Popular Post Scott Lloyd Posted August 31, 2017 Popular Post Posted August 31, 2017 The Church History Department is doing some interesting things with the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon (this is the one that got placed into the cornerstone of the Nauvoo House and partially destroyed after water seeped in). My story has gotten quite a bit of traffic after being posted late yesterday afternoon, so I thought some here might be interested: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865687831/LDS-Church-History-Department-announces-newly-found-fragment-of-original-Book-of-Mormon-manuscript.html 8
Robert F. Smith Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 (edited) Very interesting that fragments are still being found. Thanks for your story. Edited August 31, 2017 by Robert F. Smith
hagoth7 Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 (edited) Quote Neilson said that when he displays portions of the original manuscript to library visitors, he reminds them, “This is as close as you’ll ever get to the gold plates.” Cough. Sputter. As awesome as the rest of the article is, I suggest that Brother Neilson change his tune a wee bit. Edited August 31, 2017 by hagoth7 3
ksfisher Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 1 minute ago, hagoth7 said: Cough. Sputter. As awesome as the rest of the article is, I suggest that Brother Neilson change his tune a wee bit. Why? The statement seems to be true. 1
longview Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 I take for granted that I will be able to see the "Gold Plates" in the next world and comprehend the script and the languages. Also to see all the source materials for it. And confirm the BoM to truly be a historical record. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted August 31, 2017 Author Posted August 31, 2017 18 minutes ago, longview said: I take for granted that I will be able to see the "Gold Plates" in the next world and comprehend the script and the languages. Also to see all the source materials for it. And confirm the BoM to truly be a historical record. I think it obvious that Reid was speaking in the context of mortality.
snowflake Posted September 1, 2017 Posted September 1, 2017 20 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: The Church History Department is doing some interesting things with the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon (this is the one that got placed into the cornerstone of the Nauvoo House and partially destroyed after water seeped in). My story has gotten quite a bit of traffic after being posted late yesterday afternoon, so I thought some here might be interested: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865687831/LDS-Church-History-Department-announces-newly-found-fragment-of-original-Book-of-Mormon-manuscript.html With only 28% of the original manuscript, how do we know for certain that many plain and precious truths were not removed?
Scott Lloyd Posted September 1, 2017 Author Posted September 1, 2017 2 hours ago, snowflake said: With only 28% of the original manuscript, how do we know for certain that many plain and precious truths were not removed? The printer's manuscript, a safe copy made for use in the typesetting of the first edition of the Book of Mormon, has been preserved in its entirety except for one line. It has long been in the custody of the Community of Christ (formerly the RLDS Church), which cooperated with the LDS Church History Department in the recent publication of the printer's manuscript as part of the Joseph Smith Papers project.
stemelbow Posted September 1, 2017 Posted September 1, 2017 (edited) 22 hours ago, ksfisher said: Why? The statement seems to be true. I'd say for starters the Plates weren't used in the translation process, or so it appears according to those who witnessed. Edited September 1, 2017 by stemelbow 1
stemelbow Posted September 1, 2017 Posted September 1, 2017 (edited) 22 hours ago, longview said: I take for granted that I will be able to see the "Gold Plates" in the next world and comprehend the script and the languages. Also to see all the source materials for it. And confirm the BoM to truly be a historical record. i wonder what other, at that point, useless earthly items will be sitting amongst the many billions of for us to view as we travel through the heavenly museums on our days of creating and overseeing. How man ther gold plates will there be from other planets? Edited September 1, 2017 by stemelbow
snowflake Posted September 1, 2017 Posted September 1, 2017 23 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: The printer's manuscript, a safe copy made for use in the typesetting of the first edition of the Book of Mormon, has been preserved in its entirety except for one line. It has long been in the custody of the Community of Christ (formerly the RLDS Church), which cooperated with the LDS Church History Department in the recent publication of the printer's manuscript as part of the Joseph Smith Papers project. Without the original to compare it to how can you be sure the first copies hadn't been changed by the printer? We could compare the 28% to the printer's manuscript, but that is all we could be absolutely sure about.
Scott Lloyd Posted September 1, 2017 Author Posted September 1, 2017 (edited) 34 minutes ago, snowflake said: Without the original to compare it to how can you be sure the first copies hadn't been changed by the printer? We could compare the 28% to the printer's manuscript, but that is all we could be absolutely sure about. Because the first edition (and subsequent editions until his death) were prepared under the supervision of the Prophet Joseph Smith, who obtained the copyright for the book (I've been to the Library of Congress and seen the copy that Joseph Smith submitted for obtaining the copyright). If there had been some plan afoot by the typesetter to leave out or change content ( a really off-the-wall notion, but I'll entertain it for a moment to humor you) it would have been caught immediately by Joseph and his scribe, Oliver Cowdery, who supervised the typesetting every step of the way and proofread the printing in advance as any conscientious author (or, in this case, translator) would do. Edited September 1, 2017 by Scott Lloyd 1
Scott Lloyd Posted September 1, 2017 Author Posted September 1, 2017 25 minutes ago, stemelbow said: I'd say for starters the Plates weren't used in the translation process, or so it appears according to those who witnessed. But they were in the possession of the Prophet at the time the translation was made. And, it would appear, the work of translation could not proceed without them being in his possession. Thus, it must be said that the physical presence of the plates was essential to the translation. So I think Reid Neilson's observation is spot on. 2
Scott Lloyd Posted September 1, 2017 Author Posted September 1, 2017 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Because the first edition (and subsequent editions until his death) were prepared under the supervision of the Prophet Joseph Smith, who obtained the copyright for the book (I've been to the Library of Congress and seen the copy that Joseph Smith submitted for obtaining the copyright). If there had been some plan afoot by the typesetter to leave out or change content ( a really off-the-wall notion, but I'll entertain it for a moment to humor you) it would have been caught immediately by Joseph and his scribe, Oliver Cowdery, who supervised the typesetting every step of the way and proofread the printing in advance as any conscientious author (or, in this case, translator) would do. I'll add here that the earliest extant copies of the books of the Bible are already hundreds of years removed from the original writings. This contrasts sharply with the circumstance of the Book of Mormon translation by Joseph Smith, for which the original manuscript is extant, even if only in partial form. Edited September 1, 2017 by Scott Lloyd
RevTestament Posted September 1, 2017 Posted September 1, 2017 22 hours ago, hagoth7 said: Cough. Sputter. As awesome as the rest of the article is, I suggest that Brother Neilson change his tune a wee bit. Indeed. We are still promised the sealed portion of the plates which promise to hold greater things than what we presently have... I believe they will hold the story of the Nephites and Lamanites during their peaceful interlude after Christ visited them. Presently, that is a huge gap. We learn little about Christ's visit. Someone will see the plates again, as well as possibly other records.
RevTestament Posted September 1, 2017 Posted September 1, 2017 On 8/31/2017 at 11:54 AM, Scott Lloyd said: The Church History Department is doing some interesting things with the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon (this is the one that got placed into the cornerstone of the Nauvoo House and partially destroyed after water seeped in). My story has gotten quite a bit of traffic after being posted late yesterday afternoon, so I thought some here might be interested: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865687831/LDS-Church-History-Department-announces-newly-found-fragment-of-original-Book-of-Mormon-manuscript.html Thanks for letting us know. I indeed look forward to its release, although I don't expect much different from the publisher's manuscript.
stemelbow Posted September 1, 2017 Posted September 1, 2017 20 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: But they were in the possession of the Prophet at the time the translation was made. And, it would appear, the work of translation could not proceed without them being in his possession. Thus, it must be said that the physical presence of the plates was essential to the translation. So I think Reid Neilson's observation is spot on. Interesting theory Scott. The plates themselves are magical? I don't think that they were in his possession as he translated means that what is on the plates could be translated to what is the Book of Mormon. We're just guessing here. 1
snowflake Posted September 1, 2017 Posted September 1, 2017 18 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Because the first edition (and subsequent editions until his death) were prepared under the supervision of the Prophet Joseph Smith, who obtained the copyright for the book (I've been to the Library of Congress and seen the copy that Joseph Smith submitted for obtaining the copyright). If there had been some conspiracy afoot by the typesetter to leave out or change content ( a really off-the-wall notion, but I'll entertain it for a moment to humor you) it would have been caught immediately by Joseph and his scribe, Oliver Cowdery, who supervised the typesetting every step of the way and proofread the printing in advance as any conscientious author (or, in this case, translator) would do. According to Royal Skousen the LDS textual critic, there were many changes from the original, of the 28% that could be compared with the printer's manual. Changes made by Oliver Cowdrey and others. According to Skousen, a fragment from 2 Nephi chapter 7 had 6 errors on that small fragment alone, some errors "grammatical", and some "accidental". Remember Joseph and Oliver were not professional scribes like the Jewish scribes of the Old Testament. Skousen will be the first to admit that your BOM is not the same as the printer's edition BOM.
RevTestament Posted September 1, 2017 Posted September 1, 2017 18 minutes ago, snowflake said: According to Royal Skousen the LDS textual critic, there were many changes from the original, of the 28% that could be compared with the printer's manual. Changes made by Oliver Cowdrey and others. According to Skousen, a fragment from 2 Nephi chapter 7 had 6 errors on that small fragment alone, some errors "grammatical", and some "accidental". Remember Joseph and Oliver were not professional scribes like the Jewish scribes of the Old Testament. Skousen will be the first to admit that your BOM is not the same as the printer's edition BOM. I've always maintained we should bring back all the spelling errors and lack of punctuation so the critics will have a version to make them happy. 1
cdowis Posted September 1, 2017 Posted September 1, 2017 1 hour ago, stemelbow said: I'd say for starters the Plates weren't used in the translation process, or so it appears according to those who witnessed. When you post to this forum, is there a computer in your home where it gets posted to? We don't know the role that the plates served in the translation process, but we do know that JS must have them in his possession in order to do the translation. Sort of a client/server model, I suppose between the plates and the seer stone.
snowflake Posted September 1, 2017 Posted September 1, 2017 31 minutes ago, RevTestament said: I've always maintained we should bring back all the spelling errors and lack of punctuation so the critics will have a version to make them happy. I agree Rev, I want to see it as "original" as possible!
stemelbow Posted September 1, 2017 Posted September 1, 2017 14 minutes ago, cdowis said: When you post to this forum, is there a computer in your home where it gets posted to? We don't know the role that the plates served in the translation process, but we do know that JS must have them in his possession in order to do the translation. Sort of a client/server model, I suppose between the plates and the seer stone. Either way that's missing the point. We don't know what was on the plates corresponds with what is the book of Mormon. No one does. No one referred to the plates to know. Thus, there's no way for us to know if this will get us closer to the plates. I do find it interesting though, we treat the plates as magical mystical objects. SOmeone said, they hope to see them in the eternities. I'd imagine the story fo the Book of Mormon will seem a bit like child's play to us then. And the plates, if they somehow survive, will seem like useless old, rusty objects we need to throw out. My guess is the plates don't contain the story that is the Book of Mormon. That's probably largely why the plates were taken. IT's much like the papyrus doesn't contain the story found in the Book of Abraham. Joseph also did not consult old fragments of the Bible to produce a "translation" of it either.
ksfisher Posted September 1, 2017 Posted September 1, 2017 2 hours ago, stemelbow said: I'd say for starters the Plates weren't used in the translation process, or so it appears according to those who witnessed. True, but the statement in the article wasn't talking about the translation process. It was a lighthearted jest saying that the original manuscript, which is one Kevin Bacon step removed from the plates, is as close as people would ever get. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted September 1, 2017 Author Posted September 1, 2017 2 hours ago, stemelbow said: Interesting theory Scott. The plates themselves are magical? I don't think that they were in his possession as he translated means that what is on the plates could be translated to what is the Book of Mormon. We're just guessing here. No, not "magical." (Your attempt to poison the well by using a pejorative is noted.) I mean that, by all indications, God would not provide Joseph with the gift to translate unless the plates were in his possession. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted September 1, 2017 Author Posted September 1, 2017 2 hours ago, snowflake said: According to Royal Skousen the LDS textual critic, there were many changes from the original, of the 28% that could be compared with the printer's manual. Changes made by Oliver Cowdrey and others. According to Skousen, a fragment from 2 Nephi chapter 7 had 6 errors on that small fragment alone, some errors "grammatical", and some "accidental". Remember Joseph and Oliver were not professional scribes like the Jewish scribes of the Old Testament. Skousen will be the first to admit that your BOM is not the same as the printer's edition BOM. And this is supposed to give me pause why, exactly?
Recommended Posts