Book Of Mormon Plates And Records Questions

[Rob Bowman]

I'm studying the chart by John Welch on the Book of Mormon Plates and Records and have two questions. Note that in the chart Welch uses solid black arrows to denote "quotations" and gray arrows to denote "abridgments."

1. For what I will call the little Book of Mormon (book 13 of the 15 books within the big Book of Mormon), Welch shows a gray arrow from "Mormon" (representing that book) to the Plates of Mormon. However, my understanding is that the little Book of Mormon is said to be written by Mormon himself and is not in any sense an abridgment. Is this a mistake in the chart (understandable enough given its complexity), or am I missing something (also quite possible)?

2. For what becomes the Book of Ether, the chart shows the Records of the Jaredites being abridged into "Ether" but then Ether being abridged into the Plates of Mormon. My understanding is that Moroni abridged the Records of the Jaredites that were written down by Ether into what we have as the Book of Ether, which would seem to suggest a one-step abridgment process, not a two-step process. Was the book of Ether that Moroni abridged itself an abridgment by Ether of earlier records?

[CV75]

2. For what becomes the Book of Ether, the chart shows the Records of the Jaredites being abridged into "Ether" but then Ether being abridged into the Plates of Mormon. My understanding is that Moroni abridged the Records of the Jaredites that were written down by Ether into what we have as the Book of Ether, which would seem to suggest a one-step abridgment process, not a two-step process. Was the book of Ether that Moroni abridged itself an abridgment by Ether of earlier records?

Ether 1:1-2 explains that Moroni made an abridgement of the 24 plates, which itself was compiled by Ether from the larger archive of Jaredite records (15:33, 34).

[Duncan]

I'm studying the chart by John Welch on the Book of Mormon Plates and Records and have two questions. Note that in the chart Welch uses solid black arrows to denote "quotations" and gray arrows to denote "abridgments."

1. For what I will call the little Book of Mormon (book 13 of the 15 books within the big Book of Mormon), Welch shows a gray arrow from "Mormon" (representing that book) to the Plates of Mormon. However, my understanding is that the little Book of Mormon is said to be written by Mormon himself and is not in any sense an abridgment. Is this a mistake in the chart (understandable enough given its complexity), or am I missing something (also quite possible)?

2. For what becomes the Book of Ether, the chart shows the Records of the Jaredites being abridged into "Ether" but then Ether being abridged into the Plates of Mormon. My understanding is that Moroni abridged the Records of the Jaredites that were written down by Ether into what we have as the Book of Ether, which would seem to suggest a one-step abridgment process, not a two-step process. Was the book of Ether that Moroni abridged itself an abridgment by Ether of earlier records?

1) I would say that the little Book of Mormon is in the plates of Mormon section

2)if i catch your second question right I think...Moroni just put in the whole abridgement of the Jaredites that he did. Where he got the info I have no idea and you may be right that Ether abridged everything and then Moroni added his material as per Grant Hardy's idea-but I could be wrong

[Rob Bowman]

CV75,

Hi. Thanks for responding to my question. You wrote:

Ether 1:1-2 explains that Moroni made an abridgement of the 24 plates, which itself was compiled by Ether from the larger archive of Jaredite records (15:33, 34).

Ether 15:33-34 doesn't seem to say that Ether was abridging a larger archive of Jaredite records. The parenthetical statement "and the hundredth part I have not written" (v. 33) seems to be Moroni's comment, not Ether's.

Edited January 1, 2012 by Rob Bowman

[Brant Gardner]

I'm studying the chart by John Welch on the Book of Mormon Plates and Records and have two questions. Note that in the chart Welch uses solid black arrows to denote "quotations" and gray arrows to denote "abridgments."

1. For what I will call the little Book of Mormon (book 13 of the 15 books within the big Book of Mormon), Welch shows a gray arrow from "Mormon" (representing that book) to the Plates of Mormon. However, my understanding is that the little Book of Mormon is said to be written by Mormon himself and is not in any sense an abridgment. Is this a mistake in the chart (understandable enough given its complexity), or am I missing something (also quite possible)?

Perhaps Mormon used material from what he wrote on the official Nephite record,but it isn't clear that that is what happened. The book of Mormon (as opposed to the book of Mormon) was written specifically for his larger work(though again it might have repeated some material from his other record).

2. For what becomes the Book of Ether, the chart shows the Records of the Jaredites being abridged into "Ether" but then Ether being abridged into the Plates of Mormon. My understanding is that Moroni abridged the Records of the Jaredites that were written down by Ether into what we have as the Book of Ether, which would seem to suggest a one-step abridgment process, not a two-step process. Was the book of Ether that Moroni abridged itself an abridgment by Ether of earlier records?

The text isn't clear on the main source for Ether. My best guess is that Moroni used Mosiah's translation of the plates of Ether and added his comments and explanations as he recounted Mosiah's translation.

[CV75]

1. For what I will call the little Book of Mormon (book 13 of the 15 books within the big Book of Mormon), Welch shows a gray arrow from "Mormon" (representing that book) to the Plates of Mormon. However, my understanding is that the little Book of Mormon is said to be written by Mormon himself and is not in any sense an abridgment. Is this a mistake in the chart (understandable enough given its complexity), or am I missing something (also quite possible)?

I suspect the grey arrow is a proofreading oversight and should be black.

[CV75]

Ether 15:33-34 doesn't seem to say that Ether was abridging a larger archive of Jaredite records. The parenthetical statement "and the hundredth part I have not written" (v. 33) seems to be Moroni's comment, not Ether's.

Yes, but Ether 1:6 shows that Ether put the 24 plates together, and it is reasonable to think he took it from other Jaredite records.

While 15:33 may refer to 1/100 of the 24 plates (which would only fill ¼ of one plate), it may refer to the vast and comprehensive history Mormon understood to have taken place in the land of Desolation (as evidenced by the remains of the lost civilization, Omni 1:22; Mosiah 21:26).

P.S. I just remembered Mosiah 8:8-12 (Mormon's acknowledgement of a large, powerful civilization) and Ether 8:9 (reference to other Jaredite record-keeping)

Edited January 2, 2012 by CV75

[Robert F. Smith]

2. For what becomes the Book of Ether, the chart shows the Records of the Jaredites being abridged into "Ether" but then Ether being abridged into the Plates of Mormon. My understanding is that Moroni abridged the Records of the Jaredites that were written down by Ether into what we have as the Book of Ether, which would seem to suggest a one-step abridgment process, not a two-step process. Was the book of Ether that Moroni abridged itself an abridgment by Ether of earlier records?

Pedro Olavarria is fond of saying that "I see five layers, the original historical sources, Ether’s redaction of those sources into his record, Mosiah’s translation of that record, Moroni’s redaction of that translation for his account and Joseph’s translation of Moroni’s account."

FWIW

[Rob Bowman]

Robert,

You wrote:

Pedro Olavarria is fond of saying that "I see five layers, the original historical sources, Ether’s redaction of those sources into his record, Mosiah’s translation of that record, Moroni’s redaction of that translation for his account and Joseph’s translation of Moroni’s account."

FWIW

Yes, I recall him saying that. But Ether 1:2 says, "I [Moroni] take mine account from the twenty and four plates which were found by the people of Limhi, which is called the Book of Ether," and 1:6 says, "He that wrote this record was Ether." These statements appear to assert that Moroni produced his account directly from the 24 plates. Hypothetically, one may suppose that Moroni had access to Mosiah's translation of those plates, but the very passage that tells us about that translation also states that the 24 plates were passed down from one generation to the next along with the other records (Mosiah 28:11-20).

As best I can tell, the Book of Ether we have is supposed to be Joseph's translation of Moroni's version of the book, which consisted of excerpts from the 24 plates interspersed with other material from Moroni. Ether presumably used earlier sources, but the text does not suggest that he was abriding an earlier book. Thus, the process would be (1) whatever sources Ether used, (2) Ether's book on the 24 gold plates, (3) Moroni's Book of Ether, perhaps utilizing Moroni's translation but still drawn from Ether's book itself, and (4) Joseph's translation of Moroni's Book of Ether.

[zerinus]

CV75, Hi. Thanks for responding to my question. You wrote: Ether 15:33-34 doesn't seem to say that Ether was abridging a larger archive of Jaredite records. The parenthetical statement "and the hundredth part I have not written" (v. 33) seems to be Moroni's comment, not Ether's.

The Book of Mormon tells us that the twenty-four plates were translated into the Nephite language by King Mosiah, by mens of the “interpreters,” implying the Urim and Thummim:

Mosiah 28:

11 Therefore he took the records which were engraven on the plates of brass, and also the plates of Nephi, and all the things which he had kept and preserved according to the commandments of God, after having translated and caused to be written the records which were on the plates of gold which had been found by the people of Limhi, which were delivered to him by the hand of Limhi;

12 And this he did because of the great anxiety of his people; for they were desirous beyond measure to know concerning those people who had been destroyed.

13 And now he translated them by the means of those two stones which were fastened into the two rims of a bow.

14 Now these things were prepared from the beginning, and were handed down from generation to generation, for the purpose of interpreting languages;

15 And they have been kept and preserved by the hand of the Lord, that he should discover to every creature who should possess the land the iniquities and abominations of his people;

16 And whosoever has these things is called seer, after the manner of old times.

17 Now after Mosiah had finished translating these records, behold, it gave an account of the people who were destroyed, from the time that they were destroyed back to the building of the great tower, at the time the Lord confounded the language of the people and they were scattered abroad upon the face of all the earth, yea, and even from that time back until the creation of Adam.

18 Now this account did cause the people of Mosiah to mourn exceedingly, yea, they were filled with sorrow; nevertheless it gave them much knowledge, in the which they did rejoice.

19 And this account shall be written hereafter; for behold, it is expedient that all people should know the things which are written in this account.

20 And now, as I said unto you, that after king Mosiah had done these things, he took the plates of brass, and all the things which he had kept, and conferred them upon Alma, who was the son of Alma; yea, all the records, and also the interpreters, and conferred them upon him, and commanded him that he should keep and preserve them, and also keep a record of the people, handing them down from one generation to another, even as they had been handed down from the time that Lehi left Jerusalem.

This account appears to have been pretty comprehensive and detailed, and much larger than the Book of Ether that we have in the Book of Mormon. For example, Alma says this about the contents of that record:

Alma 37:

20 Therefore I command you, my son Helaman, that ye be diligent in fulfilling all my words, and that ye be diligent in keeping the commandments of God as they are written.

21 And now, I will speak unto you concerning those twenty-four plates, that ye keep them, that the mysteries and the works of darkness, and their secret works, or the secret works of those people who have been destroyed, may be made manifest unto this people; yea, all their murders, and robbings, and their plunderings, and all their wickedness and abominations, may be made manifest unto this people; yea, and that ye preserve these interpreters.

22 For behold, the Lord saw that his people began to work in darkness, yea, work secret murders and abominations; therefore the Lord said, if they did not repent they should be destroyed from off the face of the earth.

23 And the Lord said: I will prepare unto my servant Gazelem, a stone, which shall shine forth in darkness unto light, that I may discover unto my people who serve me, that I may discover unto them the works of their brethren, yea, their secret works, their works of darkness, and their wickedness and abominations.

24 And now, my son, these interpreters were prepared that the word of God might be fulfilled, which he spake, saying:

25 I will bring forth out of darkness unto light all their secret works and their abominations; and except they repent I will destroy them from off the face of the earth; and I will bring to light all their secrets and abominations, unto every nation that shall hereafter possess the land.

26 And now, my son, we see that they did not repent; therefore they have been destroyed, and thus far the word of God has been fulfilled; yea, their secret abominations have been brought out of darkness and made known unto us.

27 And now, my son, I command you that ye retain all their oaths, and their covenants, and their agreements in their secret abominations; yea, and all their signs and their wonders ye shall keep from this people, that they know them not, lest peradventure they should fall into darkness also and be destroyed.

And Moroni informs us further that they even contained the vision of the Brother of Jared:

Ether 4:

1 And the Lord commanded the brother of Jared to go down out of the mount from the presence of the Lord, and write the things which he had seen; and they were forbidden to come unto the children of men until after that he should be lifted up upon the cross; and for this cause did king Mosiah keep them, that they should not come unto the world until after Christ should show himself unto his people.

2 And after Christ truly had showed himself unto his people he commanded that they should be made manifest.

3 And now, after that, they have all dwindled in unbelief; and there is none save it be the Lamanites, and they have rejected the gospel of Christ; therefore I am commanded that I should hide them up again in the earth.

4 Behold, I have written upon these plates [i.e. Book of Mormon] the very things which the brother of Jared saw; and there never were greater things made manifest than those which were made manifest unto the brother of Jared.

5 Wherefore the Lord hath commanded me to write them; and I have written them. And he commanded me that I should seal them up; and he also hath commanded that I should seal up the interpretation thereof; wherefore I have sealed up the interpreters, according to the commandment of the Lord.

So it was a pretty detailed account, of which what we have is a small abridgement. Now exactly how so much information could have been crammed into 24 plates, is one of the mysteries of the Book of Mormon I suppose; but that appears to have been the case.

In the case of Moroni, when he said that he abridged the 24 plates for insertion into the Book of Mormon, it more likely means that he abridged the translated version of it, since the original one would have been in the Jaredite language, which presumably he would not have been able to read without special help:

Ether 1:

1 And now I, Moroni, proceed to give an account of those ancient inhabitants who were destroyed by the hand of the Lord upon the face of this north country.

2 And I take mine account from the twenty and four plates which were found by the people of Limhi, which is called the Book of Ether.

3 And as I suppose that the first part of this record, which speaks concerning the creation of the world, and also of Adam, and an account from that time even to the great tower, and whatsoever things transpired among the children of men until that time, is had among the Jews—

He also makes an interesting comment about those 24 plates:

4 Therefore I do not write those things which transpired from the days of Adam until that time; but they are had upon the plates [of Ether]; and whoso findeth them, the same will have power that he may get the full account.

5 But behold, I give not the full account, but a part of the account I give, from the tower down until they were destroyed.

In other words, those 24 plates appear to have been “hidden” separately, with the expectation that someday someone will be able to “find them,” and be able to translate them.

[Calm]

Now exactly how so much information could have been crammed into 24 plates

I don't remember anything ever being said about the size of the plates, if so I don't think we should assume they were the same size as the plates of the Nephites.

[zerinus]

I don't remember anything ever being said about the size of the plates, if so I don't think we should assume they were the same size as the plates of the Nephites.

They were small enough for Limhi's scouts to find them and carry them back to base. So they couldn't have been exactly the size of a football field. Gold is a soft and pliable (and heavy) metal. A large plate would have been easily deformed and bent out of shape (or torn) under its own weight. A more likely scenario is that by "24 plates" is meant 24 bundles of plates. In the Book of Mormon, "plates" always refers to a bundle. It never counts the number of individual plates in a bundle. The "brass plates of Laban" for example refers to a bundle. It doesn't tell you how many individual "plate pages" were in a bundle. These bundles could be hinged at the edges and folded on top of each other in a zigzag fashion; so it was effectively one plate but folded together like a piece of cloth. So 24 plates more likely means 24 bundle of plates, of various sizes each.

Edited January 3, 2012 by zerinus

[LeSellers]

I'm studying the chart by John Welch on the Book of Mormon Plates and Records ...

Why?

Don't bother responding with "To understand ...", because we all know you don't want to understand. Your goal is to undermine.

Lehi

[CV75]

1. For what I will call the little Book of Mormon (book 13 of the 15 books within the big Book of Mormon), Welch shows a gray arrow from "Mormon" (representing that book) to the Plates of Mormon. However, my understanding is that the little Book of Mormon is said to be written by Mormon himself and is not in any sense an abridgment. Is this a mistake in the chart (understandable enough given its complexity), or am I missing something (also quite possible)?

The 1999 edition shows the arrow as black--there may be an even more updated edition out there

[zerinus]

Why?

Don't bother responding with "To understand ...", because we all know you don't want to understand. Your goal is to undermine.

Lehi

I think that when somebody asks a legitimate question, and asks it respectfully, we should answer the question, and do so in the same spirit, without trying to judge their motives. A good question deserves a good answer--their motives be whatever it might.

[LeSellers]

I think that when somebody asks a legitimate question, and asks it respectfully, we should answer the question, and do so in the same spirit, without trying to judge their motives. A good question deserves a good answer--their motives be whatever it might.

There comes a point when the person asking the question will have proven himself so biased and contrary that refusing to answer him is the most productive approach.

Rob Bowman is not an honest seeker of truth, but uses our politeness to his own purposes, and these are not helpful to the Church or Gospel of Jesus Christ.

While I took a Survival, Escape, Evasion, and Resistance class in the Army, the instructor told us the story of how the 'KP" in a North Vietnamese PoW camp was, in fact, the camp commander. His ploy was to be friendly to the USmerican PoWs, even to passing them treats or extra rations, and finally, to engage them in "innocent" conversation. His goal was to get tactical (and strategic) information from his prisoners to use against them, individually and against the efforts of the Republic of Vietnam and her allies, particularly the USmericans. Any information given to him was potentially deadly.

It is similar with Mr. Bowman: he has shown himself to be no innocent. Have you seen the result of his earlier conversations with us, as he has posted them at IIR?

Lehi

Edited January 3, 2012 by LeSellers

[zerinus]

There comes a point when the person asking the question will have proven himself so biased and contrary that refusing to answer him is the most productive approach.

Rob Bowman is not an honest seeker of truth, but uses our politeness to his own purposes, and these are not helpful to the Church or Gospel of Jesus Christ.

While I took a Survival, Escape, Evasion, and Resistance class in the Army, the instructor told us the story of how the 'KP" in a North Vietnamese PoW camp was, in fact, the camp commander. His ploy was to be friendly to the USmerican PoWs, even to passing them treats or extra rations, and finally, to engage them in "innocent" conversation. His goal was to get tactical (and strategic) information from his prisoners to use against them, individually and against the efforts of the Republic of Vietnam and her allies, particularly the USmericans. Any information given to him was potentially deadly.

In the gospel it doesn't work that way. The gospel or the Church can never be harmed by the truth. Our weapon is the truth. The adversary's weapon is the lie. Neither Rob Bowman, nor anybody else, can ever hurt us with the truth. Neither can we undermine our position by giving people the truth; nor can we help it by failing or refusing to give people that truth.

It is similar with Mr. Bowman: he has shown himself to be no innocent. Have you seen the result of his earlier conversations with us, as he has posted them at IIR?

It doesn't matter what he says. Neither he, nor anyone else, can harm us with the gospel truth that we give them. They can only do so by finding a way of circumventing or obscuring that truth. If they do, so be it. Truth always has a way of winning in the end.

[LeSellers]

It doesn't matter what he says. Neither he, nor anyone else, can harm us with the gospel truth that we give them. They can only do so by finding a way of circumventing or obscuring that truth. If they do, so be it. Truth always has a way of winning in the end.

While that is true, the problem is that we have not always received "the truth" because God has not revealed it, yet, and there are discrepancies in what I understand about proposition X or Y and what you believe about them. He uses that separation against us in nefarious ways.

And, as I have seen it, he takes the truth, warps it, and makes it sound like his distortion is our doctrine. Too many examples of his manipulations have been demonstrated here to need further illustration.

Lehi

Edited January 3, 2012 by LeSellers

[Hestia]

Lehi, since you don't have anything to say except against opening poster, take a break from this thread.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I suspect the grey arrow is a proofreading oversight and should be black.

I wonder if could be that simple?

[zerinus]

While that is true, the problem is that we have not always received "the truth" because God has not revealed it, yet, and there are discrepancies in what I understand about proposition X or Y and what you believe about them.

That is an interesting point. I have confidence in my ability to give him the gospel truth as it has been revealed in the latter days. I don't claim perfection in this, but I am confident that for the most part I am able to do so. I have that confidence because I know where I am getting it from. I cannot speak for what other people say or do, nor am I affected by it.

He uses that separation against us in nefarious ways.

Again, I cannot allow that to prevent me from doing my duty which is to give people the truth, when they ask it in a becoming manner, without sitting in judgement on their motives. Everyone deserves to be given the truth, without bias or prejudice regarding their motives. What they do with that truth is up to them; it doesn't concern me at all.

And, as I have seen it, he takes the truth, warps it, and makes it sound like his distortion is our doctrine. . . .

That is his choice. His choice doesn't affect mine. I am not going to let him determine my choice.