Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Rob Bowman

Cfr For Ldsfaq: Joseph'S Translation Of The Gold Plates

Recommended Posts

ldsfaq wrote:

Let me guess.... You're likely like every other anti-mormon and also say the Church is "lying" also when it presents the "translation" of the BOM as being Joseph and the Plates, rather than with head in hat? What you don't realize, is that Joseph DID translate the plates with the plates just as the Church portrays. Further, he did translate it other ways also, in a hat and even with nothing at all with him. The translation didn't all only occur with a head in the hat, and in fact the head in the hat thing occurred the LEAST of any of the methods. Thus the portrayal by the Church is simply the most clear ARTISTIC method to display Joseph actually translating plates. Thus, the Church isn't lying at all.

CFR that Joseph EVER translated the gold plates in the way depicted in the usual LDS Church artwork (with the plates open before him and with him looking at the characters directly on the plates with no instrument).

Share this post


Link to post

remember this, a person holding his breathe will pass out and still live without the other person having to do the thing the first person was holding their breathe for. I hope you have low expectations on this being referenced.

Edited by frankenstein

Share this post


Link to post

Hey Rob, don't you have an unsolvable problem for your religious worldview if Joseph translated the gold plates at all, no matter the aesthetics of the method?

Share this post


Link to post

Who cares how he translated it?

Share this post


Link to post

Here is a reference for you. Doesn't directly mention the "head in the hat", but it should at least steer you in the right direction.

Book of Mormon Translation by Joseph Smith

Personally, I'm not so concerned with the exact method of how Joseph translated the Book of Mormon. What matters most is that we have it and that it can help all of us to come closer to Christ.

Share this post


Link to post

Well Rob, those of us who have actually studied the history of the Church "properly", are well aware of the various methods Joseph used to translate the plates.

  • He used the hat.
  • He used the spectacles in the hat.
  • He used the rock in the hat
  • He had the plates and used the spectacles
  • He had the plates only, sometimes covered, sometimes not
  • He had nothing at all with him, not even the plates
  • and likely more variations that I can't remember at the moment....

Share this post


Link to post
Here is a reference for you. Doesn't directly mention the "head in the hat", but it should at least steer you in the right direction.

Book of Mormon Translation by Joseph Smith

Personally, I'm not so concerned with the exact method of how Joseph translated the Book of Mormon. What matters most is that we have it and that it can help all of us to come closer to Christ.

Time and again we Saints must point out, often even to each other, that the word "translate" did not mean, in 1829, what we commonly think of in 2011.

Translate meant "to move from one form or position to another" (see Webster's 1828 Dictionary of the English Language)). We still use it in this sense today, albeit rarely. (I say "we", but I mean "astronauts" and "aviators".)

Joseph Smith did not "translate" (in 2011 terms) the Book of Mormon at all. He translated it (in 1829 terms) from one lingo-cultural form to another (XIX, pseudo-Elizabethan English). We don't know how that happened, mechanically, but we do know it was by the Gift and Power of God. There were, from all accounts, many physical methods of translation. None of which makes even the least difference to the actual translation that, by the Gift and Power of God, Joseph effected.

There is no need, and even much harm, in defending the word "translation" from a XXI perspective, and I heartily wish we'd just stop doing so. It's the wrong battle, and it's the wrong strategy. We play into Satan's hands when we let him define the terms of the war.

Lehi

Share this post


Link to post

Here is a reference for you. Doesn't directly mention the "head in the hat", but it should at least steer you in the right direction.

Book of Mormon Translation by Joseph Smith

Personally, I'm not so concerned with the exact method of how Joseph translated the Book of Mormon. What matters most is that we have it and that it can help all of us to come closer to Christ.

The above article only says this about the subject..... The article itself is only a general overview of the events related to the translation, not every known detail.

Most reports state that throughout the project Joseph used the "Nephite interpreters" or, for convenience, he would use a seer stone (see CHC 1:128–30). Both instruments were sometimes called by others the Urim and Thummim. In 1830, Oliver Cowdery is reported to have testified in court that these tools enabled Joseph "to read in English, the reformed Egyptian characters, which were engraved on the plates" (Benton,Evangelical Magazine and Gospel Advocate 2 [Apr. 9, 1831]:15). In an 1891 interview, William Smith indicated that when his brother Joseph used the "interpreters" (which were like a silver bow twisted into the shape of a figure eight with two stones between the rims of the bow connected by a rod to a breastplate), his hands were left free to hold the plates.
Other late reports mention a variety of further details, but they cannot be historically confirmed or denied.

Share this post


Link to post

Since there is no official declaration as to how exactly the Book of Mormon was translated (beyond declaring that it was translated by the gift and power of God), let alone whether there were one or varied methods employed over the course of the translation; and given that even scholars aren't completely in agreement on the matter; and given that most of Joseph's journal entries do not specify a mode of translation, but speak generically of him translating and who may have been doing the translating; then to the reasonably minded, this leave ample room for artistic license when painting what is important to the Church and its members.

As such, it is petty and trite in the extreme, and straining at gnats to the point of absurdity, too consider it a lie for church artists not to include certain relatively unimportant and somewhat debatable translation methods in their diverse paintings.

Aren't there better things to do like harping on the Catholics about the supposed inaccuracies in Michelangelo's paintings of the Sistine Chapel? :crazy:

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited by wenglund

Share this post


Link to post

ldsfaq wrote:

CFR that Joseph EVER translated the gold plates in the way depicted in the usual LDS Church artwork (with the plates open before him and with him looking at the characters directly on the plates with no instrument).

Why is this relevent? The question is not how it got there but is it of any value in the lives of those who read it and believe it. Obviously it is to millions. That you do not find it so is sad. What is even sadder is that because you don't find it helpful to you, you attempt to throw mud and spoil it for others.

Share this post


Link to post

Ya, it makes me laugh how the anti's think they are so informed, to think the translation occurred only with the hat, clearly mostly only reading anti-mormon materials, rather than actual LDS history which has made clear the translation methodology occurred in many different ways, not only with the hat.

Their bias and propaganda is made manifest.

Although, while I appreciate everyones response to Rob as to what's really important etc.

I think it would be best if anyone has access to any of their history info on the issue, to list some quotes for him, so he doesn't again accuse us of making up stuff and lying about whatever we say or trying to "avoid" the question (as he will most certainly do).

He asked for a "CFR", thus, let's try to give it if anyone can. Thanks much.

Edited by ldsfaqs

Share this post


Link to post

ldsfaq wrote:

CFR that Joseph EVER translated the gold plates in the way depicted in the usual LDS Church artwork (with the plates open before him and with him looking at the characters directly on the plates with no instrument).

From the Church Educational System text Church History in the Fulness of Times, p. 46:

Between December 1827 and February 1828, he copied many of the characters from the plates and translated some of them by using the Urim and Thummim. In the early stages of the work, Joseph spent considerable time and effort becoming familiar with the language of the plates and learning how to translate.

Presumably, the act of copying characters from the plates would entail opening the plates and looking at them directly, just as the artwork depicts. And familiarizing himself with the language of the plates and learning how to translate might plausibly involve looking directly at them.

Critics who quibble over the art depictions must of necessity be prepared to argue that there never was a single instance in which Joseph opened the plates and examined them directly. I don't see how they could know such a thing.

Edited by Scott Lloyd

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...