Scott Lloyd Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 I think the Nephite translators were taken from Joseph after Martin Harris loss the 116 pages I don't think he got them back.Then why does the Introduction to the just released Joseph Smith Papers volume state the following? In July 1828, not long after Harris lost the manuscript, the angel who had previously appeared to Smith returned the interpreters to him. Smith immediately "enquired of the Lord through them and obtained" a revelation of chastisement. ... The angel then left, taking with him both the plates and the interpreters. According to Joseph Smith, the items were returned "a few days" after the reprimand; Lucy Mack Smith, however, stated that the moratorium on translation lasted until September 1828. In any event, it appears that no additional translation was done until March 1829. Footnotes in that paragraph cite previously released volumes in the Joseph Smith Papers series.
Scott Lloyd Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 The only thing more unbelievable than that would be to translate verbatim several dozen Bible verses from ancient Hebrew via reformed Egyptian to Elizabethean English via an 1820's American man.Orrrrr, maybe Joseph just had the BIble verses written down and when someone entered his home he quickly hid the paper or placed it in his hat. With OC "assisting" in the translation this really wouldn't have been difficult to accomplish.Can you cite anything about Oliver Cowdery that would lend credence to the notion that he was such a con artist? Richard Lloyd Anderson wrote the best book on the the Book of Mormon witnesses. It's called Investigating the Book of Mormon Witnesses. Perhaps you could start there.
sethpayne Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 We need to remember that the plates would be valuable and joseph did have an idea about their monetary value for which he was chastized. Not to mention that people in the town wanted to get their hands on them and some of his acqaintances were hanging around when they heard about the plates. People have been murdered for less and have had their homes robbed too. They were also hidden under a cloth with emma present in the room. And of course, we have joseph running around trying to hide the plates and fleeing from people who wish to get their hands on them with emma along for the ride. Why risk one's life for something that one made themselves for a vision of starting a church that may or may not succeed? I can think of easier ways to found a church. Huh? Your response has literally nothing to do with sunstoned's comment/question. 1
why me Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) Huh? Your response has literally nothing to do with sunstoned's comment/question.Sunstone stated: I have always wondered why go through all the effort to carry the the gold plates up to NY state and burry them if they were not used in the translation process. I just expanded on it. Why would Joseph go through all the effort of carrying the plates around, fleeing with them with wife in tow for a con job that may or may not work? I don't think that Joseph Smith was insane. Sunstone is no longer a member to my knowledge. Just too much effort for a con job with a lot of risk taking, including the story of the plates as in the book of mormon being hidden for a translation process that didn't need the plates. However, we overlook the need for witnesses that the plates actually existed which would give proof that the plates did exist based on faith. Complete with heavenly visitations to confirm their truth so that such witnesses would never deny their testimony regardless of their feelings for joseph the man. Edited August 5, 2015 by why me
Calm Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) Why did Joseph need a seer stone if God had preserved and provided him with the ancient translators to use for the translation of the gold plates? And, is it true that the gold plates were not even present or used either (for much of the translation)?I'd love to know the truth here and your opinions too. Thanks!https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-mormon-translation?lang=engRead footnotes too. Edited August 5, 2015 by calmoriah
Tsuzuki Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 The October 2015 Ensign will include this: Awesome. I have better scrying tools than this. No wonder the Book of Mormon came out all King-James-y. 1
Paddy Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Does anyone know what kind of rock it is? What material it is??
Storm Rider Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 The only thing more unbelievable than that would be to translate verbatim several dozen Bible verses from ancient Hebrew via reformed Egyptian to Elizabethean English via an 1820's American man.Orrrrr, maybe Joseph just had the BIble verses written down and when someone entered his home he quickly hid the paper or placed it in his hat. With OC "assisting" in the translation this really wouldn't have been difficult to accomplish. Although I understand your thinking and logic, the part that never makes any sense is that several of the witnesses fell away from following Joseph Smith and/or the Church and yet retained a testimony of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon and of Joseph Smith as a prophet. To me, if I were to have a falling out with another person AND they had a giant con going, I am talking and telling the truth. I certainly would not go out of my way to confirm a witness to the truthfulness of such events. Condescending attitude aside, you make the same mistake of others on the other side - you think in black and white. You disallow, dismiss, or fail to recognize the strengths and weaknesses on both sides of the discussion. Honest individuals who seek truth do not abandon critical thinking just because it causes problems for their position. Rather, the problems are acknowledged and, in so doing, retain a degree of humility about the topic. Religion is a strange beast; God can be unfathomable to me at times. I can think of a many ways that God could have made it easier, but in each invented manner the idea of choice and agency are abrogated in favor of the desired outcome. A faithful person sifts through the experiences of life and retains the beauty of mystery and comes to a knowledge that God is there. I have never been a fan of Joseph Smith i.e. I have never sensed any degree of deep closeness or reverence for him. For me he was simply a man God used to complete a work. I have the gospel, I know of its value in my life and by it I am empowered to recognize truth. I guess that I am not going to get hung up on every little jot and tittle about the weakness of man and how the gospel was restored to the earth. 1
BookofMormonLuvr Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Does anyone honestly believe that this stone had magical properties? Please, lets not discuss BoM historicity or origins, just focus on the stone itself and whether any actual metaphysical properties are inherently part of this stone or any other seer stones for that matter. I personally find it hard to believe being raised in these modern times, but I'm curious what others think. I believe it was merely an instrument to focus one's thoughts- other than that, it's a rock.
BookofMormonLuvr Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Does anyone know what kind of rock it is? What material it is??Looks like petrified wood to me... but I'm no geologist.
HappyJackWagon Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 I would welcome it as well as a challenge from the Church to those who think Joseph Smith made the BOM up. That challenge would be to stick your face in a hat and dictate almost word for word entire chapters of Isaiah that match the KJV without looking at the KJV at all with no do overs. Joseph Smith did it. Hard to copy from the KJV when the face is planted in a hat.Why would it be necessary to have a blanket or curtain separating JS and the scribe. Since the plates were rarely in the same room, and therefore didn't need to be hidden from view, why the separation. The other picture shows Joseph sitting on the stairs, out of sight. Why would this be the case? If he's out of sight of his scribe, is it impossible to think that JS could have had a copy of the KJV bible out as a reference? 1
filovirus Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) Why would it be necessary to have a blanket or curtain separating JS and the scribe. Since the plates were rarely in the same room, and therefore didn't need to be hidden from view, why the separation. The other picture shows Joseph sitting on the stairs, out of sight. Why would this be the case? If he's out of sight of his scribe, is it impossible to think that JS could have had a copy of the KJV bible out as a reference?From here: http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2014-fairmormon-conference/reflections-letter-ces-director"A correspondent from the Chicago Times interviewed David Whitmer on the 14th of October 1881, and got essentially the same account. “Mister Whitmer emphatically asserts, as did Harris and Cowdery, that while Smith was dictating the translation, he had no manuscript notes, or other means of knowledge, save the seer stone and the characters as shown on the plates, he being present and cognizant how it was done.” Similarly, the Saint Louis Republican, based upon an interview in mid-July of 1884, reported that “Father Whitmer, who was present very frequently during the writing of the manuscript of the Book of Mormon, affirms that Joseph Smith had no book or manuscript before him from which he could have read, as asserted by some that he did; he, Whitmer, having every opportunity to know whether Smith had Solomon Spalding’s or any other person’s romance to read from.”"David Whitmer repeatedly insisted that the translation process occurred in full view of Joseph Smith’s family and associates. It would appear, in fact, that the common image of a curtain hanging between the Prophet and his scribes, sometimes seen in illustrations as we saw here, of the story of the Book of Mormon, was not the usual modus operandi. There was indeed a curtain, at least in the latter stages of translation process, however that curtain was suspended not between the translator and his scribe, but near the front door of the Peter Whitmer home in order to prevent idle passers-by and gawkers from interfering with the work. In order to give privacy to the proceeding, a blanket…Well, I don’t think I need to quote this, it makes the point."On another occasion Whitmer recalled, “I often sat by and heard them translate and write for hours together. Joseph never had a curtain drawn between him and his scribe while he was translating. He would place the director in his hat and then place his face in his hat so as to exclude the light, and then read the words as they appeared before him.”" Edited August 5, 2015 by filovirus 2
Tacenda Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) It may have been mentioned but one of the seer stones is at this museum in Utah. http://www.wilfordwoodmuseum.com/WilfordC.Wood.htm Edited August 5, 2015 by Tacenda
ALarson Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Why would it be necessary to have a blanket or curtain separating JS and the scribe. Since the plates were rarely in the same room, and therefore didn't need to be hidden from view, why the separation. The other picture shows Joseph sitting on the stairs, out of sight. Why would this be the case? If he's out of sight of his scribe, is it impossible to think that JS could have had a copy of the KJV bible out as a reference?Some witnesses stated there was a curtain hung to separate Joseph from the scribe and others stated there was not a curtain. So maybe he used one sometimes but not always? 1
carbon dioxide Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) Why would it be necessary to have a blanket or curtain separating JS and the scribe. Since the plates were rarely in the same room, and therefore didn't need to be hidden from view, why the separation. The other picture shows Joseph sitting on the stairs, out of sight. Why would this be the case? If he's out of sight of his scribe, is it impossible to think that JS could have had a copy of the KJV bible out as a reference?The pictures you refer were not done by iPhones or regular cameras. They are just artist renderings. I guess if one is going to focus on those images, why not assert that Joseph did not comb is hair that way or he really did not have that shirt in his collection. If one is going to rely on the scribes in their descriptions of what happened during the translation process, they also must accept what they said in regards to having a Bible or anything else. They said he did not have a Bible. Edited August 5, 2015 by carbon dioxide 2
ALarson Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 The pictures you refer were not done by iPhones or regular cameras. They are just artist renderings. I guess if one is going to focus on those images, why not assert that Joseph did not comb is hair that way or he really did not have that shirt in his collection. If one is going to rely on the scribes in their descriptions of what happened during the translation process, they also must accept what they said in regards to having a Bible or anything else. They said he did not have a Bible. Yes, but there are statements that there was a curtain between them. (I'll try to find the statements, but I believe at least Martin Harris stated this)
ALarson Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) Was this stone given to Joseph by an angel (instead of returning the original interpreters after the 116 pages were lost)? I had not heard this before, but here is a quote from the Meridian Magazine today on this topic: In some interviews, David Whitmer claims that after Martin Harris lost the 116 pages of manuscript, Joseph did not receive the original Urim and Thummim but “was given by the angel a Urim of Thummim of another pattern, it being shaped in oval or kidney form.” The Richmond Democrat reported in January 1888, that after the manuscript debacle, Joseph Smith “was presented with a strange oval-shaped, chocolate colored stone, about the size of an egg but more flat, which it was promised should answer the same purpose.” - Cook, Lyndon W. David Whitmer Interviews, A Restoration Witness. Orem, Utah: Grandin Book Company, 1991, p. 108. Edited August 5, 2015 by ALarson
jkwilliams Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 The pictures you refer were not done by iPhones or regular cameras. They are just artist renderings. I guess if one is going to focus on those images, why not assert that Joseph did not comb is hair that way or he really did not have that shirt in his collection. If one is going to rely on the scribes in their descriptions of what happened during the translation process, they also must accept what they said in regards to having a Bible or anything else. They said he did not have a Bible. That's why I don't rely on the scribes.
carbon dioxide Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) The only thing more unbelievable than that would be to translate verbatim several dozen Bible verses from ancient Hebrew via reformed Egyptian to Elizabethean English via an 1820's American man.Orrrrr, maybe Joseph just had the BIble verses written down and when someone entered his home he quickly hid the paper or placed it in his hat. With OC "assisting" in the translation this really wouldn't have been difficult to accomplish.Several verses maybe but entire chapters? Why not Elizabethean English. It was a standard, accept version of scripture in 1820. Perhaps you would have preferred he translate those passages in ebonics. More importantly is if Joseph Smith was just making the BOM up and was a conman, why would he be so stupid to copy from the KJV which everyone would immediately recognize? The scribes themselves would recognize it. That seems to be a high risk, low reward for doing such a thing. Unless there was a reason it was done that way that you are not considering. Edited August 5, 2015 by carbon dioxide
mfbukowski Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 well can you explain the placebo effect? We call it that because we cant explain it
mfbukowski Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 I think the challenge is many people only look at the "stone/rock" from a mortal point of view.If we truly believe that there is more out there than our senses can see, why does this bother them so much? I find nothing in the gospel that prevents a seer stone from existing and being used.Me neither.It's like seeing pictures in the clouds or staring into a fire or watching the ocean.It focuses and calms the mind like repeating a mantra
Sevenbak Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) Yes, but there are statements that there was a curtain between them. (I'll try to find the statements, but I believe at least Martin Harris stated this)If I understand correctly, the curtain was used before the angel or Joseph showed the plates to the three witnesses or the eight witnesses. It was a commandment prior to that that was not needed after, since the scribes also became witnesses... at least that is my understanding. Edited August 5, 2015 by Sevenbak
jkwilliams Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 There is a human tendency to associate spiritual or supernatural properties with physical objects (rabbit's foot, religious medallions, e-meters). Does God use such things in His dealings with humans? If we believe the Bible, with stories of Moses' bronze serpent and a woman being healed by touching Jesus' garment, it would appear so. 1
DJBrown Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Does anyone honestly believe that this stone had magical properties? Please, lets not discuss BoM historicity or origins, just focus on the stone itself and whether any actual metaphysical properties are inherently part of this stone or any other seer stones for that matter. I personally find it hard to believe being raised in these modern times, but I'm curious what others think. " Once Martin found a rock closely resembling the seerstone Joseph sometimes used in place of the interpreters and substituted it without the Prophet’s knowledge. When the translation resumed, Joseph paused for a long time and then exclaimed, “Martin, what is the matter, all is as dark as Egypt.” Martin then confessed that he wished to “stop the mouths of fools” who told him that the Prophet memorized sentences and merely repeated them." https://www.lds.org/ensign/1988/01/a-new-prophet-and-a-new-scripture-the-coming-forth-of-the-book-of-mormon?lang=eng If true, this suggests that there was something special about the seer stone. 2
Recommended Posts