The Gold Plates

[why me]

37 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Indeed. According to Clark, Harris was not allowed to look at Joseph or he would arouse “the most terrible divine displeasure”

That was according to Clark. I see no tribulation among the others. We also need to remember that Mary Whitmer saw the plates and she never altered her testimony of it and this was even after the Whitmer's had problems with the church.

[why me]

45 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Are you saying the Book of Mormon was produced without paper and ink?

I am speaking about a manuscript written by Joseph. Of course, during the translation process paper and ink needed to be obtained.

[webbles]

56 minutes ago, JarMan said:

Can you be more specific about the problem you see? The small plates covered roughly the same time period as the Book of Lehi. The bible does the same type of thing with Chronicles, for example. It seems quite reasonable that an author writing in the biblical tradition would follow similar patterns as the bible. As for the Words of Mormon, the best explanation imo was published last year: https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/that-which-you-have-translated-which-you-have-retained/.

The problem is that the lost pages just happen to match pretty close with the small plates and that the Words of Mormon (or chapter 2 of Mosiah per that article) just happen to give a fairly nice (but not perfect) segue between the small plates and the rest of the text.  Excluding God from the equation, that coincidence is just too much for me to accept.

Also, D&C 3 and 10 make it seem like Joseph was not aware of the existence of the small plates.  But if he had an existing manuscript that he could read, I would have expected him to know what was on it.

[webbles]

1 hour ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

I don’t know how Joseph did it. Having a crib sheet with key points, names, dates, etc makes sense to me (similar to how many give talks), but I’m not married to the idea. If we believe his mother, he was rehearsing stories from the Book of Mormon to his family for years. 
 

Tiktok continually serves me videos of magic tricks. I couldn’t say how a single one is done (because they are intentionally trying to deceive me), but could offer guesses. 

Magic tricks just use misdirection to make us not pay attention to what is happening.  It does take a fair amount of practice, though, to accomplish the misdirection.  And it is easier to do when there are less people around.  Joseph would be doing this misdirection for multiple months with different amount of people in the room and not all under his control.  That's a fairly difficult feat to do.  I'm not sure the best modern magician could pull that off.

I'd love to see someone pull it off, though.  The problem for me with all natural explanations of the translation is that they all fail when I seriously investigate them.  I've yet to find one that feels like it can be accomplished, unless you assume that others are in on it.  And that assumption causes other issues that fail.

[mfbukowski]

3 hours ago, why me said:

I remember when many people left the church over history. They did not know about the hat process. Of courses, in the 1970s we knew about the hat process. It was widely spoken about. But after a while it was forgotten as time went on. However I always found it rather faith promoting. Hard to write a book with your face in a hat. He could have taken that trick on the road and made a fortune. The man who could write a book with his head in a hat gimmick.

I am sure you know it was dictated?

[SeekingUnderstanding]

2 hours ago, webbles said:

Magic tricks just use misdirection to make us not pay attention to what is happening.  It does take a fair amount of practice, though, to accomplish the misdirection.  And it is easier to do when there are less people around.  Joseph would be doing this misdirection for multiple months with different amount of people in the room and not all under his control.  That's a fairly difficult feat to do.  I'm not sure the best modern magician could pull that off.

Not so. Derren Brown (an atheist) has an excellent series of shows available online. In one he induced an atheist to have an overpowering spiritual experience in a church. In another he reproduces an evangelical faith healing. Good magicians/mentalists are able to get inside your head. And then throw in the cult of personality. There are certain political and cultural talking heads that have such a following that they are believed above all else. One of them remarked that he could stand in the middle of fifth avenue and shoot someone and he wouldn’t loose any voters. With respect it seems to me there is a phycological element that you are ignoring (in my opinion of course!). 

2 hours ago, webbles said:

I'd love to see someone pull it off, though.  The problem for me with all natural explanations of the translation is that they all fail when I seriously investigate them.  I've yet to find one that feels like it can be accomplished, unless you assume that others are in on it.  And that assumption causes other issues that fail.

You can solve anything by saying God did it. <shrug>

[Bernard Gui]

7 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

It’s my point of view that Joseph was intentionally deceiving those around him. It’s my point of view that he had years of practice doing this sort of thing. He led people on treasure hunts with gold that somehow melted into the earth. He had scribes that feared the wrath of God if they examined the process too closely. That fear is ideal if you want to hide a manuscript. I personally don’t know if he had a manuscript. I rather think it more likely he had notes to reference, but I don’t know. I also don’t know how Derren Brown (an atheist) was able to heal the sick and curse the unbelieving on his Netflix show. I don’t know how David Copperfield made a UFO appear at the Vegas show I attended. But I am reasonably sure these were tricks. 
 

Joseph’s scribe Martin Harris reported that he was afraid to look at Smith while he was translating. And you wonder how he might be able to turn a page? Did they take breaks? How many pages per day were produced? 

Thanks. There are too many holes in your theory for me to take it seriously. 

[webbles]

1 hour ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Not so. Derren Brown (an atheist) has an excellent series of shows available online. In one he induced an atheist to have an overpowering spiritual experience in a church. In another he reproduces an evangelical faith healing. Good magicians/mentalists are able to get inside your head. And then throw in the cult of personality. There are certain political and cultural talking heads that have such a following that they are believed above all else. One of them remarked that he could stand in the middle of fifth avenue and shoot someone and he wouldn’t loose any voters. With respect it seems to me there is a phycological element that you are ignoring (in my opinion of course!). 

But we are talking a physical act that people actually saw.  I understand that you can trigger people to have spiritual experiences and such.  I have a very hard time accepting anything that I feel as a spiritual experience because of that knowledge.  But Joseph Smith sat down, day after day, and "translated" the Book of Mormon.  People sat at the table with him, walked around the room, watched him, interrupted him, stole the stone in his hat, etc.  The people in the room could have felt very strongly that it was a special experience and that God was in the room there, but it would be hard to hide the fact that he has papers in his hat and in his personal belongings.  These aren't big houses and they don't a lot of personal space.

If the translation had been just with Martin Harris, then yes, we could say that he was duped.  He wasn't the brightest person on the block and was very susceptible to persuasion.  If it was just Oliver Cowdery, it could be explained since he also tried to translate with his dowsing rods and so would be in the mood.  But for several months, they were with the Whitmers and that included not just the entire Whitmer family but also multiple uninvited guests.  Their personal space shrunk considerably as well.  That last part is where it gets hard for him to pull off a magic trick.

2 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

You can solve anything by saying God did it. <shrug>

"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."  The natural methods that have been proposed just don't hold up to scrutiny (in my opinion).

[Bernard Gui]

4 hours ago, webbles said:

Magic tricks just use misdirection to make us not pay attention to what is happening.  It does take a fair amount of practice, though, to accomplish the misdirection.  And it is easier to do when there are less people around.  Joseph would be doing this misdirection for multiple months with different amount of people in the room and not all under his control.  That's a fairly difficult feat to do.  I'm not sure the best modern magician could pull that off.

I'd love to see someone pull it off, though.  The problem for me with all natural explanations of the translation is that they all fail when I seriously investigate them.  I've yet to find one that feels like it can be accomplished, unless you assume that others are in on it.  And that assumption causes other issues that fail.

A magician working in close quarters does not repeat his tricks over and over day after day because eventually the observers will figure out what he is doing.

[SteveO]

10 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Thanks. There are too many holes in your theory for me to take it seriously. 

Eventually, and ironically, the “divine origins” is an easier ask than the twisted, convoluted mess of alternative theories that need to be constantly revised and added to.

[Bernard Gui]

25 minutes ago, SteveO said:

Eventually, and ironically, the “divine origins” is an easier ask than the twisted, convoluted mess of alternative theories that need to be constantly revised and added to.

Thanks. This is why I said earlier that the critics can’t give an inch to Joseph’s story.

[JarMan]

On 10/2/2022 at 1:58 PM, webbles said:

The problem is that the lost pages just happen to match pretty close with the small plates and that the Words of Mormon (or chapter 2 of Mosiah per that article) just happen to give a fairly nice (but not perfect) segue between the small plates and the rest of the text.  Excluding God from the equation, that coincidence is just too much for me to accept.

If I allowed God to be part of the equation I would expect the 116 pages to never have been lost in the first place. You are finding miracles where you should be seeing tragedy. This looks more like confirmation bias than serious analysis.

On 10/2/2022 at 1:58 PM, webbles said:

Also, D&C 3 and 10 make it seem like Joseph was not aware of the existence of the small plates.  But if he had an existing manuscript that he could read, I would have expected him to know what was on it.

On the contrary, D&C 10 shows that Joseph was aware of the small plates. He may or may not have been aware in D&C 3, but we certainly aren't required to take D&C 3 at face value. But let's pretend that Joseph did know what was on the manuscript when he started the translation process. This means he knew he had a replacement text for the 116 pages he lent to Martin Harris. He could have even set the whole thing up to bolster his case for divine intervention. If you're determined not to accept the small plates as coincidence, you should consider it could have been a con or at least a pre-meditated Plan B in case the 116 pages were lost. As for me, I think a coincidence is the most likely scenario. Nothing about this aspect of the translation story screams divine intervention to me.

[JarMan]

On 10/2/2022 at 2:09 PM, webbles said:

Magic tricks just use misdirection to make us not pay attention to what is happening.  It does take a fair amount of practice, though, to accomplish the misdirection.  And it is easier to do when there are less people around.  Joseph would be doing this misdirection for multiple months with different amount of people in the room and not all under his control.  That's a fairly difficult feat to do.  I'm not sure the best modern magician could pull that off.

I'd love to see someone pull it off, though.  The problem for me with all natural explanations of the translation is that they all fail when I seriously investigate them.  I've yet to find one that feels like it can be accomplished, unless you assume that others are in on it.  And that assumption causes other issues that fail.

Joseph could have easily pulled off the stone in a hat trick by having a manuscript in or near his lap which he could read while appearing to peer at the stone in his hat. No sleight of hand or misdirection required. I've pulled this off on multiple people myself just to test this theory.

[webbles]

1 hour ago, JarMan said:

If I allowed God to be part of the equation I would expect the 116 pages to never have been lost in the first place. You are finding miracles where you should be seeing tragedy. This looks more like confirmation bias than serious analysis.

On the contrary, D&C 10 shows that Joseph was aware of the small plates. He may or may not have been aware in D&C 3, but we certainly aren't required to take D&C 3 at face value. But let's pretend that Joseph did know what was on the manuscript when he started the translation process. This means he knew he had a replacement text for the 116 pages he lent to Martin Harris. He could have even set the whole thing up to bolster his case for divine intervention. If you're determined not to accept the small plates as coincidence, you should consider it could have been a con or at least a pre-meditated Plan B in case the 116 pages were lost. As for me, I think a coincidence is the most likely scenario. Nothing about this aspect of the translation story screams divine intervention to me.

The small plates end with Amaleki talking about a King Benjamin.  The non-lost pages start with King Benjamin.  King Benjamin lived about 70-80 years.  Out of the 1000 year history that the Book of Mormon contains (just talking about the Nephites/Lamanites), the chance that Martin just happened to loose just the right amount of pages to hit within those 70-80 years is pretty slim.  And, if Words of Mormon was actually transcribed by Martin and was left behind, the chance gets even slimer.

But maybe he did plan to loose those exact 116 pages so he could pull off this divine intervention.  If he did know that there was a duplicate story of the first ~500 years, then when Martin asks him to take the papers Joseph could have realized that he had a backup just in case the pages were lost.  So the first time, he tells Martin "no" and keeps "translating" because he needs to get to the "words of mormon" section.  Martin asks again but they haven't yet reached that part so "no" again.  But when Martin asks the third time, Joseph has reached the "words of mormon" section and so he knows he has a safety backup.  Then when the pages get lost, he figures out a way to utilize it to make it look like divine intervention.

How did Joseph get Martin to start the "words of mormon" at the top of a page and not take that page?  The "words of mormon" isn't a new chapter or else the Printer's manuscript would say "chapter" before it like in all of the other breaks.  Did Joseph just tell Martin to start on a new page?  And why does the small plates describe reason behind their existence as a special purpose?  That fits better with Joseph making it up or actual divine intervention than it does with an ancient manuscript that just happened to have those pages lost by Martin's accident.

I think it is simpler to assume that Joseph wrote the contents of the small plates (if you ignore divine help).  He could then assure that it ties in with the rest of the papers.  He could also put in special "divine intervention" verses on how God actually knew this was all going to happen from the beginning.

 

[webbles]

2 hours ago, JarMan said:

Joseph could have easily pulled off the stone in a hat trick by having a manuscript in or near his lap which he could read while appearing to peer at the stone in his hat. No sleight of hand or misdirection required. I've pulled this off on multiple people myself just to test this theory.

But, did you do it for multiple months and multiple hours each day while dealing with meal breaks, bathroom breaks, interruptions, a pregnant wife, visitors, etc?  Can you get yourself ready with the papers while the person is in the room with you?  I can do some pretty impressive magic tricks but if I had to do the same trick over and over again, I'm going to slip up.  All Joseph needed to do was have his papers fall on the floor, or forget to put them away, or get them mixed up and read things out of order, or make too much noise/movement when changing pages.  Too much time along with too many ways to slip up makes this theory really implausible.  If he just did it one day or even one week, then I'd agree with you.  But it was multiple months and with multiple people, some not entirely under his control (for example Emma's brother-in-law Michael Morse - https://www.arisefromthedust.com/a-strange-piece-of-work-poorly/).

[JarMan]

1 hour ago, webbles said:

The small plates end with Amaleki talking about a King Benjamin.  The non-lost pages start with King Benjamin.  King Benjamin lived about 70-80 years.  Out of the 1000 year history that the Book of Mormon contains (just talking about the Nephites/Lamanites), the chance that Martin just happened to loose just the right amount of pages to hit within those 70-80 years is pretty slim.  And, if Words of Mormon was actually transcribed by Martin and was left behind, the chance gets even slimer.

This is the classical logical fallacy I discuss in another thread: https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/74828-plausibility-evidence-and-the-search-for-explanations/page/3/

A small chance of a naturalistic event occurring cannot be logically interpreted to mean that a supernatural explanation is better. It's fine to say that you take it on faith that God was involved. It's not fine to say God must be involved because you find naturalistic explanations wanting.

1 hour ago, webbles said:

How did Joseph get Martin to start the "words of mormon" at the top of a page and not take that page?  The "words of mormon" isn't a new chapter or else the Printer's manuscript would say "chapter" before it like in all of the other breaks.  Did Joseph just tell Martin to start on a new page?

I don't understand the problem here. According to the Interpreter article, Words of Mormon had already been transcribed when the manuscript was given to Martin Harris. If this is true, then the apparent fact it was retained speaks in favor of Joseph knowing it would be important to keep in order to bridge the narrative from the small plates.

1 hour ago, webbles said:

And why does the small plates describe reason behind their existence as a special purpose?  That fits better with Joseph making it up or actual divine intervention than it does with an ancient manuscript that just happened to have those pages lost by Martin's accident.

I think it is simpler to assume that Joseph wrote the contents of the small plates (if you ignore divine help).  He could then assure that it ties in with the rest of the papers.  He could also put in special "divine intervention" verses on how God actually knew this was all going to happen from the beginning.

The stated "special purpose" was to have an account of the ministry of Nephi's people. It's not unreasonable at all for a manuscript to contain that language. You might be thinking of a "wise purpose" which is stated in 1 Nephi 9, 1 Nephi 19, and Words of Mormon, all in the context of the small plates. However, it's not stated what this "wise purpose" is. This is important because we also see "wise purpose" in Alma 37 as Alma passes the large plates on to his son, Helaman. "Wise purpose" was a phrase used in the context of creating both the small plates and the large plates so I have to believe this was a general description of the reason that Nephite records were being kept, not a cryptic allusion to future events.

1 hour ago, webbles said:

But, did you do it for multiple months and multiple hours each day while dealing with meal breaks, bathroom breaks, interruptions, a pregnant wife, visitors, etc?  Can you get yourself ready with the papers while the person is in the room with you?  I can do some pretty impressive magic tricks but if I had to do the same trick over and over again, I'm going to slip up.  All Joseph needed to do was have his papers fall on the floor, or forget to put them away, or get them mixed up and read things out of order, or make too much noise/movement when changing pages.  Too much time along with too many ways to slip up makes this theory really implausible.  If he just did it one day or even one week, then I'd agree with you.  But it was multiple months and with multiple people, some not entirely under his control (for example Emma's brother-in-law Michael Morse - https://www.arisefromthedust.com/a-strange-piece-of-work-poorly/).

As you know there was the translation period for the 116 pages and the translation period for the rest. The first period he didn't use the hat in the stone method exclusively. At times Emma transcribed what he said from behind a curtain or from another room in the house. With that type of distance it would have been easier to keep the manuscript hidden.

The 1829 period only consisted of about 60 days of translation. The vast majority of the time it was just Joseph and Oliver in the room. It's possible Oliver was aware of the manuscript so they would only have needed to go through the charade while others were present. However, I still believe Joseph could have kept the manuscript hidden from Oliver. The manuscript could have essentially existed in scroll form rather than being bound or a pile of loose papers. It would not be hard to advance a scroll periodically with one hand while the other hand held the hat. Some sort of very simple, miniature scaffolding could have been used to hold the scroll in place on his lap or attached to the underside of the table. Joseph also kept his family and friends in fear of seeing the plates, possibly in order to help keep the distance between them and the manuscript.

As an example of a similar modern feat, see the story of Mike Postle who succeeded in cheating at Poker for over a year. Here he was sitting at a poker table with up to 9 other people while also being live-streamed. Yet he was periodically looking at his phone in his lap which had information about the other players' cards. He went unnoticed for a long time over many sessions that each lasted many hours. He was finally discovered, not because someone noticed him looking at his phone on his lap, but because a live commentator who had both played against him and commentated during several of his games became suspicious of the plays he was making.

[webbles]

10 hours ago, JarMan said:

This is the classical logical fallacy I discuss in another thread: https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/74828-plausibility-evidence-and-the-search-for-explanations/page/3/

A small chance of a naturalistic event occurring cannot be logically interpreted to mean that a supernatural explanation is better. It's fine to say that you take it on faith that God was involved. It's not fine to say God must be involved because you find naturalistic explanations wanting.

I'm not talking about needing a supernatural explanation.  I think it is more realistic for Joseph to have written the small plates than for him to have a manuscript that already contains them.  Joseph would have had about a year to come up with the contents in the small plates and he filled up the space with Isaiah, a few prophecies from the original manuscript, and his own narration.

10 hours ago, JarMan said:

As you know there was the translation period for the 116 pages and the translation period for the rest. The first period he didn't use the hat in the stone method exclusively. At times Emma transcribed what he said from behind a curtain or from another room in the house. With that type of distance it would have been easier to keep the manuscript hidden.

The 1829 period only consisted of about 60 days of translation. The vast majority of the time it was just Joseph and Oliver in the room. It's possible Oliver was aware of the manuscript so they would only have needed to go through the charade while others were present. However, I still believe Joseph could have kept the manuscript hidden from Oliver. The manuscript could have essentially existed in scroll form rather than being bound or a pile of loose papers. It would not be hard to advance a scroll periodically with one hand while the other hand held the hat. Some sort of very simple, miniature scaffolding could have been used to hold the scroll in place on his lap or attached to the underside of the table.

If you are including Oliver in the deception, then you've added more complexity to the scheme and it makes it even less probable.  So lets keep Oliver out of the picture.  Lets say that Joseph s really, really good.  He has a 99% chance of pulling it off every day.  To do that for 60 days, that gives a probability of 54%.  That's not really great.  And I doubt Joseph had a 99% chance per day.  If it was just 98% (still good), it is now 30%.  97% per day is 16%.  That's why the length of time hurts.

10 hours ago, JarMan said:

Joseph also kept his family and friends in fear of seeing the plates, possibly in order to help keep the distance between them and the manuscript.

He rarely had the plates out when he was translating.  So I don't see why this fear would keep any distance between them and him.

10 hours ago, JarMan said:

As an example of a similar modern feat, see the story of Mike Postle who succeeded in cheating at Poker for over a year. Here he was sitting at a poker table with up to 9 other people while also being live-streamed. Yet he was periodically looking at his phone in his lap which had information about the other players' cards. He went unnoticed for a long time over many sessions that each lasted many hours. He was finally discovered, not because someone noticed him looking at his phone on his lap, but because a live commentator who had both played against him and commentated during several of his games became suspicious of the plays he was making.

That story actually doesn't help the case.  He won 62 games in that timespan (https://www.theringer.com/2019/10/4/20899034/poker-cheating-mike-postle-stones-gambling-hall-twitch-no-limit-holdem-sacramento-veronica-brill says he won 62 games out of 69).  The cheat also didn't appear to be phone based since he won several of those games when phones were banned.  So he probably had something hidden in his clothing that he didn't even need to look at.  That makes it fairly easy to hide from people around you.  So, if he could pull off his cheat with 99% accuracy, he would have a total probability of 53.6% at the end.  And it looks like he was caught after that time.  Joseph isn't as lucky.  He needed something physical to look at, either a scroll, paper, etc.  So, if Postle could be discovered after roughly the same number of days as Joseph and Postle had a better way to hid his cheat, I don't see how Joseph could have pulled it off.

[why me]

On 10/2/2022 at 11:41 PM, mfbukowski said:

I am sure you know it was dictated?

I am not sure if I understand what you mean in relation to the seer stone. However, we knew about the head in the hat back in the 70s. History was taught. Many saints read The Mormon Experience by Leonard Arrington. However that book did not mention the head in the hat but it dd reference David Whitmer's Address to all Believer's in Christ book.

[california boy]

I have a pretty basic question.  Where did the small plates go?  Were they bound with the large plates?  Were there two different sets of plates?   Has anyone ever testified to seeing the small plates and the large plates?  Did the witnesses testify that they saw both the small plates and the large plates?  I have never heard anything about the small plates after the 116 pages was lost.  Has anyone else? 

Something that also doesn't make sense to me, unless I am missing something.  Why would Mormon start the narrative with small plates and then switch to different size plates?  

[JustAnAustralian]

47 minutes ago, california boy said:

Something that also doesn't make sense to me, unless I am missing something.  Why would Mormon start the narrative with small plates and then switch to different size plates?  

He didn't.

The text is pretty clear. Words of Mormon says that he finished the abridgement of what he thought were "the plates" and then found the small plates, and put them with his abridgement.

Also, since they were going with the remainder of his record, they would have been bound together.

Edited October 4, 2022 by JustAnAustralian

[teddyaware]

57 minutes ago, JustAnAustralian said:

He didn't.

The text is pretty clear. Words of Mormon says that he finished the abridgement of what he thought were "the plates" and then found the small plates, and put them with his abridgement.

Also, since they were going with the remainder of his record, they would have been bound together.

Of course, the 900 pound gorilla in this room is the mind boggling text of the Book of Mormon itself! As one who knows for a surety that the Book of Mormon is the word of God, if it weren’t for the solemn seriousness of it all threads like this would almost be amusing to observe how some actually think they can negate the singularity of the text’s exalted magnificence by coming up with some alternative theory as to how the text itself came to be. I believe the day will come when many of these desperate explanation seekers will finally have their spiritual eyes opened (probably in the spirit world), and when that day comes they will stand in flabbergasted amazement as they try to fathom how it was possible for them to not be able to comprehend and appreciate the marvelous book of miraculous wonders that a merciful God placed right before their eyes.

Edited October 4, 2022 by teddyaware

[webbles]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

I have a pretty basic question.  Where did the small plates go?  Were they bound with the large plates?  Were there two different sets of plates?   Has anyone ever testified to seeing the small plates and the large plates?  Did the witnesses testify that they saw both the small plates and the large plates?  I have never heard anything about the small plates after the 116 pages was lost.  Has anyone else? 

Something that also doesn't make sense to me, unless I am missing something.  Why would Mormon start the narrative with small plates and then switch to different size plates?  

The plates were most like in the following order: Book of Lehi (116 pages), Mosiah (most likely not named Mosiah) -> Moroni, 1 Nephi -> Omni.  Words of Mormon could be at the end of Omni, at the end of Moroni, or at the beginning of Mosiah.  The paper that JarMan linked to (https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/that-which-you-have-translated-which-you-have-retained/) gives a really good theory that Words of Mormon is actually part of the chapter before Mosiah 1.

So, if you had the golden plates in front of you, the small plates would have been the last leafs of the unsealed portion.

[JarMan]

5 hours ago, webbles said:

I'm not talking about needing a supernatural explanation.  I think it is more realistic for Joseph to have written the small plates than for him to have a manuscript that already contains them.  Joseph would have had about a year to come up with the contents in the small plates and he filled up the space with Isaiah, a few prophecies from the original manuscript, and his own narration.

I'm convinced Joseph did not have the ability to create the small plates. And I think you're selling them short.

5 hours ago, webbles said:

If you are including Oliver in the deception, then you've added more complexity to the scheme and it makes it even less probable.  So lets keep Oliver out of the picture.  Lets say that Joseph s really, really good.  He has a 99% chance of pulling it off every day.  To do that for 60 days, that gives a probability of 54%.  That's not really great.  And I doubt Joseph had a 99% chance per day.  If it was just 98% (still good), it is now 30%.  97% per day is 16%.  That's why the length of time hurts.

I don't think this is as big a problem as you imagine. Oliver doesn't need to be a conspirator; he can simply be a dupe. Let's say Oliver does see the manuscript. Joseph can tell him the Lord prepared the manuscript for him to use as an aid in the translation process. Oliver doesn't necessarily know exactly what's on the manuscript. There are an infinite number of things Joseph could have come up with that would still allow Oliver to think Joseph was actually translating the plates despite the presence of a manuscript. 

5 hours ago, webbles said:

He rarely had the plates out when he was translating. So I don't see why this fear would keep any distance between them and him.

You need to read what the witnesses have said then (or what they purportedly said). Martin Harris: "He had also been directed to let no mortal see them under the penalty of immediate death, which injunction he steadfastly adheres to." Also, "Harris declares, that when he acted as amanuenses, and wrote the translation, as Smith dictated, such was his fear of the Divine displeasure, that a screen (sheet) was suspended between the prophet and himself."

5 hours ago, webbles said:

That story actually doesn't help the case.  He won 62 games in that timespan (https://www.theringer.com/2019/10/4/20899034/poker-cheating-mike-postle-stones-gambling-hall-twitch-no-limit-holdem-sacramento-veronica-brill says he won 62 games out of 69).  The cheat also didn't appear to be phone based since he won several of those games when phones were banned.  So he probably had something hidden in his clothing that he didn't even need to look at.  That makes it fairly easy to hide from people around you.  So, if he could pull off his cheat with 99% accuracy, he would have a total probability of 53.6% at the end.  And it looks like he was caught after that time.  Joseph isn't as lucky.  He needed something physical to look at, either a scroll, paper, etc.  So, if Postle could be discovered after roughly the same number of days as Joseph and Postle had a better way to hid his cheat, I don't see how Joseph could have pulled it off.

He definitely used a phone in his lap during some of the games. See, for instance this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSzyRWMhlhE. For some context here (I know not everyone has been in a poker room), Postle was in a well-lit poker room with up to nine other players around the table. In addition, there were other people such as servers who walked behind him. There are also security cameras that were there for the sole purpose of catching cheaters, as well as a live stream feed watched by a whole lot of people online. This means he had dozens, hundreds, likely thousands of sets of eyeballs on him. The video I linked to is one part of a five part series that watches him during a single five hour session of poker. One session! He did this multiple times and got away with it. There were some games where phones were banned, but we don't know if he smuggled in a phone during those games or not. He was never caught in the act!

Let's contrast this with Joseph Smith's environment. I'll focus on the 1829 process. Here he was in a poorly lit room (they put a blanket over the window according to one eye witness) with one or a handful of friends or family members in the room. Joseph likely had control of how the room was set up which means he could have positioned himself with his back to the wall. There is some evidence he kept the plates nearby wrapped in a cloth. This could have been the box that normally held the manuscripts. None of the eyewitness accounts mention going behind the table where he probably kept the "plates." This could have been because they literally feared instant death should they happen to see them, as expressed by Martin Harris.

Given what Mike Postle accomplished under conditions much less favorable than Joseph Smith's, it's perfectly plausible that Joseph could have pulled this off. 

 

[webbles]

1 hour ago, JarMan said:

I don't think this is as big a problem as you imagine. Oliver doesn't need to be a conspirator; he can simply be a dupe. Let's say Oliver does see the manuscript. Joseph can tell him the Lord prepared the manuscript for him to use as an aid in the translation process. Oliver doesn't necessarily know exactly what's on the manuscript. There are an infinite number of things Joseph could have come up with that would still allow Oliver to think Joseph was actually translating the plates despite the presence of a manuscript. 

Sure, Oliver might not realize what the papers are the first time but once he saw them, he won't miss them again.  He'll constantly see them over and over again.  And then Oliver never mentions it to anyone.  You either have to have Oliver be a co-conspirator or never have him see it.  And both those options aren't good.

1 hour ago, JarMan said:

He definitely used a phone in his lap during some of the games. See, for instance this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSzyRWMhlhE. For some context here (I know not everyone has been in a poker room), Postle was in a well-lit poker room with up to nine other players around the table. In addition, there were other people such as servers who walked behind him. There are also security cameras that were there for the sole purpose of catching cheaters, as well as a live stream feed watched by a whole lot of people online. This means he had dozens, hundreds, likely thousands of sets of eyeballs on him. The video I linked to is one part of a five part series that watches him during a single five hour session of poker. One session! He did this multiple times and got away with it. There were some games where phones were banned, but we don't know if he smuggled in a phone during those games or not. He was never caught in the act!

Let's contrast this with Joseph Smith's environment. I'll focus on the 1829 process. Here he was in a poorly lit room (they put a blanket over the window according to one eye witness) with one or a handful of friends or family members in the room. Joseph likely had control of how the room was set up which means he could have positioned himself with his back to the wall. There is some evidence he kept the plates nearby wrapped in a cloth. This could have been the box that normally held the manuscripts. None of the eyewitness accounts mention going behind the table where he probably kept the "plates." This could have been because they literally feared instant death should they happen to see them, as expressed by Martin Harris.

Given what Mike Postle accomplished under conditions much less favorable than Joseph Smith's, it's perfectly plausible that Joseph could have pulled this off. 

We actually don't know how Postle pulled it off.  Many think it was a phone in his lap.  If you'll notice in that video, lots of phones are visible.  So the fact that his phone is in his lap wouldn't raise any alarms.  And viewing what is on a phone screen is difficult to do from an angle.  I doubt it is a phone.

So, Postle probably had a higher probability of hiding it.  Instead of 99%, maybe it was 99.5% or even 99.9%.  With 99.5% over 62 sessions, that is 73%.  That's pretty good.  With 99.9%, that is 94% which is really nice.

But Joseph doesn't have 99%.  I doubt he even has 90%.  He doesn't have a tiny phone that is easily hidden and that no one would find amiss.  He either has 200+ sheets of paper or a roll that is big enough for 200+ sheets of paper.  Those aren't as easy to hide.  He has a table that is tiny and barely covers his lap (see the size of room in the Whitmer home and the size of tables they would have there).  He is sleeping in the same room with Oliver when they first arrive at the Whitmers and then later with his wife.  He doesn't have the ability to setup the room before someone enters because people are already in there.

1 hour ago, JarMan said:

You need to read what the witnesses have said then (or what they purportedly said). Martin Harris: "He had also been directed to let no mortal see them under the penalty of immediate death, which injunction he steadfastly adheres to." Also, "Harris declares, that when he acted as amanuenses, and wrote the translation, as Smith dictated, such was his fear of the Divine displeasure, that a screen (sheet) was suspended between the prophet and himself."

I'm not talking about the translation period of the 116 pages.  I've mentioned before but if this was the only situation for the translation, then yes, I could fully believe that Joseph could pull off hiding a manuscript.  Martin wasn't the brightest person and was easily swayed.  But I'm talking about the 60 days with Cowdery and the Whitmers.  And just because Martin was scared about the plates doesn't mean that the others were.  We know Emma had on problem with them as she would move them around as she cleaned the house.  We have witnesses say that Joseph didn't even have the plates in the room when he did the translations.  We also know that there were other people in the room besides Joseph and a scribe.  With Joseph having his head in his hat, that means he won't be able to notice what other people are looking at.  This allows all the other people in the room to look over curiously and see what he is doing.

[JarMan]

54 minutes ago, webbles said:

Sure, Oliver might not realize what the papers are the first time but once he saw them, he won't miss them again.  He'll constantly see them over and over again.  And then Oliver never mentions it to anyone.  You either have to have Oliver be a co-conspirator or never have him see it.  And both those options aren't good.

This is a false dichotomy. You said you had looked into possible naturalistic explanations and found them wanting. This is easy to do if you alone get to set the bounds of what is possible and what isn't.

58 minutes ago, webbles said:

We actually don't know how Postle pulled it off.  Many think it was a phone in his lap.  If you'll notice in that video, lots of phones are visible.  So the fact that his phone is in his lap wouldn't raise any alarms.  And viewing what is on a phone screen is difficult to do from an angle.  I doubt it is a phone.

You haven't watched the youtube videos, then. It clearly is a phone. He takes it off the siderail and holds it in his lap while he peeks at it. He pretends to re-check his cards, but he's really looking into his lap. Much as Joseph pretended to look into the hat but really looked into his lap.

1 hour ago, webbles said:

So, Postle probably had a higher probability of hiding it.  Instead of 99%, maybe it was 99.5% or even 99.9%.  With 99.5% over 62 sessions, that is 73%.  That's pretty good.  With 99.9%, that is 94% which is really nice.

This isn't a mathematical exercise. It's not like they were shooting free throws. The point is that somebody sitting in a chair behind a table was able to deceive thousands of witnesses over a period of many, many hours by secretly looking at a device hiding in his lap. Most of the people deceived were poker players who strive to observe their opponents in order to pick up tells. This was certainly a heavier lift than Joseph's.

1 hour ago, webbles said:

But Joseph doesn't have 99%.  I doubt he even has 90%.  He doesn't have a tiny phone that is easily hidden and that no one would find amiss.  He either has 200+ sheets of paper or a roll that is big enough for 200+ sheets of paper.  Those aren't as easy to hide.  He has a table that is tiny and barely covers his lap (see the size of room in the Whitmer home and the size of tables they would have there).  He is sleeping in the same room with Oliver when they first arrive at the Whitmers and then later with his wife.  He doesn't have the ability to setup the room before someone enters because people are already in there.

Perhaps Joseph had a series of scrolls that he could change out. He leaves what he's not using in his box he calls the plates. And we don't know what table Joseph had at the time. Assuming Oliver was sitting at the same table I think it's fair to say it was at a comfortable writing height. This would have been sufficient to hide the manuscript behind. And he didn't do the translation in someone's bedroom. He initiates the process when the coast is clear, perhaps while the household is out doing their morning chores. 

1 hour ago, webbles said:

I'm not talking about the translation period of the 116 pages.  I've mentioned before but if this was the only situation for the translation, then yes, I could fully believe that Joseph could pull off hiding a manuscript.  Martin wasn't the brightest person and was easily swayed.  But I'm talking about the 60 days with Cowdery and the Whitmers.  And just because Martin was scared about the plates doesn't mean that the others were.  We know Emma had on problem with them as she would move them around as she cleaned the house.  We have witnesses say that Joseph didn't even have the plates in the room when he did the translations.  We also know that there were other people in the room besides Joseph and a scribe.  With Joseph having his head in his hat, that means he won't be able to notice what other people are looking at.  This allows all the other people in the room to look over curiously and see what he is doing.

We don't have witnesses that say Joseph didn't have plates in the room when he did the translation in 1829. Those accounts refer to the earlier period of translation. And as mentioned, there's evidence the "plates" were present, wrapped in cloth while he translated. I imagine that for the vast majority of the translation time it was just Joseph and Oliver. When others were present he would need to be more careful, obviously. These people believed Joseph had found ancient gold plates with the help of an an angel. But somehow they were sophisticated enough to know they were being deceived when Joseph told them that seeing the plates meant death? Joseph loved using the threat of imminent, divine destruction when he needed to manipulate the situation.