Small plates, Large Plates, Record of Lehi, and 116 pages

[Fether]

I had been pondering on this a lot the last two days.

the Book of Mormon consists of an abridgment of Nephi's small plates (1 Nephi - Omni), The large plates (Mosiah - 4 Nephi), Plates from the Jaredites (Ether), and the remaining record from Mormon and Moroni.

Here is my question.

What was a part of the 116 pages?

Im aware that it contained the writing on Lehi, but did it also contain the beginning portion of the Large Plates of Nephi?

In the Words of Mormon, Mormon shares his decision to add the small plates to the record as follows 

“I had made an abridgment from the plates of Nephi, down to the reign of this king Benjamin, of whom Amaleki spake, I searched among the records which had been delivered into my hands, and I found these plates, which contained this small account of the prophets, from Jacob down to the reign of this king Benjamin, and also many of the words of Nephi.
 And the things which are upon these plates pleasing me, because of the prophecies of the coming of Christ; and my fathers knowing that many of them have been fulfilled; yea, and I also know that as many things as have been prophesied concerning us down to this day have been fulfilled, and as many as go beyond this day must surely come to pass--
 Wherefore, I chose these things, to finish my record upon them, which remainder of my record I shall take from the plates of Nephi; and I cannot write the hundredth part of the things of my people.”

So this is what it looks like to me.

The Book of Mormon was intended to be the Record of Lehi, Large Plates, record of Ether, final words from Mormon and Moroni.

The first 116 pages contained the Book of Lehi and the Large Plates up to the Book of Mosiah.

Those 116 pages were supplanted by the small plates of Nephi.

If this is the case, that would be absolutely incredible!! The Book of Omni ends with Amaleki saying “I am about to lie down in my grave; and these plates are full. And I make an end of my speaking.”

Amaleki then gives the plates to King Mosiah (WoM 1:10)

This means that where the small plates ran out of room covered the exact amount of time needed to cover the losing of the 116 lost pages.

Am I mistaken in any of this? Was the 116 pages ONLY the record of Lehi?

Edited September 23, 2018 by Fether

[JohnsonJones]

My impression is that a majority of what was covered in the 116 pages were now covered by the Small Plates.  There were differences though. 

For starters, the 116 pages probably started with Lehi's account and his words.  Then we have Nephi's plates, but these plates probably did not cover as much scripture (and thus probably not as much Isaiah) for his time and were more a record of the events, their wars, and other items.  In accordance with that they probably also covered more mundane actions by those who were their Kings and such. 

Instead of being the full record, I imagine it was also an abridgement made by Mormon, and thus more in his voice than that of those ancient prophets and leaders of the Nephites.

It may be that the kings/rulers of the Nephites branched off at some point (seems like it) and so the large plates/abridgement may also not have included some of the authors of the small plates.  The small plates seem to have become more of family record with a family tradition to put some information in them from those who inherited them.

It appears there is a small bit of overlap between the small plates and even what we have of the Large plates where they were resumed translating. 

However, with the Lord knowing the beginning to the end, I would say he knew of what would occur and prepared for this.  Nephi was not sure of why, but he did as the Lord instructed and thus the history and the major teachings of Lehi and Nephi were not lost.

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

The 116 pages covered from Lehi to the first two chapters of Mosiah. The Mosiah 1 we have would have been Mosiah 3. Following Moroni was the Title page that we now have. When Joseph and Oliver had completed the Cumorah plates they returned them to Moroni, then they travelled to Fayette, New York. Once in New York the small plates from the Cumorah depository in New York were brought to them. They then translated the small plates and completed the Book of Mormon that we now have.

[Just_A_Guy]

I could easily be wrong, but I had the impression that Mormon abridged only Nephi’s large plates, which abridgement he dubbed the “Book of Lehi” out of respect for the prophecy whose ministry kicked off the account—just as the “Book of Alma” begins with Alma’s ministry but continues well after he is out of the picture.

Edited September 24, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[Fether]

1 hour ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

The 116 pages covered from Lehi to the first two chapters of Mosiah. The Mosiah 1 we have would have been Mosiah 3. Following Moroni was the Title page that we now have. When Joseph and Oliver had completed the Cumorah plates they returned them to Moroni, then they travelled to Fayette, New York. Once in New York the small plates from the Cumorah depository in New York were brought to them. They then translated the small plates and completed the Book of Mormon that we now have.

Can you provide a source?

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

Just now, Fether said:

Can you provide a source?

Research it, I don’t have the time to look it all up again. Good luck.

[Fether]

53 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I could easily be wrong, but I had the impression that Mormon abridged only Nephi’s large plates, which abridgement he dubbed the “Book of Lehi” out of respect for the prophecy whose ministry kicked off the account—just as the “Book of Alma” begins with Alma’s ministry but continues well after he is out of the picture.

The historical process, from my understanding, Mormon abridged thevlarge Plates up to Mosiah 1ish, then found the small plates and added an abridgment of them at the end of the Book, then continued on abridging the Large Plates.

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

9 hours ago, Fether said:

The historical process, from my understanding, Mormon abridged thevlarge Plates up to Mosiah 1ish, then found the small plates and added an abridgment of them at the end of the Book, then continued on abridging the Large I wish we had more information about the process of translation.

 

[Vort]

19 hours ago, Fether said:

So this is what it looks like to me.

The Book of Mormon was intended to be the Record of Lehi, Large Plates, record of Ether, final words from Mormon and Moroni.

The first 116 pages contained the Book of Lehi and the Large Plates up to the Book of Mosiah.

Those 116 pages were supplanted by the small plates of Nephi.

If this is the case, that would be absolutely incredible!! The Book of Omni ends with Amaleki saying “I am about to lie down in my grave; and these plates are full. And I make an end of my speaking.”

Amaleki then gives the plates to King Mosiah (WoM 1:10)

This means that where the small plates ran out of room covered the exact amount of time needed to cover the losing of the 116 lost pages.

Am I mistaken in any of this? Was the 116 pages ONLY the record of Lehi?

The book of Lehi was a very large record, the first part of what Nephi calls his "large plates". We don't know whether Lehi himself actually wrote in the book of Lehi, or if it was only Nephi and his descendants (the first kings of the Nephites, called Nephi II, Nephi III, etc.). In either case, the "book" or section of the large plates was named after its first major prophet, similar to other sections.

While Nephi was keeping the record of his father's and his own prophetic doings on the so-called "large plates", he received a commandment to make another, much smaller set of plates. He was instructed to keep a more spiritual history on the small set, which he called his "small plates". While the large plates probably constituted a hundred (or several hundred) pounds of thinly hammered gold alloy, the small plates were very few in number, probably no more than five or so pounds of material. So the small plates did constitute a sort of parallel history in their overlap with the large plates, but a much abbreviated history, and one that concentrated on the spiritual state of the Nephites rather than the particulars of their kings, wars, etc.

At Nephi's death, the two sets of plates went different ways. The Nephite prophet-ruler (Nephi II) was charged with the custodial duties of the large plates, including keeping the history. The small plates, in contrast, were given by Nephi himself to his brother Jacob, who was the spiritual caretaker and prophet to the Nephites. It seems likely to me that few Nephites knew or cared about the small plates, while the existence and content of the large plates would have been common knowledge and greatly valued. Jacob himself made important additions to the small plates, but after him, little room was left. Eventually, the room was used up and the patriarchal line that kept the plates died out, so the last of that line gave the record, not to some patriarchal cousin to continue a record that was already full, but instead to the prophet-king Mosiah. (That would be the first Mosiah, Benjamin's father, not the one that the book of Mosiah is named for, who was Benjamin's son.)

We are told that the 116 lost (stolen) pages covered for the loss of Joseph Smith's translation of the book of Lehi. Well, not quite; it covered for the loss of Joseph's translation of Mormon's historical abridgment of the book of Lehi. The book of Lehi itself would be massive, likely far larger than our extant Book of Mormon in its entirety. If we had the 116 lost pages, we doubtless would call it the "Book of Lehi", just as we have the books of Mosiah, Alma, and Helaman; like those books, it was a translation of Mormon's abridgment of those prophetic writings from the large plates. In God's wisdom, he prompted Nephi to keep the record of the "small plates", which Mormon was then prompted to include verbatim in his abridgment, and which 2400 years later would effectively replace the translation of Mormon's lost abridgment of the book of Lehi.

Edited September 24, 2018 by Vort

[Just_A_Guy]

We know, from either the first or second chapter of 1 Nephi, that Lehi kept his own written record.  But I don’t believe there are any further references to what happened to that record, or whether Mormon had access to it a thousand years later.

[Fether]

55 minutes ago, Vort said:

The book of Lehi was a very large record, the first part of what Nephi calls his "large plates". We don't know whether Lehi himself actually wrote in the book of Lehi, or if it was only Nephi and his descendants (the first kings of the Nephites, called Nephi II, Nephi III, etc.). In either case, the "book" or section of the large plates was named after its first major prophet, similar to other sections.

 While Nephi was keeping the record of his father's and his own prophetic doings on the so-called "large plates", he received a commandment to make another, much smaller set of plates. He was instructed to keep a more spiritual history on the small set, which he called his "small plates". While the large plates probably constituted a hundred (or several hundred) pounds of thinly hammered gold alloy, the small plates were very few in number, probably no more than five or so pounds of material. So the small plates did constitute a sort of parallel history in their overlap with the large plates, but a much abbreviated history, and one that concentrated on the spiritual state of the Nephites rather than the particulars of their kings, wars, etc.

At Nephi's death, the two sets of plates went different ways. The Nephite prophet-ruler (Nephi II) was charged with the custodial duties of the large plates, including keeping the history. The small plates, in contrast, were given by Nephi himself to his brother Jacob, who was the spiritual caretaker and prophet to the Nephites. It seems likely to me that few Nephites knew or cared about the small plates, while the existence and content of the large plates would have been common knowledge and greatly valued. Jacob himself made important additions to the small plates, but after him, little room was left. Eventually, the room was used up and the patriarchal line that kept the plates died out, so the last of that line gave the record, not to some patriarchal cousin to continue a record that was already full, but instead to the prophet-king Mosiah. (That would be the first Mosiah, Benjamin's father, not the one that the book of Mosiah is named for, who was Benjamin's son.)

We are told that the 116 lost (stolen) pages covered for the loss of Joseph Smith's translation of the book of Lehi. Well, not quite; it covered for the loss of Joseph's translation of Mormon's historical abridgment of the book of Lehi. The book of Lehi itself would be massive, likely far larger than our extant Book of Mormon in its entirety. If we had the 116 lost pages, we doubtless would call it the "Book of Lehi", just as we have the books of Mosiah, Alma, and Helaman; like those books, it was a translation of Mormon's abridgment of those prophetic writings from the large plates. In God's wisdom, he prompted Nephi to keep the record of the "small plates", which Mormon was then prompted to include verbatim in his abridgment, and which 2400 years later would effectively replace the translation of Mormon's lost abridgment of the book of Lehi.

Sooo... the book of Lehi covered the history from 1 Nephi to Omni?

[Vort]

Just now, Fether said:

Sooo... the book of Lehi covered the history from 1 Nephi to Omni?

Yes. Mormon's abridgment of the book of Lehi covered the same time period that was covered by the small plates, which Mormon included without modification in his abridgment.

[Fether]

Just now, Vort said:

Yes. Mormon's abridgment of the book of Lehi covered the same time period that was covered by the small plates, which Mormon included without modification in his abridgment.

So... the small plates filled up at the exact point where the Large Plates that got lost with the 116 pages?

[Vort]

3 minutes ago, Fether said:

So... the small plates filled up at the exact point where the Large Plates that got lost with the 116 pages?

More or less, yes. The small plates had a different purpose from the large plates where Mormon got his abridgment material, so the substance of the content was different. But yes, the time periods of the two match up quite closely.

[Fether]

46 minutes ago, Vort said:

But yes, the time periods of the two match up quite closely.

That’s so cool

[Guest]

On 9/24/2018 at 1:55 PM, Fether said:

So... the small plates filled up at the exact point where the Large Plates that got lost with the 116 pages?

On 9/24/2018 at 2:00 PM, Vort said:

More or less, yes. The small plates had a different purpose from the large plates where Mormon got his abridgment material, so the substance of the content was different. But yes, the time periods of the two match up quite closely.

As I understood it, there was no coincidence in this.  Mormon specifically stuck the small plates in between the first portion and the second portion of his abridgment (so it was placed in the same location that his (Mormon's) abridgment already covered.  So, by simply looking at the plates, there was a noticeable break in the narrative.

Martin Harris took this "break" as an opportunity to ask to take the papers to others.

[Fether]

8 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Mormon specifically stuck the small plates in between the first portion and the second portion of his abridgment (so it was placed in the same location that his (Mormon's) abridgment already covered.  So, by simply looking at the plates, there was a noticeable break in the narrative.

I found this on accident today 

“He was now translating the last part of the record, known as the small plates of Nephi, which would actually serve as the beginning of the book. Revealing a history similar to the one he and Martin had translated and lost”

- The Saints Vol 1 chap 7

[Guest]

On 9/28/2018 at 12:13 AM, Fether said:

I found this on accident today 

“He was now translating the last part of the record, known as the small plates of Nephi, which would actually serve as the beginning of the book. Revealing a history similar to the one he and Martin had translated and lost”

- The Saints Vol 1 chap 7

Could you broaden the quote a bit to give it more context and meaning?  I have no idea what this is getting at.

No, I haven't gotten my copy of Saints yet.  And I hate resorting to electronic stuff when I don't have a hard copy.  Yes, I'm a grumpy old man.

[Fether]

23 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Could you broaden the quote a bit to give it more context and meaning?  I have no idea what this is getting at.

No, I haven't gotten my copy of Saints yet.  And I hate resorting to electronic stuff when I don't have a hard copy.  Yes, I'm a grumpy old man.

You had said

On 9/27/2018 at 1:32 PM, Carborendum said:

Mormon specifically stuck the small plates in between the first portion and the second portion of his abridgment (so it was placed in the same location that his (Mormon's) abridgment already covered.  So, by simply looking at the plates, there was a noticeable break in the narrative.

 Martin Harris took this "break" as an opportunity to ask to take the papers to others

I had come across this quotation showing that that wasn’t the case. The small plates were at the end of Mormon’s abridgment.

Here is an expanded quotation.

”One morning, as he was getting ready to translate, Joseph became upset with Emma. Later, when he joined Oliver and David in the upstairs room where they worked, he could not translate a syllable.
He left the room and walked outside to the orchard. He stayed away for about an hour, praying. When he came back, he apologized to Emma and asked for forgiveness. He then went back to translating as usual.

He was now translating the last part of the record, known as the small plates of Nephi, which would actually serve as the beginning of the book. Revealing a history similar to the one he and Martin had translated and lost, the small plates told of a young man named Nephi, whose family God had guided from Jerusalem to a new promised land. It explained the origins of the record and the early struggles between the Nephite and Lamanite peoples. More important, it bore a powerful testimony of Jesus Christ and His Atonement.
When Joseph translated the writing on the final plate, he found that it explained the record’s purpose and gave it a title, The Book of Mormon, after the ancient prophet-historian who had compiled the book.”

[zil]

https://www.lds.org/languages/eng/content/history/saints-v1/07-fellow-servants

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Fether said:

You had said

I had come across this quotation showing that that wasn’t the case. The small plates were at the end of Mormon’s abridgment.

Ah, I see.  I read that passage with a different meaning.  While I can accept that your reading may indeed be the correct one, I see that it can be read as being last portion that was translated chronologically.  It doesn't necessarily mean that it was the last in physical position of the bulk of the plates.

I may be incorrect.  That is why I began my earlier post with "As I understand it".  All that I was told before certainly lent to that narrative.  I'll have to look into the source material that generated that statement in Saints.  Notice that it was not a direct quote, merely a narrative.  Details are important.

[Fether]

5 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Ah, I see.  I read that passage with a different meaning.  While I can accept that your reading may indeed be the correct one, I see that it can be read as being last portion that was translated chronologically.  It doesn't necessarily mean that it was the last in physical position of the bulk of the plates.

I may be incorrect.  That is why I began my earlier post with "As I understand it".  All that I was told before certainly lent to that narrative.  I'll have to look into the source material that generated that statement in Saints.  Notice that it was not a direct quote, merely a narrative.  Details are important.

The Saints is written in Chronological order of events that occurred. The losing of the 116 pages occurred 2 chapter prior and many events occurred in between the losing of the plates and beginning again to translate, and the actual translating of the small plates.

But yes, please do read the book, not only to satisfy my need to be right, but also for your own benefit  my wife and I read a chapter every night and there are some cool insights I had never heard before.

[Guest]

Just now, Fether said:

The Saints is written in Chronological order of events that occurred.

I don't see how that contradicts what I said.  My original statement was about the physical placement.  Saints speaks of the Chronology.  They are not necessarily related -- especially since he was translating from the seer stone anyway.

[Fether]

1 minute ago, Carborendum said:

I don't see how that contradicts what I said.  My original statement was about the physical placement.  Saints speaks of the Chronology.  They are not necessarily related -- especially since he was translating from the seer stone anyway.

Why would Joseph Smith skip over translating the small plates if Mormon put it in the middle of the record? And why would it be referred to as “the last part of the record” if it was in the middle. The small plates were not chronologically at the end of the events of the Book of Mormon, therefore it must have been at the end of the plates.

In order for your assessment to be true, Joseph Smith would have needed to physically remove the small plates, where you claim Mormon to have placed them, and have put them at the end of the record.

30 minutes ago, Fether said:

He was now translating the last part of the record, known as the small plates of Nephi, which would actually serve as the beginning of the book. Revealing a history similar to the one he and Martin had translated and lost,

I don’t see how this can be interpreted any other way???? It is the last part of the record (the record Mormon abridge and compiled), and would actually serve as the beginning of the Book (meaning the last part of the record was going to be published as if it were the beginning).

 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Fether said:

In order for your assessment to be true, Joseph Smith would have needed to physically remove the small plates, where you claim Mormon to have placed them, and have put them at the end of the record.

Did I not mention he translated via the seer stone?

2 minutes ago, Fether said:

I don’t see how this can be interpreted any other way???? It is the last part of the record (the record Mormon abridge and compiled), and would actually serve as the beginning of the Book (meaning the last part of the record was going to be published as if it were the beginning).

They can be interpreted another way because I so obviously and desperately want to be right that I'm not willing to admit defeat.  duh.