The lost 116 pages

[Gordon]

I guess He wanted confusion.

[Tchild2]

But apparently Joseph's fear was that he would not reproduce the 116 pages word for word to everyone's satisfaction, and his enemies would then produce the original to show that he had failed, to show that he was not a prophet.

This is counterintuitive. If J.S. had reproduced the 116 pages (by true revelation) his copy would have very closely resembled the original. If God had forseen the lost manuscript and gone to so much trouble to have duplicates made centuries prior, couldn't God simply have given Joseph the revelation needed to redo the pages word for word like the original? What would it even matter if some hooligans had a copy that very closely resembled the original, but that was off a few words. Would the story have changed? Would the doctrinal, and theological matters have been any different (That answer wholly depends on whether Joseph was a prophet or a charlatan)?

This scenario would have been the best proof of J.Smith's prophetic ability. The critics would have flashed the original after Joseph had retranslated the 116 pages, and then comparing it to the retranslation, they (and the whole world) would have seen that the translation was nearly identical.

In fact, if this scenario had played out. We would now know if the revelation process was "loose" (concepts and ideas) or "tight" (word for word). We could quit quibbling about horses and steel in the BoM and all of us could focus on the far weightier matters of earrings, playing cards, and caffeine in soda drinks.

[Gordon]

t2t2 - the history of the human race has been that it doesn't really matter what mortals see, by way of proofs or miracles, etc. they aren't going to believe unless they want to. What more could the children of Israel have seen? The 10 plagues, the capitulation of the pharaoh, the parting of the Red Sea, and then Moses is gone for a few days, and what happens?

"Gee, I would have believed the whole thing if I had seen the gold plates!" History shows you probably wouldn't unless you wanted to, and then you wouldn't have needed to see them.

You beat me to the punch...and with alot less words.

[lwyatt]

But apparently Joseph's fear was that he would not reproduce the 116 pages word for word to everyone's satisfaction, and his enemies would then produce the original to show that he had failed, to show that he was not a prophet.

This is counterintuitive. If J.S. had reproduced the 116 pages (by true revelation) his copy would have very closely resembled the original. If God had forseen the lost manuscript and gone to so much trouble to have duplicates made centuries prior, couldn't God simply have given Joseph the revelation needed to redo the pages word for word like the original? What would it even matter if some hooligans had a copy that very closely resembled the original, but that was off a few words. Would the story have changed? Would the doctrinal, and theological matters have been any different (That answer wholly depends on whether Joseph was a prophet or a charlatan)?

This scenario would have been the best proof of J.Smith's prophetic ability. The critics would have flashed the original after Joseph had retranslated the 116 pages, and then comparing it to the retranslation, they (and the whole world) would have seen that the translation was nearly identical.

In fact, if this scenario had played out. We would now know if the revelation process was "loose" (concepts and ideas) or "tight" (word for word). We could quit quibbling about horses and steel in the BoM and all of us could focus on the far weightier matters of earrings, playing cards, and caffeine in soda drinks.

It was also a test of Josephs faith. He had asked God several times if he could do this for Martin, and each time God said no. Finally, after Joseph asking again and again, God said ok, but gave the caveat that there would be consequences for trying the Lord.

Anyone care to guess what those consequences were? Here is a hint: Where are the lost pages?

[Tchild2]

It was also a test of Josephs faith. He had asked God several times if he could do this for Martin, and each time God said no. Finally, after Joseph asking again and again, God said ok, but gave the caveat that there would be consequences for trying the Lord.

This is the God wildcard, "God as spackle" as Cinepro coined. Use God to patch those glaring contradictions. God makes the best spackle because no one gets to ask God if he really did use it as a test of faith. The guy speaking for God says so. Isn't this a conflict of interest?

[Gordon]

If God had forseen the lost manuscript and gone to so much trouble to have duplicates made centuries prior, couldn't God simply have given Joseph the revelation needed to redo the pages word for word like the original?

Yes, he could have. That's not the point, though. The exact copy that the Lord would have had JS translate would have been different from the original that would have been changed by others - this would have led to the problem.

This scenario would have been the best proof of J.Smith's prophetic ability.

[Gordon]

This is the God wildcard, "God as spackle" as Cinepro coined. Use God to patch those glaring contridictions. God makes the best spackle because no one gets to ask God if he really did use it as a test of faith. The guy speaking for God says so. Isn't this a conflict of interest?

And you know of the sure-fire way to know the dealings of G-d? Please, let me in on that secret...

[Moksha]

Side Question - Why would people who shouldn't necessarily have Jewish superstitions concerning the writing of the word God, use G-D instead of God?

This issue of the 116 pages probably wouldn't be a good candidate for Occam's razor, would it?

[Mighty Curelom]

  t2t2 - the history of the human race has been that it doesn't really matter what mortals see, by way of proofs or miracles, etc. they aren't going to believe unless they want to. What more could the children of Israel have seen? The 10 plagues, the capitulation of the pharaoh, the parting of the Red Sea, and then Moses is gone for a few days, and what happens?

You would be right, if the bible were actually a history of the human race. The fact that people in the bible so stupidly refuse to believe while it's raining frogs or as they're running on dry land through the middle of a parted sea is not evidence that people are reluctant to believe; it's evidence that the bible is not real history. That's just not how people behave. This sort of misrepresentation of human psychology is taken to absurd lengths in Joseph's characters Laman and Lemuel. C'mon. Nobody would be that stupid. I don't care how "wicked" or "stiff-necked" you are; if ANYONE say half the crap L&L supposedly saw, they'd either be forced to admit there was something supernatural going on or they'd gone completely bonkers.

-----------------------------------------------------

Keep in mind that the Spaulding Theory, took almost 60 years till becomes to be debunked. How long would take to prove that critics really adultered the text? Who knows? How many good people would buy that before hand and would not join the Church only for disregading the BOM?

How many good people haven't joined the church because of the way it actually turned out? To most (and I'm being generous by not saying "all") non-Mormons who hear this story, Joseph doesn't come off too great. The immediate and obvious response is "well duh. He didn't retranslate the original 116 pages because he couldn't. And it sure does seem suspicious that there would be a summary of the exact events depicted in the lost pages. "

Secondly, it turns out God was wrong. In the D&C, God says

And behold, I say unto you, that because they have altered the words, they read contrary from that which you translated and caused to be written;

But they didn't. If the 116 pages were retained by Joseph's enemies, don't you think they would have resurfaced at some point? Since Joseph translated a summary of the events depicted in the 116 pages, what's to stop the schemers from altering that same event in the original 116 pages? They still could have enacted their plan--but they didn't. This is either because (1) there never was a plan to do this in the first place, or (2) Lucy or someone else destroyed the ms. In either cause, God was wrong.

[Moon Quaker]

But instead, we have Moroni preparing an alternate set of plates (miraculously covering the exact material to be lost hundreds of years later), carting them thousands of miles to bury them, revealing them to Joseph, who is then pestered by Martin Harris at the exact moment they reach the spot where the "back up" record ends, to the point that the manuscript is lost...

Cool how the Lord can see all time - past, present, and future - and has his servants act accordingly...

I think the Lord would have been more effective if he just had Moroni toss out the Book of Lehi. That way, JS never would have translated it; hence there would be no manuscript for Martin Harris to show his wife. I know, I know, this is flawed because Martin Harris' wife would have hounded Martin for a manuscript anyway. So I'm actually willing to bet that the Lord devised even a more complex plan than we are aware of. In the unlikely event that JS gave to someone the manuscript of Nephi's account, Sam et al. would have miraculously kept a record of the same events. Since JS kept the manuscript of Nephi's account, there was no need for JS to translate the account of Sam et al.

[Moon Quaker]

If God had forseen the lost manuscript and gone to so much trouble to have duplicates made centuries prior, couldn't God simply have given Joseph the revelation needed to redo the pages word for word like the original?

Yes, he could have. That's not the point, though. The exact copy that the Lord would have had JS translate would have been different from the original that would have been changed by others - this would have led to the problem.

Better yet, had the manuscript truly been altered by JS's enemies, the Lord could have been most effective by simply dictating the words of the altered manuscript, word-for-word, to JS. This way the bad guys would be confounded at JS's ability to produce an exact copy of the altered document (then for doctrinal reason he could change it back to the original); Nephi wouldn't have had to take precious time inscribing redundant material on the plates (IIRC, plate inscribing is quite a lengthy process); Moroni wouldn't have had to cart around the extra pounds (gold is very heavy. I'm sure short distances are a cinch, but to lug the extra 116-page-equivolent in gold across the continent would have only fatigued Moroni just that much sooner.)

[Outshined]

I guess He wanted confusion. 

This is where I find myself departing from your average Mormon.  Sounds like an incredibly complicated system for revealing truth.  What's the point?  So that modern people can have faith?  You all obviously want more than that or Nibleys books wouldn't sell like they do.  There wouldn't be people combing Arabia looking for a place where they can say "this was possible!!". 

My personal opinion - God would be more concerned that people see and know His truth FOR truth than He would be that someone go through a trial of faith before they will/can even know that it IS truth.  Meaning - if the BoM truly contains the word of God, principals that will make man happy, ideas and truths that will bring people back to God - why make that book hard to believe in?  Like I said, seems needlessly complicated if the goal is to teach your children truth.

By this logic, why did Christ appear to only the disciples after the Resurrection, and not everyone? Then everyone would have believed, and the disciples would not have been persecuted.

Why make His Resurrection so hard to believe in?

[Marcelo]

-----------------------------------------------------

Keep in mind that the Spaulding Theory, took almost 60 years till becomes to be debunked. How long would take to prove that critics really adultered the text? Who knows? How many good people would buy that before hand and would not join the Church only for disregading the BOM?

How many good people haven't joined the church because of the way it actually turned out? To most (and I'm being generous by not saying "all") non-Mormons who hear this story, Joseph doesn't come off too great.

Most non-Mormons pick anything that they want to turn out against Joseph Smith History. Angels? Revelation? Where are the plates? Why are there grammar mistakes? Why did Nephi built a ship, instead of God just translade he and his family to America? ...and so on...

My only response would be: Why not? Or, why God has to reason the same and exactly way you think?

In the proposal scenario critics have 116 pages (could Harris' wife burnt all of them without letting any piece of evidence to her husband?), they have time, the caligraphy of Martin Harris, the material and could replicate easily fake sheets to damage Joseph Smith reputation. Think just like introducing a gross error (from history or from geography) at the original paper and when Joseph would came out again with the new information they would say: "See, we have the original, Joseph told before that Josiah, not Zedequiah was king of Jerusalem in 600 B.C., he said that there were not walls around the city at that time, when he knew all these were blatant errors he corrected it in his second version, but we have the originals, his work is a hoax...and so on".

Joseph Smith could not hire lawyers to defend himself, untill the copy of the critics be proved false it would take years, maybe decades untill he could turn out the case in his favor again.

For Joseph it was a lose-lose situation. I think that he would lose much less if he just keep going to his work and did not look backwards.

Bye!

[Mighty Curelom]

when Joseph would came out again with the new information they would say: "See, we have the original, Joseph told before that Josiah, not Zedequiah was king of Jerusalem in 600 B.C., he said that there were not walls around the city at that time, when he knew all these were blatant errors he corrected it in his second version, but we have the originals, his work is a hoax...and so on".

But you see, even by taking the course of action JS ended up taking--ie, translating a summary of the events originally depicted in the 116 pages--the possibility of altering the original manuscript still existed. Smith's enemies could still have pointed to the second version and said "ah-ha! Our version says king so-and-so did this, but Joseph's summary of the same events says otherwise. We have therefore demonstrated that Joseph is a fraud." The fact that they didn't do this means they either weren't planning on this scheme in the first place or the 116 pages were destroyed--contrary to what Joseph said God told him.

For Joseph it was a lose-lose situation. I think that he would lose much less if he just keep going to his work and did not look backwards.

On that I can agree. It's too bad God didn't have the forethought to tell Joseph to make a copy before he started lending it out. But I suppose that's a little too simple for God, who seems to have a penchant for making things difficult.

[Rollo Tomasi]

Final note: The 116 pages must surely have been destroyed, else SOMEONE would have produced it, just for the curiosity value if nothing else.

The closest we've come to finding the lost 116 pages was in Mark Hofmann's basement.

[Scottie]

Why wouldn't God reveal to JS who had the 116 pages and command him to go in and lop off his/her head? Better that one man die than a nation dwindle, right?

[t2t2]

"Gee, I would have believed the whole thing if I had seen the gold plates!" History shows you probably wouldn't unless you wanted to, and then you wouldn't have needed to see them.

Me? I did want to. For most of my life. But that's beside the point.

I always try to think of God like I picture a father. What would be more important to you as a father? Would it make more sense for a God to give rules that will help people out - and make SURE they know about these rules and that they come from God to bless them - than to make it dificult to even know about these guidelines to happiness? If you were a parent would you put obstacles like that in front of your kids? I woulnd't.

Don't drink until you're 18! If you do and I find out you will be grounded. More importantly, you could go to jail, you could loose your license, you could REALLY hurt someone you love or even yourself. Understand? Good. Remember - this rule is there because I love you and want you to be safe and happy.

or

Son, here are 30 different books that people have written - all of which claim to know what my rules are. They are VERY different from each other....but if you really spend some time looking at them, reading them, studying them - you will know which I really want you to follow. Better yet, if you read the right one and watch me you'll see that I smile ever so slightly at the correct one. I smile all the time? Well....yes....but you'll see the subtle difference if you watch closely.

Which more closely mirrors the way you would raise a kid?

-------------

By this logic, why did Christ appear to only the disciples after the Resurrection, and not everyone? Then everyone would have believed, and the disciples would not have been persecuted.

I thought he appeared to a whole nation of people here in America. Seems like he could have appeared ONLY to a few - wouldn't that have made the Nephites' faith stronger?

As for the Bible...who knows? I've never accepted the Bible as a literal history. I think most is clouded by the authors' faiths, the little we even know a valid source for. I don't think it was the resurrection that Jesus was concerned people know about. I think he wanted poeple to remember what he taught when he was alive. And THAT the people DID see in the flesh. Those that saw had the choice given to them to believe or not.

[tubaloth]

But you see, even by taking the course of action JS ended up taking--ie, translating a summary of the events originally depicted in the 116 pages--the possibility of altering the original manuscript still existed. Smith's enemies could still have pointed to the second version and said "ah-ha! Our version says king so-and-so did this, but Joseph's summary of the same events says otherwise.

(Doctrine and Covenants 10:15-19.)

15 For behold, he has put it into their hearts to get thee to tempt the Lord thy God, in asking to translate it over again.

16 And then, behold, they say and think in their hearts

[Magyar]

I dunno....seems like Joseph could have silenced everyone in one easy blow - show 'em the plates. Done and done.

Actually...seems like that would have made pretty much every discussion on this board irrelevent.

Yes, let's toss out faith and show the plates to each and every investigator of the Church. Tear Moroni's promise out of the back page of the book, while we're at it. Twelve witnesses to the plates are not enough to convince anyone of their veracity, let alone that Holy Spirit thing.

[t2t2]

Yes, let's toss out faith and show the plates to each and every investigator of the Church. Tear Moroni's promise out of the back page of the book, while we're at it. Twelve witnesses to the plates are not enough to convince anyone of their veracity, let alone that Holy Spirit thing.

...well, it's not really your choice now is it since these plates were taken away from you by an angel?

12 witnesses, all of whom would loose every ounce of credibility if they later exposed themselves as liars? Most of whom, I would imagine, truly did believe they saw something, even if it was only "in the spirit". Enough people have REALLY ( ) been taken into alien ships, probed and set loose to know that people see all kinds of things - often in large groups. I've read stories about group seances where everyone saw the same vision - as real to them as the table around which they sat. Did they? Who knows. Probably not in most cases. I watch crime shows with my wife and it's amazing how often groups of kids will confess to things they never did. They will talk in great detail - all of them correctly corroborating each others stories...and yet they were never there. The ability to feed off each other's fear and belief creates memories some refuse to give up even after a cop or lawyer shakes them and says "DNA proves you didn't do this!!".

No, 12 witnesses to something like this shows little to me. I've shown this before - but have the makers of that alien autopsy video STILL not come forward to say "yeah..it was a hoax!"? At this point it's too far gone. It's too well known and out there. Too many people believe it now. They're stuck. Better to just smile and say nothing.

Moroni's promise? Sure - ask God and he will answer. Joseph wrote what he found in James in the Bible. We're not talking about personal convictions. There are many threads for that. We're talking about physical evidences. Plates and a manuscript.

[Outshined]

I don't think it was the resurrection that Jesus was concerned people know about. I think he wanted poeple to remember what he taught when he was alive. And THAT the people DID see in the flesh. Those that saw had the choice given to them to believe or not.

Come now, what better way to prove to the critics that He was God? The ultimate miracle would have done just that, and spared His followers a lot of grief. It is exactly the same principle as what you ask of the plates.

[charity]

Mighty Curelom, You invoke the name of psychologists in trying to say people would actually believe in miracles if they saw them. I am a psychologist. People can come up with all kinds of reasons to explain away a miraculous event, and usually will. Actually, from what psychologists know, people are predisposed to disbelieve in miraculous events. Learning theory has demonstrated that we are really quite slow learners. (Except for taste aversions.)

t2t2 Our Heavenly Father did give us the rules, in a clear cut way. Those rules are contained in the Bible, the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Coventants and Pearl of Great Price. He didn't write the other books or set out a different set of rules. Could He have struck down the other, false ways? Of course. But remember, agency is an eternal principle. When there is only one choice, you really have no choice. "Here kids, is ice cream. There's vanilla, and then there's vanilla, and there's more vanilla. Take your pick."

It would be easier if there weren't any choices at all. But that's not the plan. I know from your previous posts that at one time you knew the correct path. Someone got in your way and, from what you have said, caused you great pain and self-doubt. You have said you became convinced you were lied to, and that kind of betrayal hurts like crazy. The Holy Ghost does not, cannot lie. You can want to believe again and come to see that your Heavenly Father is not acting in the irrational, bad parent model you proposed.

[t2t2]

Come now, what better way to prove to the critics that He was God? The ultimate miracle would have done just that, and spared His followers a lot of grief. It is exactly the same principle as what you ask of the plates.

Who says he didn't? I'm sort of the wrong person to ask this of since I don't believe the Gospels can be shown to be very accurate. It's pretty obivous Matthew, Mark, Luke and John (maybe) were not the authors. I think the only things contained therein that are likley authentic are the actual words Jesus spoke - not necessarily the accounts and tales as laid out. My personal opinion is that Jesus was a great prophet who taught some amazing truths. Whether he rose from the dead is going to be subject of a lot of discussion. See? I didn't see it for myself and I doubt. Oddly enough, my name IS Thomas!

My feeling is that if Jesus rose from the grave he likley showed himself to whoever was around at the time. I don't think he would have limited it just to Mary and a few followers unless that's all he had time for before...whatever came next.

--------

Those rules are contained in the Bible, the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Coventants and Pearl of Great Price. He didn't write the other books or set out a different set of rules.

Ahh...but here is where it IS confusing. Other churches will say he didn't write the BoM, PoGP or D&C. Each disagree. Go back to my example. Which path would you lay out for your son?

When there is only one choice, you really have no choice. "Here kids, is ice cream. There's vanilla, and then there's vanilla, and there's more vanilla. Take your pick."

There will always be choices. The question is whether God can make it easier or harder to know where to find the right choices to make. No one is suggesting God take away the choices or make them any less hard. We're suggesting that God could make it easier to know what choices are good and what are bad by taking away the confusion over which manual is his official one.

[Mighty Curelom]

This is completely off topic, but this thread has lost focus anyway.

People can come up with all kinds of reasons to explain away a miraculous event, and usually will. Actually, from what psychologists know, people are predisposed to disbelieve in miraculous events. Learning theory has demonstrated that we are really quite slow learners.

Do Americans believe in Miracles?

    * 84% believe God performs miracles.

    * 79% believe the miracles in the Bible actually took place.

    * 63% know someone who claims to have experienced a miracle.

    * 48% say they have experienced or witnessed one.

    * 90% of Christians believe in miracles.

    * 46% of non-Christians do.

    * 98% of Evangelical Protestants believe in them.

    * 87% agree miracles can happen to religious faiths different than their own.

    * 67% of Americans have prayed for a miracle.

    * 77% believe miracles can cure people given no chance by medical doctors.

    * 72% say people who face death in accidents can be saved by a miracle.

This poll doesn't suggest that people are "predisposed to disbelieve in miraculous evens." Quite the opposite.

[lwyatt]

It was also a test of Josephs faith. He had asked God several times if he could do this for Martin, and each time God said no. Finally, after Joseph asking again and again, God said ok, but gave the caveat that there would be consequences for trying the Lord.

This is the God wildcard, "God as spackle" as Cinepro coined. Use God to patch those glaring contradictions. God makes the best spackle because no one gets to ask God if he really did use it as a test of faith. The guy speaking for God says so. Isn't this a conflict of interest?

I don't know of any glaring contradictions in this event at all. There are contemprary comments made to support the fact that this is exactly what happened. Joseph stated as much in his diaries, same as Martin Harris, Emma Smith as well as the D&C. To say that it is the God wild card used to spackle over the glaring contradictons shows a lack of thought I think.