Why Did God Leave The Dead Sea Scrolls And Not The Plates.

[rameumptom]

I trust the Book of Mormon is right about Genisis being scripture. The Joseph Smith Translation did also re-affirm the books place in the Bible.

The presence of the scrolls does not prove what scripture claims about itself is true. My belief in scripture and God is not based on Bible manuscripts alone, but on faith in God. Reading the scriptures inspire me to think about and have faith in God. But if i did not have that faith all the Dead Sea Scrolls would be to me is religious fiction.

I agree that Genesis is scripture and is inspired. Now, does that mean that it came directly from the pen of Moses? Of course not. And that is one reason why we have the JST, to show that some things were lost from the original Genesis that Moses received.

I mean, look at how much Enoch material the world would not have, if it were not for Joseph Smith's translation. And there is evidence that it is authentic, because the name Mahujah is also found in the DSS version of Enoch that was discovered in 1947 - a century after Joseph Smith died!

Of course, the antis will tell us that Joseph must have gotten hold of a copy of it somewhere along the way.....

[Dale]

I am open to the idea different versions of the Genisis circulated at one point. I have also concluded just because the JST revised the KJV does not mean the KJV was in error. The prophet Joseph Smith included modern expansions and commentary, ect in his translations.

Book of Commandments 6 was the parchment Joseph Smith saw and translated only from parchment he saw through the seer stone. (D.&C.7) It is a smaller version in the BofC. He changed, enlarged, or reduced in spots many revelations that now make up the D.&C.

Blake Ostler feels the Book of Mormon contains 19th century concepts. one he pointed out was an Arminian concept. Others he feels heavily influenced the translation was KJV snippets. He still feels much evidence for the anitiquity of the text exists. He had a 1987 Dialogue article and included a review of How Wide the Divide? in a FARMS Review of Books where he mentions the concepts he found from the 19th century in the text. This is my own thinking myself i adopted from reading him.

[rameumptom]

I agree that there was no way for 19th century anachronisms to not slip into the record, as it was not a nice and neat word for word Translation. It all came through his mind and thought process, and used words that best fit Joseph.

However, several have shown that many ancient ideas have also shown up that Joseph would not have noticed. Brant Gardner gave a talk at the 2004 FAIR conference showing that the Ammon story fits in well with Mayan methods, for example.

The Case for Historicity: Discerning the Book of Mormon's Production Culture