Significance of the plates

[naturenut]

I understand that the golden plates and Joseph's translation of them are central to the lds church and are part of what makes Mormonism fascinating.  It's troubling to me that descriptions of the plates vary so greatly among witnesses.

Joseph's father is said to have described them as being about half an inch thick.  Emma, who didn't see them but who was allowed to handle them, said the plates were pliable like paper and could be ruffled like pages of a book.  I believe brother William agreed with Emma.

There's a wide margin of error between half inch thick and paperlike.  What could account for it and how do Saints reconcile the disparity? Please understand I'm not trying to hold anyone's feet to the fire but am just trying to get some sort of sense of these objects that are so fundamental to the beliefs built upon them.

[Admin]

Maybe you can post full quotes and the sources of those quotes rather than put 'they said'.

[naturenut]

Sure.

Emma; "They seemed to be pliable like thick paper and would rustle with a metallic sound when the edges were moved by the thumb as one does sometimes thumb the edges of a book. "

Saints Herald Vol.  xxvi october 1,1879, p. 289

Joseph Sr. ; consisted of a set of gold plates, about six inches wide, and nine or ten inches long, half an inch thick

Historical Magazine Vol.  7 May 1870 Interview with the Father of Joseph Smith

[Moronipromise]

Well, some people aren't really good at describing things.  Maybe this is the case with them?

[naturenut]

Well, some people aren't really good at describing things.   Maybe this is the case with them?

Thank you for responding, Moronipromise.  At least that's something.

[GoldieLocks]

I understand that the golden plates and Joseph's translation of them are central to the lds church and are part of what makes Mormonism fascinating.   It's troubling to me that descriptions of the plates vary so greatly among witnesses. 

Joseph's father is said to have described them as being about half an inch thick.   Emma, who didn't see them but who was allowed to handle them, said the plates were pliable like paper and could be ruffled like pages of a book.   I believe brother William agreed with Emma. 

There's a wide margin of error between half inch thick and paperlike.   What could account for it and how do Saints reconcile the disparity? Please understand I'm not trying to hold anyone's feet to the fire but am just trying to get some sort of sense of these objects that are so fundamental to the beliefs built upon them. 

I think we should go with Joseph Smith's version since he is the first one who saw the plates.  He said in a newspaper that "each plate was six inches [15 cm] wide and eight inches [20 cm] long, and not quite so thick as common tin.  They were. . . 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 [15 cm] in thickness".

[naturenut]

Thanks, Goldielocks. Yes, that's pretty definitive, all right.  Did he say how many plates there were?

What I was really wondering, though, is whether the wildly varying desciptions (from paper-like to a half inch thick) were a source of concern to many Saints, since the plates were. . . well, you know. . . the very foundation of the religion.

Just wondering, that's all.  Surely you know that we gentiles tend to prattle on amongst ourselves about some of the elements of Mormonism.  A lot of the things sound bizarre but endlessly fascinating Thanks again.

[Sariah_Gift]

What I was really wondering, though, is whether the wildly varying desciptions (from paper-like to a half inch thick) were a source of concern to many Saints, since the plates were. . . well, you know. . . the very foundation of the religion.

I would dare to say only few lds members really know about church history or would focus in details such as this so I dont think its a concern at all for them (generally speaking).