A Challenge to Critics

[Mike Reed]

Mike,

The quote on the breastplate as a masonic prop was fascinating!!!

Thanks Chris.

[Brenda]

Yes it does. It makes it more believable to you, which is why you said, "The only thing that makes sense is that he didn't make it up, OR his whole concoction would have been a whole lot less fantastic."

No, it doesn't make it less or more believable to me. I accept the story either way.

Like I said... some people have a tendency to believe elaborate hoaxes, simply because of the existence of elaborate (unnecessary) details contained therein. Emmanuel Sweedenborg (although I wouldn't necessary identify him as a fraud), for example, gave extremely detailed explanations of the visions he reportedly had. His reports were so extremely detailed about things that were seemingly unnecessary, that the inclusion of such details (to the minds of some) actually added to his credibility.

He didn't construct anything that others could see and hold, which might have exposed him. He didn't provide any real evidence that might have been used against him.

don't think they had a chance to look at the plates very closely.

I just now asked my husband, as he passed through the room, how do you tell the difference between tin and gold? He stopped and looked at me, obviously puzzled. "You look at it." Duh.

Now really, they "hefted" the plates. Not to mention appearance, weight alone says a lot.

I don't agree. See my previous explanation, including my current theory (which I hope to later develop) about Smith's story evolving from his involvement in a quasi-Masonic ritual.

Which is perhaps why he guarded them so closely... and even told people that if he allowed people to see the plates, God would strike him dead. A little suspicious, don't you think?

Of course it's suspicious. I get it. I can see that. So to enable a phony story, NO plates would have been a much better idea.

[Mike Reed]

No, it doesn't make it less or more believable to me. I accept the story either way.

He didn't construct anything that others could see and hold, which might have exposed him. He didn't provide any real evidence that might have been used against him.

I just now asked my husband, as he passed through the room, how do you tell the difference between tin and gold? He stopped and looked at me, obviously puzzled. "You look at it." Duh.

Now really, they "hefted" the plates. Not to mention appearance, weight alone says a lot.

Of course it's suspicious. I get it. I can see that. So to enable a phony story, NO plates would have been a much better idea.

You asked your husband? {chuckle} And now you deny your previous argument--an argument which claimed that the existence of exotic/risky/unnecessary props is evidence that Smith's story wasn't a hoax. I am done conversing with you in this thread. Your unwillingness/inability to have a reasonable discussion about this topic has become apparent.

[Joseph Antley]

But really, could sheets of tin have been easily mistaken for gold plates? What about the engravings? It seems like making these would be an extraordinarily time-consuming task.

[John Williams]

But really, could sheets of tin have been easily mistaken for gold plates? What about the engravings? It seems like making these would be an extraordinarily time-consuming task.

The Kinderhook guys managed it OK, and so did James Strang.

[Joseph Antley]

The Kinderhook guys managed it OK, and so did James Strang.

Were the Kinderhook plates made of tin? Were there as many plates as would have had to have been in Joseph's gold plates? Did the fabricators have metallurgical experience?

Although I can't recall all the details surrounding the Kinderhook plates, I would guess that the circumstances were very, very different.

[Mike Reed]

But really, could sheets of tin have been easily mistaken for gold plates? What about the engravings? It seems like making these would be an extraordinarily time-consuming task.

Hello Joseph. This has turned out to be a very interesting and thought provoking thread. I appreciate you starting it.

Anyhow... as I previously mentioned, my theory is that the "gold" plates, the breastplate, and sword of laban were a masonic props, and not something that Joseph Smith himself would have needed to create (I have yet to fully explore this theory yet, however). I don't argue that the material used was tin, although this is a possibility. As for how the metal was so easily mistaken as gold, I don't think that the witnesses were allowed to have a very close look at them. Besides, the suggestion that the plates were made from a metal other than gold is not an assertion coming exclusively from critics. Apologists have also suggested that the plates were of a different metal (that "gold" was just an adjective describing the color of the plates), in order to more closely fit the demensions and weight that witnesses described. As critics have pointed out long ago, gold is a VERY heavy metal.

[John Williams]

Were the Kinderhook plates made of tin? Were there as many plates as would have had to have been in Joseph's gold plates? Did the fabricators have metallurgical experience?

Although I can't recall all the details surrounding the Kinderhook plates, I would guess that the circumstances were very, very different.

Nope, the Kinderhook plates, IIRC, were of brass. Either way, it wasn't too difficult for the hoaxers or Strang to produce convincing "ancient" plates. The method of producing the Kinderhook plates was pretty simple: scratch ancient-looking characters into wax, brush with acid, and press to the plates. Worked rather well.

[Joseph Antley]

Hello Joseph. This has turned out to be a very interesting and thought provoking thread. I appreciate you starting it.

Anyhow... as I previously mentioned, my theory is that the "gold" plates, the breastplate, and sword of laban were a masonic props, and not something that Joseph Smith himself would have needed to create (I have yet to fully explore this theory yet, however).

I don't quite understand this. What do you mean by Masonic props? How did Joseph obtain them?

I don't argue that the material used was tin, although this is a possibility. As for how the metal was so easily mistaken as gold, I don't think that the witnesses were allowed to have a very close look at them. Besides, the suggestion that the plates were made from a metal other than gold is not an assertion coming exclusively from critics. Apologists have also suggested that the plates were of a different metal (that "gold" was just an adjective describing the color of the plates), in order to more closely fit the demensions and weight that witnesses described. As critics have pointed out long ago, gold is a VERY heavy metal.

Yes, I'm familiar with that, and I agree with it as well. I should've been more clear in my objection, which was, how did Joseph get sheets of tin to resemble "gold plates"? i.e., did Joseph have some gold paint to cover them with?

Nope, the Kinderhook plates, IIRC, were of brass. Either way, it wasn't too difficult for the hoaxers or Strang to produce convincing "ancient" plates. The method of producing the Kinderhook plates was pretty simple: scratch ancient-looking characters into wax, brush with acid, and press to the plates. Worked rather well.

Joseph's gold plates seemed to have been much more complicated than the Kinderhook plates, and, were they fraudulent, would have been created by someone with less metallurgical experience. The creation of gold plates -- Joseph somehow obtaining sheets of metal, making them resemble gold, scratching random symbol after random symbol into them, and then attaching them together somehow--it's remarkable that he could go to the trouble of accomplishing something like that (and risk getting caught), and then refusing to show it even to his closest family members.

[Mike Reed]

I don't quite understand this. What do you mean by Masonic props?

As described in Mark C. Carnes' excellent book, Secret Ritual and Manhood in Victorian America,

"In the third section of the ceremony that repatriated captives were allowed to help build the Temple. Often they were taken to a corner of the lodge and told to dig among boards and stones representing the ruins of the first Temple. They would eventually discover a trapdoor, attached to the keystone of an arch, that concealed a darkened chamber below.... A rope was placed seven times around the body of one initiate; the other two lowered him into the 'vault.' On the first descent he usually found three squares, which the High Priest said were the jewels of 'our ancient Grand Masters--King Solomon; Hiram, King of Tyre; and Hiram Abiff.' On the second descent he discovered a chest 'having on its top several mysterious characters.' Inside were a pot of manna, Aaron's rod, and the 'long lost book of the law'.... Lodge members sang the Royal Arch ode:

Joy, the sacred law is found

Now the temple stands complete

Gladly let us gather round

Where the pontiff holds his seat.

Joy, the secret vault is found,

Full the sunbeam falls within,

Pointing dardly underground,

Tod the treasure we would win.

They have brought it fort to light,

And again it cheers the earth;

All its leaves are shining bright,

Shining in their newest worth.

(p. 44-45)

How did Joseph obtain them?

Perhaps he stole/borrowed them.

[Joseph Antley]

As described in Mark C. Carnes' excellent book, Secret Ritual and Manhood in Victorian America,

"In the third section of the ceremony that repatriated captives were allowed to help build the Temple. Often they were taken to a corner of the lodge and told to dig among boards and stones representing the ruins of the first Temple. They would eventually discover a trapdoor, attached to the keystone of an arch, that concealed a darkened chamber below.... A rope was placed seven times around the body of one initiate; the other two lowered him into the 'vault.' On the first descent he usually found three squares, which the High Priest said were the jewels of 'our ancient Grand Masters--King Solomon; Hiram, King of Tyre; and Hiram Abiff.' On the second descent he discovered a chest 'having on its top several mysterious characters.' Inside were a pot of manna, Aaron's rod, and the 'long lost book of the law'.... Lodge members sang the Royal Arch ode:

Joy, the sacred law is found

Now the temple stands complete

Gladly let us gather round

Where the pontiff holds his seat.

Joy, the secret vault is found,

Full the sunbeam falls within,

Pointing dardly underground,

Tod the treasure we would win.

They have brought it fort to light,

And again it cheers the earth;

All its leaves are shining bright,

Shining in their newest worth.

(p. 44-45)

Perhaps he stole/borrowed them.

This seems like a stretch to me--from a critical perspective, the Book of Mormon seems to condemn Freemasonry. Since, AFAIK, the Smiths had no Masonic connections during those days, how could Joseph have even known about the Mason's "book of the law" prop, much less borrow or steal an important ritualistic prop? And had a "book" like this existed--wouldn't someone have spoken up about how Smith's account of gold plates resembled their own lost "plates"?

[Mike Reed]

This seems like a stretch to me--from a critical perspective, the Book of Mormon seems to condemn Freemasonry.

I agree that the BoM seems to condemn Freemasonry. However, I am not asserting that Joseph Smith actually got the BoM narrative from the plates.

Since, AFAIK, the Smiths had no Masonic connections during those days, how could Joseph have even known about the Mason's "book of the law" prop, much less borrow or steal an important ritualistic prop?

Hyrum Smith was a mason in the 1820s. Oliver Cowdery's father and brother had been initiated into Royal Arch freemasonry. Also, as John L. Brooke writes in The Refiner's Fire: The Making of Mormon Cosmology, 1644-1844:

Among the money-digging clans there was at least one contemporary connection with Royal Arch Freemasonry; Sally Chase's brother Durfee Chase was a member of the Palmyra Royal Arch chapter until he was expelled for 'unmasonic conduct' in 1825. Given the subsequent history of William Morgan, the Antimasonic martyr, one wonders whether this conduct involved the divulging of the ritual secrets of the Royal Arch to the money-digging circles. (p. 158)

There were also a ton of exposes of freemasonry circulating in Joseph Smith's day which mentioned the existence of such props.

And had a "book" like this existed--wouldn't someone have spoken up about how Smith's account of gold plates resembled their own lost "plates"?

When William Morgan disappeared in 1826 (a year before Joseph Smith reportedly received the plates from Moroni), freemasonry was forced underground. As explained by Mark C. Carnes,

"Antimasonry [following the disappearance of Morgan] generated intense public pressure that forced thousands of members to renounce the order and hundreds of lodges to relinquish their charters [Mike Reed wonders: hmm... what would they have done with the props no longer needed?]. By best estimate membership declined from 100,000 in the mid-1820s to 40,000 a decade later.

Those who remained did so circumspectly, rarely holding public events and refraining from publicizing meeting places and times

." (p. 25)

To speak out against Smith's use of the props would have been a rather dangerous thing to do, as doing so would have exposed themselves as masons. Besides, Joseph Smith and Emma moved to Pennsylvania three months after he reportedly received the plates.

[Joseph Antley]

I agree that the BoM seems to condemn Freemasonry. However, I am not asserting that Joseph Smith actually got the BoM narrative from the plates.

I didn't mean to assert that in my post either. My point was that that condemnation was a reflection of Joseph Smith's personal views. If Joseph Smith thought that Masonry was an abomination, then I see him as remaining distant from anything Masonic. Although, if he were willing to steal a Masonic prop and try to pass it off as an ancient American record, I guess that casts a shadow on his ethics as a whole.

When William Morgan disappeared in 1826 (a year before Joseph Smith reportedly received the plates from Moroni), freemasonry was forced underground. As explained by Mark C. Carnes,

"Antimasonry [following the disappearance of Morgan] generated intense public pressure that forced thousands of members to renounce the order and hundreds of lodges to relinquish their charters [Mike Reed wonders: hmm... what would they have done with the props no longer needed?]. By best estimate membership declined from 100,000 in the mid-1820s to 40,000 a decade later.

Those who remained did so circumspectly, rarely holding public events and refraining from publicizing meeting places and times

." (p. 25)

Even if Joseph had been aware of such a prop, I don't see how he could have secretly obtained it. Have you proposed a hypothesis for that?

To speak out against Smith's use of the plates would have been a rather dangerous thing to do, as doing so would have exposed themselves as masons. Besides, Joseph Smith and Emma moved to Pennsylvania three months after he reportedly received the plates.

It wouldn't have necessarily exposed themselves as Masons. As you already demonstrated, it might have been possible for the treasure-hunters to have been aware of the Masonic props. If Joseph was aware, it stands to reason that at least some of the others would have been aware as well. Likewise, revealing Joseph's possible use of the Masonic prop wouldn't necessarily expose someone as a Mason, just as several contemporaries willfully "exposed" the Book of Mormon's connections with treasure-hunting lore and rituals did not necessarily mean their involvement in treasure-hunting.

I don't see why Smiths' move in relevant; the stories of Joseph's "gold plates" was popular gossip in Palmyra/Manchester from the late 1820's until, well, today.

[Mike Reed]

Even if Joseph had been aware of such a prop, I don't see how he could have secretly obtained it. Have you proposed a hypothesis for that?

Not yet. Like I said, I haven't fully explored the possibilities and available evidence. I think the secretiveness of freemasonry in general, at that time (being driven underground), could have worked to Smith's advantage. It is also possible that Joseph Smith purchased the props from a traveling merchant (who had obtained them from a lodge that had shut down).

I know that these speculations are unsatisfactory, and lead to many unanswered questions (questions that I am not ready to answer). I need to do more research before I will be willing to go out any further on the limb that I am already hanging on. I hope you understand.

For the moment, I have to focus my time and attention on condensing my thesis (on Mormons and the Cross) for Sunstone.

Edit to add:

While I am confident that the breastplate/U&T and Sword of Laban could have easily been masonic props, I am less confident that such was the case for the "gold" plates.

To be clear... I don't believe the "Book of the Law" was a masonic prop generally made from metal. However, considering the variety of rituals that developed (partly due to freemasonry going underground), it seems possible that such a prop could have existed--Perhaps as a result of conflating the book of the law with the Golden Plate of Enoch (which was triangular).

Admittedly, supporting/discrediting such an idea requires much more research. Hopefully I will get a chance to further explore this possibility soon.

For now, I retract any claim about that the Gold Plates... but maintain the view that the breastplate/U&T was most likely a masonic prop.