Stone Box

[Calm]

No, actually I've never heard that before! Mike

I don't think I have, at least not from a member...I vaguely remember a nonmember making the joke about LDS using that.

[Calm]

IMO "revering" the Prophet of the Living God" is not leadership worship at all! We don't stand when a Bishop, stake president, or even other GAs enter, only for the Earthly president of the church!

I have never been in a local Sacrament Meeting when the Prophet showed up, do they stand at those times as well or only during conference and other such general meetings?

[Stone holm]

I have found no mention of such a thing. OK, so why do you feel that is a possibility?

If he was trying to keep the existence of the plates secret and the box had served its purpose, why not. When did Moroni retrieve the other relics?

[MormonMason]

If he was trying to keep the existence of the plates secret and the box had served its purpose, why not. When did Moroni retrieve the other relics?

He hid the plates in various places to keep them out of the public eye. I think he would have mentioned destroying the box to someone close to him had this been the case. I find zero evidence for this. Moroni likely retrieved the other relics when Joseph Smith royally screwed up in the case of the 116 pages. We know that was when he took the plates and the Interpreters, so it is likely that the breastplate also went with it. Joseph Smith actually used the breastplate for a bit and then you hear no more about it after that time of loss. So, it is likely that the rest of the stuff was confiscated at that time, although the angel showed these things along with the plates to Oliver Cowdery and David Whitmer, all arranged on some kind of table, if I recall correctly. The box was not used during that time.

Another source I read some time ago also stated that at a later time the hole on the side of the hill could still be seen some years later.

Now, some may think it strange that I would make a comment based upon an anti-Mormon book. But, a number of these sources contain some really useful information, especially when it can be compared with other materials along the same lines. Sometimes they make arguments that undercut the arguments of other anti-Mormon writers. Sometimes they tell it like it really is on some points.

A prime example of something of that nature is David Whitmer's claim that God told him to separate himself from among the Latter-day Saints. I believe that this really did happen. Had it not happened, one of the most powerful witnesses may well have ended up dead rather than testifying for many years afterward, while still outside the Church. Sampson Avard want him killed as soon as possible.

The trouble is that David Whitmer already was not a member of the Church by that June so he could not have been told by God to leave the Church. But, he could well have been told to separate himself from among those Latter-day Saints who were in a body where he was. As I said, I fully believe that this event occurred but faulty memory on the part of David Whitmer in his later years turned a warning for his safety into a revelation to leave the Church, even though he had already ceased to be a member of the Church a month or so previous, after his excommunication and before his revelation.

Had I my copy of the Far West Record and my Missouri files I could confirm the dates.

Edited May 26, 2013 by MormonMason

[mrmendoza]

I have never been in a local Sacrament Meeting when the Prophet showed up, do they stand at those times as well or only during conference and other such general meetings?

I have never been in a local Sacrament Meeting when the Prophet showed up, do they stand at those times as well or only during conference and other such general meetings?

Absolutly,they do!

mike

[Calm]

Thanks for the info.

[coolrok7]

I was wondering if anyone knew if the church has ever made a serious, concerted effort to find the stone box that supposedly held the gold plates, seer stones, breast plate and sword of Laban?

It seems to me that it would be a fairly large stone box (much larger than depicted in LDS art) and that the large domed stone covering it would be quite a tell-tale marker. . . .(opening comment of the op)

If they had, it would more than likely be displayed in the visitor center next to the “Hill Cumorah” with the spot marked and the remnants of the stone/box and cement but you will not find any of that there or anywhere.

When seeing the picture of the monument on the top of the hill provided in the BofM (before I visited there), I had always wondered why they never showed the remains of the “stone box” which still should have been around, at least somewhere. I was in New York back in the summer of 2009 attending the Palmyra pageant. While there I had intended to see if the Mormon Church had any information concerning the location of the “stone box” and where it had supposedly been buried. There was nothing to be seen or talked about where the plates were buried. The whole hillside now is covered in trees with not anything pointing out where the supposed hole was.

From a description of the “HILL Cumorah” and “The Sacred Record” in, “THE TESTIMONY OF THE PROPHET JOSEPH SMITH” pamphlet (11/98):

The Hill Cumorah is about three miles southeast of the Smith farm in Palmyra, New York. In Joseph’s time the north end was covered with grass, the south with scattered timber and forests. The plates were buried on the west side, not far from the top. Caption with Photograph: August 1907, (p.7—middle right of page)

The Sacred Record

Convenient to the village of Manchester, Ontario county, New York, stands a hill of considerable size, . . .On the west side of this hill, not far from the top, under a stone of considerable size, lay the plates, deposited in a stone box. This stone was thick and rounding in the middle on the upper side, and thinner towards the edges, so that the middle part of it was visible above the ground, but the edge was covered with earth.

Having removed the earth, I obtained a lever, which I got fixed under the edge of the stone, and with a little exertion raised it up. I looked in, and there indeed did I behold the plates, the Urim and the Thummim, and the breastplate, as stated by the messenger. The box in which they lay was formed by laying stones together in some kind of cement. In the bottom of the box were laid two stones crossways of the box, and on these stones lay the plates and the other things with them. (p.eight

There is a picture booklet I’ve seen entitled, “Back to Cumorah, A Visual Journey”. In part, along with the pictures, it tells of the missionary experiences of the Bean family:

Some traditions were already in place by the time the Beans arrived in Palmyra. Someone had planted a rose bush on the west side of the hill marking the spot where some believed the plates buried. Others felt it was among the few remaining trees still growing on the hill. Even a sign was posted to mark the general area (p.182)

On p.183 there is a photograph of the above mentioned sign:

SOMEWHERE IN THIS VICINITY, THE GOLD PLATES WHICH HAD LAIN BURIED FOR FOURTEEN CENTURIES WERE DELIVERED TO JOSEPH SMITH. BY THE GIFT AND POWER OF GOD JOSEPH SMITH TRANSLATED THE PLATES INTO THE BOOK OF MORMON. THESE GOLD PLATES WERE DELIVERED TO JOSEPH SMITH BY THE ANGEL MORONI SEPTEMBER 22ND 1827

On p.184 the following is stated:

Andrew Galloway, a missionary in Palmyra in 1870, perported from memory, “I saw the box that had contained the plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated. This box as far as I remember was something like three feet long a trifle over two feet wide, and two feet in depth. The box lide [sic. lid] showed no marks of any tools having been used. The Lide [sic] was a little rounding on the upper side.”

In 1878, Joseph F. Smith visited Cumorah with Orson Pratt. President Smith wrote: “At that time [1878] there were seven good sized trees growing on the west side of the hill—near the north end. And about two-thirds or a little more than halfway up the hill—and a distinct depression—near this clump of trees—which bro. Pratt said—must have been the very spot from whence the plates were taken—when they were delivered to Joseph by Moroni.”

George Anderson, in 1907, took this photo of a man standing in a hole some believed to be where the stone box had once been.

On p.185 is the above referenced photograph with a man standing in what appears to be a small hole or depression with the hand written caption in the upper left corner:

Where Plates were found.

Hill Cumorah.

On p.186, it states:

Years later it was said that the plates were buried where the letter “R” was located in the hedge spelling out the name “Cumorah” along the brow of the hill.

[MormonMason]

Andrew Galloway, a missionary in Palmyra in 1870, perported from memory, “I saw the box that had contained the plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated. This box as far as I remember was something like three feet long a trifle over two feet wide, and two feet in depth.

Wow, I actually made a pretty good guess relative to the dimensions above!

[coolrok7]

So where is the box (or its remnants)?

Edited May 26, 2013 by coolrok7

[Stone holm]

If they had, it would more than likely be displayed in the visitor center next to the “Hill Cumorah” with the spot marked and the remnants of the stone/box and cement but you will not find any of that there or anywhere.

When seeing the picture of the monument on the top of the hill provided in the BofM (before I visited there), I had always wondered why they never showed the remains of the “stone box” which still should have been around, at least somewhere. I was in New York back in the summer of 2009 attending the Palmyra pageant. While there I had intended to see if the Mormon Church had any information concerning the location of the “stone box” and where it had supposedly been buried. There was nothing to be seen or talked about where the plates were buried. The whole hillside now is covered in trees with not anything pointing out where the supposed hole was.

From a description of the “HILL Cumorah” and “The Sacred Record” in, “THE TESTIMONY OF THE PROPHET JOSEPH SMITH” pamphlet (11/98):

There is a picture booklet I’ve seen entitled, “Back to Cumorah, A Visual Journey”. In part, along with the pictures, it tells of the missionary experiences of the Bean family:

On p.183 there is a photograph of the above mentioned sign:

On p.184 the following is stated:

On p.185 is the above referenced photograph with a man standing in what appears to be a small hole or depression with the hand written caption in the upper left corner:

On p.186, it states:

Very interesting, never heard that before. It would suggest someone dug out the box. I can imagine that cut stone was useful. Given the migration of people in those days the area probably was populated by people who knew not Joseph. When did the Church acquire the property?

[Calm]

Very interesting, never heard that before. It would suggest someone dug out the box. I can imagine that cut stone was useful. Given the migration of people in those days the area probably was populated by people who knew not Joseph. When did the Church acquire the property?

Feb 1928: http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/jbms/?vol=13&num=1&id=337&cat_id=475

[MormonMason]

So where is the box (or its remnants)?

Unknown at present. David Whitmer himself claimed to have seen the box as well, until he found it had washed down the hill. That quote is up a few pages, here.

"Uncle Dale," posting on a site I cannot link without breaking rules, made a comment about a report he had read that the stones from the box became a part of a local resident's front yard. He offers no source for this, however. For the record, I will state that I also recall reading such an account but no longer recall where.

Edited May 27, 2013 by MormonMason

[ERayR]

So where is the box (or its remnants)?

After 200 years? Of what value is an empty stone box? If you really want the valuable stuff then get a copy of the Book of Mormon.

[ERayR]

Very interesting, never heard that before. It would suggest someone dug out the box. I can imagine that cut stone was useful. Given the migration of people in those days the area probably was populated by people who knew not Joseph. When did the Church acquire the property?

Please point me to where it said the box was cut stone. I had always envisioned it made from flat stones cemented together.

[Stone holm]

Please point me to where it said the box was cut stone. I had always envisioned it made from flat stones cemented together.

An assumption on my part, but stones flat enough to look like a box would have been useful as well.

[blackstrap]

A lid stone that was about 2 ft. by 3 ft. and perhaps 3-4 inches thick could easily weigh 100-200 lbs . It would require " some exertion " to move .

[Stone holm]

A lid stone that was about 2 ft. by 3 ft. and perhaps 3-4 inches thick could easily weigh 100-200 lbs . It would require " some exertion " to move .

Have you looked at some of the Stone fences of the era?

[ERayR]

An assumption on my part, but stones flat enough to look like a box would have been useful as well.

They would only have to have been flat on one side. A little squaring, some cement and you have a box. The lid doesn't have to be flat just big enough to fit over the top. The box did not have to be fashioned from a solid stone.

Edited May 27, 2013 by ERayR

[coolrok7]

After 200 years? Of what value is an empty stone box? If you really want the valuable stuff then get a copy of the Book of Mormon.

It is rather a convenient story for history after the fact of it not being there along with the plates being taken back and the rest of the story of the BofM which contradicts Biblical Scripture at key points of doctrine.

[ERayR]

It is rather a convenient story for history after the fact of it not being there along with the plates being taken back and the rest of the story of the BofM which contradicts Biblical Scripture at key points of doctrine.

Nobody has your arm up behind your back. The contradictions are your interpretation. I don't see it that way and since I am the one responsible for my choices, pardon me if I don't put you in charge of it.

[coolrok7]

Nobody has your arm up behind your back. The contradictions are your interpretation. I don't see it that way and since I am the one responsible for my choices, pardon me if I don't put you in charge of it.

Interpretation is the bottom line of it all. The individual is responsible for their choices of course.

It goes to the credibility of the story. You as an individual have the right to believe as you see fit of course but when the church sends it’s missionaries out to proselytize the story than it does go to the credibility based on what it presents to those outside its proclaimed faith as the truth of God:

THE DIVINE MISSION OF JOSEPH SMITH

CHURCH STANDS OR FALLS WITH JOSEPH SMITH.

Mormonism, as it is called, must stand or fall on the story of Joseph Smith. He was either a prophet of God, divinely called, properly appointed and commissioned, or he was one of the biggest frauds this world has ever seen. There is no middle ground. If Joseph Smith was a deceiver, who willfully attempted to mislead the people, then he should be exposed; his claims should be refuted, and his doctrines shown to be false, for the doctrines of an imposter cannot be made to harmonize in all particulars with divine truth. If his claims and declarations were built upon fraud and deceit, there would appear many errors and contradictions, which would be easy to detect. The doctrines of false teachers will not stand the test when tried by the accepted standards of measurement, the scriptures. (Doctrines of Salvation, Joseph Fielding Smith, p.188, 1954 edition)

[ERayR]

Interpretation is the bottom line of it all. The individual is responsible for their choices of course.

It goes to the credibility of the story. You as an individual have the right to believe as you see fit of course but when the church sends it’s missionaries out to proselytize the story than it does go to the credibility based on what it presents to those outside its proclaimed faith as the truth of God:

The Church missionary program gives others the right make their own choices. You would deny others the right to hear and make their choice? What has a stone box got to do with credibility? An empty stone box only proves that somebody made a stone box. The lack of one proves nothing.

[coolrok7]

The Church missionary program gives others the right make their own choices. You would deny others the right to hear and make their choice? What has a stone box got to do with credibility? An empty stone box only proves that somebody made a stone box. The lack of one proves nothing.

It doesn’t give them the right to distort the truth of history and misrepresent what others actually believe with what is in the Bible. Also not dependent upon Joseph Smith to know the truth as it was already established to be the truth before Joseph Smith and others which make the same type claims as to restoring lost truth:

Again, in 1885, [Whitmer] told a correspondent of the Chicago Tribune that Joseph Smith took Whitmer and Cowdery to the Hill Cumorah where they personally viewed "the receptacle in which Moroni . . . had concealed the history of his father."⁹¹ As early as 1875 Whitmer told a Chicago Times reporter that he had seen the stone box three times and that it had been washed "down to the foot of the hill."⁹² As to what happened to this sacred object after that he does not say. (from post #23)

The church goes out of its way to provide historical artifacts to back up their story where it can. It goes against the claims when the stone box cannot be put forth as an evidence for the story in light of the testimony of others which are a critical part of the telling of that story.

The claimed translation of the BofM was not the norm (reading letters of light is not translating) in the usual understanding of the term. One would normally understand that one translates from a known language (or tongue) into another (the Biblical New Testament of Koine Greek into English such as the KJV for example):

The Translation of the Book of Mormon was effected through the power of God manifested in the bestowal of the gift of revelation. The book professes not to be dependent upon the wisdom or learning of man; its translator was not versed in linguistics; his qualifications were of a different and a more efficient order. With the plates, Joseph Smith received from the angel other sacred treasures, including a breastplate, to which were attached the Urim and Thummim, called by the Nephites Interpreters; and by the use of these he was enabled to translate the ancient records into our modern tongue. The details of the work of translation have not been recorded, beyond the statement that the translator examined the engraved characters by means of the sacred instruments, and then dictated to the scribe the English sentences. . . .

The Genuiness of the Book of Mormon will appear as the result of impartial investigation into the circumstances attending its coming forth. The fanciful theories of its origin, advanced by prejudiced opponents, are in general too inconsistent, and in most instances too thoroughly puerile, to merit serious consideration. Assumptions that the Book of Mormon is the production of a single author or of men working in collusion, a work of fiction, or in any manner a modern composition, are their own refutation. . . . (Articles of Faith, James E. Talmage, 1982, p.267, 269)

Edited May 27, 2013 by coolrok7

[MormonMason]

A lid stone that was about 2 ft. by 3 ft. and perhaps 3-4 inches thick could easily weigh 100-200 lbs . It would require " some exertion " to move .

...ΚAΙ ΧAΡΙΣΤΙΩΝΙ ΤAΝ ΓAΝ ΚΙΝΗΣΩ ΠAΣAΝ.

...and with a lever I will move the whole earth.

-Archimedes.

[MormonMason]

It is rather a convenient story for history after the fact of it not being there along with the plates being taken back and the rest of the story of the BofM which contradicts Biblical Scripture at key points of doctrine.

Where are the original Decalogue tablets, the rod of Aaron, and the pot of manna? Sometimes men destroy the things of God and man and God allows it. It is not contrary to anything much less some vague "biblical scripture at key points of doctrine." It just happens.

On the other hand, there were other witnesses of the existence of the stone box besides Joseph Smith, and one of them was opposed to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints all of his remaining life.