Don Bradley's Kinderhook Bomb

[_Buffalo]

Excellent points, Kevin.

by the way, I know that you've recently been allowed back at MAD, but that's no reason to ignore good old MDB. Just sayin.

[_onandagus]

Hey folks,

I have a tendency to spend way too much time on the boards when I do participate, which is why I usually do not.

I've been wanting to post something on what I think the implications of this find are, which I haven't gotten around to in the midst of responding to others' thoughts. If I do that, it won't be right here or right now. I'm not enjoying the current discussion--it merely provokes me to annoyance by misrepresenting what I've said and therefore draws me back into responding even when I should put my time toward my work. So, I'm scrambling my password, and won't be back for a while. Those who want to misrepresent me can now do so with the satisfaction that they will not have to face any response.

That said, I don't want to focus solely on the negative. Some of my thoughts on the issue have been sharpened by engaging with those here who've offered substantive critique. And the resulting paper will be better for it. Thanks to those who've been cordial, have taken a sincere interest in the evidence, and have offered substantive critique.

Cheers,

Don

[_Darth J]

I remember those merry old days, when official LDS publications touted the partial translation of the Kinderhook Plates as evidence of Joseph Smith's divine calling as a prophet, as well as corroborating the historicity of the Book of Mormon.

Good times, good times.

"Certain bell-shaped plates are said to have been discovered in a mound, in the vicinity of Kinderhook, Pike county, Illinois, by Robert Wiley, in 1843, and taken to Joseph Smith. Now, I wish to ask: 1. Were these plates translated by Joseph Smith? 2. If so, what were their contents? 3. Where are they? 4. Are they considered of any value in confirming the Book of Mormon? 5. Is there anything about them in any of the Church works?

"1 and 2. Near Kinderhook, in Pike county, Illinois-between fifty and sixty miles south and east of Nauvoo-on April 23, 1843, a Mr. Robert Wiley, while excavating a large mound, took from said mound six brass plates of bell shape, fastened by a ring passing through the small end, and fastened with two clasps, and covered with ancient characters. Human bones together with charcoal and ashes were found in the mound, in connection with the plates which evidently had been buried with the person whose bones were discovered. The plates were submitted to the Prophet, and speaking of them in his journal, under date of May 1, 1843, he says: "I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth."

"3. The plates were later placed in a museum in St. Louis, known as McDowell's, which was afterwards destroyed by fire, and the plates were lost.

"4. The event would go very far towards confirming the idea that in very ancient times, there was intercourse between the eastern and western hemispheres; and the statement of the prophet would mean that the remains were Egyptian. The fair implication, also, from the prophet's words is that this descendant of the Pharaohs possessed a kingdom in the new world; and this circumstance may account for the evidence of a dash of Egyptian civilization in our American antiquities.

"5. The whole account of the finding of the plates, together with the testimony of eight witnesses, besides Mr. Wiley, who were acquainted with the finding of the relics, as also the statement from the prophet's history, is found in the Millennial Star, vol. 21: pp. 40-44." (Improvement Era. Vol. VII. March 1904. No. 5.)

__________________________________________________________________

"A recent rediscovery of one of the Kinderhook plates which was examined by Joseph Smith, Jun., reaffirms his prophetic calling and reveals the false statements made by one of the finders. . . .

"The plates are now back in their original category of genuine. . . . Joseph Smith, Jun., stands as a true prophet and translator of ancient records by divine means and all the world is invited to investigate the truth which has sprung out of the earth not only of the Kinderhook plates, but of the Book of Mormon as well" (Welby W. Ricks, "The Kinderhook Plates," Improvement Era, Sept. 1962).

[_Darth J]

Maybe Joseph Smith was using the GAEL to encipher his translation of the Kinderhook Plates.......

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Hello,

At the end of the day, I just don't see the value-added component of Mr. Don's whatever-it-is.

What doesn't change is this:

- Joseph Smith was duped.

- Joseph Smith attempted an erroneous translation of fraudulent plates.

- The Mormon church touted his erroneous translation of fraudulent plates as evidence of his prophethood.

Mormon apologists can yammer on about this or that all day long but it still doesn't absolve their church of being wrong on this subject, and clearly uninspired.

*One would think with all the prophets and apostles since the KP were introduced God would've given one of them a head's up at some point*

V/R
Dr. Cameron

[_Patriarchal gripe]

Hello,

At the end of the day, I just don't see the value-added component of Mr. Don's whatever-it-is.

What doesn't change is this:

- Joseph Smith was duped.

- Joseph Smith attempted an erroneous translation of fraudulent plates.

- The Mormon church touted his erroneous translation of fraudulent plates as evidence of his prophethood.

Mormon apologists can yammer on about this or that all day long but it still doesn't absolve their church of being wrong on this subject, and clearly uninspired.

*One would think with all the prophets and apostles since the KP were introduced God would've given one of them a head's up at some point*

V/R
Dr. Cameron

I find it interesting that so much hot air was spent on this issue. We were supposed to sit on the edge of our seats until this new presentation blew the doors off modern Mormon apologetics, and all the critics would slink off to their dens of iniquity to never show their faces on the boards again. So far I hear a lot of head scratching and yawns over this one.

Meanwhile, in other circles, George Miller seems to have found some truly meaningful history that might prove a deeper connection between masonry and mormonism--not just the temple--and crickets chirp.

Let's go back to talking about something interesting like underwear or Glenn Beck.

[_harmony]

Meanwhile, in other circles, George Miller seems to have found some truly meaningful history that might prove a deeper connection between masonry and mormonism--not just the temple--and crickets chirp.

We cannot do anything about crickets in "other circles". Perhaps if whatever it is was brought here?

[Guest]

I find it interesting that so much hot air was spent on this issue. We were supposed to sit on the edge of our seats until this new presentation blew the doors off modern Mormon apologetics, and all the critics would slink off to their dens of iniquity to never show their faces on the boards again. So far I hear a lot of head scratching and yawns over this one.

Meanwhile, in other circles, George Miller seems to have found some truly meaningful history that might prove a deeper connection between masonry and mormonism--not just the temple--and crickets chirp.

Hey Patriarchal Gripe- I appreciate your kind words about my work. However, having said that, I think you underestimate the contribution that Don Bradley's work brings to the conversation. To be honest I have been somewhat disheartened by much of the response to Don's presentation.

Living outside of the Utah corridor, I was unable to attend either Sunstone or the FAIR conference. However, I had the privilege of being a beta-tester of the presentation at the MHA conference in May where Don showed a select few of us his findings over a dinner of BBQ ribs (Yummy!). I was actually amazed and stunned at what Don had discovered and Don should be applauded for a enlightening piece of scholarship.

The Kinderhook Plates, their translation, and the witnesses's testimonies have been an opaque conundrum for years among both Mormons and critics with arguments spanning the spectrum of just about every issue surrounding the event. In under an hour Don Bradley analyzed all the extant reports, produced new eye witness testimony, and discovered Joseph Smith's modus operandi for translation. Ignoring the infighting and distortions brought by the rose and grey tinted glasses worn by apologists and critics alike, Don brought his usual well reasoned historical eyes to bear on the subject, and clearly showed what had actually happened in 1843 in Nauvoo.

Don's presentation was indeed an academic game changer with regards to our understanding of the historical events surrounding the Kinderhook Plates episode. Sadly, it seems that everyone else on the field is playing an entirely different sport than Don. While Don is playing professional baseball, the participants on the boards are instead playing wiffle ball. Watching the response on the boards has been thoroughly disheartening. Almost the only aspect of Don's fascinating discovery that has been discussed is if it has greater value as a pointy stick for apologists or the critics. In the meantime the audience seems completely blind to the wide reaching implications of Don's find and the understanding it can bring to Joseph Smith's religious narrative and how Joseph Smith's mind worked.

Personally, I found Don's work to be solid, intellectually honest, and erudite in its presentation. The implications and the light it sheds on many aspects of the Mormon experience were apparent to me 3 minutes into the presentation with further light incrementally shed throughout the presentation. I just wish both the critics and the apologists would take off their blinders and see the much larger picture that Don's findings reveal.

[_jon]

George,

What, in your opinion, are the 2/3 main bullet points of information that we now know as a result of Don's presentation, that we didn't know before it?

[Guest]

What, in your opinion, are the 2/3 main bullet points of information that we now know as a result of Don's presentation, that we didn't know before it?

1. One of the unanswered questions in the field has been how much we can trust Clayton's account of the content of the translation. Some have argued that Clayton heard the translation first hand while others have concluded that the translation is gossip. Don laid out a rock solid case, using some evidence that had never seen the light of day, to show that Clayton's translation was most likely his own first hand account of hearing what Joseph Smith said personally. Additionally, the correlation between Clayton's account and the Ho ee oop hah hieroglyph provides a control whereby we can gauge the accuracy of Clayton's account.

2. Discrepancies exist between the differing accounts of what happened surrounding the translation of the plates, and these differences have led some to doubt the accuracy of the accounts. By providing new sources, including the contemporary report of a "Gentile", Don has provided a strong case that all parties are reporting the facts in good faith and accurately.

3. Don has clearly shown something that NOBODY up to this point has shown, the modus operandi by which Joseph Smith translated the KP. This in and of itself is fascinating and provides us insight into Joseph Smith's conception of the nature of ancient languages. Sadly the majority of participants in the these threads have simply argued about secular vs. revelatory while ignoring the modus operandi which is much more interesting than the partisan politics too many are steeped in here and other places.

4. Don's work also answers some key questions that nobody was, and everyone should have been, asking. For example Don's research shows how much of the KP Joseph Smith translated and which character(s) Joseph Smith translated.

There are many other points I could bring up, but I will leave it at that since you only asked for 2-3 points, and I have already gone over your suggested limit.