A Dialogue Starter for Thoughtful Conversation
Friends, I’ve been thinking about something that genuinely puzzles me, and I’d value hearing your perspective. You know I come at this from a different theological tradition, but I’m asking in the spirit of honest inquiry—not to score points, but because I find the question genuinely fascinating and I suspect you’ve thought about it more than I have.
The Question:
When I consider the narrative of the golden plates, I find myself wondering about their return to Moroni. Here’s what occupies my thinking: throughout Scripture, God seems remarkably willing to leave physical evidence of His direct intervention in human hands. The Israelites carried the original stone tablets—inscribed by God’s own finger—through the wilderness, into Canaan, and eventually into Solomon’s Temple. These weren’t replicated or copied and then withdrawn; the originals remained with God’s people for centuries until the Babylonian destruction.
So my question is this: Why would the pattern differ so significantly with the plates? If their continued physical presence could serve as an ongoing witness—something skeptics and believers alike could examine—why withdraw them?
I recognize there are thoughtful answers to this. Perhaps the emphasis on faith over empirical proof is intentional. Perhaps there’s something about the nature of the Restoration that requires a different evidentiary standard. I’m genuinely curious how you think through this.
An Invitation:
I’m not asking this as a ‘gotcha’—I’m asking because I think the question reveals something important about how we understand God’s relationship to physical evidence, human testimony, and the nature of faith itself. What has your reflection on this been?”
No “Babylonian destruction” that we know of in the history of Mormonism. The plates were supposedly taken back by the angel who brought it to Joseph Smith after he “translated” it. Humans are prone to idolizing things that has spiritual significance that’s why God destroys things instead of preserving them through the centuries until the present time. I’m not saying the Mormon’s golden plates have equal significance as the tablets of the 10 Commandments. I’m sure you have a better answer.
Christine, you raise an excellent point, and I appreciate the thoughtful engagement! You’re absolutely right that God sometimes removes sacred objects to prevent idolatry—the bronze serpent (Nehemiah 18:4) being a prime example, and Moses’ hidden burial site another.
However, I’d gently push back on the parallel. The biblical pattern shows God *first* providing verifiable evidence to the community of faith before removing objects. Thousands of Israelites *saw* the tablets, the ark, the serpent. The removal came *after* authentication, not instead of it.
With the golden plates, we have the inverse: removal *before* any independent verification. The witnesses never carefully examined the engravings, compared them to known languages, or had extended access. The plates appeared and vanished within a tight circle of Smith’s associates.
More importantly, God preserved His written Word for millennia—we have thousands of biblical manuscripts precisely *because* He intended Scripture to be examined, compared, and verified across generations. The “taken back to heaven” explanation conveniently exempts the Book of Mormon from the same evidentiary standard God applied to the Bible.
So while your theological instinct about idolatry is sound, I’d suggest the plates’ disappearance looks less like divine wisdom and more like a necessary exit strategy.
Thank you for reading and thinking deeply about these questions!