cinepro Posted December 12, 2011 Posted December 12, 2011 Section 9 of the Doctrine and Covenants occurs during a familiar story in LDS Church history: Oliver Cowdrey, after serving as scribe for a few weeks. Apparently he tried to do something, but couldn't do it, and is told by the Lord (through revelation through Joseph Smith):5 And, behold, it is because that you did not continue as you commenced, when you began to translate, that I have taken away this privilege from you.6 Do not murmur, my son, for it is wisdom in me that I have dealt with you after this manner.7 Behold, you have not understood; you have supposed that I would give it unto you, when you took no thought save it was to ask me.8 But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right.9 But if it be not right you shall have no such feelings, but you shall have a stupor of thought that shall cause you to forget the thing which is wrong; therefore, you cannot write that which is sacred save it be given you from me.10 Now, if you had known this you could have translated; nevertheless, it is not expedient that you should translate now.11 Behold, it was expedient when you commenced; but you feared, and the time is past, and it is not expedient now;Can anyone tell me what, exactly, Oliver Cowdery did when he tried to translate? Suppose the Church audiovisual department asked you to direct a short video of this story. They have actors to play Joseph and Oliver, and there is a prop department on hand to make any sorts of props you might need.What would happen in the video? What would Oliver do when he tries to translate? The witnesses wouldn't see the plates until June 1829, but was Oliver allowed to see them months earlier?
Cobalt-70 Posted December 12, 2011 Posted December 12, 2011 (edited) Section 9 of the Doctrine and Covenants occurs during a familiar story in LDS Church history: Oliver Cowdrey, after serving as scribe for a few weeks. Apparently he tried to do something, but couldn't do it, and is told by the Lord (through revelation through Joseph Smith):Can anyone tell me what, exactly, Oliver Cowdery did when he tried to translate?Suppose the Church audiovisual department asked you to direct a short video of this story. They have actors to play Joseph and Oliver, and there is a prop department on hand to make any sorts of props you might need.What would happen in the video? What would Oliver do when he tries to translate? The witnesses wouldn't see the plates until June 1829, but was Oliver allowed to see them months earlier?There is no reason to necessarily think that Cowdery was trying to translate the golden plates. He was most likely trying to "translate" other hidden documents, similar to the "Parchment of John" that Smith "translated" around the time of this revelation (see D&C 7). As this was a mystical process rather than an act of scholarship, Smith did not claim to actually refer to any physical golden plates or "Parchment of John" during these translations. The revelation that is now D&C 8 talks of "engraveings of old Records which are ancient which contain those parts of my Scriptures of which hath been spoken by the manifestation of my Spirit," and "all those ancient Records which have been hid up which are Sacred." (I'm quoting from Revelation Book 1). This is evidently much broader than the golden plates.Also, we can be pretty sure that Cowdery used his divining rod for this translation attempt, rather than seer stones, as Smith used. Cowdery's "gift," according to Smith, was "working with the sprout" (i.e., dowsing). In the Book of Commandments, this gift was called the "gift of working with the rod," or the "rod of nature." Edited December 12, 2011 by Cobalt-70
Chris Smith Posted December 12, 2011 Posted December 12, 2011 I seem to recall that there's one verse in the original BoM manuscript that's partly in Joseph Smith's handwriting, and some scholar speculated that that was where Cowdery tried to translate. But I don't remember where I saw that.
ksfisher Posted December 12, 2011 Posted December 12, 2011 Brant Gardner discusses this subject in his new book "The Gift and Power." Basically it was the Book of Mormon that he was trying to translate, but because Cowdry's gift was with a divining rod the process was not workable. (That is a tremendous oversimplification of Gardner's explanation)
Cobalt-70 Posted December 12, 2011 Posted December 12, 2011 I seem to recall that there's one verse in the original BoM manuscript that's partly in Joseph Smith's handwriting, and some scholar speculated that that was where Cowdery tried to translate. But I don't remember where I saw that.Do you remember the source? I have doubts of this, because first of all, the revelation says that Cowdery was unsuccessful in translating. Second, it seems evident that Cowdery's attempt to translate was in early April, soon after Smith and Cowdery met each other, and before they had translated much of the Book of Mormon together. We don't have the original manuscript of this earliest Book of Mormon translation with Cowdery, which I think the evidence suggests was in the book of Mosiah (based on the Mosiah-first theory). Nothing in Mosiah from the original manuscript has survived.
Cobalt-70 Posted December 12, 2011 Posted December 12, 2011 Brant Gardner discusses this subject in his new book "The Gift and Power." Basically it was the Book of Mormon that he was trying to translate, but because Cowdry's gift was with a divining rod the process was not workable. (That is a tremendous oversimplification of Gardner's explanation)Why would it be any less workable than seer stones? Cowdery's gift of working with the "rod of nature" is given God's endorsement in Book of Commandments VII:3: "there is no other power save God, that can cause this rod of nature, to work in your hands, for it is the work of God..."
David T Posted December 12, 2011 Posted December 12, 2011 (edited) Because Joseph was easily able to project what his mind was 'seeing' into a darkened circular concave stone as covered by a hat. Harder to do that with a stick. Edited December 12, 2011 by nackhadlow
ksfisher Posted December 13, 2011 Posted December 13, 2011 Why would it be any less workable than seer stones? Cowdery's gift of working with the "rod of nature" is given God's endorsement in Book of Commandments VII:3: "there is no other power save God, that can cause this rod of nature, to work in your hands, for it is the work of God..."Joseph was able to see words in the seer stone. Cowdrey's rod seems to have worked more on a yes and no basis. In order to translate Cowdrey would have to work out the translation, ask if it was correct, and then a yes or no could be provided through the rod.
Cobalt-70 Posted December 13, 2011 Posted December 13, 2011 (edited) Because Joseph was easily able to project what his mind was 'seeing' into a darkened circular concave stone as covered by a hat. Harder to do that with a stick.The revelation states that Cowdery's wand had already "told [him] things." Perhaps these "things" related only to activities like finding hidden treasure, minerals, or water, which was the most common use of divining rods. But just as Smith was called to convert his gift of seership from treasure seeking to a more religious purpose, D&C 8/BCC VII seems to do the same thing for Cowdery and his wand. It says that whatever Cowdery asks by means of the wand, God would "grant unto [him] that [he] shall know." The revelation also talks of knowing the "mysteries of God," and translating. So Cowdery was to obtain knowledge from his wand.The mechanism by which this would occur is unknown, just as the mechanism of Smith's stone-seership is not well known, except that we know Smith "saw" things with "spirit light." Both stones and wands were intended as sort of psychical "antennae." If Cowdery were to successfully produce a translation using his wand, he might have held it and and then seen the words of the translation with his "spiritual eyes." Or perhaps Cowdery might have "felt" the translation through the fine movements of the wand. Evidently, Cowdery was not a skilled enough magician, or did not have enough confidence in his magical abilities. Edited December 13, 2011 by Cobalt-70
Brant Gardner Posted December 13, 2011 Posted December 13, 2011 I seem to recall that there's one verse in the original BoM manuscript that's partly in Joseph Smith's handwriting, and some scholar speculated that that was where Cowdery tried to translate. But I don't remember where I saw that.Skousen has looked at that passage. His opinion, based on where it begins and ends, is that Oliver had to leave and for some reason Joseph wanted to get something down. Based on the context, Skousen didn't believe it was a natural beginning point for a shift in translator. Of course, all is speculation, but when it comes to what we see on the original, Skousen is our best source.
Rivers Posted December 13, 2011 Posted December 13, 2011 I actually recall a seminary movie that portrayed this event. If I remember correctly, Oliver Cowdry (played by the Richard Dutcher) tried to translate by staring at the actual plates.
why me Posted December 13, 2011 Posted December 13, 2011 Why would it be any less workable than seer stones? Cowdery's gift of working with the "rod of nature" is given God's endorsement in Book of Commandments VII:3: "there is no other power save God, that can cause this rod of nature, to work in your hands, for it is the work of God..."But he did not have the power of god to do it. And no would Joseph if he did not have the power of god behind him. Over and over gain we hear that Joseph translated the plates by the power of god. Without that power, he would only see darkness.
cdowis Posted December 14, 2011 Posted December 14, 2011 I actually recall a seminary movie that portrayed this event. If I remember correctly, Oliver Cowdry (played by the Richard Dutcher) tried to translate by staring at the actual plates.As I remember (from somewhere), JS transcribed some of the characters on paper, and that is what Oliver was trying to translate rather than directly from the plates.
Investigating Posted August 5, 2014 Posted August 5, 2014 Are the sections of D&C in chronological order? Was section 8 given before section 9?
Calm Posted August 5, 2014 Posted August 5, 2014 (edited) Some of them are, some aren't. See the intro on lds.org for more info.https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/chron-order?lang=eng Edited August 5, 2014 by calmoriah
Okrahomer Posted August 5, 2014 Posted August 5, 2014 (edited) Are the sections of D&C in chronological order?Was section 8 given before section 9?https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/chron-order?lang=engAccording to this article, most of the sections of the Doctrine and Covenants are listed in chronological order. Section 8 seems to have given before section 9. Sections 1, 74, 78, 94, 99, 133, 134, 137, and 138 seem to be the exceptions to the chronology. Edited August 5, 2014 by Okrahomer
Okrahomer Posted August 5, 2014 Posted August 5, 2014 Some of them are, some aren't. See the intro on lds.org for more info.https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/chron-order?lang=engDoh! You beat me to it again!
Investigating Posted August 5, 2014 Posted August 5, 2014 https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/chron-order?lang=engAccording to this article, most of the sections of the Doctrine and Covenants are listed in chronological order. Section 8 seems to have given before section 9. Sections 1, 74, 78, 94, 99, 133, 134, 137, and 138 seem to be the exceptions to the chronology. Thank you. Did Joseph write something like this in the first chapter of History of The Church? "Oliver translated a few words, but could not continue."
Calm Posted August 5, 2014 Posted August 5, 2014 (edited) FYI: http://history.lds.org/article/doctrine-and-covenants-oliver-cowdery?lang=eng http://rsc.byu.edu/archived/days-never-be-forgotten-oliver-cowdery/3-oliver-cowdery-book-mormon-scribe Edited August 5, 2014 by calmoriah
Duncan Posted August 5, 2014 Posted August 5, 2014 Section 9 of the Doctrine and Covenants occurs during a familiar story in LDS Church history: Oliver Cowdrey, after serving as scribe for a few weeks. Apparently he tried to do something, but couldn't do it, and is told by the Lord (through revelation through Joseph Smith):Can anyone tell me what, exactly, Oliver Cowdery did when he tried to translate?Suppose the Church audiovisual department asked you to direct a short video of this story. They have actors to play Joseph and Oliver, and there is a prop department on hand to make any sorts of props you might need.What would happen in the video? What would Oliver do when he tries to translate? The witnesses wouldn't see the plates until June 1829, but was Oliver allowed to see them months earlier? let me take a wild guess, you work for the Church audiovisual dept. and you want us to do your job for you because you aren't coming up with any ideas and so this is your secret plan you hatched upon us about the what and the how etc.?! nailed it
Storm Rider Posted August 5, 2014 Posted August 5, 2014 Why would it be any less workable than seer stones? Cowdery's gift of working with the "rod of nature" is given God's endorsement in Book of Commandments VII:3: "there is no other power save God, that can cause this rod of nature, to work in your hands, for it is the work of God..." I suspect that in one process there was a resulting product and in the other there was nothing but a stupor of thought.
Calm Posted August 5, 2014 Posted August 5, 2014 (edited) Thank you.Did Joseph write something like this in the first chapter of History of The Church?"Oliver translated a few words, but could not continue."The account is described briefly, mostly by including the revelations on page 78, which is in I believe the fourth chapter:https://ia600505.us.archive.org/6/items/HistoryOfTheChurchhcVolumes1-7original1902EditionPdf/hoc.pdf Edited August 5, 2014 by calmoriah
Oliver_Cowdery Posted August 5, 2014 Posted August 5, 2014 Oliver could have used some creative ways to get more than a yes or no answer out of his decinding rod. There's no reason he couldn't have written letters on a sheet of paper and then use the rod to spell out words. Kind of like a wiji board.
Avatar4321 Posted August 5, 2014 Posted August 5, 2014 My understanding was that he had parchment that was a copy of the plates he tried to translate. I wish Oliver would have stayed in the Church, perhaps he would have translated as the Lord said He could.
Recommended Posts