u/instrument_801

My young son is obsessed with “roomba vacuum”. He loves playing with it and has always been fascinated with it. First, it was a fascination and mild suspicion of it. Next, it turned into pressing the buttons and checking out the brushes. Lately, he has started throwing it around and we’re trying to teach him to treat our items nice. Anything that resembles a roomba he will yell out “roomba vacuum!”

For his birthday, my wife made him a hand-made roomba from scratch. She hand stuffed, sewed the stitches, sewed his name (redacted), and put together everything! He loves it and is obsessed. Hopefully it isn’t too abnormal 😂.

My young son is obsessed with “roomba vacuum”. He loves playing with it and has always been fascinated with it. First, it was a fascination and mild suspicion of it. Next, it turned into pressing the buttons and checking out the brushes. Lately, he has started throwing it around and we’re trying to teach him to treat our items nice. Anything that resembles a roomba he will yell out “roomba vacuum!”

For his birthday, my wife made him a hand-made roomba from scratch. She hand stuffed, sewed the stitches, sewed his name (redacted), and put together everything! He loves it and is obsessed. Hopefully it isn’t too abnormal 😂.

Brent Metcalfe recently left a comment on a video by Ben Park about the gold plates that I found particularly interesting. I think his argument could be used both for and against the authenticity of the Book of Mormon plates.

In the comment, Metcalfe notes that Joseph Smith generally did not hide ancient records that were part of the ordinary, physical world. He publicly displayed the Egyptian papyri and, at least briefly, allowed others to inspect and copy the Kinderhook plates. By contrast, the gold plates occupied a unique place in Joseph Smith’s narrative. Metcalfe argues that they were presented as artifacts that could only be seen under specific spiritual conditions and were therefore more akin to the supernatural treasures found in early American treasure lore than to ordinary historical objects.

- Point 1 (Against Authenticity): If Joseph Smith typically displayed ancient records that he possessed, his reluctance to openly exhibit the gold plates could be seen as evidence that they either did not exist or that whatever object he possessed could not withstand public scrutiny. Under this interpretation, the plates’ restricted visibility becomes a potential red flag. Of course, this becomes more complicated when considering the testimonies of the official and unofficial witnesses, many of whom claimed to have seen or handled the plates.
- Point 2 (For Authenticity): On the other hand, Joseph Smith’s tendency to display artifacts may actually strengthen the case for the plates’ authenticity. If he had created a convincing physical forgery, one might expect him to exhibit it widely, just as he did with other purported ancient artifacts. Instead, he consistently maintained that the plates were sacred objects that could only be viewed by those authorized by God. Under this interpretation, his refusal to openly display them is exactly what one might expect if he genuinely believed the plates were real and subject to divine restrictions.

In that sense, the same observation can be interpreted in opposite ways. Joseph Smith treated the gold plates differently from every other artifact that came into his possession. What do you think is the best explanation for that difference?