Mike Reed Drops Bomb on Metal Plates

[_Kishkumen]

I'm as much an amateur when it comes to Mormon history as Mike or "George Miller" is, although they are much more prolific than myself.

Sorry for being a jerk, Nevo.

[Guest]

As for me, I think Mike Reed did solid historical research, and he deserves kudos for it.

Is this just a hunch or have you read Mike's paper?

I read an early draft of Mike's paper and it was stellar research. Mike even identified books known to be owned by Joseph Smith which discuss writing on metal plates. I know I have personally in my more apologetic days been guilty of saying in effect, "recent research of antiquity shows that the ancients wrote on metal plates, how could Joseph Smith have known this?" Having personally made, in light of Mike's findings, such a gaff in the past made Mike's research all the more compelling to me personally.

[Guest]

I expect Mike did find lots of pre-1830 references to ancient writing on metal plates since numerous people before 1830 had read the Bible. I don't find that particularly interesting or significant, but I guess some do.

Which makes it relevant to whether Joseph would have believed that ancients wrote texts on metal plates. Since there are numerous texts suggesting it, and as you have brought up the Bible, which Joseph was very familiar with, itself suggests it as well, it becomes probable that Joesph thought that the ancients did write on metal plates.

In my view, the important question isn't whether people ever wrote on metal in antiquity (they did), but whether they ever committed lengthy texts to gold or bronze plates comparable to what we find in the Book of Mormon. The Brass Plates, for example, are said to have contained the five books of Moses, a history of the Jewish people down to the reign of Zedekiah, the writings of Israelite prophets—including some that don't appear in the Bible—and a genealogy of Lehi's ancestors going back to Jacob. This does indeed seem an implausibly long text to write on metal plates.

You have hit on one of the important issues here. While you say it is not implausible, I would think it to be very implausible to write that much text onto metal plates. We do not see any examples of this, and inscribing on metal plates is rare and contain so little text that might make up a few sentences or a paragraph or two. This is why paper type material was used for more lengthy texts. Easier material to make and write onto, and if properly stored can last for a long time. It would also be easier to create copies of the text and paper takes up much less space and especially weight.

I seriously doubt if one were to actually put that much information onto the Brass plates that one or two people would even be able to carry the resultant plates. Same problem would apply to other metal plates. The Gold plates would need to hold over ~1500 pages of English text. I am not sure we could find a linguist who thinks you could do that in any language.

[_Kishkumen]

Which makes it relevant to whether Joseph would have believed that ancients wrote texts on metal plates. Since there are numerous texts suggesting it, and as you have brought up the Bible, which Joseph was very familiar with, itself suggests it as well, it becomes probable that Joesph thought that the ancients did write on metal plates.

Another bulls-eye for Joseph Smith! ;-)

[_Nevo]

Sorry for being a jerk, Nevo.

No worries, my friend.

[_karl61]

Can someone give me the reference for metal plates in the Bible. I tried to google it but hit this instead.

http://www.jefflindsay.com/bme10.shtml

[_Kishkumen]

I read an early draft of Mike's paper and it was stellar research. Mike even identified books known to be owned by Joseph Smith which discuss writing on metal plates. I know I have personally in my more apologetic days been guilty of saying in effect, "recent research of antiquity shows that the ancients wrote on metal plates, how could Joseph Smith have known this?" Having personally made, in light of Mike's findings, such a gaff in the past made Mike's research all the more compelling to me personally.

Thanks for the informed input, George.

[_Doctor Scratch]

I have only one published paper on LDS topics. You can find the reference here. I freely admit that the paper isn't very good. I was a Bushman summer fellow before they "raised the bar" ;) But Scratch will be pleased to know that no less a figure than the "dark lord" himself—John W. Welch—criticized it when I presented it at the symposium.

Hi there, Nevo.

Actually, the phrase Bagley used to describe Welch was "dark, menacing presence." And that's a real bummer that he criticized your work. Hopefully he was nicer to you than Gee apparently was with Mike Reed.

[_George Miller]

I read an early draft of Mike's paper and it was stellar research. Mike even identified books known to be owned by Joseph Smith which discuss writing on metal plates. I know I have personally in my more apologetic days been guilty of saying in effect, "recent research of antiquity shows that the ancients wrote on metal plates, how could Joseph Smith have known this?" Having personally made, in light of Mike's findings, such a gaff in the past made Mike's research all the more compelling to me personally.

Thanks for the informed input, George.

No problem Kish. :-)

[_Doctor Scratch]

Wow, Kishkumen. I see that Dr. Peterson is insisting on having the last word. He was really laying it on thick in his last couple of posts. And it's quite clear what he's up to. He began by using gross distortion and hyperbole and now that he feels confident that he's duped the more gullible TBMs into thinking that the reports were somehow inaccurate, he's now circled back around to portray you as someone with an axe to grind. Quite a performance.

All that said, I think he's most upset at the notion that an preemptive "attack" was actually coordinated by some of these Maxwell Institute apologists. Yes: the "whispering" does seem somewhat suspicious. Also, the fact that so many of the more vicious Mopologists were gathered there in one room is noteworthy. Finally, I seem to recall Jack Welch being somewhat harsh in his criticism of Mike's early work on this project. (Didn't M. Reed mention something along those lines in the Celestial Forum?) I halfway wonder if Welch ordered these apologists to go in and rattle Mike Reed. And based on Will Bagley's description of Welch, I think you can chalk up their failure to produce "refuting" documentation to the fact that--per Bagley--they would have had to go and get permission to do so from Welch.