How Heavy Were Those Gold Plates? [Mormon

Paramount in the story of the Latter-day Saints is the account given by Joseph Smith of a visitation he received from the angel Moroni on September 21, 1823. He stated that after he retired to bed, his room became filled with light. At his bedside stood an angel who called Smith by name and told him that God had a work for the young boy to do. Smith claimed to have been told how, "there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang" (Joseph Smith – History 1:34).

Smith claims that he was not allowed to retrieve the buried plates for another four years. In verse 54 of his testimony, he related that the day he was allowed to dig up the record came on September 22, 1827. Mormon historian Leonard Arrington notes that, "Sometime after midnight in the early morning hours of September 22, Joseph and Emma drove to the hill, obtained the plates and hid them in an old birch log about three miles from the Smith home. With neighboring ruffians seeking the plates, thinking they were of great monetary worth, Joseph changed the hiding place several times and managed to keep them from being discovered and stolen" (Mormonism: From Its New York Beginnings, Dialogue, Vol.13, No.3, p.122). Eventually Joseph Smith would bring the plates home to be translated. His mother, Lucy Mack Smith, remembered the day this way:

"The plates were secreted about three miles from home... Joseph, on coming to them, took them from their secret place, and, wrapping them in his linen frock, placed them under his arm and started for home."

After proceeding a short distance, he thought it would be more safe to leave the road and go through the woods. Traveling some distance after he left the road, he came to a large windfall, and as he was jumping over a log, a man sprang up from behind it, and gave him a heavy blow with a gun. Joseph turned around and knocked him down, then ran at the top of his speed. About half a mile further he was attacked again in the same manner as before; he knocked this man down in like manner as the former, and ran on again; and before he reached home he was assaulted the third time. In striking the last one he dislocated his thumb, which, however, he did not notice until he came within sight of the house, when he threw himself down in the corner of the fence in order to recover his breath. As soon as he was able, he arose and came to the house. lie was still altogether speechless from fright and the fatigue of running" (History of Joseph Smith by His Mother, Lucy Smith, pp.107-108).

Smith stated, "These records were engraven on plates which had the appearance of gold, each plate was six inches wide and eight inches long, and not quite so thick as common tin. They were filled with engravings, in Egyptian characters, and bound together in a volume as the leaves of a book, with three rings running through the whole. The volume was something near six inches in thickness, a part of which was sealed" (History of the Church 4:537)

Numerous LDS leaders and historians have concurred with Smith's description. As to the size and thickness of the plates there seems to be no dispute.

Paintings of Smith show him receiving the plates with outstretched arms or resting on his knee. Although these are just an artist's perception, these descriptions do cause us to ask, "If they really existed, just how heavy would those plates have been given the size and description by Smith?"

The answer to this question is varied. We do know that gold weighs about 1,204 pounds per cubic foot. Given the dimensions by Smith, some have concluded that the plates could have weighed as much as 234 pounds to as little as 100 pounds. The heavier weight is based on what would probably be the total weight of a solid block of gold measuring the size of Smith's plates. This weight, proponents say, would tend to be unlikely due to "air space" between the uneven plates. This argument becomes tenuous given the soft nature of gold. Plates of gold stacked in the manner described by Smith would easily flatten out, thus displacing any arbitrary "air space" suggested by LDS apologists.

Mormon metallurgist Reed Putnam estimates that if the plates were made of pure gold, they would have probably weighed around 100 pounds. Still, this is not at all a reasonable weight that can be carried by even the strongest of New York farm boys. In perspective, that would be like carrying a bag of Portland cement under one's arm.

The possibility of the plates being too heavy for Smith to carry has not escaped the notice of LDS apologists. To credit their founder with the ability to carry such a weight while running at "the top of his speed" would seem to conclude that Smith had no idea how heavy gold really was, thus making it appear that he fabricated this story.

Researchers for the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS) have attempted to come to Smith's rescue. In a bulletin cover (number F-15) they provide an explanation for this anomaly. Entitled "Where the Gold Plates Gold?" it theorized that the plates were not made of pure gold at all. Rather, they theorize, that they were composed of an alloy called tumbaga. This Central American alloy, the article states, is made up of 8K gold and copper. In other words, the plates would have been primarily composed of 66% copper and only 33% gold.

The article debunks the notion that the plates could have been made of pure gold since "pure gold would be too soft to make useful plates." However, this argument overlooks Mosiah 8:9 in the Book of Mormon that mentions 24 Jaredite plates that were "filled with engravings, and they are of pure gold."

This argument also fails to take into account a photograph in earlier editions of the Book of Mormon that showed a "gold tablet found in Persia in 1961, dating to the time of Darius II (Fourth century B.C.), covered with cuneiform engravings." The caption went on to say, "This tablet is about the size of the gold plates of the Book of Mormon." In his book entitled An Approach to the Book of Mormon, Dr. Hugh Nibley also mentioned this parallel as evidence to the fact that Smith had plates of gold. If the plates deposited by Moroni were really an alloy made primarily of copper, why go to such lengths?

The FARMS' article supports the tumbaga theory by referring to William Smith, Joseph's brother, who was quoted in the Saints Herald (31, 1884, p. 644) as stating that the plates were a mixture of gold and copper. One can only imagine how William arrived at such a conclusion since there is no evidence to suggest that the plates were ever analyzed. Making William's statement even less credible is the fact that he admitted to having never seen the plates. He claimed, "I was permitted to lift them as they laid in a pillow-case; but not to see them, as was contrary to the commands he had received. They weighed about sixty pounds according to the best of my judgment" (A New Witness for Christ in America 2:417). FARMS insists that tumbaga plates would have weighed only about 53 pounds. In other words, it would be like carrying a sack of redi-mix concrete.

Despite the effort from FARMS to change LDS history, it appears that the tumbaga theory is not being taken too seriously. As recently as May 15, 1999, the LDS Church News ran an article entitled "Hands-on opportunity." Speaking of Joseph Smith, it read, "He had also been instructed by an angel, Moroni, who had met with him each year for four years. On his last visit, he was entrusted with plates of solid gold, which he had been translating by the power of the Spirit."

Keep this in mind the next time you stop at a hardware store. Pick up a bag of cement, tuck it under your arm, and imagine yourself carrying it for a distance of three miles running as fast as you can at least part of the way. For added effect you could jump over a display or two.

The foundation myths of all religions are ridiculous to the non-believer.

First of all, while it's true that "the foundation myths" of religions generally make it into that religion's "sacred documents," -- like as you mentioned, the virgin birth written about in the Bible...
...and yes, it's "so" that Joseph Smith's "first vision" account was later "canonized" within Mormon "scriptures"...
...but this account we're talking about on this thread made it "nowhere" into Mormon's official, canonized "scriptures..." -- so to place it on the same level as the "virgin birth" is a bit off-kilter.

The foundation myths of all religions are ridiculous to the non-believer. This one is no stranger than the notion of virgin birth or a talking snake and a magic apple. If one doesn’t believe, it all sounds literally unbelievable; if one does believe it sounds like gospel truth, literally.

Allow me to quote Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason (& then apply his comment to yours):

Source of this excerpt: Miracles or Myths

This reminds me of a comment I heard yesterday in a discussion about religious issues on Dennis Prager's show here in Los Angeles, noting that Friday, yesterday was Good Friday and also Passover. He accurately pointed out that the Exodus and Resurrection are the defining events of two of the world's major religions. They are not the highest of holidays but they are the most defining events. Then he said something rather interesting. Dennis said that he has callers that talk about these kinds of things that are so pregnant with religious significance and meaning--the resurrection and the Passover--but have said to him, "I have a hard time taking these stories literally." Prager said, "So what? It is the meaning that is most important." This point of view reflects comments that were made a number of times in this article, that it is not so much whether the event actually happened or not, it's the story or the spiritual truth that is communicated through the message. I think this is a profound misunderstanding. It comes into play in my comments on the notion of myth.

A myth is not the same as a fairy tale. You need to know this. Oftentimes, we think of it that way, but that is not what a myth is. A myth is a story. It's not true in the same way that a fairy tale is not true, so they are similar in that way, but they have a different purpose. A fairy tale is simply meant to entertain. A myth is a story meant to communicate a truth of life. The message has deep significance for the mysteries of the meaning of life.

So it seems that people are not concerned about the historicity of the events in the Bible because what is more important is not that they happened, but that they teach this deep life truth. The resurrection teaches about new life in Jesus. The chances of new beginnings. Power over death. Life after death. That's what the message is. Whether Jesus rose from the dead or not is quite incidental to the message of the resurrection story. The message is paramount. I think this is a false view. Certainly the apostles didn't have the belief that the message was more paramount than the history itself. In fact, the message was in the history. Without the history, there is no message. That was their point. So this view ignores the statements of those who wrote the Bible themselves.

Before this, Koukl was commenting on a Time Magazine article describing miracles of the Bible, and Time presented these miracles as a "mystery" -- prompting Koukl to essentially ask why Time didn't simply ask whether these miracles happened or not? Why were they presented as a mystery if they really happened? Isn't it at least important to raise the Q if they occurred or not?

So...let's ask that Q as applied to these two accounts:
(a) Did the virgin birth occur in history?
(b) Did Smith run three miles at top speed hauling a few hundred pounds of solid gold around? And then did he "translate" a nobody-heard of language that he didn't know?

In answering (a) the series of Q are:
(1) Did the Biblical writers present the virgin birth as a historical account? (Answer: Yes)
(2) Did the Biblical writers seamlessly attribute the virgin birth to divine intervention? (Answer: Yes -- the Holy Spirit "overshadowed" her)
(3) And: was the virgin birth written in the same mythical religious style as other indigenous religions? (Answer: no)
(4) Do even Mormon "scriptures" like the Book of Mormon claim the Virgin birth to be true? (Answer: yes)

Now let's compare these same similar series of Q to answering (b)...the series of Q being:
(1) Do the Mormon "scriptures" talk about Joseph's account of running with these gold plates -- the subject of this thread? (Answer: No...it was in other Mormon documents that even Mormons don't elevate as special sacred status)
(2) Does this "History of the Church" account attribute divine intervention for Smith that allowed him to run that fast carrying something that heavy -- hence giving glory to God and not man? (Answer: No)
(3) And: was this Mormon account written in the same mythical religious style as other indigenous religions -- as Irish leprachauns who were competing for buried treasure? (Answer: Yes: Traveling some distance after he left the road, he came to a large windfall, and as he was jumping over a log, a man sprang up from behind it, and gave him a heavy blow with a gun. Joseph turned around and knocked him down, then ran at the top of his speed. About half a mile further he was attacked again in the same manner as before; he knocked this man down in like manner as the former, and ran on again; and before he reached home he was assaulted the third time. Source: History of Joseph Smith by His Mother, Lucy Smith, pp.107-108).
(4) Do even Christian historical documents provide any reinforcement to Smith's claims about these gold plates? (Answer: no)

There ya go: You've got to dig deeper muir_redwoods if you're going to start comparing the foundation of Christmas to this Smith myth.

I think the question is, do you have any proof, other than faith, that it was a virgin birth?

Sam:
Why do you think that “faith” has only a vertical dimension? Isn’t “trust” a component of “faith?” If you worship at a local church, don’t you “trust” (to various degrees) what the pastor is saying? Isn’t that what one might call “horizontal” trust?

In the same way, when we are reading any writer of antiquity – and they are NOT writing in the language of myth – but conveying accounts as if they were eyewitnesses, do we not have the opportunities to extend trust (or distrust) in these accounts?

If you’re a juror in a case, and you are presented with written evidence by an eyewitness who is now deceased, are you thereby not weighing the “eyewitness testimony” of this person?

Are you telling us that all of this involves only a “me and God faith” thing – but that eyewitnesses bear no role in this process? If so, were you to serve as a juror in a trial case, would you only “pray” and exercise “faith” in God to determine the guilt or innocence of the person on trial?

Why would you exercise distinct standards in a trial by jury than scrutinizing the eyewitnesses who are recorded in the books of the Bible – including the very authors who wrote them? (You know the Bible is not simply one book; it’s 40 or so authors who wrote them).

It’s on this basis I claim: Ask any prosecuting attorney if eyewitnesses have been enough to convict somebody…even with lack of direct evidence. If you have such testimony, usually coupled with circumstantial evidence, and character witnesses attesting to the eyewitnesses, ‘tis enough to convict. And jurors don't convict people based upon "faith" or burning bosoms.

Sam, too often people neglect to treat the books of the Bible as written by eyewitnesses who are offering their testimony – and they are also reporting additional eyewitnesses. As such, people tend to treat eyewitnesses in courtroom trials – and hold them to distinct standards than they would eyewitness writers of history.

It is the same with Mormons. They have faith that their documentation is correct.

Well, now apply the above comments to Mormons. It’s not simply a “me and God ‘faith’” on this…
...just like the Bible and the eyewitnesses who recorded the historicity of it, we need to also review the eyewitnesses & secondary witnesses who recorded these events – like what is in the Mormon document, History of the Church.

We need to ask both is this a trustworthy (secondary) source?
And does the account stand up to its own consistency, etc.?

They cant find the gold plates, we couldnt find Jesus’ body.

Sorry, but Jesus’ “body” appeared to up to 500 witnesses before heading back to heaven. Most of the so-called “eyewitnesses” of these plates (like 2 of the top 3 witnesses) said they only “saw” the plates with “eyes of FAITH” – distinct than “eyewitness” testimony). Other “witnesses” mentioned in the article of this thread – like brother William Smith – also never actually “saw” the plates but supposedly picked them up covered by a pillowcase. (Who knows what may have been inside) Bottom line – unlike Jesus’ resurrection which was openly paraded by hundreds of people – these gold plates were sequestered away from just about all people.

Once again, you want to jump from Point A (grave to the sky in Jesus’ case; hiding place to the sky in Smith’s “gold plate” case) minus carefully weighing the horizontal dimension that occurred in the interim time between the two destinations. It just doesn’t work the way you've described. Yes, faith trumps reason; but God gave us reason. He is not expecting us to deny reason or be unreasonable. We know Pentecost (Acts 2) occurred 50 days after the resurrection. And we know the Ascension is recorded prior to that (Acts 1). It appears Jesus hung around for weeks before ascending; and it would have been necessary for these gold plates to have been around for years and years per Smith's tale. If Jesus' bodily resurrection could drum up enough eyewitnesses where the apostle Paul could later claim that none of what happened was done "in a corner," then it's not merely based upon a contemporary supernatural faith; there's a dimension that also includes historical events.

If you denegrate someone’s faith because you think it is silly, you have to be welcome to them doing the same to you.

I am saying examine this the same way a jury would examine a case.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.