more familiar with the subject raised by your questions than I am. He is a man of large learning in Semitic languages and archaeology. The substance of what he has to say is: The document which you enclose raises a moral rather than a linguistic problem. A few letters or signs are noticeable which correspond more or less closely to the Aramaic, sometimes called Chaldee language; for example, s, h, g, t, l, b, n. There are no Assyrian characters in it; and the impression made is that the document is fraudulent."

Dr. Charles E. Moldenke, of New York, of whom Dr. Davis says, "He is probably the best Egyptian scholar in the country," writing from Jerusalem said: "I believe the plates of the Book of Mormon to be a fraud. In the first place it is impossible to find in any old inscription, Egyptian, Arabic, Chaldee and Assyrian characters mixed together. The simple idea of finding ​Egyptian and Arabic side be side is ridiculous and impossible." Doctrine and Doomas. These testimonies represent the scholarship of the world. They establish one fact: The Mormon plates were a fraud. There was not an Egyptian character on them.

The Old Testament, it is claimed, was written in Hebrew. Suppose that the testimony of scholars was unanimous that there was not a Hebrew character in the manuscripts of which it was claimed to be a translation. If such was the case it would be the unanimous decision, among the intelligent, that the whole thing was a fraud. In that case no intelligent, conscientious person would want to appear before the public in its defense.

It is claimed that the New Testament was written in Greek. Suppose, however, that the unanimous decision of scholars was that there was not a Greek letter in the manuscripts of which it was said to be a translation. In that event no intelligent, conscientious man would want to appear before the public in order to defend its claims as a revelation from God. If it was as we have supposed with regard to the Bible he who would undertake its defence would do so under circumstances that would insure his defeat in the judgment of all intelligent people. Under just such disadvantages all must labor who undertake to defend the claims of the Book of Mormon. The fact that people accept and undertake the defense of that book is a demonstration of the gullibility of the human mind in matters religious.