Talk:Latter Day Saint movement and engraved metal plates

Korea
Moderately sized metal books have been discovered in Korea.

http://www.klinebooks.com/kline/images/items/32139_2.jpg http://www.sabaidesignsgallery.com/images/product_images/popup_images/576_0.jpg http://www.cha.go.kr/unisearch/imagefiles/national_treasure/a0123010035002.jpg

Mormography (talk) 19:06, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Strangites as "Mormons"
In actuality, Strangites don't seem to have a large problem with being referred to as "Mormons," nor their religion as "Mormonism" (see Wingfield Watson's Prophetic Controversy pamphlets, for instance), so long as those doing so are careful to distinguish them from the Utah LDS church. That said, I think this move was an excellent one, and I heartily support it. - Ecjmartin (talk) 22:55, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Latter Day Saint movement and engraved metal plates. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090326185942/http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=17741 to http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=17741

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:25, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Nibley Strawman
On the subject of Mormonism and engraved metal plates, apologist frequently repeat a Hugh Nibley strawman that goes like this: A common attack in Joseph Smith's day was ancient cultures never wrote on metal. The truth is no critic ever argued ancients did not etch or engrave on metal the same way ancients did with stone.

The strawman is most often defended with two quotes, one from LaRoy Sunderland and one from Rev. Lamb. When both quotes are read in entirety and in context, the reading that no ancient wrote on metal is clearly seen to be deceitful spin, textbook strawman. When apologist repeat the Sunderland quote, they deliberately leave Sunderland's quotation marks around 'written on' off.

Sunderland Quote: https://bcgmaxwell.wordpress.com/tag/zions-watchman/

"These plates, the book of Mormon says, were “written on.” One writer says of another p. 149: “I saw the last which he wrote, that he wrote it with his own hand.” How could brass be written on?"

In the actual quote Sunderland is questioning brass specifically, not metal, hence he puts quotation marks around written on. Sunderland is clearly pointing out that shouldn't the word be engraved upon the brass. He is trying to understand what is even meant by writing upon with a single hand like writing on paper or parchment. Recall the Kinderhook brass plates used acid etching. Even apologist ask questions like this! In asking this, most apologist change brass into bronze! As for the golden plates (which may or may not be similar to the brass plates) even apologist asked about weight and softness of gold and therefore come up with tumbaga, which has its problems also. These questions were not common knowledge in 1830, but are today. What Sunderland and Lamb were presenting in their day was not common, but today is, the opposite of what Nibley argued.

Rev. Lamb quote: "But after a very careful study of the book, a conscientious and painstaking examination of all the evidence he has been able to gather both for and against it, the author of these pages has been forced to reject every one of the above claims. He is compelled to believe that no such people as are described in the Book of Mormon ever lived upon this continent; that no such records were ever engraved upon golden plates, or any other plates, in the early ages; that no such men as Mormon or Moroni or any other of the prophets or kings or wise men mentioned in the book, ever existed in this country; that Jesus Christ never appeared upon this continent in person, or had a people here before its discovery by Columbus. In short, that no such civilization, Christian or otherwise, as is described in the Book of Mormon had an existence upon either North or South America.

With the Lamb quote, Lamb is writing in the context of talking about Moroni, Mormon, and Nephite people Lamb writes "no such records" referring specifically to the Book of Mormon peoples. The deceitful strawman then turns "no such records" to falsely mean any metal writing.

One apologist responds “the earliest Hebrew writing happens to be a couple verses of scripture written on silver metal from Nephi's day (right, it's not the whole canon on metal plates, not even a whole book, just a couple of silver amulets with a verse or two)“

If that were proof metal bibles Torah thru Isaiah were wlll know in 600 BC, then missionary plaques would be evidence that today we keep detailed records on chunks of wood with plastic engravings attached. The apologist admit n such evidence of metal bibles have been found, but defend that economic value of the metals caused them to be plundered. The discovery of other cultures much smaller examples of metal texts contradicts this assertion, indicating one expects copyies to be discovered some place.

The subject is what was common knowledge in 1830 and what is now less crazy and absurd today. Sunderland and Lamb are vindicated, not Nibley. What Sunderland and Lamb attempted to educated people on is common knowledge today, but was not in 1830.

Joseph Smith was and still is very much mocked today for many things by scholars and the common person alike. Though modern scholars are much more polite in how they go about saying something is nonsense, nearly all the BoM assertions are considered false and the falseness is accepted as settled science by the common person. In the 19th century, theories like pre-Columbian wandering Israelites or Atlanteans in the Americas were popular, books stating so sold well, and politicians and like openly professed belief in such theories. Today few consider such theories more than historical or science fiction.

Because of the cognitive pain it would cause them, without data apologist deny this stark shift in public awareness. Motivated by the need for psychological denial, they parrot Nibley's efforts to manufacture a idea that in 1830 the idea of ancients etching on metal, the way the Kinderhook and Strangite plates were etched on in Joseph Smith's day, was crazy.

To manufacture this fake conclusion, they take quotes from a contemporary Smith critics which only states ancient Jews are not known to have copied their scriptures (the Torah thru Isaiah) on metal in book format, and then falsely extrapolate these quotes to mean: "Metal writing was considered ridiculous by Joseph Smith's contemporaries." The truth is the actual statements are now considered settled science, the Book of Mormon story is not found inscribed on metal or paper anywhere in the world, no record of the ancient Jews adopting the book format, and no record of the ancient Jews etching the length of their scripture in metal plates, brass, gold, bronze, tumbaga, or otherwise.

The truth is its the apologist whose arugment evolved, not the other way around. Apologist now say plates of brass must have really been plates of bronze and golden plates must have been tumbaga plates. Apologist further concede, even if the Torah and Isaiah was enscribed onto bronze no evidence of this has been found. Apologist explain this lack of evidence due to the plundering of Jerusalem and the valuable metal taken for the metal and not what was written on it.

http://evidencesofmormon.org/evidences/brass-plates-of-laban.aspx

https://www.quora.com/Could-Joseph-Smiths-gold-plates-have-been-made-of-tumbaga-from-ores-mined-in-ancient-America-Are-there-other-ancient-native-American-records-recorded-on-plates-of-tumbaga/answer/Mark-Blanchard-6

Jeff Lindsay famously propagates the strawman. Lindsay states of the Rev Lamb quotes, "He doesn't seem to be hinting that the basic idea of records on metal plates was well known and plausible". In Lindsay's strawman, Lamb does not hint at the obvious -- that ancients could etch or engrave on metal as easily as they could stone -- therefore Lamb must be arguing against any ancients engraving on metal, even in novelty form. This is textbook strawman. Fact is, after 200 years of searching Sunderland and Lamb have been vindicated, especially when the apologists concede brass should have been bronze, gold should have been tumbaga, and ancient metal bibles are not found because the metal must have been plundered for its economic value, something contradicted by the apologist examples of other cultures metal writings being discovered. Bronze, tumbaga, etc were not common knowledge in 1830, but now are.

https://www.jefflindsay.com/bme25.shtml

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.210.47.163 (talk) 21:21, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Original Research?
Some of the passages in the Mormon Studies and metal plates section feel very original research-y, drawing connections to Mandaeanism that aren't supported directly by a source that I find and also citing "evidence" on both sides of the argument that don't directly address the topic of the paragraph. I'm not sure that I'm competent enough to revamp the section and capture the nuance that's currently in that section but I do also think it bears revisiting. BenBeckstromBYU (talk) 23:27, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Brass Plates
Should we put more information about the Brass Plates on this page or Golden Plates? BenBeckstromBYU (talk) 22:26, 16 February 2024 (UTC)