The Plates Don't Make Sense to Me

[_moksha]

First-hand information is often the best. Best to place an emphasis on the story than worry about the story's structure as told through its McGuffin.

In this case the description of the McGuffin must be consistent with claims about the translation process.

Maybe, but we need to consider that the plates (the McGuffin) were either composed of some sort of impure gold alloy (tumbaga?) or else were composed of pure Mormonium.

The story itself could always attribute a lack of internal consistency to Mormon being an unreliable narrator.

[_Dr Exiled]

I like blaming the imaginary for problems that occur in real life. I like to imagine some unnamed person that is so vile and full of contempt and blame this person for whatever goes wrong. I know our apologist friends agree with me on this one, for right now as we discuss the plates issue, Dr. Midgely is imagining some loser who doesn't travel and hasn't read the classics and probably digs ditches somewhere, agreeing that the plates were not real and internally don't make sense. Of course, he says, this ditch digger is incapable of believing anything worthy like Joseph Smith's divine mission or sacred things. What a loser! He probably doesn't contribute to the church, sneered Dr. Midge, and so of course doesn't believe our most holy witnesses that the plates were real and necessary.

[_Gadianton]

I like blaming the imaginary for problems that occur in real life. I like to imagine some unnamed person that is so vile and full of contempt and blame this person for whatever goes wrong. I know our apologist friends agree with me on this one, for right now as we discuss the plates issue, Dr. Midgely is imagining some loser who doesn't travel and hasn't read the classics and probably digs ditches somewhere, agreeing that the plates were not real and internally don't make sense. Of course, he says, this ditch digger is incapable of believing anything worthy like Joseph Smith's divine mission or sacred things. What a loser! He probably doesn't contribute to the church, sneered Dr. Midge, and so of course doesn't believe our most holy witnesses that the plates were real and necessary.

beautifully said.

[_Kishkumen]

I like blaming the imaginary for problems that occur in real life. I like to imagine some unnamed person that is so vile and full of contempt and blame this person for whatever goes wrong. I know our apologist friends agree with me on this one, for right now as we discuss the plates issue, Dr. Midgely is imagining some loser who doesn't travel and hasn't read the classics and probably digs ditches somewhere, agreeing that the plates were not real and internally don't make sense. Of course, he says, this ditch digger is incapable of believing anything worthy like Joseph Smith's divine mission or sacred things. What a loser! He probably doesn't contribute to the church, sneered Dr. Midge, and so of course doesn't believe our most holy witnesses that the plates were real and necessary.

It is a game to play, to be sure. I don’t give a tinker’s damn about it, but it keeps Dr. Midgley occupied.

[_DonBradley]

Kish,

Joseph Smith narrated in his history that when the angel gave him the plates of Mormon on September 22, 1827, the plates were no longer under the angel's guardianship and were now his responsibility until he was finished translating them. So when Joseph left New York on November 1, 1827 to begin dictating his translation of Mormon's writings in Harmony, it was his job to get these plates down to Harmony, not the angel's. He thus reportedly took the plates to Harmony by wagon, in a barrel of beans.

By way of contrast, when Joseph finished with Mormon's abridgment and its postscript in Moroni's writings in Harmony in late May 1829 and headed back to New York to start on the small plates, by all accounts he did not transport Mormon's plates back to New York on the wagon. Rather, he turned them over to the messenger, who carried them to New York. This is why on their wagon ride Joseph, Oliver, and David saw this messenger carrying the plates, and reported he was "going to Cumorah."

Note several converging lines of evidence here:

1) Since these plates were supposed to be Joseph's responsibility until his work with them was complete, it stands to reason that Joseph would have only surrendered those plates to the messenger when his own work with them actually was complete.

2) Joseph delivers the plates to the messenger only after completing Mormon's writings and their postscript by his son--the writings we would expect to find on Mormon's plates, indicating that Joseph was done with Mormon's plates.

3) When we know Joseph has material to translate from these plates (when he is traveling to Harmony to work on them), he has to transport them himself. That the messenger transports the plates back to New York suggests Joseph no longer has material to translate from them.

4) The accounts of the encounter with the old man by the roadside who is identified as the messenger indicate that the messenger was not taking the plates to the Whitmer farm, for further translation work, but, rather, that he is taking them back to Cumorah--meaning that Joseph was done with them!

5) Like Mormon's plates, Joseph himself returns to New York when his work with those plates is done and he is now ready to translate "the small plates of Nephi." Why? Because Joseph understands that he now needs to go acquire that second set of plates, Nephi's small plates.

6) No sources say the small plates are bound with the plates of Mormon. The book itself certainly does not say this. Rather, it says he "put them with" the "remainder of his record," whatever that "remainder" is supposed to be (Words of Mormon 1:6). That the phrase "put them with" is not meant to refer to binding them together into a single volume is indicated by how this phrase is used four verses later: "after Amaleki had delivered up these plates into the hands of king Benjamin, he took them and put them with the other plates, which contained records which had been handed down by the kings"--an obvious reference Nephi's "large plates" (Words of Mormon 1:10). No one understands the small plates and large plates to have been bound together as a single volume, and Mormon's own description of having "searched among the records which had been delivered into my hands, and I found these plates, which contained this small account of the prophets" after having already abridged the large plates would preclude such a reading.


The small plates were thus a separate set of plates from the plates of Mormon, which Joseph had translated down in Harmony and delivered to the angel. This is why Joseph thought he needed to return to New York to get the small plates--they weren't already part of the record he'd used and finished with.

Don

[Guest]

6) No sources say the small plates are bound with the plates of Mormon. The book itself certainly does not say this. Rather, it says he "put them with" the "remainder of his record," whatever that "remainder" is supposed to be (Words of Mormon 1:6). That the phrase "put them with" is not meant to refer to binding them together into a single volume is indicated by how this phrase is used four verses later: "after Amaleki had delivered up these plates into the hands of king Benjamin, he took them and put them with the other plates, which contained records which had been handed down by the kings"--an obvious reference Nephi's "large plates" (Words of Mormon 1:10). No one understands the small plates and large plates to have been bound together as a single volume, and Mormon's own description of having "searched among the records which had been delivered into my hands, and I found these plates, which contained this small account of the prophets" after having already abridged the large plates would preclude such a reading.

Thanks for this, Don. That is an interesting argument. Very nicely done. It seems to me to hinge mostly on the meaning of “put them with,” which you say “is not meant to refer to binding them together,” but then one would have to know exactly what Mormon or Joseph was thinking when he wrote that. “Put them with” could indeed mean just that. Everyone is apt to use the same word or phrase in different senses in the same speech or text. I do it all the time. Since we do not know what “put them with” means in the first case, we can choose your reading, aporia, wild guessing, or a reasonable inference. My reading was that the small plates were bound together with Mormon’s abridgment of the large plates.

"Remainder" would naturally be the remainder of what we see of Mormon’s abridgment. I should think that excluding this logical reading of the phrase “the remainder of my record” simply to say “whatever that is,” as if there is no possibility staring us in the face, is not the best strategy here.

But, yes, you have definitely shown us that this phrase very well might not indicate that the small plates were bundled in with Mormon's abridgment of the large plates, based on a close reading of the rest of the text. If a text can only mean what it appears to say on the surface, and we exclude the normal patterns of human language use, then a very strict logical reading of the text would seem to indicate that the small plates and the plates containing Mormon's abridgment were not bound together. My difficulty with this is that Joseph was dictating his translation of this passage, and dictations is the very kind of situation in which I could imagine Joseph using the same expression in two different senses.

Moreover, when you bind “put them with” and “the remainder of my record” together, the strong suggestion is that the plates were bound together. You have to create uncertainty about the meaning of “remainder” in order to exclude this possibility. But I really don’t know why we would want to do this.

Indeed, if one is like I am, and one thinks that Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon, then it would make sense that he sought to make the seam between the two “documents” as tight as possible, and one way of doing that would be to suggest to the reader that Mormon bound the small plates into his abridgment of the large plates.

In any case, you have made as good an argument that they were not bound together as one could make, and I think that many people who think there were actual ancient Book of Mormon plates will agree with you. That is why your recounting of the history is so vital to your reading. If, on the other hand, you do not think that Joseph had anything more than a prop, which could be described and re-described in any number of ways, then this evolving, ad hoc scenario, would be shaped by the loss of the manuscript and the need to reframe the plates and translation in a way that adjusts to the new situation.

In the latter view, “put them with” and the “the remainder of my record” strongly appear to be Smith’s creative solution of compensating for the loss by adding a small plates infix in Mormon’s abridgment.

[_Dr Moore]

"Put them with" is unclear, I agree. The honest reader can interpret that either way.

Are there not some problems with the account of finding the man walking along the road, such as his name? I forget the details. Also, odd behavior for an angelic messenger walk along the road, with plates, in plain view of so many muggles. What risky behavior.

Don, I am curious how you wrestle with the text of Omni offering clues that point to fabrication, as has been pointed out separately (if memory serves) by Metcalf and Vogel.

[_Kishkumen]

Words of Mormon, Chapter 1

1 And now I, Mormon, being about to deliver up the record which I have been making into the hands of my son Moroni, behold I have witnessed almost all the destruction of my people, the Nephites.

Mormon is about to hand over his record, which he has been making with his own hands, to his son Moroni.

2 And it is many hundred years after the coming of Christ that I deliver these records into the hands of my son; and it supposeth me that he will witness the entire destruction of my people. But may God grant that he may survive them, that he may write somewhat concerning them, and somewhat concerning Christ, that perhaps some day it may profit them.

Mormon is delivering "these records" into the hands of his son. Is he now speaking of the record he has been making plus another record, or even more records? He also expects his son will write something of his own.

3 And now, I speak somewhat concerning that which I have written; for after I had made an abridgment from the plates of Nephi, down to the reign of this king Benjamin, of whom Amaleki spake, I searched among the records which had been delivered into my hands, and I found these plates, which contained this small account of the prophets, from Jacob down to the reign of this king Benjamin, and also many of the words of Nephi.

Mormon made an abridgment of the large plates down to Benjamin, and then he searched among the records that had been handed to him and found the small plates. So, I am thinking now that we must interpret "these records" in verse two as the same library that was delivered to Mormon, plus Mormon's own abridgment of the large plates.

4 And the things which are upon these plates pleasing me, because of the prophecies of the coming of Christ; and my fathers knowing that many of them have been fulfilled; yea, and I also know that as many things as have been prophesied concerning us down to this day have been fulfilled, and as many as go beyond this day must surely come to pass

Mormon likes the content written on the small plates, which included prophecies of Christ, and other prophecies, some of which have been fulfilled and others he assumed would be in the future.

5 Wherefore, I chose these things, to finish my record upon them, which remainder of my record I shall take from the plates of Nephi; and I cannot write the hundredth part of the things of my people.

So, he has chosen "these things" on the small plates to finish his record upon them. The remainder of his record he will abridge (presumably) from the large plates. This is a very confusing passage. These things here would seem to refer to the content of the small plates. Yet his statement that he will finish his record "upon them" might be read as "upon these things (prophecies)" or "upon these plates." I offer the latter possibility because in verse four he talks about "the things which are upon these plates." So, the precise antecedent of the "them" in "upon them" is murky.

He then redefines the "finish[ing] of [his] record" as the "remainder of my record" (i.e., not the first section of abridgment from the large plates), which he will take from the large plates. In an earlier post I opined that "I chose these things to finish my record upon them" might mean that Mormon is choosing prophecies to make them the editorial program for the rest of his abridgment. In other words, now that he knows of the prophecies, he will shape his abridgment in accordance with that knowledge.

Another possible reading, however, is that he is going to finish his record on the small plates forged by Nephi. It is for this reason that he apologizes that he "cannot write the hundredth part of the things of [his] people."

6 But behold, I shall take these plates, which contain these prophesyings and revelations, and put them with the remainder of my record, for they are choice unto me; and I know they will be choice unto my brethren.

Mormon will take the small plates and "put them with the remainder of [his] record." Now new problems crop up, because one would assume that this "remainder" is the same remainder he was just referring to, about which he wrote: "I chose these things, to finish my record upon them." According to Don, if I am reading him correctly, this "putting with" is just some kind of statement on how Mormon is organizing the library of the plates. Because they are worthwhile for religious reasons, he wants to put them with his abridgment in some loose, organizational sense.

Notice that "these plates" always seems to refer to the small plates. The "plates of Nephi" are consistently the large plates.

"These" is a demonstrative being used deictically. Within the context it seems to refer to the thing that he has closest to him (as this and these tends to suggest) as opposed to further away from him (that and those). It is entirely justified by the context here to infer that "these" refers to plates in Mormon's hand, and that when he says he chose "these things" to finish the remainder of his record "upon them" that the overall message is to communicate where he is writing.

Because remember, he is writing this stuff. He is much more likely, in my view, to say "these" about the plates he is actually writing on.

9 And now I, Mormon, proceed to finish out my record, which I take from the plates of Nephi; and I make it according to the knowledge and the understanding which God has given me.

Now Mormon embarks upon finishing his record as he said he was going to do. This record is an abridgment of the large plates. He is making the abridgment according to the inspiration of God. If my understanding of Mormon's use of the demonstrative "these" is correct, then he is writing this abridgment of the large plates on the small plates.

10 Wherefore, it came to pass that after Amaleki had delivered up these plates into the hands of king Benjamin, he took them and put them with the other plates, which contained records which had been handed down by the kings, from generation to generation until the days of king Benjamin.

Here Mormon is telling us that Amaleki had the small plates (these plates), and he delivered to Benjamin. Benjamin then "put them with the other plates," which contained records handed down by the kings (like the large plates and others?). Don interprets this "put them with" as limiting the meaning of the first instance of the phrase in this passage. Because "put them with" has the object of "other plates," it is entirely reasonable, in accordance with Don's interpretation, to suppose that the first object of "put them with" is also another separate set of plates.

Of course, this is not necessarily the case. In the latter case, "put them with" is an action that occurred in the past and represented the organization of plates that already existed. In the prior case, Mormon is predicting that he will take the plates in his hands and put them with the remainder of a record that does not yet exist. Without skipping a beat, Mormon proceeds to go from this plan to "put" the small plates "with the remainder of [his] record" and actually doing it.

He never switched from the plates in his hands (these) to others that will contain his abridgment. That is, unless Words of Mormon was always written on a separate set of plates making up the abridgment. The problem with the latter idea is, he would be narrating his actions as if he is doing them in real time when he had in fact already done them. That is not impossible, of course, but it must count against the idea that Words of Mormon up to verse 9 was on a separate set of plates from the small plates.

I can't say that I don't see other possibilities. Mormon could be using the demonstrative "these" to refer to plates sitting right next to him as he is writing on other plates. Sure. But one thing that is striking about the passage is the imagery of hands and people handing things off to others.

1. deliver up the record . . . into the hands of my son Moroni.

2. I deliver these records into the hands of my son.

3. I searched among the records which had been delivered into my hands, and I found these plates.

10. Amaleki had delivered these plates into the hands of king Benjamin, he took them and put them with other plates.

11. And they were handed down from king Benjamin, from generation to generation, until they have fallen into my hands.

The crucial transition here, in my opinion, takes place in verse three, in which he writes about finding the small plates "these plates" among those that had come into his hands. The implicit image is now one of a person who is holding "these plates" and working with "these plates." "I chose these things to finish my record upon them." In other words, I am now writing this material on "these plates," but the abridgment will drawn from "the plates of Nephi."

It may in fact be the case that when he is talking about "the remainder of my record" in verse six, he is actually referring to the first part of his abridgment on another set of plates. In short, Don could be right, in that putting the plates Mormon is writing on with "the remainder of my record" does not mean binding them together, but it means organizing the small plates, which will include the latter part of his abridgment project, with other plates containing an abridgment he had already completed.

The first plates Joseph had would only be the first installment of Mormon's abridgment?

[_consiglieri]

My understanding is that two-thirds of the plates were sealed, and so we are really dealing only with the top third.

Given the reported dimensions of the plates, together with the necessary thickness of each individual plate, it seems like we are talking about quite a few "sets" of plates to fill the bill.

In other words, once you break down all the different sets of plates described and cram them into the top one third of a the smallish dimensions reported, it would seem difficult to have enough room to accommodate them all.

Or am I off here?

[_consiglieri]

I mean, if the witness descriptions are correct that all the plates are four to six inches in thickness; and we go with the largest of those estimates at six inches; then take off four inches for the sealed two-thirds, we are talking about only two inches of plates left on the top to contain all this information.

Right?