Book Of Mormon Translation - Rock In The Hat.

[Snow]

Originally posted by Cal@Feb 12 2004, 08:14 PM

Second, being lacking in FORMAL training DOES show up in how he wrote the BoM--it had literally thousands of grammatical errors and poorly worded passages, which have since been edited out.

Please, do tell us more about these thousands of poorly worded passages that have since been deleted. Can you mention a couple dozen - out of the 1000's? And while your at it, please cite your source for the 1000's or poorly worded passages.

[Guest antishock82003]

Originally posted by Snow+Feb 12 2004, 10:50 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Snow @ Feb 12 2004, 10:50 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Cal@Feb 12 2004, 08:14 PM

Second, being lacking in FORMAL training DOES show up in how he wrote the BoM--it had literally thousands of grammatical errors and poorly worded passages, which have since been edited out.

Please, do tell us more about these thousands of poorly worded passages that have since been deleted. Can you mention a couple dozen - out of the 1000's? And while your at it, please cite your source for the 1000's or poorly worded passages.

This is the Snow that I hate. Sigh...what a phony. You know what Cal meant. Do you do this for your own sake, or for the cattle?

[Jenda]

Originally posted by Cal+Feb 12 2004, 07:31 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cal @ Feb 12 2004, 07:31 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Jenda@Feb 11 2004, 07:05 PM

Actually, all JS had to have was a vivid imagination and great story telling ability--not something unknown in all of human history.

You really must be kidding!  If that is what you believe, then you have never really studied the BoM.  You are making all your assertions about it being false on things you have heard other people say.

The BoM weaves a timeline, and has themes and sub-themes, and is laced throughout with the Abrahamic Covenant in ways that it would take more than just "someone with a vivid imagination" to come up with.  Not just that, but to have it rife with archaic Jewish poetry that was not even discovered as a type of poety till about 15 years ago, so good old Joe couldn't have thought it up.

Do some real studying before you come here and spout nonsense.

Jenda--

Maybe it is you that needs to study the whole issue and the circumstances around the production of the BoM. By the way I have read the BoM so many times I have lost track, so please don't make assumptions you haven't investigated.

But--consider this---JS was intimately familiar with the Bible--he quoted it extensively in the BoM (or maybe you hadn't noticed--perhaps YOU need to read it a bit more with a more OBJECTIVE eye). Why do you think it so unusual that he would have repeated some of the patterns present in the Bible. The Bible was the primary literature of the 1800's and many people knew its contents.

All it really took was a great imagination and the ability to weave an intricate story. The fact that someone writes something most of us couldn't hardly proves that it comes from a supernatural source. There is lots of impressive literature in the world--you don't need "other world" explanations for all of it. Give the human mind and imagination some credit.

On top of that look at things like 1) the ultra-specific nature of prophesies of things that had ALREADY happened by JS' time and the shortage of anything SPECIFIC after as well as 2) many of the issues resolved by the BoM were issues hotly debated in the society of New England at the time of JS (what a coincidence that the Native Americans we discussing the same things 1500 years ago) 3) He described a Hebrew people whose scribes seemed to know little about common Hebrew customs--at least not even mentioned.. 4) The native americans the supposed Moroni described as Lamanites (and therefore Hebrews) have no genetic connection to the middle east. 5) When translating what was supposed to be Isaiah off the Plates of Laban, JS included the translation errors of the King James version. How interesting?

These are raise serious questions about the authenticity of the BOM.

Cal,

First, I was not talking to you when I posted that post, so I was obviously not speaking of your knowledge of the BoM, now, was I? But now that you have mentioned it, it seems awfully strange that, since you have read it (numerous times, I might add) that you have made several bad mistakes in your post.

Secondly, if you read what I wrote, you would understand that I was talking about the continuance of Biblical themes in the BoM, such as the Abrahamic Covenant, etc., being carried through to completion.

Let me state it this way. I come from a different restoration background than the LDS. Our studies of the BoM have gone in different directions than our LDS cousins. There are times when I sit here and read what they believe about the BoM scriptures and I say "Huh? How did they get that?" Our church spent a lot of time immersed in the BoM and how it relates to Abraham, Moses, OT prophets, etc. since the peoples came from OT Jerusalem. And to see the carry-through and resolution of these themes, at least to me, is wonderful.

Let me make a suggestion. I don't know what you are trying to bash here, the BoM or the LDS, but I would offer you a challenge. Try to ignore everything you have learned about the BoM from the LDS, and try to ignore all the anti crap you have read. Find a restoration branch of the RLDS church (since the CoC doesn't do serious scripture study (of any kind) anymore) and engage some members there about their beliefs and studies of the BoM. They are so completely un-LDS-like that you would be amazed. I am not saying that this will necessarily convince you of the truth of the BoM, but you will certainly see a different side of the book than you did before. If you are interested in taking this challenge, I can hook you up with a few, but I would only do it if you seriously wanted to learn about it and not find new ways to bash something that you don't know.

[Jenda]

Originally posted by Cal+Feb 12 2004, 07:37 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cal @ Feb 12 2004, 07:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--bat@Feb 11 2004, 07:22 PM

Jenda,

So what would it mean if chiasmus was exhibibed in Joseph Smith's diaries and in the D&C?  You might want to check into that before asserting that this constitutes a valid evidence for the BoM's authenticity.  Unless you're going to claim that the D&C and JS's diaries are ancient texts too.

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/3500/

Jenda--I've never understood why mormons would think that Chiasmus in the BoM is anything unusual. The Bible had it, JS was familiar with the Bible so he, either intentionally or subconscieously, included it as an aliterative style. I have NO problem believing that JS was an extremely bright guy, with an incredible memory and imagination. However, none of that makes what he did "super natural".

The question is, did he have a little (or a lot) of the "con man" in him? Was he capable of "pulling a fast one on people"?

The answer to that question is, clearly he did. As a young man he went around trying to convince people he could see buried treasure in a peep stone. The question is DID he do that when it comes to the BoM story?

Let's put it this way, Jenda--do you think JS could actually see buried treasure in a peep stone as he told people he could? If you believe the rest of what he said, why don't you believe that?

Chiasmus is a very specific form of poetry, and was not discovered till fairly recently (in the grand scheme of things.) Certainly after JS,Jr's time. While he might have been able to copy writing styles from the Bible, it is highly unlikely that he would have had the brilliance to come up with some of the chiasmus present that have been found in the BoM because some have been extremely intricate.

It would have taken a lot more imagination than a 22 year old boy could conjure up to write a 777 page scriptural document, have the themes of the OT carry through to resolution, add the intricate Chiasmus (before anyone was aware of Chiasmus), know that languages deteriorate without the aid of written works to keep them pure, etc. Sorry, the definition you gave to Occam's Razor just doesn't fit. The definition that best fits is what JS,Jr. said. It was given to him from God.

One more thing, Cal. But since you are so familiar with the BoM and all, I hate to bring it up, you know, but did you forget, or something, that it was the publisher who put in punctuation, versification, etc.

[Jenda]

Originally posted by Cal+Feb 12 2004, 07:47 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cal @ Feb 12 2004, 07:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Jenda@Feb 11 2004, 09:06 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--bat@Feb 11 2004, 08:10 PM

Finally, the critic points out that the Book of Mormon, itself, says

that the language the people used was altered, and that there are no

examples of ancient-American books written on plates of metal with

languages derived from Hebrew/Egyptian -- with or without Chiasmus.

So there is no pre-existing reason to look for "special Hebrew

Chiasmus" in the Book of Mormon because it is not primarily a Hebrew

document.  It is primarily an ancient-American document.  Any Hebrew

style is easily explained as Joseph Smith copying both style and

word-for-word from the Bible (which he did a lot).

If you are basing whether or not to believe in the BoM on this assertion, let me tell you that the critic is wrong. It says nowhere in the BoM that the language of the people was altered. Nowhere.

What it does say is that they used Egyptian heiroglyphics to write their Hebrew words because they took up less space to write. As time went on, they altered the Egyptian heiroglyphics to conform better to their usage, so that what they ended up using for the written word was no longer the same heiroglyph that they used when they left Jerusalem. It states nowhere that the language, itself, was altered.

Maybe your critic had better re-read what he claims to have read so he can get his facts straight.

Jenda--are you familiar with the fact that JS actually made a copy of some of these BoM heiroglyphics which is what he claimed to have shown to professor Anthon and that the church has a copy of them. The church makes no secret of it, and that Egyptologists have examined it and find that they bear no resemblance to heiroglypics of that time period--NONE. If that was "reformed eqyptian", it must have been so "reformed" that no one could recognize them.

I think there is a much simpler explanation (Occum's Razor)--he made them up, thinking no one could contradict him since no one at the time could translate egyptian heiroglyphics anyway! (same thing with the BoA)

Yes, I am familiar with that story. And he didn't send the characters to Anthon to ask if they were Egyptian, he sent them to him to ask if what he wrote could be a possible translation.

PLEASE use the true facts when you want to argue? Why do you want to look like a fool?

[Guest antishock82003]

Yes, I am familiar with that story. And he didn't send the characters to Anthon to ask if they were Egyptian, he sent them to him to ask if what he wrote could be a possible translation.

PLEASE use the true facts when you want to argue? Why do you want to look like a fool?

Why would he send something that was unknown and untranslatable, according to the BoM? That's silly.

[Cal]

Originally posted by Snow+Feb 12 2004, 10:50 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Snow @ Feb 12 2004, 10:50 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Cal@Feb 12 2004, 08:14 PM

Second, being lacking in FORMAL training DOES show up in how he wrote the BoM--it had literally thousands of grammatical errors and poorly worded passages, which have since been edited out.

Please, do tell us more about these thousands of poorly worded passages that have since been deleted. Can you mention a couple dozen - out of the 1000's? And while your at it, please cite your source for the 1000's or poorly worded passages.

Snow--there are several sites where you can find comparisons of the original BoM compared with the present translation. The Tanners have documented the changes quite competently. You can find them as easily as I can.

[Cal]

Originally posted by Jenda+Feb 13 2004, 05:51 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jenda @ Feb 13 2004, 05:51 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Cal@Feb 12 2004, 07:31 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Jenda@Feb 11 2004, 07:05 PM

Actually, all JS had to have was a vivid imagination and great story telling ability--not something unknown in all of human history.

You really must be kidding!  If that is what you believe, then you have never really studied the BoM.  You are making all your assertions about it being false on things you have heard other people say.

The BoM weaves a timeline, and has themes and sub-themes, and is laced throughout with the Abrahamic Covenant in ways that it would take more than just "someone with a vivid imagination" to come up with.  Not just that, but to have it rife with archaic Jewish poetry that was not even discovered as a type of poety till about 15 years ago, so good old Joe couldn't have thought it up.

Do some real studying before you come here and spout nonsense.

Jenda--

Maybe it is you that needs to study the whole issue and the circumstances around the production of the BoM. By the way I have read the BoM so many times I have lost track, so please don't make assumptions you haven't investigated.

But--consider this---JS was intimately familiar with the Bible--he quoted it extensively in the BoM (or maybe you hadn't noticed--perhaps YOU need to read it a bit more with a more OBJECTIVE eye). Why do you think it so unusual that he would have repeated some of the patterns present in the Bible. The Bible was the primary literature of the 1800's and many people knew its contents.

All it really took was a great imagination and the ability to weave an intricate story. The fact that someone writes something most of us couldn't hardly proves that it comes from a supernatural source. There is lots of impressive literature in the world--you don't need "other world" explanations for all of it. Give the human mind and imagination some credit.

On top of that look at things like 1) the ultra-specific nature of prophesies of things that had ALREADY happened by JS' time and the shortage of anything SPECIFIC after as well as 2) many of the issues resolved by the BoM were issues hotly debated in the society of New England at the time of JS (what a coincidence that the Native Americans we discussing the same things 1500 years ago) 3) He described a Hebrew people whose scribes seemed to know little about common Hebrew customs--at least not even mentioned.. 4) The native americans the supposed Moroni described as Lamanites (and therefore Hebrews) have no genetic connection to the middle east. 5) When translating what was supposed to be Isaiah off the Plates of Laban, JS included the translation errors of the King James version. How interesting?

These are raise serious questions about the authenticity of the BOM.

Cal,

First, I was not talking to you when I posted that post, so I was obviously not speaking of your knowledge of the BoM, now, was I? But now that you have mentioned it, it seems awfully strange that, since you have read it (numerous times, I might add) that you have made several bad mistakes in your post.

Secondly, if you read what I wrote, you would understand that I was talking about the continuance of Biblical themes in the BoM, such as the Abrahamic Covenant, etc., being carried through to completion.

Let me state it this way. I come from a different restoration background than the LDS. Our studies of the BoM have gone in different directions than our LDS cousins. There are times when I sit here and read what they believe about the BoM scriptures and I say "Huh? How did they get that?" Our church spent a lot of time immersed in the BoM and how it relates to Abraham, Moses, OT prophets, etc. since the peoples came from OT Jerusalem. And to see the carry-through and resolution of these themes, at least to me, is wonderful.

Let me make a suggestion. I don't know what you are trying to bash here, the BoM or the LDS, but I would offer you a challenge. Try to ignore everything you have learned about the BoM from the LDS, and try to ignore all the anti crap you have read. Find a restoration branch of the RLDS church (since the CoC doesn't do serious scripture study (of any kind) anymore) and engage some members there about their beliefs and studies of the BoM. They are so completely un-LDS-like that you would be amazed. I am not saying that this will necessarily convince you of the truth of the BoM, but you will certainly see a different side of the book than you did before. If you are interested in taking this challenge, I can hook you up with a few, but I would only do it if you seriously wanted to learn about it and not find new ways to bash something that you don't know.

Jenda--rather than simply claim that I "don't know", please tell me WHAT IT IS that I don't know. Having read the BoM numerous times, I nevertheless am ALWAYS interested in what I DON'T KNOW. You're being like Snow, making bald assertions--be specific and back it up with specific examples and evidence.

From what I can see in the BoM, JS is INDEED addressing OT issues--how is that evidence that what he did was not of his own (or perhaps Oliver Cowdrey's) background knowledge of the Abramic Covenant? What DOES stand out like a sore thumb in the BoM is the lack of reference to the myriad of OTHER Jewish cultural concerns, like the Passover.

[Cal]

Originally posted by Jenda+Feb 13 2004, 06:07 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jenda @ Feb 13 2004, 06:07 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Cal@Feb 12 2004, 07:37 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--bat@Feb 11 2004, 07:22 PM

Jenda,

So what would it mean if chiasmus was exhibibed in Joseph Smith's diaries and in the D&C?  You might want to check into that before asserting that this constitutes a valid evidence for the BoM's authenticity.  Unless you're going to claim that the D&C and JS's diaries are ancient texts too.

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/3500/

Jenda--I've never understood why mormons would think that Chiasmus in the BoM is anything unusual. The Bible had it, JS was familiar with the Bible so he, either intentionally or subconscieously, included it as an aliterative style. I have NO problem believing that JS was an extremely bright guy, with an incredible memory and imagination. However, none of that makes what he did "super natural".

The question is, did he have a little (or a lot) of the "con man" in him? Was he capable of "pulling a fast one on people"?

The answer to that question is, clearly he did. As a young man he went around trying to convince people he could see buried treasure in a peep stone. The question is DID he do that when it comes to the BoM story?

Let's put it this way, Jenda--do you think JS could actually see buried treasure in a peep stone as he told people he could? If you believe the rest of what he said, why don't you believe that?

Chiasmus is a very specific form of poetry, and was not discovered till fairly recently (in the grand scheme of things.) Certainly after JS,Jr's time. While he might have been able to copy writing styles from the Bible, it is highly unlikely that he would have had the brilliance to come up with some of the chiasmus present that have been found in the BoM because some have been extremely intricate.

It would have taken a lot more imagination than a 22 year old boy could conjure up to write a 777 page scriptural document, have the themes of the OT carry through to resolution, add the intricate Chiasmus (before anyone was aware of Chiasmus), know that languages deteriorate without the aid of written works to keep them pure, etc. Sorry, the definition you gave to Occam's Razor just doesn't fit. The definition that best fits is what JS,Jr. said. It was given to him from God.

One more thing, Cal. But since you are so familiar with the BoM and all, I hate to bring it up, you know, but did you forget, or something, that it was the publisher who put in punctuation, versification, etc.

Jenda--highly unlikely that JS could have picked up Chiasmus from the Bible? Why? Perhaps you think that it is highly unlikely that a 25 year old Einstein could have explained the Photoelectric effect, or come up with Special and General Relativity--BUT HE DID. As I have pointed out, there is plenty of exteraneous evidence that JS DID have a highly inventive and brilliant story telling ability that showed itself EARLY in his life. So you claim that the BoM must be true becasue JS was so stupid is a vacuous argument.

Errors in the BoM---who cares who edited them out? My point was that I agreed that JS lacked formal training in the use of the language. Which brings up another question--did God also lack training in formal English? Because I thought JS was supposed to be getting his words from God! If your answer is that JS was only getting IMPRESSIONS and using his own language, then how do you explain that when Martin Harris described the "translation" process he said that JS would "read off" what he was seeing in the "stone", and then would double check it to make sure the scribe had written it down right. Was he seeing bad English? And if so, why would God put bad English in the stone?

[Cal]

Originally posted by Jenda@Feb 13 2004, 06:12 AM

Finally, the critic points out that the Book of Mormon, itself, says

that the language the people used was altered, and that there are no

examples of ancient-American books written on plates of metal with

languages derived from Hebrew/Egyptian -- with or without Chiasmus.

So there is no pre-existing reason to look for "special Hebrew

Chiasmus" in the Book of Mormon because it is not primarily a Hebrew

document.  It is primarily an ancient-American document.  Any Hebrew

style is easily explained as Joseph Smith copying both style and

word-for-word from the Bible (which he did a lot).

If you are basing whether or not to believe in the BoM on this assertion, let me tell you that the critic is wrong. It says nowhere in the BoM that the language of the people was altered. Nowhere.

What it does say is that they used Egyptian heiroglyphics to write their Hebrew words because they took up less space to write. As time went on, they altered the Egyptian heiroglyphics to conform better to their usage, so that what they ended up using for the written word was no longer the same heiroglyph that they used when they left Jerusalem. It states nowhere that the language, itself, was altered.

Maybe your critic had better re-read what he claims to have read so he can get his facts straight.

Jenda--are you familiar with the fact that JS actually made a copy of some of these BoM heiroglyphics which is what he claimed to have shown to professor Anthon and that the church has a copy of them. The church makes no secret of it, and that Egyptologists have examined it and find that they bear no resemblance to heiroglypics of that time period--NONE. If that was "reformed eqyptian", it must have been so "reformed" that no one could recognize them.

I think there is a much simpler explanation (Occum's Razor)--he made them up, thinking no one could contradict him since no one at the time could translate egyptian heiroglyphics anyway! (same thing with the BoA)

Yes, I am familiar with that story. And he didn't send the characters to Anthon to ask if they were Egyptian, he sent them to him to ask if what he wrote could be a possible translation.

PLEASE use the true facts when you want to argue? Why do you want to look like a fool?

Jenda--how could they be a correct translation if Anthon couldn't FIRST recognize them as real Egyptian? Now who is the fool?

[srm]

It is well documented that he, from a young age, had great powers of story telling AND of persuasion. His mother recalls in her diary of how he, as a young man, would keep the family spell bound for hours telling tales of the native american indians.

This old chestnut has been hashed and rehashed. You seem to be a very intelligent man. You must know that Lucy was not saying that Joseph was a great story teller. She was saying that he was sharing information that he receive via revelation. Not that he , "...had great powers of story telling AND of persuasion." rather that he received the info from the Lord. BTW...it isn't from her diary.

[Maureen]

These are some excerpts from the book The Prophet Puzzle. Personally I see JS as a very complex personality. He may have had little schooling but nevertheless was quite intelligent and creative.

The Prophet Puzzle - Interpretive Essays on Joseph Smith

EDITOR'S INTRODUCTION

To some degree, Joseph Smith used ambiguity—especially regarding his own life—in similar ways. Taking into consideration the "deeply suspicious world" into which the Mormon prophet "introduced his Adamic restoration," writes Paul Johnson, "we must conclude that Joseph Smith expected to arouse accusations of fraud" by leaving many details about his story unanswered. Throughout his life Smith said very little, for example, about the translation process that resulted in the Book of Mormon, and he offered multiple versions of his "first vision" experience.(5) Indeed, Smith at some points knowingly fostered an "aura of ambiguity" around himself: such a cloak of secrecy made possible the institution in Illinois of rituals designed to protect the political and sexual peculiarities being introduced by Smith and others. Smith's legacy, Johnson concludes, is a "game," an "enigma that demands (as is demanded of no other major American religious figure) that we guess at the authenticity or fraudulence of the founder and the visionary," even a century and a half after his death.(6) In Bercovitch's terms, Smith uses ambiguity to demand "faith" in an "ideal prospect that impels us toward an ever-larger truth"—the truth of his own prophetic calling.

10. THE PSYCHOLOGY OF RELIGIOUS GENIUS: JOSEPH SMITH AND THE ORIGINS OF NEW RELIGIOUS MOVEMENTS

Lawrence Foster

…Religious genius, especially the prophetic leadership of founders of new religious movements, has proven even more difficult to evaluate with any degree of openness and objectivity. Adherents to new faiths often accept at face value prophetic claims to having had direct communication with the divine, while naive critics and apostates in equally one-dimensional fashion tend to see nothing but fraud and delusion in such claims. Neither approach begins to do justice to complexities that characterize the classic foundational phenomena that noted American psychologist William James explored so convincingly in his still unsurpassed analysis of the psychology of religious genius, The Varieties of Religious Experience.(1)

This essay focuses on one particularly well-documented case of religious genius—that of Mormon prophet Joseph Smith, founder of a rapidly-growing religious movement that now numbers more than 10 million members worldwide. Joseph Smith's motivation and the psychological dynamics that made possible both his successes and failures have proven highly controversial, both in his own time and today. Critics of Smith such as Fawn Brodie have often found him opaque and disingenuous. They have speculated that his was a highly conflicted personality with enormous powers to rationalize his own impulses as being the will of God. Devout Latter-day Saints, on the other hand, have often ignored whole areas of Smith's personality and actions, creating an almost unbelievable paragon who could do nothing wrong as he consistently attempted to do God's will. Despite the apparent polarization of opinion, recent scholarship increasingly has seen Smith as a complex figure who nevertheless creatively attempted to come to terms with and fuse seemingly conflicting elements within his personality and his world into a new synthesis.(2)

The analysis that follows is an admittedly speculative personal reflection on elements that need to be kept in mind in understanding the psychological dynamics of Joseph Smith's creativity…..

http://www.signaturebooks.com/excerpts/pro....htm#psychology

M.

[srm]

You asked

Who saw the plates with their real eyes?  Who handled the plates, not in a box, and not covered with a clothe? 

here are some accounts. If you would like more I can probably dig some more up.

David Whitmer

‘No sir! I was not under any hallucination, nor was I deceived! I saw with these eyes, and I heard with these ears! I know whereof I speak!’”

Joseph Smith III, et al., Interview, July 1884, Richmond Missouri, in Lyndon W. Cook, David Whitmer Interviews, 134-35).

Martin Harris

Gentlemen, do you see that hand? Are you sure you see it? Are your eyes playing a trick or something? No. Well, as sure as you see my hand so sure did I see the angel and the plates.

Richard L. Anderson (1981), Investigating the Book of Mormon

Witnesses (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1981), 116.

I have seen the gold plates from which the Book of Mormon is written. An angel appeared to me and others and testified to the truthfulness of the record, and had I been willing to have perjured myself and sworn falsely to the testimony I now bear I could have been a rich man, but I could not have testified other than I have done and am now doing for these things are true.”

Oliver Cowdery

I beheld with my eyes, and handled with my hands, the gold plates from which it was transcribed. I also saw with my eyes and handled with my hands the Holy Interpreters.

Andrew Jenson, LDS Biographical Encyclopedia, (Salt Lake City:

The three witnesses together,

"Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people unto whom this work shall come, that we, through the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, have seen the plates which contain this record, which is a record of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites, their brethren, and also of the people of Jared who came from the tower of which hath been spoken; and we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true. And we also testify that we have seen the engravings which are upon the plates; and they have been shewn unto us by the power of God, and not of man. And we declare with words of soberness, that an angel of God came down from heaven, and he brought and laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates, and the engravings thereon, and we know that it is by the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, that we beheld and bear record that these things are true; and it is marvellous in our eyes, nevertheless the voice of the Lord commanded us that we should bear record of it; wherefore, to be obedient unto the commandments of God, we bear testimony of these things. And we know that if we are faithful in Christ, we shall rid our garments of the blood of all men, and be found spotless before the judgment-seat of Christ, and shall dwell with him eternally in the heavens. And the honour be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God. Amen.

OLIVER COWDERY

DAVID WHITMER

MARTIN HARRIS"

Here is what the eight witnesses said,

John Whitmer

"I now say, I handled those plates; there were fine engravings on both sides." later he does say that he saw them by supernatural power. I'll need to look up the quote at home to get the context.

(History of the Church, Vol. 3, p. 307).

[the plates were]"uncovered into our hands, and we turned the leaves sufficient to satisfy us."

Deseret News, 6 August 1878

"Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people unto whom this work shall come, that Joseph Smith, Jun., the translator of this work, has shewn unto us the plates of which hath been spoken, which have the appearance of gold; and as many of the leaves as the said Smith has translated, we did handle with our hands; and we also saw the engravings thereon, all of which has the appearance of ancient work, and of curious workmanship. And this we bear record with words of soberness, that the said Smith has shewn unto us, for we have seen and hefted, and know of a surety that the said Smith has got the plates of which we have spoken. And we give our names unto the world, to witness unto the world that which we have seen; and we lie not, God bearing witness of it.

CHRISTIAN WHITMER,

JACOB WHITMER,

PETER WHITMER, Jun.

JOHN WHITMER,

HIRAM PAGE,

JOSEPH SMITH, Sen.

HYRUM SMITH,

SAMUEL H. SMITH"

The BoM states that there was limited space. 

You said that they used Gold plates because of limited space. Where does it say that?

[Guest antishock82003]

I meant to say that there was limited space on the plates, and it is stated in the BoM.

[Guest bat]

Originally posted by srm@Feb 13 2004, 12:00 PM

You asked

Who saw the plates with their real eyes?  Who handled the plates, not in a box, and not covered with a clothe? 

here are some accounts. If you would like more I can probably dig some more up.

David Whitmer

‘No sir! I was not under any hallucination, nor was I deceived! I saw with these eyes, and I heard with these ears! I know whereof I speak!’”

Martin Harris

Gentlemen, do you see that hand? Are you sure you see it? Are your eyes playing a trick or something? No. Well, as sure as you see my hand so sure did I see the angel and the plates.

I have seen the gold plates from which the Book of Mormon is written. An angel appeared to me and others and testified to the truthfulness of the record, and had I been willing to have perjured myself and sworn falsely to the testimony I now bear I could have been a rich man, but I could not have testified other than I have done and am now doing for these things are true.”

Oliver Cowdery

I beheld with my eyes, and handled with my hands, the gold plates from which it was transcribed. I also saw with my eyes and handled with my hands the Holy Interpreters.

The three witnesses together,

"Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people unto whom this work shall come, that we, through the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, have seen the plates which contain this record, which is a record of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites, their brethren, and also of the people of Jared who came from the tower of which hath been spoken; and we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true. And we also testify that we have seen the engravings which are upon the plates; and they have been shewn unto us by the power of God, and not of man. And we declare with words of soberness, that an angel of God came down from heaven, and he brought and laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates, and the engravings thereon, and we know that it is by the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, that we beheld and bear record that these things are true; and it is marvellous in our eyes, nevertheless the voice of the Lord commanded us that we should bear record of it; wherefore, to be obedient unto the commandments of God, we bear testimony of these things. And we know that if we are faithful in Christ, we shall rid our garments of the blood of all men, and be found spotless before the judgment-seat of Christ, and shall dwell with him eternally in the heavens. And the honour be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God. Amen.

OLIVER COWDERY

DAVID WHITMER

MARTIN HARRIS"

Here is what the eight witnesses said,

John Whitmer

"I now say, I handled those plates; there were fine engravings on both sides." later he does say that he saw them by supernatural power. I'll need to look up the quote at home to get the context.

[the plates were]"uncovered into our hands, and we turned the leaves sufficient to satisfy us."

"Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people unto whom this work shall come, that Joseph Smith, Jun., the translator of this work, has shewn unto us the plates of which hath been spoken, which have the appearance of gold; and as many of the leaves as the said Smith has translated, we did handle with our hands; and we also saw the engravings thereon, all of which has the appearance of ancient work, and of curious workmanship. And this we bear record with words of soberness, that the said Smith has shewn unto us, for we have seen and hefted, and know of a surety that the said Smith has got the plates of which we have spoken. And we give our names unto the world, to witness unto the world that which we have seen; and we lie not, God bearing witness of it.

CHRISTIAN WHITMER,

JACOB WHITMER,

PETER WHITMER, Jun.

JOHN WHITMER,

HIRAM PAGE,

JOSEPH SMITH, Sen.

HYRUM SMITH,

SAMUEL H. SMITH"

Could you cite sources please? I'd like to look these up.

[srm]

Originally posted by bat+Feb 13 2004, 06:32 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (bat @ Feb 13 2004, 06:32 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--srm@Feb 13 2004, 12:00 PM

You asked

Who saw the plates with their real eyes?  Who handled the plates, not in a box, and not covered with a clothe? 

here are some accounts. If you would like more I can probably dig some more up.

David Whitmer

‘No sir! I was not under any hallucination, nor was I deceived! I saw with these eyes, and I heard with these ears! I know whereof I speak!’”

Martin Harris

Gentlemen, do you see that hand? Are you sure you see it? Are your eyes playing a trick or something? No. Well, as sure as you see my hand so sure did I see the angel and the plates.

I have seen the gold plates from which the Book of Mormon is written. An angel appeared to me and others and testified to the truthfulness of the record, and had I been willing to have perjured myself and sworn falsely to the testimony I now bear I could have been a rich man, but I could not have testified other than I have done and am now doing for these things are true.”

Oliver Cowdery

I beheld with my eyes, and handled with my hands, the gold plates from which it was transcribed. I also saw with my eyes and handled with my hands the Holy Interpreters.

The three witnesses together,

"Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people unto whom this work shall come, that we, through the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, have seen the plates which contain this record, which is a record of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites, their brethren, and also of the people of Jared who came from the tower of which hath been spoken; and we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true. And we also testify that we have seen the engravings which are upon the plates; and they have been shewn unto us by the power of God, and not of man. And we declare with words of soberness, that an angel of God came down from heaven, and he brought and laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates, and the engravings thereon, and we know that it is by the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, that we beheld and bear record that these things are true; and it is marvellous in our eyes, nevertheless the voice of the Lord commanded us that we should bear record of it; wherefore, to be obedient unto the commandments of God, we bear testimony of these things. And we know that if we are faithful in Christ, we shall rid our garments of the blood of all men, and be found spotless before the judgment-seat of Christ, and shall dwell with him eternally in the heavens. And the honour be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God. Amen.

OLIVER COWDERY

DAVID WHITMER

MARTIN HARRIS"

Here is what the eight witnesses said,

John Whitmer

"I now say, I handled those plates; there were fine engravings on both sides." later he does say that he saw them by supernatural power. I'll need to look up the quote at home to get the context.

[the plates were]"uncovered into our hands, and we turned the leaves sufficient to satisfy us."

"Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people unto whom this work shall come, that Joseph Smith, Jun., the translator of this work, has shewn unto us the plates of which hath been spoken, which have the appearance of gold; and as many of the leaves as the said Smith has translated, we did handle with our hands; and we also saw the engravings thereon, all of which has the appearance of ancient work, and of curious workmanship. And this we bear record with words of soberness, that the said Smith has shewn unto us, for we have seen and hefted, and know of a surety that the said Smith has got the plates of which we have spoken. And we give our names unto the world, to witness unto the world that which we have seen; and we lie not, God bearing witness of it.

CHRISTIAN WHITMER,

JACOB WHITMER,

PETER WHITMER, Jun.

JOHN WHITMER,

HIRAM PAGE,

JOSEPH SMITH, Sen.

HYRUM SMITH,

SAMUEL H. SMITH"

Could you cite sources please? I'd like to look these up.

you bet. It may be a little while.

[Guest antishock82003]

Are you sure that there's no contradictory accounts from these same witnesses floating around?

[Guest antishock82003]

Why does the church teach that Joseph Smith used the Urim and Thummim device to “translate” the golden plates, when witnesses testify that he buried his face in his hat, which contained a chocolate-colored stone, and dictated in this fashion, all the while the plates were supposedly hidden out in the woods (see David Whitmer: Address to All Believers in Christ, and James E. Lancaster, By the Gift and Power of God: The Method of Translation of The Book of Mormon, in The Saints Herald, November 15, 1962, p. 17, and Millenial Star 43:423, and Richard Van Wagoner & Steve Walker, “Joseph Smith: ‘The Gift of Seeing’,” in Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol. 15:2, Summer 1982, p. 53)

[srm]

Originally posted by bat@Feb 13 2004, 06:32 PM

Could you cite sources please? I'd like to look these up.

I edited my above post to include the sources

[srm]

here's the passage from History of the Church p 307

Whitmer replied: "I now say, I handled those plates; There were fine engravings on both sides. I handled them;" and he described how they were hung, and "they were shown to me by a supernatural power.

[srm]

Originally posted by antishock82003@Feb 14 2004, 09:49 AM

Why does the church teach that Joseph Smith used the Urim and Thummim device to “translate” the golden plates, when witnesses testify that he buried his face in his hat, which contained a chocolate-colored stone, and dictated in this fashion, all the while the plates were supposedly hidden out in the woods (see David Whitmer: Address to All Believers in Christ, and James E. Lancaster, By the Gift and Power of God: The Method of Translation of The Book of Mormon, in The Saints Herald, November 15, 1962, p. 17, and Millenial Star 43:423, and Richard Van Wagoner & Steve Walker, “Joseph Smith: ‘The Gift of Seeing’,” in Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol. 15:2, Summer 1982, p. 53)

The Church says that Joseph translated by the gift and power of God. Both the Seerstone and the urim and thummim would qualify. The use of both were mentioned. probably the best source it that of the translator who said that he used the Urim and Thummim

[Guest antishock82003]

I never knew about the seer stones until I had actually left the Church. The Church may say that he used seer stones, but it certainly doesn't TEACH it. Why would the Church teach one thing, but not the other?

Actually, let me edit that...I didn't know about A seer stone that was placed in a hat, and Jospeh SUPPOSEDLY stuck his face in the hat in order to "translate" the plates.....THAT WERE'T EVEN IN THE ROOM.

How can you possibly believe that a dude, who sticks his face in a hat, is translating gold plates that aren't even there?

[Guest antishock82003]

1) Why did some of the eight witnesses, who were supposed to be "physical" witnesses of the plates, claimed the event was based on the supernatural. For example, John Whitmer as you quoted claimed that "they were shown to me by a supernatural power".

2) Why does the church now extol the witnesses when Joseph Smith condemned them? (Doctrine and Covenants 3:12-13) ("Such characters as McLellin, John Whitmer, David Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery, and Martin Harris are too mean to mention; and we had liked to have forgotten them." - History of the Church, Vol. 3, p. 232) (In History of the Church, Vol. 3, page 228 Joseph Smith calls David Whitmer a "dumb ######".)

3) What sort of objectivity can the witnesses offer when all (except Martin Harris--who had a financial interest) were related to Joseph Smith or David Whitmer?

4) Why did Joseph Smith say before they viewed the plates they were told, "it is by your faith that you shall view them"? If the plates are physical, there would be no need for faith to see them.

[Guest Starsky]

How can you possibly believe that a dude, who sticks his face in a hat, is translating gold plates that aren't even there?

HOW? Anyway he pleases.

[Snow]

Originally posted by antishock82003@Feb 14 2004, 09:49 AM

Why does the church teach that Joseph Smith used the Urim and Thummim device to “translate” the golden plates, when witnesses testify that he buried his face in his hat, which contained a chocolate-colored stone, and dictated in this fashion, all the while the plates were supposedly hidden out in the woods

First, the plates were'nt hidden out in the woods. They may have been there some of the time but other times, they were not. Sometimes they were in the roon (presumably behind the curtain) and later under a cloth.

Second, the plates were translated, in part, with the U&T - the 116 pages.

Third. I think that there was a lot of imprecised terminology. Oliver talked about the U&T at a time when according to other accounts the U&T were already supposed to have been returned to Moroni. So Oliver was, evidently, calling the seer stone the U&T.