Professor Riley, with some other anti-"Mormon" writers, suggests the possibility of collective hypnotization in the case of the Eight as well as in that of the Three Witnesses: and hypnotization produced both visual and sense illusion; but it is only a suggestion. While maintaining, with the utmost confidence the mental mirage theory, induced by hypnotic suggestion, as an adequate accounting for the testimony of the Three Witnesses, he can only suggest it as a possible solution of the testimony of the Eight Witnesses, and inclines rather to the theory of "pure fabrication." "It is a document," he remarks, "due to the affidavit habit."[[26]]
As for the rest of the anti-"Mormon" critics on this point, they adopt the pure fabrication theory, or admit that the Prophet Joseph had in his possession some kind of plates which he either manufactured or accidentally discovered in his alleged searching after hidden treasures for some of his employers, and which he really exhibited to the Eight Witnesses. But why have the "pure fabrication" theory to account for the testimony of the Eight Witnesses, and the "mental hallucination" theory to account for the testimony of the Three? If the testimony of the Eight is pure fabrication is not the testimony of the Three pure fabrication also? Or, at least, is it not most likely to be so? For if conscious fraud, and pure fabrication lurks anywhere in Joseph Smith's and the Eleven Witnesses' account of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, would it not exist throughout the whole proceeding? Professor Turner, already twice quoted, in admitting that the Prophet had in his possession some sort of plates, which he showed the Eight Witnesses, says that he is anxious to make the admission "in order to keep up the just and charitable equilibrium between the knaves and fools in 'Mormonism' and the world at large. Three to Eight is at once a happy and reasonable proportion. We will not disturb it. It is gratifying to human philanthropy to be able to account for all the facts in the case by this charitable solution." This sarcasm, however, is not a "solution;" nor is it refutation of the testimony of the Witnesses; nor is it argument; nor anything but the fuming of a small mind; yet it is the only "reason" I have ever heard advanced for adopting the hallucination theory in the case of the Three Witnesses, and either the pure fabrication or deception theory in the case of the Eight Witnesses.
The testimony of the Three and the Eight Witnesses, respectively, stands or falls together. If the pure fabrication theory is adopted to explain away the testimony of the Eight Witnesses, there is no reason why it should not be adopted to explain away the testimony of the Three. But every circumstance connected with the testimony of all these Witnesses, as we have seen, cries out against the theory of "pure fabrication." It is in recognition of the evident honesty of the Three Witnesses that the theory of mental hallucination is invented to account for their testimony; as it is also the evident honesty of the Eight Witnesses that leads to the admission by many anti-"Mormon" writers that Joseph Smith must have had some kind of plates which he exhibited to the Eight Witnesses, though he may not have obtained them through supernatural means.
The theory of pure fabrication of the testimony of the Witnesses is absolutely overwhelmed by the evidence of their honesty.
The hallucination theory breaks down under the force of the matter-of-fact testimony of the Eight Witnesses, from which all possible elements of hallucination are absent.
The manifestation of the divine power, through which the Three Witnesses received their testimony, destroys the theory of deception alleged to have been practiced by the Prophet on the credulity of the Eight Witnesses by exhibiting plates either manufactured by himself or accidentally discovered.
Such, then, is the force of this direct testimony of the Eleven Witnesses to the truth of the Book of Mormon—the testimony of the Three and the Eight when considered together. It is so palpably true that it cannot be resolved into illusion or mistake. It is so evidently honest that it cannot be resolved into pure fabrication. It is of such a nature that it could not possibly have been the result of deception wrought by the cunning of Joseph Smith. There remains after these but one other theory: "The Witnesses were honest." They saw and heard and handled what they say they saw, and heard, and handled. Their testimony stands not only unimpeached, but unimpeachable.
Footnotes
[1]. Renan, The Apostles, p. 67 and note 46.
[2]. Renan, Life of Jesus, introduction, p. 14; also New Witnesses, vol. I, chapter 1.