Joseph Antley Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 Here's only one of the several rubs: the witnesses who describe what Joseph saw in the stone didn't see in the stone. Also, none of them attribute their description of what JS saw in the stone to JS, and the statements were made after JS had died. Finally, the one fellow who might have had a look was Oliver Cowdery, and evidently he failed, though it could be possible he saw something. Did Oliver describe what was seen in the stone? I'm not sure that Oliver used the stone to translate -- D&C 8 seems to imply that he used the "gift of Aaron" to translate instead of Joseph's seer-stone method.
robuchan Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 Here are a few of the several rubs: the witnesses who describe what Joseph saw in the stone didn't see in the stone. Also, none of them attribute their description of what JS saw in the stone to JS, and the statements were made after JS had died. Finally, the one fellow who might have had a look was Oliver Cowdery, and evidently he failed, though it could be possible he saw something. Did Oliver describe what was seen in the stone? He used his divining rod not the stone.
LifeOnaPlate Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 You're right. In fact, I believe that the KJV text was consulted somehow, and I haven't disregarded the idea that a Bible was used to dictate the Isaiah, Matthew, and Malachi chapters.If Joseph could see plates in his seer stone, why not a KJV? But even then, he's performing some sort of miracle, so what can be done?!
structurecop Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 Here are a few of the several rubs: the witnesses who describe what Joseph saw in the stone didn't see in the stone. Also, none of them attribute their description of what JS saw in the stone to JS, and the statements were made after JS had died. Finally, the one fellow who might have had a look was Oliver Cowdery, and evidently he failed, though it could be possible he saw something. Did Oliver describe what was seen in the stone? Okay, but in that case what did he see in there? Holographic videos?
David T Posted October 1, 2009 Author Posted October 1, 2009 What portions did Emma act as scribe? Her statement seems to only apply for that portion.Q. Had he not a book or manuscript from which he read, or dictated to you? A. He had neither manuscript or book to read from. Q. Could he not have had, and you not know it? A. If he had anything of the kind he could not have concealed it from me.
mfbukowski Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 Most people don't believe the words formed in the seer stones?Regardless of what most believe, this is really on shaky ground epistemologically. How can we know what Joseph experienced, and even if we knew, how could it be relevant? It is like speculating on if my experience of "red" is like your experience of "blue". We can only go on descriptions to others but no one can get into Joseph's head to find out.Joseph may have seen it that way.It's unknowable so don't worry about it. Anything else is speculation, so speculate as much as you or anybody wants to.
LifeOnaPlate Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 He used his divining rod not the stone.I am aware of the revelation commending Oliver for gift with the rod and so forth, but can you provide an actual source saying he tried to use it to translate? Or as we say around these parts, "CFR."
Joseph Antley Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 If Joseph could see plates in his seer stone, why not a KJV? But even then, he's performing some sort of miracle, so what can be done?!But if he's getting it all from the seer-stone via inspiration, why get an almost-exact copy of the KJV with the majority of changes suspiciously on the italicized words? It just doesn't add up for me -- I'm convinced that the KJV had to be consulted in some way.
Joseph Antley Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 I am aware of the revelation commending Oliver for gift with the rod and so forth, but can you provide an actual source saying he tried to use it to translate? Or as we say around these parts, "CFR." Robuchan stated it more definitely than I would have -- but as I said in my other post, D&C seems to suggest that he used his divining rod (the "gift of Aaron") in his attempt to translate.
David T Posted October 1, 2009 Author Posted October 1, 2009 Keep in mind that Skousen points out that there is less variation in the Isaiah chapters in the original manuscript than there is in the printed editions.
David T Posted October 1, 2009 Author Posted October 1, 2009 I just remembered there's a paper called 'Textual Variants in the Isaiah Quotations in the Book of Mormon' by Skousen in the free copy of 'Isaiah in the Book of Mormon' FARMS sent me. Guess I better read that...
mfbukowski Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 We will never know, period. End of story imo.Either it's inspired or it's not, and there is only one way to know that, through our own direct subjective experience.Which we can "know" as surely as we know anything about our internal lives -- who we love or don't love, how we see the colors we see, and what the experience of riding the elevator in the Eiffel tower was.We can "know" all of these just as surely as any other.But getting into someone else's mind? Not possible.Edit: I don't care if he was "translating" the patterns of the wallpaper on the wall, or WHAT he was looking at. All of these could have happened during different portions of the translation, and it doesn't amount to a hill of beans
robuchan Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 It can't, unless you assume the sentences were partly the produce of Joseph Smith's mind. I'd venture guess that most people here don't believe that's actually what happened -- I certainly don't.To the believing LDS that don't believe that's what happened: what do you think of Elder Nelson teaching this to a group of mission presidents and the Ensign officially publishing it?
LifeOnaPlate Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 Okay, but in that case what did he see in there? Holographic videos?I'm still trying to get a good idea myself.
mfbukowski Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 To the believing LDS that don't believe that's what happened: what do you think of Elder Nelson teaching this to a group of mission presidents and the Ensign officially publishing it?They're right. It is as correct a description as anyone can know.
LifeOnaPlate Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 I just remembered there's a paper called 'Textual Variants in the Isaiah Quotations in the Book of Mormon' by Skousen in the free copy of 'Isaiah in the Book of Mormon' FARMS sent me. Guess I better read that...Free copy? .....explain
LifeOnaPlate Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 To the believing LDS that don't believe that's what happened: what do you think of Elder Nelson teaching this to a group of mission presidents and the Ensign officially publishing it?I think it's great to talk about different witness accounts of the translation. Great enough to make into a personal project. http://www.lifeongoldplates.com/2009/09/joseph-smiths-descriptions-of-book-of.html
Joseph Antley Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 To the believing LDS that don't believe that's what happened: what do you think of Elder Nelson teaching this to a group of mission presidents and the Ensign officially publishing it?I'm not sure why you're quoting me when you asked that question.
mfbukowski Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 Maybe we could start a thread on what Lincoln was thinking about when he wrote the Gettysburg Address, or what images flashed through his brain that led to specific phrases.Good idea.
Joseph Antley Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 Maybe we could start a thread on what Lincoln was thinking about when he wrote the Gettysburg Address, or what images flashed through his brain that led to specific phrases.Good idea.We get that you think it's a pointless discussion. We still like talking about it.
robuchan Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 I am aware of the revelation commending Oliver for gift with the rod and so forth, but can you provide an actual source saying he tried to use it to translate? Or as we say around these parts, "CFR." It's pretty clear from the original Book of Commandments, no?
structurecop Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 Maybe we could start a thread on what Lincoln was thinking about when he wrote the Gettysburg Address, or what images flashed through his brain that led to specific phrases.Good idea.If people's entire lives were centered around what was said in the Gettysburg Address and Lincoln claimed to have unique revelatory powers that told him what to say, that might make sense.
structurecop Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 It's pretty clear from the original Book of Commandments, no?I have a hard time believing that Oliver tried to translate the BoM using diving rods. That would be like writing the text in binary.
Joseph Antley Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 I have a hard time believing that Oliver tried to translate the BoM using diving rods. That would be like writing the text in binary.Oliver's rod was a revelatory rod, meaning it was used to communicate with God. D&C 8 suggests that this is how he tried to translate. I think that the rod was used to receive revelation to things besides simple yes or no questions. I imagine it working the same way that the seer-stone did: a catalyst for revelation that gave him inspiration in the same way that you and I receive inspiration as the result of prayer.
LifeOnaPlate Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 It's pretty clear from the original Book of Commandments, no?No. What does it say about the translation attempt?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.