I need help with information on the kinderhook plates

[Blossom76]

thanks for trying to help everyone, I appreciate it.  Unfortunately it doesn't change anything   The questions are still there, the doubt is still there, the information in that CES letter is very hard to explain away, there are a lot of supporting evidence for this guys claims, both from LDS and non LDS scholars as well as respected egyptologists.  Its a very solid argument .

I'm very confused and sad right now 

[Jane_Doe]

21 minutes ago, Blossom76 said:

thanks for trying to help everyone, I appreciate it.  Unfortunately it doesn't change anything   The questions are still there, the doubt is still there, the information in that CES letter is very hard to explain away, there are a lot of supporting evidence for this guys claims, both from LDS and non LDS scholars as well as respected egyptologists.  Its a very solid argument .

I'm very confused and sad right now 

LDS and non LDS scholars = men

 egyptologists = men.

What about God?  What have you asked of God and listened to Him?    

Don't let anti-Christ junk succeed in it's goal of coming between you and God.  

Edited February 3, 2018 by Jane_Doe

[bytebear]

I hope your experience with the Book of Mormon shows that answers do come, and you recognize the Holy Ghost.  One think I want you to consider is that the Holy Ghost also reveals lies and those who would try to persuade people away from Christ.  I hope you recognize the sickening feeling as a prompting from God that the material you read is not Godly.  Just ask yourself if you find the analysis to bring you closer to God or further from God.  The Book of Abraham is, in my opinion., one of the critical revelations to the restoration and the Gospel of Christ.  It answers so many questions, and although you aren't there yet, is critical in understanding the Temple experience.   Simply put, the church could not exist without it.  Your concern should be far less about how it came to be, as to what it contains. It's no coincidence that we call the compilation of canonized truth the Pearl of Great Price.

[Blossom76]

I believe in the Book of Mormon but I'm not sure about this, I shall pray on it though.  But I'm not just going to 'make something fit' in the face of overwhelming evidence that it does not.  Just because I believe the book of mormon to be true doesn't mean that everything else about the church is automatically true.

Edited February 3, 2018 by Blossom76

[bytebear]

Ok, I have never read the CES Letter, but I looked it up and read the section on the Kinerhook plates.  The author quotes as follows:
 

Quote

"I insert facsimiles of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook... I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the historyof 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.” –Joseph Smith, Jr.

This is literally the only "official" comment ever made about the kinderhook plates in regards to Joseph Smith.  But the CES Letter author is manipulating you.  Smith never wrote that, nor did he ever say that.  As I said earlier, the quote is actually from William Clayton's journal. Early church history was often compiled from second hand sources and attributed as first hand.  So Clayton believes Smith said this, but we have no idea where he got his information from.  As far as we know, Smith saw then, said they look interesting, and never did anything more about it.  There was never an actual translation of any part of them, and no record other than the one above, of anything even relating to Smith and the plates.  Not a thing.  So, it's interesting that this anti-Mormon booklet would make a big deal out of a very small incident, and going to great lengths to convince you the quote is from Smith and not Clayton.  Certainly the one misleading you is the CES guy, not the church, which has several extensive histories (https://www.lds.org/ensign/1981/08/kinderhook-plates-brought-to-joseph-smith-appear-to-be-a-nineteenth-century-hoax?lang=eng), with much more detail about the Kinderhook plates. Ironically, the CES guy use the 1981 article to claim the church was caught in a hoax, but he ignores the bulk of the article to continue his manipulation.  The LDS article is cited, but the Clayton as source is completely ignored.  So, decide for yourself who you think is being dishonest.

Edited February 3, 2018 by bytebear

[Blossom76]

[Page 372]

Comment of the Prophtet on the Kinderhook Plates.

I insert fac-similes of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook, in Pike county, Illinois, on April 23, by Mr. Robert Wiley and others, while excavating a large mound. They found a skeleton about six feet from the surface of the earth, which must have stood nine feet high. The plates were found on the breast of the skeleton and were covered on both sides with ancient characters.

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.

This is from The History of The Church Volume 5 Chapter 19

https://byustudies.byu.edu/content/volume-5-chapter-19

@bytebear Church records are saying The Prophet (Joseph Smith) said this, I cross check all the information in the CES letter about this, I'm not just taking this guys word for it. The Church Says Jospeh Smith said this.  I don't assume the Church is being Dishonest when it said the Prophet said something. If its in offical Church History, written by the Church, then I should be able to trust their word for it shouldn't I? Or are you saying that I shouldn't?  Because if I can't trust what the church writes about their own history, then thats a really big problem.  I don't want to be misunderstood in all this, I am honestly trying to find a way to move past this, but its not good and there really is no excuse for it.

I like this church, I like the way of life it gives its members, but the main point of it is to worship God in a way that is acceptable to him.  Even if it is the best life I'm not sure its worth living if it is based on falsehood, or has started with the truth and then been corrupted.  Evidence is sometimes very black and white.  Its either true or its not.  And just because I want it to be true with every fibre in my being, doesn't mean that it will be.

The point is these plates were a fraud and were proven a fraud, yet Joseph said they contained the history of a man descendant from Ham, that's not true, that's a big problem.  

This is a quote on the subject from an LDS Historian Richard Bushman.

“Church historians continued to insist on the authenticity of the Kinderhook Plates until 1980 when an examination conducted by the Chicago Historical Society, possessor of one plate, proved it was a nineteenth-century creation.”

– LDS Historian Richard Bushman, Rough Stone Rolling, p.490

Edited February 3, 2018 by Blossom76

[askandanswer]

8 hours ago, Blossom76 said:

thanks for trying to help everyone, I appreciate it.  Unfortunately it doesn't change anything   The questions are still there, the doubt is still there, the information in that CES letter is very hard to explain away, there are a lot of supporting evidence for this guys claims, both from LDS and non LDS scholars as well as respected egyptologists.  Its a very solid argument .

I'm very confused and sad right now 

There's a real battle going on for your soul right now. What does your soul/heart say/feel about this?

it can be remarkable how quickly and completely a seemingly solid argument can be blown away by the smallest whisper of the Spirit. 

[Blossom76]

9 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

There's a real battle going on for your soul right now. What does your soul/heart say/feel about this?

it can be remarkable how quickly and completely a seemingly solid argument can be blown away by the smallest whisper of the Spirit. 

My heart/soul agrees with my brain, even though I am heartbroken over it, this just doesn't add up, solid evidence is solid evidence.  This is not satan trying to get my soul, this is just truth.  But I do appreciate your kindness and I don't want to tell anyone else what to think, but I"m not going to accept things as truth or 'shelf and ignore uncomfortable things' when I know, and can see strong evidence for it being false.

I still believe in the Book of Mormon, but so do a lot of other faiths

Edited February 3, 2018 by Blossom76

[askandanswer]

So when you read and pray about the Book of Mormon you feel good and peaceful and calm and sure. I think you feel that way because it is true and the Spirit is confirming to you that it is true.

So when you read about the CES letter and the Kinderhook plates you feel doubt, confusion and uncertainty. Do you think a plausible reason for those feelings might be because what you are reading is not true? The Spirits gives light and peace, the opposition tends to darkness and confusion. 

It seems to me as if your husband is stretching the boundaries of your agreement. My recollection is that you and he would both study about Catholicism and Mormonism for 18 months but what he has given you is much more to do with anti-Mormonism rather than Mormonism. How would he feel about bringing anti-Catholic material to your study sessions?

[askandanswer]

@Blossom76 I've just done a quick search on gospelink.com on the kinderhook plates. Many references came up. I only read the first one. Its very brief, from Encyclopedia of Mormonism. This iswhat it says. I encourage you to have a good look through what many references on gospelink.com

Kinderhook Plates

In April 1843 some alleged New World antiquities were presented to Joseph Smith for his opinion. The six 2 7/8-by-2 1/4-inch bell-shaped brass plates with strange engravings were reported to have been excavated in Kinderhook, Illinois, about seventy miles south of Nauvoo (HC 5:372-79). They were shown to Smith because of his claim to have translated the Book of Mormon from ancient gold plates taken from a New York hill in 1827.

The Kinderhook plates created a stir in Nauvoo; articles appeared in the Church press, an illustrated handbill was published, and some Latter-day Saints even claimed Joseph Smith said he could and would translate them. No translation exists, however, nor does any further comment from him indicating that he considered the plates genuine. After his assassination in June 1844, the incident was largely forgotten. Decades later two of the alleged discoverers announced that the plates were a hoax; an attempt to discredit Smith. By then, however, the Church was headquartered in Utah and little attention was paid to these strange disclosures.

Interest was kindled again in 1920 when the Chicago Historical Society acquired what appeared to be one of the original Kinderhook plates. Later the Chicago plate was subjected to a number of nondestructive tests, with inconclusive results. Then in 1980, the Chicago Historical Society gave permission for destructive tests, which were done at Northwestern University. Examination by a scanning electron microscope, a scanning auger microprobe, and X-ray fluorescence analysis proved conclusively that the plate was one of the Kinderhook six; that it had been engraved, not etched; and that it was of nineteenth-century manufacture. There thus appears no reason to accept the Kinderhookplates as anything but a frontier hoax.

[Blossom76]

11 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

So when you read and pray about the Book of Mormon you feel good and peaceful and calm and sure. I think you feel that way because it is true and the Spirit is confirming to you that it is true.

So when you read about the CES letter and the Kinderhook plates you feel doubt, confusion and uncertainty. Do you think a plausible reason for those feelings might be because what you are reading is not true? The Spirits gives light and peace, the opposition tends to darkness and confusion. 

It seems to me as if your husband is stretching the boundaries of your agreement. My recollection is that you and he would both study about Catholicism and Mormonism for 18 months but what he has given you is much more to do with anti-Mormonism rather than Mormonism. How would he feel about bringing anti-Catholic material to your study sessions?

He's catholic, catholic priests will show you anti catholic material, they use it for study purposes, it doesn't bother him (or any catholic I know) at all, he just find the answers for it or the reasons for it.  He's studied a LOT of anti-catholic material (not that we call it that, its just called opposition viewpoints - like lutheranism for example, the Catholic Church does a lot of study of his works)

The kinder hook plates were proven false in 1980, yet Jospeh claimed (as is recorded in church history as I referenced above) that they are the history of a man descendant from Ham.  Its just not true, its proven not true, you CAN"T argue with that.  You can see that it's true from Church History, that has nothing to do with doubt or anything else, its just a fact.  Honestly I'd feel a lot better if someone would just acknowledge that, its a fact, you can't deny it.

 

Edited February 3, 2018 by Blossom76

[Blossom76]

24 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

@Blossom76 I've just done a quick search on gospelink.com on the kinderhook plates. Many references came up. I only read the first one. Its very brief, from Encyclopedia of Mormonism. This iswhat it says. I encourage you to have a good look through what many references on gospelink.com

Kinderhook Plates

In April 1843 some alleged New World antiquities were presented to Joseph Smith for his opinion. The six 2 7/8-by-2 1/4-inch bell-shaped brass plates with strange engravings were reported to have been excavated in Kinderhook, Illinois, about seventy miles south of Nauvoo (HC 5:372-79). They were shown to Smith because of his claim to have translated the Book of Mormon from ancient gold plates taken from a New York hill in 1827.

The Kinderhook plates created a stir in Nauvoo; articles appeared in the Church press, an illustrated handbill was published, and some Latter-day Saints even claimed Joseph Smith said he could and would translate them. No translation exists, however, nor does any further comment from him indicating that he considered the plates genuine. After his assassination in June 1844, the incident was largely forgotten. Decades later two of the alleged discoverers announced that the plates were a hoax; an attempt to discredit Smith. By then, however, the Church was headquartered in Utah and little attention was paid to these strange disclosures.

Interest was kindled again in 1920 when the Chicago Historical Society acquired what appeared to be one of the original Kinderhook plates. Later the Chicago plate was subjected to a number of nondestructive tests, with inconclusive results. Then in 1980, the Chicago Historical Society gave permission for destructive tests, which were done at Northwestern University. Examination by a scanning electron microscope, a scanning auger microprobe, and X-ray fluorescence analysis proved conclusively that the plate was one of the Kinderhook six; that it had been engraved, not etched; and that it was of nineteenth-century manufacture. There thus appears no reason to accept the Kinderhookplates as anything but a frontier hoax.

[Page 372]

Comment of the Prophtet on the Kinderhook Plates.

I insert fac-similes of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook, in Pike county, Illinois, on April 23, by Mr. Robert Wiley and others, while excavating a large mound. They found a skeleton about six feet from the surface of the earth, which must have stood nine feet high. The plates were found on the breast of the skeleton and were covered on both sides with ancient characters.

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.

This is from The History of The Church Volume 5 Chapter 19

https://byustudies.byu.edu/content/volume-5-chapter-19

It clearly says that Jospeh Smith claimed the kinder hook plates contain the history of a descendant of Ham, this is in Church History - I don't understand how anyone else can't see the problem with this?  Church History Records are claiming something that has been proven to be a fraud, and that claim was made by the prophet who started the church.  I find this very very disturbing and very hard to believe that anyone who actually thinks about it for a second wouldn't find it disturbing as well.

Edited February 3, 2018 by Blossom76

[askandanswer]

I just looked it up and read the same quote as well from History of the Church. This is something new to me that I have never come across before. I'm a little perplexed and puzzled but not concerned. Mentally/spiritually, I will file it in my "too hard for now" basket. I see it as odd, interesting, unusual, surprising, but of no concern and no relevance in the eternal picture. Worst case scenario: Joseph Smith will have some explaining to do ( if he hasn't already done so) when the day of judgement comes. If Joseph Smith was in error or if he lied, that's between him and God and doesn't really have anything to do with me. Nor does it, or should it, have any affect on my testimony. If I look at the sky and it looks blue, and the Spirit says it is green, then the sky is green. I can't explain how or why the sky is green or why it appears to be blue when it is really green, and the reasons don't matter because if we are forced to choose between logic and the Spirit (and the times when we are faced with such a choice will be pretty rare) then its safer and wiser to trust the Spirit than our own reasoning. That's not fanaticism, that's faith, coupled with experience. 

[Blossom76]

10 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

I just looked it up and read the same quote as well from History of the Church. This is something new to me that I have never come across before. I'm a little perplexed and puzzled but not concerned. Mentally/spiritually, I will file it in my "too hard for now" basket. I see it as odd, interesting, unusual, surprising, but of no concern and no relevance in the eternal picture. Worst case scenario: Joseph Smith will have some explaining to do ( if he hasn't already done so) when the day of judgement comes. If Joseph Smith was in error or if he lied, that's between him and God and doesn't really have anything to do with me. Nor does it, or should it, have any affect on my testimony. If I look at the sky and it looks blue, and the Spirit says it is green, then the sky is green. I can't explain how or why the sky is green or why it appears to be blue when it is really green, and the reasons don't matter because if we are forced to choose between logic and the Spirit (and the times when we are faced with such a choice will be pretty rare) then its safer and wiser to trust the Spirit than our own reasoning. That's not fanaticism, that's faith, coupled with experience. 

Thank you for actually taking the time to read it, I appreciate it, I really do.  I'm glad you can do that, but for me I simply cannot.  To lie is human, but to lie about something and claim it was from God, well that's something entirely different in my books.  For if someone could make false claims about something like that, what else is not true?

David Whitmer testified after Jospeh inquired of the Lord after a failed revelation by God to Joseph to sell the copy-right of the Book Of Mormon

“...and behold the following revelation came through the stone: ‘Some revelations are of God; and some revelations are of man: and some revelations are of the devil.’ So we see that the revelation to go to Toronto and sell the copy-right was not of God, but was of the devil or of the heart of man.” – An Address to All Believers in Christ, p.31

How are we supposed to know what revelations are from God, from the devil, or from the heart of man if even the Prophet Joseph Smith couldn’t tell? It puts everything in a different light.

Edited February 3, 2018 by Blossom76

[askandanswer]

The whole incident reminds me of Numbers 19: 2-12.

2  And there was no water for the congregation: and they gathered themselves together against Moses and against Aaron.
3  And the people chode with Moses, and spake, saying, Would God that we had died when our brethren died before the LORD!
4  And why have ye brought up the congregation of the LORD into this wilderness, that we and our cattle should die there?
5  And wherefore have ye made us to come up out of Egypt, to bring us in unto this evil place?  it is no place of seed, or of figs, or of vines, or of pomegranates; neither is there any water to drink.
6  And Moses and Aaron went from the presence of the assembly unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and they fell upon their faces: and the glory of the LORD appeared unto them.
7  ¶ And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
8  Take the rod, and gather thou the assembly together, thou, and Aaron thy brother, and speak ye unto the rock before their eyes; and it shall give forth his water, and thou shalt bring forth to them water out of the rock: so thou shalt give the congregation and their beasts drink.
9  And Moses took the rod from before the LORD, as he commanded him.
10  And Moses and Aaron gathered the congregation together before the rock, and he said unto them, Hear now, ye rebels; must we fetch you water out of this rock?
11  And Moses lifted up his hand, and with his rod he smote the rock twice: and the water came out abundantly, and the congregation drank, and their beasts also.
12  ¶ And the LORD spake unto Moses and Aaron, Because ye believed me not, to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this congregation into the land which I have given them.
 

Do you see any substantial differences between Moses and the rock at Meribah, and Joseph Smith and the Kinderhook plates? And we know what the Lord thought of Moses and what happened to him. God called Moses His friend. Moses paid for this error by not being allowed to bring the Children of Israel to the promised land, but this incident had no impact on his calling as a prophet, and God's continued willingness to use him as a prophet. This incident had personal consequences for Moses, but no consequences for the people he led or the divinity and truthfulness of the work he was engaged in.  

[askandanswer]

2 minutes ago, Blossom76 said:

How are we supposed to know what revelations are from God, from the devil, or from the heart of man if even the Prophet Joseph Smith couldn’t tell?

You already know the answer to that question, you've already experienced it, quite possibly more than once.

[Blossom76]

3 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

The whole incident reminds me of Numbers 19: 2-12.

2  And there was no water for the congregation: and they gathered themselves together against Moses and against Aaron.
3  And the people chode with Moses, and spake, saying, Would God that we had died when our brethren died before the LORD!
4  And why have ye brought up the congregation of the LORD into this wilderness, that we and our cattle should die there?
5  And wherefore have ye made us to come up out of Egypt, to bring us in unto this evil place?  it is no place of seed, or of figs, or of vines, or of pomegranates; neither is there any water to drink.
6  And Moses and Aaron went from the presence of the assembly unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and they fell upon their faces: and the glory of the LORD appeared unto them.
7  ¶ And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
8  Take the rod, and gather thou the assembly together, thou, and Aaron thy brother, and speak ye unto the rock before their eyes; and it shall give forth his water, and thou shalt bring forth to them water out of the rock: so thou shalt give the congregation and their beasts drink.
9  And Moses took the rod from before the LORD, as he commanded him.
10  And Moses and Aaron gathered the congregation together before the rock, and he said unto them, Hear now, ye rebels; must we fetch you water out of this rock?
11  And Moses lifted up his hand, and with his rod he smote the rock twice: and the water came out abundantly, and the congregation drank, and their beasts also.
12  ¶ And the LORD spake unto Moses and Aaron, Because ye believed me not, to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this congregation into the land which I have given them.
 

Do you see any substantial differences between Moses and the rock at Meribah, and Joseph Smith and the Kinderhook plates? And we know what the Lord thought of Moses and what happened to him. God called Moses His friend. Moses paid for this error by not being allowed to bring the Children of Israel to the promised land, but this incident had no impact on his calling as a prophet, and God's continued willingness to use him as a prophet. This incident had personal consequences for Moses, but no consequences for the people he led or the divinity and truthfulness of the work he was engaged in.  

I do not see this in the same light at all, the truth is Joseph smith said something that was not true and claimed it was of God, that's not cool.

[Blossom76]

6 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

You already know the answer to that question, you've already experienced it, quite possibly more than once.

Having a spiritual experience with the book of mormon and whilst in prayer does not excuse all of this false revelation and claiming fraudulent plates are the records of Ham, the two have nothing to do with each other, they are seperate.  I find it insane to expect someone would excuse it all.  There is every chance that Jospeh fell as a prophet, it could have happened and it would explain a lot.  Prophets are to be known by their fruits -  especially those fruits they claim are of God.

Edited February 3, 2018 by Blossom76

[askandanswer]

8 minutes ago, Blossom76 said:

I do not see this in the same light at all, the truth is Joseph smith said something that was not true and claimed it was of God, that's not cool.

1 Kings 13: 8-26

8  And the man of God said unto the king, If thou wilt give me half thine house, I will not go in with thee, neither will I eat bread nor drink water in this place:
9  For so was it charged me by the word of the LORD, saying, Eat no bread, nor drink water, nor turn again by the same way that thou camest.
10  So he went another way, and returned not by the way that he came to Beth-el.
11  ¶ Now there dwelt an old prophet in Beth-el; and his sons came and told him all the works that the man of God had done that day in Beth-el: the words which he had spoken unto the king, them they told also to their father.
12  And their father said unto them, What way went he?  For his sons had seen what way the man of God went, which came from Judah.
13  And he said unto his sons, Saddle me the ass.  So they saddled him the ass: and he rode thereon,
14  And went after the man of God, and found him sitting under an oak: and he said unto him, Art thou the man of God that camest from Judah?  And he said, I am.
15  Then he said unto him, Come home with me, and eat bread.
16  And he said, I may not return with thee, nor go in with thee: neither will I eat bread nor drink water with thee in this place:
17  For it was said to me by the word of the LORD, Thou shalt eat no bread nor drink water there, nor turn again to go by the way that thou camest.
18  He said unto him, I am a prophet also as thou art; and an angel spake unto me by the word of the LORD, saying, Bring him back with thee into thine house, that he may eat bread and drink water.  But he lied unto him.
19  So he went back with him, and did eat bread in his house, and drank water.
20  ¶ And it came to pass, as they sat at the table, that the word of the LORD came unto the prophet that brought him back:
21  And he cried unto the man of God that came from Judah, saying, Thus saith the LORD, Forasmuch as thou hast disobeyed the mouth of the LORD, and hast not kept the commandment which the LORD thy God commanded thee,
22  But camest back, and hast eaten bread and drunk water in the place, of the which the LORD did say to thee, Eat no bread, and drink no water; thy carcase shall not come unto the sepulchre of thy fathers.
23  ¶ And it came to pass, after he had eaten bread, and after he had drunk, that he saddled for him the ass, to wit, for the prophet whom he had brought back.
24  And when he was gone, a lion met him by the way, and slew him: and his carcase was cast in the way, and the ass stood by it, the lion also stood by the carcase.
25  And, behold, men passed by, and saw the carcase cast in the way, and the lion standing by the carcase: and they came and told it in the city where the old prophet dwelt.
26  And when the prophet that brought him back from the way heard thereof, he said, It is the man of God, who was disobedient unto the word of the LORD: therefore the LORD hath delivered him unto the lion, which hath torn him, and slain him, according to the word of the LORD, which he spake unto him.
 

Edited February 3, 2018 by askandanswer

[askandanswer]

6 minutes ago, Blossom76 said:

 Prophets are to be known by their fruits -  especially those fruits they claim are of God.

This might be part of your answer. Consider the fruits of Joseph Smith - the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints as it is today, around the world and all that it does to make the world a better place, and its members better people. However, this is only a partial answer, as many Christians and non-Christians can rightly claim to have produced good fruits. 

[askandanswer]

Matthew 26: 69-75

69  ¶ Now Peter sat without in the palace: and a damsel came unto him, saying, Thou also wast with Jesus of Galilee.
70  But he denied before them all, saying, I know not what thou sayest.
71  And when he was gone out into the porch, another maid saw him, and said unto them that were there, This fellow was also with Jesus of Nazareth.
72  And again he denied with an oath, I do not know the man.
73  And after a while came unto him they that stood by, and said to Peter, Surely thou also art one of them; for thy speech bewrayeth thee.
74  Then began he to curse and to swear, saying, I know not the man.  And immediately the cock crew.
75  And Peter remembered the word of Jesus, which said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice.  And he went out, and wept bitterly.
 

And we know what the Lord thought of Peter and what happend to him.

Soften your heart @Blossom76

Edited February 3, 2018 by askandanswer

[Blossom76]

I know you mean well and are only trying to help.  But this doesn't excuse anything that Jospeh did, look, I don't want to upset anyone, but when something is proven false, its false.

[askandanswer]

I make no argument about the truth or error of Joseph' claim to have translated part of the Kinderhook plates. Perhaps he did, perhaps he didn't. The question is irrelevant. The answer to the question of whether he did translate them or whether he did not will have no bearing on how I live my life or my prospects for salvation or the truthfulness and divinity of the work he was engaged in.

Perhaps the examples of Moses, Peter, and the prophet in 1 Kings excuse what Joseph did, or perhaps they do not. But they certainly are clear and compelling examples of prophets engaging in lies or deception but who continued to be prophets, and in the case of Moses and Peter, not just ordinary prophets, but heads of dispensations, as was Joseph Smith. Their errors or lies in deceptions did not lead to them being fallen prophets and did not in any way affect the truth and divinity of the work they were engaged in. 

[askandanswer]

Footnote 46 of chapter 9 of Nauvoo: A place of peace, a people of promise states:

 46. The Prophet's journal kept by Willard Richards (May 1-9, 1843, Church Archives) does not mention the plates. A report that the plates described a descendant of an Egyptian Pharoah was inserted in the History of the Church (5:372) from William Clayton's personal diary and is thus less reliable than a direct dictation (Clayton, Journals, 100, entry of May 1, 1843; Allen, Trials of Discipleship, 117).

This supports the post from @bytebear that the statement about what the plates said came not from Joseph Smith, but from William Clayon. This, to me, suggests a reason for being cautious about how much weight we can place on it. 

[Grunt]

7 hours ago, Blossom76 said:

[Page 372]

Comment of the Prophtet on the Kinderhook Plates.

I insert fac-similes of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook, in Pike county, Illinois, on April 23, by Mr. Robert Wiley and others, while excavating a large mound. They found a skeleton about six feet from the surface of the earth, which must have stood nine feet high. The plates were found on the breast of the skeleton and were covered on both sides with ancient characters.

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.

This is from The History of The Church Volume 5 Chapter 19

https://byustudies.byu.edu/content/volume-5-chapter-19

@bytebear Church records are saying The Prophet (Joseph Smith) said this, I cross check all the information in the CES letter about this, I'm not just taking this guys word for it. The Church Says Jospeh Smith said this.  I don't assume the Church is being Dishonest when it said the Prophet said something. If its in offical Church History, written by the Church, then I should be able to trust their word for it shouldn't I? Or are you saying that I shouldn't?  Because if I can't trust what the church writes about their own history, then thats a really big problem.  I don't want to be misunderstood in all this, I am honestly trying to find a way to move past this, but its not good and there really is no excuse for it.

I like this church, I like the way of life it gives its members, but the main point of it is to worship God in a way that is acceptable to him.  Even if it is the best life I'm not sure its worth living if it is based on falsehood, or has started with the truth and then been corrupted.  Evidence is sometimes very black and white.  Its either true or its not.  And just because I want it to be true with every fibre in my being, doesn't mean that it will be.

The point is these plates were a fraud and were proven a fraud, yet Joseph said they contained the history of a man descendant from Ham, that's not true, that's a big problem.  

This is a quote on the subject from an LDS Historian Richard Bushman.

“Church historians continued to insist on the authenticity of the Kinderhook Plates until 1980 when an examination conducted by the Chicago Historical Society, possessor of one plate, proved it was a nineteenth-century creation.”

– LDS Historian Richard Bushman, Rough Stone Rolling, p.490

The Church reports that quote, while it appears to be written by Joseph Smith, was ACTUALLY an excerpt from the journal of William Clayton.  There is no known evidence, to my knowledge, that the Prophet ever put forth a translation of the fake plates.

 

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1981/08/kinderhook-plates-brought-to-joseph-smith-appear-to-be-a-nineteenth-century-hoax?lang=eng