Book Of Mormon Stumbling Block

[vinny15]

Analogies dont go to far.

The earth was the center of the universe for a long time untill it was proven otherwise.

[Dr T]

All analogies eventually break down sir. You got the gist, an example.

[vinny15]

Yep :)

[Outshined]

There are similar anachnronisms in the Bible. Are they not a problem?

http://www.the-book-of-mormon.com/doublestandard.html

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa38...909/ai_n8856707

[Dr T]

Great stuff Outshined. Thank you for those. Some of those are new and some I picked up as I read. The translation of the Bible from the three languages into another language (i.e., English) that is not so much of a problem as it seems the BOM would be. The idea that the Golden Plates were from an unknown language (Hieroglyphics) or God's holy language, or whatever it was and the method of translation where the word showed up, that doesn't make sense to me. That's all I'm saying.

[MaidservantX]

There are actually two or three ways to discuss this and the ways may be mutually exclusive and yet any discussion slips between the various ways, resulting in a bit of confusion. I'm speaking to the 'adieu' issue.

One way is to discuss whether or not Jacob knew the word 'adieu' (the speaker/ writer in the passage of that record). [language of the Egyptians 1Ne 1:2 and Mosiah 1:4]

One way is to discuss whether Mormon and Moroni knew the word 'adieu' (the 400 A.D. compilers of the entire gold plates). [reformed Egyptian Mormon 9:32]

Another is to discuss whether Joseph Smith would have known the word 'adieu' (the 1800s translator by the power of God of the language that was used in the gold plates into 1800s English or, alternatively, as the author/ fabricator of the book).

Another is to discuss whether God would have known the word 'adieu' (the creator of all language every where and the creator of men who speak it).

I was going to speak to each of these possibilities, but I kind of like just seeing them just like that. I'm sure everyone would have their own thoughts on them.

The one where God is admitted as being a part of this translation (scenario #4), then the fact that the word 'adieu' is used is completely reconcilable (IMO) since I'm pretty sure God knows French, and knows when he wants to use it. :)

Also, (hmm, did I say I wasn't going to make any points?), if you read through Jacob, you get a great sense of his personality -- he was dreamy and creative and bookish and emotive and wordy and the type of person who would understand exactly what Lehi laid on him in 2 Ne chapter 2. You know those 4 personality types sort of thing? Well, Jacob was a melancholy. He always had a bit of lyrical drama to his view of the world and what he had to say (and we have the privilege of reading what he had to say about the gospel and what he had to say about the life of his people). He very much would have ended with an 'adieu' or whatever the ancient counterpart to that would have been.

[Dr T]

Thank you for that X :)

[vinny15]

Well Dr. T the word showed up only sometimes. There were different ways in wich he translated.

Simply adieu was the best I guess.

There are actually two or three ways to discuss this and the ways may be mutually exclusive and yet any discussion slips between the various ways, resulting in a bit of confusion. I'm speaking to the 'adieu' issue.

One way is to discuss whether or not Jacob knew the word 'adieu' (the speaker/ writer in the passage of that record). [language of the Egyptians 1Ne 1:2 and Mosiah 1:4]

One way is to discuss whether Mormon and Moroni knew the word 'adieu' (the 400 A.D. compilers of the entire gold plates). [reformed Egyptian Mormon 9:32]

Another is to discuss whether Joseph Smith would have known the word 'adieu' (the 1800s translator by the power of God of the language that was used in the gold plates into 1800s English or, alternatively, as the author/ fabricator of the book).

Another is to discuss whether God would have known the word 'adieu' (the creator of all language every where and the creator of men who speak it).

I was going to speak to each of these possibilities, but I kind of like just seeing them just like that. I'm sure everyone would have their own thoughts on them.

The one where God is admitted as being a part of this translation (scenario #4), then the fact that the word 'adieu' is used is completely reconcilable (IMO) since I'm pretty sure God knows French, and knows when he wants to use it. :)

Also, (hmm, did I say I wasn't going to make any points?), if you read through Jacob, you get a great sense of his personality -- he was dreamy and creative and bookish and emotive and wordy and the type of person who would understand exactly what Lehi laid on him in 2 Ne chapter 2. You know those 4 personality types sort of thing? Well, Jacob was a melancholy. He always had a bit of lyrical drama to his view of the world and what he had to say (and we have the privilege of reading what he had to say about the gospel and what he had to say about the life of his people). He very much would have ended with an 'adieu' or whatever the ancient counterpart to that would have been.

Yours is my favorite. Topped me lol.

[Gabelma]

I always assumed Joseph Smith just used the word in translation - like we do today sometimes use words from other languages.

Charley

[vinny15]

And your right it is as simple as that, but oh well some people dont like simplicity.

[Gabelma]

And your right it is as simple as that, but oh well some people dont like simplicity.

Its something I learned as an archaeology student had several incidents:

There are these fascinating Celtic stone balls that academics have hummed over for years -saying what a mystery they are - a kid in a museum tour I was taking took one look and said my Dad has something like that for wrapping rope round. Its my favourite That and the group of archaeologists standing round discussing the wonderful stone features and what could it be the local farmer came by and said ooh ahh see you hit bedrock then:)

Charley

[vinny15]

Wow that must be interesting. Is your profession in archeology now?

[Gabelma]

Wow that must be interesting. Is your profession in archeology now?

no I wanted to do Forensic Anthropology before it became trendy - my fibromyalgia got really bad at college and I couldn't do the physical left in second year

Charley

[vinny15]

Oh gosh that stinks. Well at least you gave it a shot.

[CrimsonKairos]

Jefferson used the word "adieu" in his first draft of the Declaration of Independence, then scratched it out and replaced it with another word. This was in the 18th century. I don't think it's so strange for someone in or around 1827-1830 to use the word in a book meant for English speakers at first.

[snipe123]

Im still waiting for someone to adaquetly explain how the Nephites learn to say "Adieu", when even the French language didn't exist at the time?

And don't bother with Jeff Lindsay's lame argument that the word was the best match for the "translation". English words were used for the whole BoM, and "Good bye" would have been a suitable word. Or, if Smith wanted to be literal, why not say "God be with you"?

Lindsay's objections to the use of French words in the Bible don't mean squat. We all know that those weren't god-inspired translations using magic spec's or a nifty rock in a hat.

If anyone's got a better answer, I'd love to hear it.

The Nephite's did not use English words either, so according to your argument, saying "goodbye" would have been unacceptable as well...:) The Book of Mormon is an English (with the above exception of course)translation of whatever words the Nephite's happened to use which we do not know...The plates were not in English or French since the Nephites did not speak either one...the word Adieu was not on the plates and neither were any of the other English words in the Book of Mormon...It is a translation of the Nephite characters that were on the plates... naturally Joseph Smith can translate them in whatever way would be most understood by its readers, and in a way that most accurately renders the meaning of the word...If a translation is to be best understood by the readers, then the job of the translator is to render the meaning into a language that people understand...If Joseph Smith had translated the Nephite language into Latin(assuming he knew it), that would not have been very useful to the masses, since few people know it and noone uses it in common speech. Pig Latin is better known but not very reverent...:) If he had translated into pig latin or Latin, would you have cried foul since the Nephites didn't speak either one of these languages? Had Joseph Smith been French himself, and translated The Book of Mormon into French, would you have said he is a fraud because the Nephites could not have spoken French? What if he had inserted one English word into his French translation?

On another front, that he rendered his translation in King James English does not mean the Nephites spoke King James English(which is a criticism I have read elsewhere), it simply means he recognized King James English as beautiful and poetic, and frankly, the only English version of God's word that people were familiar with at that time...speaks again to the responsibility of a translator...

My only criticism of Joseph Smith on this issue is that in using a French word here, which most people in common English speech do not use, he has created some misunderstanding about translation...I would be curious to know if Adieu was a common term of departure in upstate New York by English speaking people (kinda like you hear "adios" far more often in San diego than its English equivelant) at the time of Joseph Smith...This is a far more interesting question since if it was, then in that case it would be a great rendering of the Nephite word (farewell with a blessing) for Joseph Smiths regional readers...I wonder if Joseph Smith or his family members commonly said good bye in this way? Have never read anything to say either way, but it does make me curious...

The same argument above can be used when people criticize the word "Christian" used in the B of M before the time of Christ...not a Hebrew or Nephite word certainly...not really English either...and was not used until the time of The Apostle Paul...but lets assume for sake of argument that the Nephites had a word that was used to describe a "believer or follower of Christ, or the Messiah". I have no idea what the word was, but it wasn't "Christian" since that is not a Nephite word...So Joseph Smith comes along and sees a word ( a title) on the plates that denotes "a believer in Christ or the Messiah"...The job of a traslator is to render that word in a way that the reader understands...lets say the Nephite word title for a believer or follower of Christ was..."Tralla". Sorry to trivialise here. as I have no idea what the Nephite word was...it's just the first word that popped into my head and is only for illustration...:)

So for our example:

Tralla = Believer or follower of Christ or the Messiah

Christian= Believer or follower of Christ or the Messiah

So if Joseph Smith were to render the Nephite word in the best possible way that his English readers would understand, then he would translate the word "Tralla" as "Christian". Again, this is only for illustration...it would be silly to assume the Nephites used the actual New Testament word "Christian" similarly it would be silly to assume the Nephites used a French word "Adieu". They used their own word or title, in their own language, for a believer or follower of Christ, and their own word for "farewell". Joseph Smith gave us a translation of words, not the actual words themselves as spoken and written by The Nephites...if his account is to be believed that is...:)

[Doctor Steuss]

Im still waiting for someone to adaquetly explain how the Nephites learn to say "Adieu", when even the French language didn't exist at the time?

And don't bother with Jeff Lindsay's lame argument that the word was the best match for the "translation". English words were used for the whole BoM, and "Good bye" would have been a suitable word. Or, if Smith wanted to be literal, why not say "God be with you"?

Lindsay's objections to the use of French words in the Bible don't mean squat. We all know that those weren't god-inspired translations using magic spec's or a nifty rock in a hat.

If anyone's got a better answer, I'd love to hear it.

What's really crazy is if you pick up a French Book of Mormon. I have a copy (albeit it is pretty used... it was my dad's on his mission). You are more than welcome to take it and see how people can't "adequately explain" the wealth of French words that the Nephites knew in that translation of the Book of Mormon.

I didn't think people actually used this argument. I thought that Jeff Lindsey and other apologists were just creating a strawman.

Learn something new every day.

[prisonchaplain]

Jefferson used the word "adieu" in his first draft of the Declaration of Independence, then scratched it out and replaced it with another word. This was in the 18th century. I don't think it's so strange for someone in or around 1827-1830 to use the word in a book meant for English speakers at first.

Many of these perplexities arise from the fact that Joseph Smith essentially said that the BoM is an inspired translation. If I am not mistaken, there is no copy, in the language it was originally written. However, if he was true in his claim, it matters not--the translation into English is inspired. If so, he could have written in Ebonics, and no one could really criticize it.

Do I understand this correctly?

[Doctor Steuss]

<div class='quotemain'>

Jefferson used the word "adieu" in his first draft of the Declaration of Independence, then scratched it out and replaced it with another word. This was in the 18th century. I don't think it's so strange for someone in or around 1827-1830 to use the word in a book meant for English speakers at first.

Many of these perplexities arise from the fact that Joseph Smith essentially said that the BoM is an inspired translation. If I am not mistaken, there is no copy, in the language it was originally written. However, if he was true in his claim, it matters not--the translation into English is inspired. If so, he could have written in Ebonics, and no one could really criticize it.

Do I understand this correctly?

It was "inspired" in that it was done with the power of G-d. Joseph had no secular ability to translate the plates. Although it was "inspired" it was nonetheless a translation that was done through a translator. Elements of Joseph (the translator) inevitably found their way into the text. He did not become a mindless puppet during the translation process. In fact, scripture seems to suggest the exact opposite (see D&C 9, namely verse 8)

[sellner]

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

Jefferson used the word "adieu" in his first draft of the Declaration of Independence, then scratched it out and replaced it with another word. This was in the 18th century. I don't think it's so strange for someone in or around 1827-1830 to use the word in a book meant for English speakers at first.

Many of these perplexities arise from the fact that Joseph Smith essentially said that the BoM is an inspired translation. If I am not mistaken, there is no copy, in the language it was originally written. However, if he was true in his claim, it matters not--the translation into English is inspired. If so, he could have written in Ebonics, and no one could really criticize it.

Do I understand this correctly?

It was "inspired" in that it was done with the power of G-d. Joseph had no secular ability to translate the plates. Although it was "inspired" it was nonetheless a translation that was done through a translator. Elements of Joseph (the translator) inevitably found their way into the text. He did not become a mindless puppet during the translation process. In fact, scripture seems to suggest the exact opposite (see D&C 9, namely verse 8)

Perhaps you could be correct in this.. No matter what language the BoM is written in, there will be those who continue to question the validity of it. As near as I can tell, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only Church that says basically, "You are welcome to investigate at your leisure" ... (this is my first post/reply here, so I can only hope that I have done it correctly, if not, I have erred, and I should be corrected) ...

[Doctor Steuss]

Perhaps you could be correct in this.. No matter what language the BoM is written in, there will be those who continue to question the validity of it. As near as I can tell, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only Church that says basically, "You are welcome to investigate at your leisure" ... (this is my first post/reply here, so I can only hope that I have done it correctly, if not, I have erred, and I should be corrected) ...

BoM Title Page

And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ.

[sellner]

<div class='quotemain'>

Im still waiting for someone to adaquetly explain how the Nephites learn to say "Adieu", when even the French language didn't exist at the time?

And don't bother with Jeff Lindsay's lame argument that the word was the best match for the "translation". English words were used for the whole BoM, and "Good bye" would have been a suitable word. Or, if Smith wanted to be literal, why not say "God be with you"?

Lindsay's objections to the use of French words in the Bible don't mean squat. We all know that those weren't god-inspired translations using magic spec's or a nifty rock in a hat.

If anyone's got a better answer, I'd love to hear it.

What's really crazy is if you pick up a French Book of Mormon. I have a copy (albeit it is pretty used... it was my dad's on his mission). You are more than welcome to take it and see how people can't "adequately explain" the wealth of French words that the Nephites knew in that translation of the Book of Mormon.

I didn't think people actually used this argument. I thought that Jeff Lindsey and other apologists were just creating a strawman.

Learn something new every day.

Isn't analyzing the validity of a word in the BoM or any other LDS Doctrine taking away from.. "Prepare yourselves, prepare every needful thing, and establish a house, even a house of prayer, a house of fasting, a house of faith, a house of learning, a house of glory, a house of order, a house of God."

[Doctor Steuss]

Hi! Hope someone can help.

I am an inactive member and am trying to gain a testimony. So, I have taken up Hinkley's challenge to read the BoM and everything is going smoothly until I hit a speed bump and I find whatever small testimony I was gaining being whisked away in an instant - leaving a bad taste in my month. Here is an example:

Alma 38:13-14: "Do not pray as the Zoramites do, for ye have seen that they pray to heard of men, and to be praised for thier wisdom. Do not say: O God, I thank thee that we are better than our brethren..."

Hello?! Didn't Jesus say this exact thing to the Pharasees 100 year years later??? in Luke 18:11 (btw the footnotes direct you to Luke 18:13)? So, was Jesus quoting Alma? or was Alma quoted Jesus 100 years in the past?

It's these little moments of deja vous in the BoM that make me go hmmmm. And don't get me started on the book of Ether. Last time I read that book, I put away the Book of Mormon for months! So am I nervous about reading it again.

Is there a good reason why the BoM relies so heavily in its narrative on the Old/New Testament stories?

I truly want a testimony of the BoM. I have prayed, and am obviously reading and occassional get the warm feeling of the spirit like w/ Alma 32 or other doctrinal passages, but then it is torn to shreads over things like this.

Can anyone help me?

TIA - InactiveTx

I'm guessing the déjà vu might be because the words are coming from the same G-d. Do you find similar problems when the OT quotes itself? Or when the NT quotes the OT? Don’t forget, that the Nephites did carry away with them a version of the Torah (the Torah was not solidified as it stands in its current state until a bit after 600 BCE; thus we find the writings of Zenos in the record).

I think that G-d can quote Himself (He even does it a few times in the Doctrine and Covenants… *Gasp*).

Edited to add:

I just noticed how old this thread is (I guess someone dug it up). So pretty much, the above response is just me stroking my ego. B)

[Jason]

First of all, I cannot believe I'm being called out on a post that's over two years old!

The Nephite's did not use English words either, so according to your argument, saying "goodbye" would have been unacceptable as well...:)

Wrong. The translation was to be done in a language that everyone understood. Do you think that everyone knew French in early 19th century America?

I guess we'll have to wait and see.

The Book of Mormon is an English (with the above exception of course)translation of whatever words the Nephite's happened to use which we do not know...The plates were not in English or French since the Nephites did not speak either one...the word Adieu was not on the plates and neither were any of the other English words in the Book of Mormon...It is a translation of the Nephite characters that were on the plates... naturally Joseph Smith can translate them in whatever way would be most understood by its readers, and in a way that most accurately renders the meaning of the word...If a translation is to be best understood by the readers, then the job of the translator is to render the meaning into a language that people understand...

Tell me something I don't already know.

If Joseph Smith had translated the Nephite language into Latin(assuming he knew it), that would not have been very useful to the masses, since few people know it and noone uses it in common speech.

It is my understanding that Latin was taught in public school until the 1950's or later. Of course, French and German were pretty common as well. But does it make sense to include a Latin, French or German word into an ENGLISH text? I think you've already answered that in the negative.

Pig Latin is better known but not very reverent...:) If he had translated into pig latin or Latin, would you have cried foul since the Nephites didn't speak either one of these languages? Had Joseph Smith been French himself, and translated The Book of Mormon into French, would you have said he is a fraud because the Nephites could not have spoken French? What if he had inserted one English word into his French translation?

The word "adieu" does not make the BoM fradulent. But it doesn't do much for Smiths translating abilities, as I pointed out two years ago that "god be with you" or "go with god" would have been a perfect translation for this.

On another front, that he rendered his translation in King James English does not mean the Nephites spoke King James English(which is a criticism I have read elsewhere), it simply means he recognized King James English as beautiful and poetic, and frankly, the only English version of God's word that people were familiar with at that time...speaks again to the responsibility of a translator...

I think he did it to make it seem more like the rest of Scripture.

My only criticism of Joseph Smith on this issue is that in using a French word here, which most people in common English speech do not use, he has created some misunderstanding about translation...I would be curious to know if Adieu was a common term of departure in upstate New York by English speaking people (kinda like you hear "adios" far more often in San diego than its English equivelant) at the time of Joseph Smith...This is a far more interesting question since if it was, then in that case it would be a great rendering of the Nephite word (farewell with a blessing) for Joseph Smiths regional readers...I wonder if Joseph Smith or his family members commonly said good bye in this way? Have never read anything to say either way, but it does make me curious...

Again, I don't know how we can tell for sure, other than reviewing public news papers of the area and looking for the word in print.

The same argument above can be used when people criticize the word "Christian" used in the B of M before the time of Christ...not a Hebrew or Nephite word certainly...not really English either...and was not used until the time of The Apostle Paul...but lets assume for sake of argument that the Nephites had a word that was used to describe a "believer or follower of Christ, or the Messiah". I have no idea what the word was, but it wasn't "Christian" since that is not a Nephite word...So Joseph Smith comes along and sees a word ( a title) on the plates that denotes "a believer in Christ or the Messiah"...The job of a traslator is to render that word in a way that the reader understands...lets say the Nephite word title for a believer or follower of Christ was..."Tralla". Sorry to trivialise here. as I have no idea what the Nephite word was...it's just the first word that popped into my head and is only for illustration...:)

So for our example:

Tralla = Believer or follower of Christ or the Messiah

Christian= Believer or follower of Christ or the Messiah

So if Joseph Smith were to render the Nephite word in the best possible way that his English readers would understand, then he would translate the word "Tralla" as "Christian". Again, this is only for illustration...it would be silly to assume the Nephites used the actual New Testament word "Christian" similarly it would be silly to assume the Nephites used a French word "Adieu". They used their own word or title, in their own language, for a believer or follower of Christ, and their own word for "farewell". Joseph Smith gave us a translation of words, not the actual words themselves as spoken and written by The Nephites...if his account is to be believed that is...:)

Yeah, but notice Smith used the word "Christian" not the French "Chrétien". B)

[Doctor Steuss]

First of all, I cannot believe I'm being called out on a post that's over two years old!

And yet, you seemingly go on to defend it. Has your position changed, or do you still think that “adieu” within the text is an issue? Does it matter that “adieu” was in the 1828 edition of Noah Webster's American Dictionary of the English Language?

Wrong. The translation was to be done in a language that everyone understood. Do you think that everyone knew French in early 19th century America?

I doubt everyone knew Jacobian English either, nor Akkadian (there's an Akkadian word in the text... interestingly; no one could read Akkadian during Joseph's time).

Do you have a source that it was to be done "in a language that everyone understood," or is this merely your opinion?