What happened to the lost 116 pages?

[longview]

32 minutes ago, cinepro said:

I don't know where the theory in D&C 10 came from, but I am highly skeptical of it being a revelation from God.

Do you believe there are actual revelations and commandments from God in any part of the D&C?

40 minutes ago, cinepro said:

I also don't think Lucy Harris had any "cronies".

But you can't rule that out.  Would you agree that most of Palmyra were skeptical of Joseph Smith?

46 minutes ago, cinepro said:

Or: Lucy burned the pages because she was mad about Martin's role in the project.

If that did happen, Lucy would proudly tell her husband that she did so.  But history shows nothing of the sort.

47 minutes ago, cinepro said:

I also don't see any parallels between Mark Hoffman or Hurlbut.

You don't see attempts to alter the history as a common thread?

50 minutes ago, cinepro said:

I just don't believe that Lucy Harris or others living in that time and place (frontier America in the 1820s) would come up with a plan like that.

Actually, they had greater quality of instruction in many aspects than does the world today.  They were not a bunch of morons.  They read newspapers and had energetic community discussions at the local store.

I guess you do not believe Zeezrom had the sophistication to twist the words of Alma and Amulek.  It was only the spirit of the Lord that enabled them to detect and thwart the designs of Zeezrom.

[omni]

3 hours ago, longview said:

 

I can agree with you that Lucy Harris was extremely skeptical of the work Joseph Smith was doing.  That she probably did not want her husband to spend time and money assisting with that work.  But you cannot rule out the possibility that she may have involved several men to help her to defeat the translation.  That these men were wicked (although she may have really thought they were honorable men who had great ideas for catching Joseph Smith in a lie).

 

So in your estimation why did these evil men never make changes to the original manuscript?  As I stated before, they could have still accomplished their original goal by changing the names of a few of the people/places and maybe some of the time periods.  

It's a moot point anyways, even with the changes it would have been Joseph's and Martin's word against the hoodlums.  I can't imagine them having trouble pointing out that every page that contained a difference also appeared to have been written in a different handwriting.

If the church could survive the re-discovery of the papyri, it most certainly could have survived a hairbrained scheme without losing a book of scripture to history.

[canard78]

On 1/15/2016 at 8:37 AM, The Nehor said:

Skousen did what now?

 

12 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

 

Yeah.

Consider this an official CFR.

Thanks in advance.

My reference was pretty brief, but you must have heard the theory? Skousen and few others have done research to show that the Book of Mormon contains language from the 1500s that is claimed to be extinct by the time Joseph dictated it. It means, they say, that the language of the Book of Mormon can't have been created by Joseph and instead he was simply reading out the words given to him from whomever had translated it in the first place using old English from the 1500s. That "someone" could be God or some other translator. Skousen doesn't really go into the detail of "who" did the actual translation from Reformed Egyptian to 1500s English. He just focuses on the language mainly and then drops hints and references.

Sources:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865609214/The-very-surprising-language-of-the-Book-of-Mormon.html?pg=all

http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/tyndale-versus-more-in-the-book-of-mormon/

http://mormanity.blogspot.it/2014/08/joseph-smiths-hick-language-in-original.html

 

 

[Calm]

28 minutes ago, canard78 said:

 

My reference was pretty brief, but you must have heard the theory? Skousen and few others have done research to show that the Book of Mormon contains language from the 1500s that is claimed to be extinct by the time Joseph dictated it....

 

Weren't you the one who found some examples of the language that was claimed to be extinct current in JS's time?  Or is my memory playing tricks on me again?

[Glenn101]

52 minutes ago, omni said:

So in your estimation why did these evil men never make changes to the original manuscript?  As I stated before, they could have still accomplished their original goal by changing the names of a few of the people/places and maybe some of the time periods.  

It's a moot point anyways, even with the changes it would have been Joseph's and Martin's word against the hoodlums.  I can't imagine them having trouble pointing out that every page that contained a difference also appeared to have been written in a different handwriting.

If the church could survive the re-discovery of the papyri, it most certainly could have survived a hairbrained scheme without losing a book of scripture to history.

According to D&C section 10:

 16 And then, behold, they say and think in their hearts—We will see if God has given him power to translate; if so, he will also give him power again;

 17 And if God giveth him power again, or if he translates again, or, in other words, if he bringeth forth the same words, behold, we have the same with us, and we have altered them;

 18 Therefore they will not agree, and we will say that he has lied in his words, and that he has no gift, and that he has no power;

 19 Therefore we will destroy him, and also the work; and we will do this that we may not be ashamed in the end, and that we may get glory of the world.

 

Whatever would have actually happened is moot, because Joseph did not retranslate that portion of the Book of Mormon. I do not know the state of art concerning handwriting recognition back in those days, but it would not have mattered. Not reproducing the words on those lost 116 pages left those with evil designs with an altered document, and a stolen one at that. They could not come forward with impunity.

Glenn

[PeterPear]

4 hours ago, cinepro said:

I don't know where the theory in D&C 10 came from, but I am highly skeptical of it being a revelation from God.  I also don't think Lucy Harris had any "cronies".   It sounds like a Studio C sketch:

Lucy: Okay Jasper.  My husband is in league with that crackpot Joe Smith.  What can we do to put them out of business?

Jasper: I've got it, m'lady!  You say Joe is claiming to translate those gold tablets?  Well here's what we'll do.  We'll steal all of their current work and hide it.  Then we'll wait a few weeks or months for him to re-translate it!  Then we'll get some quills and ink and we'll change the writing on the pages that we stole.  Then, when he finally goes to the publisher with your husbands money and gets the book published, we'll show the world our pages, and they'll see that Joe's new book is different so he obviously couldn't have been translating it!  He made it up!  What do you think, Kroger?

Kroger:  When Joe publishes his book, how are we going tell people about our pages?

Jasper:  We can show them to the newspapers.  It will be a huge story!

Kroger:  When the newsboys ask us where we got the pages from, what will we tell them?  Joe and Martin might remember that we stole them.

Jasper: It won't matter that we stole them.  People will be so shocked, that's all they'll be able to think about.

Kroger: But won't they be able to tell that we modified the manuscript?  I mean, all the parts that are different from Joe's book will look different, won't they?

Jasper: I know a guy.  Trust me on this.

Lucy: Just one question.  Our plan only seems to work after they've published the book, which means Martin will have already spent our money.  Can we come up with a plan that maybe stops this project before I lose all my money?

Jasper: You're getting distracted, m'lady.  You need to think of the big picture.  Now get us those pages and months or years from now, we'll show the stolen, altered pages to the world and that will be the end of Joe Smith as the rational, critical people of upper state New York reject his gold bible based on our presentation of the stolen, altered pages.  It's almost too easy. 

 

Or: Lucy burned the pages because she was mad about Martin's role in the project.

Keep in mind...

 

 

 

I also don't see any parallels between Mark Hoffman or Hurlbut.  I just don't believe that Lucy Harris or others living in that time and place (frontier America in the 1820s) would come up with a plan like that. 

CINEPRO! I'm surprised you don't believe D&C 10 is revelation from God! 

You, as an obvious Star Wars Yoda fan, what do you think of J.J. Abrams rewritimg Star Wars after Disney stole the Star Wars manuscript from George Lucas for a measly $1 Billion?

[longview]

1 hour ago, Glenn101 said:

According to D&C section 10:

 16 And then, behold, they say and think in their hearts—We will see if God has given him power to translate; if so, he will also give him power again;

 17 And if God giveth him power again, or if he translates again, or, in other words, if he bringeth forth the same words, behold, we have the same with us, and we have altered them;

 18 Therefore they will not agree, and we will say that he has lied in his words, and that he has no gift, and that he has no power;

 19 Therefore we will destroy him, and also the work; and we will do this that we may not be ashamed in the end, and that we may get glory of the world.

 

Whatever would have actually happened is moot, because Joseph did not retranslate that portion of the Book of Mormon. I do not know the state of art concerning handwriting recognition back in those days, but it would not have mattered. Not reproducing the words on those lost 116 pages left those with evil designs with an altered document, and a stolen one at that. They could not come forward with impunity.

Glenn

God took this situation seriously enough to nullify Joseph Smith's assumption that the Book of Lehi would be retranslated.  Because God knew, even back in the days of General Mormon, that the conspiracy would occur.  On the other side, Satan was orchestrating this group of evil men (which Cinepro thinks are country bumpkins) with his knowledge and several millenia of experience.  Thankfully, Satan did not prevail in this particular situation.

[cinepro]

On 1/18/2016 at 7:44 PM, longview said:

God took this situation seriously enough to nullify Joseph Smith's assumption that the Book of Lehi would be retranslated.  Because God knew, even back in the days of General Mormon, that the conspiracy would occur.  On the other side, Satan was orchestrating this group of evil men (which Cinepro thinks are country bumpkins) with his knowledge and several millenia of experience.  Thankfully, Satan did not prevail in this particular situation.

Of course, it should be noted that if Joseph practiced a "loose" translation methodology, the entire plan would have been nullified on that basis alone.  Joseph would have simply needed to explain that it wasn't a word-for-word (or "tight") translation and that such differences would be expected.  It's too bad he didn't know as much about the process as some modern apologists do.

Edited January 19, 2016 by cinepro

[longview]

15 hours ago, cinepro said:

- - - It's too bad he didn't know as much about the process as some modern apologists do.

You should put an appropriate emoticon on that statement.  I am leery of people who would second guess God or denigrate certain revelations (such as D&C 10) or the word of the Lord to His prophets.

[cinepro]

44 minutes ago, longview said:

You should put an appropriate emoticon on that statement.  I am leery of people who would second guess God or denigrate certain revelations (such as D&C 10) or the word of the Lord to His prophets.

I'm not sure what you're saying.  If Joseph was translating with a "loose" methodology, then the simple answer to the challenge of reproducing the lost pages word-for-word would be "I'm sorry, but that's not how this translation works.  I don't see it word-for-word, but instead am getting revelation that I put into my own words.  A re-translation would be similar, but not word-for-word."

Problem solved.

It reminds me of the South Park episode on Mormonism where, of all the incidents in Church history they could have shown, they chose this one.  And at the end, the non-LDS boy hears this story and says "..Wait. Mormons actually know this story and they still believe Joseph Smith was a prophet?"  It's definitely one of those things that makes sense to LDS when you hear it your whole life, but if you just think about it for a second, it totally falls apart. 

I'm not saying it proves Joseph Smith wasn't a prophet, or that D&C wasn't a revelation (maybe it is God testing our faith again...).  I'm just saying that if you look at the people involved (Lucy Harris, some never-realized conspirators, Joseph and Martin), and the situations each of them were in, the theory in D&C 10 makes no sense. 

Also, keep in mind that had the conspirators tried to publish the stolen pages, Joseph Smith could have stopped them, as evidenced by his actions against someone else who tried to publish stolen Book of Mormon passages.  The man's name was Abner Cole, and the story can be read starting on page 87 of this article:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10767066/7143-7215-1-PB.txt.pdf

So perhaps the best response to the "conspiracy" would have been for Joseph to stop them from publishing their stolen manuscript just as he did with Abner Cole.  That seems like a much more logical way to deal with it than having a separate set of plates prepared 1400 years beforehand and have them miraculously leave off exactly at the point where the stolen pages would stop.  But then God does move in mysterious ways, so who knows?

 

 

 

 

Edited January 19, 2016 by cinepro

[consiglieri]

I haven't read through the whole thread, but I expect somebody has already pointed out how strange the justification is for not retranslating the lost portion.

I mean, the idea is supposed to be that those who stole the 116-pages would change it and come forth with the changed manuscript and challenge Joseph Smith's new translation because it did not match.

As Cinepro points out, this presupposes the idea that Joseph Smith could reproduce the lost 116-pages word-for-word.

But let's say Joseph Smith had reproduced the lost 116-pages word-for-word, and then Lucy (or whoever) comes forth with the changed manuscript to prove Joseph a false prophet.

Wouldn't the changed manuscript looked, well, changed?  I mean, it's not like they had white-out back then.

In other words, it would have been impossible for somebody to change the manuscript and bring it forth looking like it had been unchanged.  The only way they could do so would be to rewrite the entire thing.  And wouldn't that be a pretty easy thing to point out?

Looked at objectively, it appears Joseph used this excuse to not retranslate precisely because he could not retranslate the lost manuscript word-for-word.

And this was his way of getting around the problem.

 

[cinepro]

22 minutes ago, consiglieri said:

I haven't read through the whole thread, but I expect somebody has already pointed out how strange the justification is for not retranslating the lost portion.

I mean, the idea is supposed to be that those who stole the 116-pages would change it and come forth with the changed manuscript and challenge Joseph Smith's new translation because it did not match.

As Cinepro points out, this presupposes the idea that Joseph Smith could reproduce the lost 116-pages word-for-word.

But let's say Joseph Smith had reproduced the lost 116-pages word-for-word, and then Lucy (or whoever) comes forth with the changed manuscript to prove Joseph a false prophet.

Wouldn't the changed manuscript looked, well, changed?  I mean, it's not like they had white-out back then.

In other words, it would have been impossible for somebody to change the manuscript and bring it forth looking like it had been unchanged.  The only way they could do so would be to rewrite the entire thing.  And wouldn't that be a pretty easy thing to point out?

Looked at objectively, it appears Joseph used this excuse to not retranslate precisely because he could not retranslate the lost manuscript word-for-word.

And this was his way of getting around the problem.

 

Even odder is that it's not like Joseph was walking around with the manuscript and letting people read it.  Few people ever saw it.  So you would have had the published book, and then what?  The conspirators would give the altered manuscript to a newspaper and the newspaper publishes an article saying "These fine men had stolen an early manuscript for Joseph Smith's gold bible so he would have to go back and "translate" that part over.  We encourage readers to compare their copies of the Book with this excerpt.  You'll notice that it's different!"

So the hard thinking, skeptical people of upper-state New York would compare their published copies of the Book of Mormon with the excerpt in the newspaper published by an anti-Mormon (and given to him by the enemies of Joseph Smith) and concluded that Joseph didn't translate the Book of Mormon because they are different?

And Joseph couldn't just publish an article saying "These men stole the pages and have altered them to make it different. And they have violated the copyright so I'm suing the newspaper just like I did with Angus Cole"?

That was the plan?  Really?

Edited January 19, 2016 by cinepro

[consiglieri]

6 minutes ago, cinepro said:

That was the plan?  Really?

It does seem unworthy of an omniscient God, doesn't it?

[Kevin Christensen]

What is strange is that nobody seems to think it strange that the Spaulding theory was launched on the basis of what various people claimed to have read in a manuscript that the accusers claimed to have (they did) but didn't want to publish (doing so would harm their thesis).  The whole argument was that Joseph had changed a manuscript to something else to suit his purposes.  It seems to me that the picture in D&C 10 is not all that far removed from what actually happened with the Spaulding witnesses.

But what do I know?, not being the sort to let a little sarcastic mocking and pointing from the Great and Spacious South Park light a bonfire with the tender kindling of my faith.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

[cinepro]

35 minutes ago, Kevin Christensen said:

What is strange is that nobody seems to think it strange that the Spaulding theory was launched on the basis of what various people claimed to have read in a manuscript that the accusers claimed to have (they did) but didn't want to publish (doing so would harm their thesis).  The whole argument was that Joseph had changed a manuscript to something else to suit his purposes.  It seems to me that the picture in D&C 10 is not all that far removed from what actually happened with the Spaulding witnesses.

But what do I know?, not being the sort to let a little sarcastic mocking and pointing from the Great and Spacious South Park light a bonfire with the tender kindling of my faith.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

It seems to me that the idea that Joseph copied the Book of Mormon from another similar manuscript is much different than the idea that he re-translated part of it and that part is different than the people who stole that other part claim it is.

A key difference is the planning, patience and effort required of the conspirators for the (presumed) payoff.    Remember, the D&C 10 theory requires Lucy Harris to be involved in a plan that requires additional time and investment on Martin's part before attempting to discredit and totally sink the project (thus ensuring as much loss of money as possible). 

[Kevin Christensen]

4 minutes ago, cinepro said:

It seems to me that the idea that Joseph copied the Book of Mormon from another similar manuscript is much different than the idea that he re-translated part of it and that part is different than the people who stole that other part claim it is.

A key difference is the planning, patience and effort required of the conspirators for the (presumed) payoff.    Remember, the D&C 10 theory requires Lucy Harris to be involved in a plan that requires additional time and investment on Martin's part before attempting to discredit and totally sink the project (thus ensuring as much loss of money as possible). 

But the actual accusation contained in Mormonism Unveiled in 1834, built on a set of witnesses who claimed to remember reading this or that detail in a Spaulding ms from years before, is not really all that different than what D&C 10 describes as a real threat. People did make all sorts of claims and producing an actual manuscript was not required. And the whole point was to discredit Joseph Smith as a translator and depict him as a fraud. And it seems to me that since D&C 10 does not name any of the conspirators, any speculative requirements regarding Lucy Harris's participation or investment strikes me as rather fluffy and ethereal grounds in which to bury my own faith.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

[omni]

1 hour ago, Kevin Christensen said:

What is strange is that nobody seems to think it strange that the Spaulding theory was launched on the basis of what various people claimed to have read in a manuscript that the accusers claimed to have (they did) but didn't want to publish (doing so would harm their thesis).  The whole argument was that Joseph had changed a manuscript to something else to suit his purposes.  It seems to me that the picture in D&C 10 is not all that far removed from what actually happened with the Spaulding witnesses.

But what do I know?, not being the sort to let a little sarcastic mocking and pointing from the Great and Spacious South Park light a bonfire with the tender kindling of my faith.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

The Spaulding theory is a perfect example of why the re-translation should not have been necessary.  We have eight upstanding citizens going to their grave with the claim (signed affidavit and all) that Joseph plagiarized Spaulding.  And what was the result?  The church mushroomed into the international organization it is today.  Why should we expect anything different to have occurred with the lost 116 pages, especially considering how easy it would have been to detect the alterations?

[cinepro]

21 hours ago, Kevin Christensen said:

But the actual accusation contained in Mormonism Unveiled in 1834, built on a set of witnesses who claimed to remember reading this or that detail in a Spaulding ms from years before, is not really all that different than what D&C 10 describes as a real threat. People did make all sorts of claims and producing an actual manuscript was not required. And the whole point was to discredit Joseph Smith as a translator and depict him as a fraud. And it seems to me that since D&C 10 does not name any of the conspirators, any speculative requirements regarding Lucy Harris's participation or investment strikes me as rather fluffy and ethereal grounds in which to bury my own faith.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

Again, the key components in Lucy Harris's theoretical conspiracy  time, planning and money. 

The situation you describe with the Spaulding theory is totally different: several people with no financial stake remember (after the fact) a manuscript from years before.  If you told me that the same set of witnesses had secretly gotten together in 1827 and decided that they would do whatever it took to stop Joe Smith from publishing his book, and then they gave Joseph money to translate and publish the Book of Mormon, and then once it was published went public with their accusations about the Spaulding manuscript and produced a version of the Spaulding manuscript which had been altered by them to make it appear more like the Book of Mormon in an attempt to discredit the book, then I would say that was just as preposterous a plan.

[cinepro]

21 hours ago, omni said:

The Spaulding theory is a perfect example of why the re-translation should not have been necessary.  We have eight upstanding citizens going to their grave with the claim (signed affidavit and all) that Joseph plagiarized Spaulding.  And what was the result?  The church mushroomed into the international organization it is today.  Why should we expect anything different to have occurred with the lost 116 pages, especially considering how easy it would have been to detect the alterations?

Perhaps the Lord's response could have been "Joseph, in you I am much displeased for thou hast been careless with the words which I hath given to you.  But fear not; it is but a moment, and thou canst retranslate that portion which hath gone missing.  For shouldst it fall into the hands of evil and designing men in these last days, their plans  will come to naught, and the work shall go forth."

Or any of these options:

http://indiemormon.com/index.php/2016/01/18/lost-116-how-it-should-have-ended/

 

[consiglieri]

22 hours ago, Kevin Christensen said:

But the actual accusation contained in Mormonism Unveiled in 1834, built on a set of witnesses who claimed to remember reading this or that detail in a Spaulding ms from years before, is not really all that different than what D&C 10 describes as a real threat. People did make all sorts of claims and producing an actual manuscript was not required. And the whole point was to discredit Joseph Smith as a translator and depict him as a fraud. And it seems to me that since D&C 10 does not name any of the conspirators, any speculative requirements regarding Lucy Harris's participation or investment strikes me as rather fluffy and ethereal grounds in which to bury my own faith.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

So why couldn't Lucy Harris, et al, just make the same type of claim about the lost manuscript?

I like your comparison between the two incidents, Kevin, but it does seem to me Lucy could have just claimed there was a difference without producing the actual manuscript and done as much damage as the Solomon Spaulding theory.

But that isn't what D&C 10 envisions.

The other thing I find strange is this:

The LDS Church survived plural marriage, the Kirtland financial crisis, getting run out of Ohio, then Missouri, then Illinois.

But somehow this little scheme would have brought the Church to its knees?

 

[Kevin Christensen]

2 hours ago, consiglieri said:

So why couldn't Lucy Harris, et al, just make the same type of claim about the lost manuscript?

I like your comparison between the two incidents, Kevin, but it does seem to me Lucy could have just claimed there was a difference without producing the actual manuscript and done as much damage as the Solomon Spaulding theory.

But that isn't what D&C 10 envisions.

The other thing I find strange is this:

The LDS Church survived plural marriage, the Kirtland financial crisis, getting run out of Ohio, then Missouri, then Illinois.

But somehow this little scheme would have brought the Church to its knees?

 

They could have done, but didn't.  As I tried to point out to Cinepro, I don't see the point of speculating about Lucy or any others in the absence of any facts. The D&C 10 revelation addresses Joseph Smith's fears and concerns and helped him move foward with the translation, which, according to Isaiah 55:8-11, is exactly what the word of God is supposed to do. "It shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it."

Frankly, I find D&C 3 far more absurd in the 1828 context and consequently far more remarkable to contemplate than D&C 10.  Bushman points out that D&C 3 is one of the oldest written revelations we have from Joseph Smith.  It comes a point when he has nothing going for him but fresh bereavement and abject failure.  And what it predicts for the as yet untranslated book, at this present point in time, is far more testable without so much hand wringing about unknowable details and persons. 

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

Edited January 20, 2016 by Kevin Christensen

[cdowis]

I read an interesting theory on the loss of the 116 pages. (do not remember the author)

He indicated that Obediah Dogberry was one of the visitors who viewed the manuscript.  He was the one who copied the printer's manuscript  and tried to print the BOM in his newspaper, until he was threatened with a lawsuit for copyright violation.  He had an interest in this book and had the resources to have a fake copy made, and to publish it, with the intention to discredit Joseph Smith.  This makes sense, and takes Mrs. Harris out of the picture.

[cdowis]

On 1/19/2016 at 4:36 PM, omni said:

.  Why should we expect anything different to have occurred with the lost 116 pages, especially considering how easy it would have been to detect the alterations?

Obviously you did not read my post on the subject.

Please help us.

And how do you detect the alterations if the entire manuscript, or just a few pages are completely re-written.  Handwriting analysis was not developed until decades later.  Someone would simply re-write the manuscript with a few changes, and how would you detect the alterations?

In fact, if you are the owner of a newspaper, such as Obediah Dogberry, you simply print the altered manuscript, and don't even bother to display any altered manuscript, or just a few pages.

Edited September 14, 2017 by cdowis

[The Nehor]

God said it was a cunning plan.

He did not say it was a well thought out plan.

 

[Calm]

40 minutes ago, cdowis said:

Obviously you did not read my post on the subject.

Please help us.

And how do you detect the alterations if the entire manuscript, or just a few pages are completely re-written.  Handwriting analysis was not developed until decades later.  Someone would simply re-write the manuscript with a few changes, and how would you detect the alterations?

In fact, if you are the owner of a newspaper, such as Obediah Dogberry, you simply print the altered manuscript, and don't even bother to display any altered manuscript, or just a few pages.

This conversation is more than a year and a half old.  It might be wiser to start a new conversation.