Jump to content

Don Bradley's Lost 116 Pages is out...


Calm

Recommended Posts

Curious, but since it's not quite out yet and only have the table of contents, thanks Robert. How does Don manage to write about something that isn't available to read or see in person, like the lost 116 pages? Dumb question? Or he's just writing about what happened? ETA: This gave me more information though...https://www.academia.edu/41028278/The_Lost_116_Pages_Reconstructing_the_Book_of_Mormons_Missing_Stories_-_PREVIEW_EXCERPT

Edited by Tacenda
Link to post
On 11/23/2019 at 10:43 AM, strappinglad said:

When I see the fun critics had with the Spaulding work, I can just imagine the chaos created with a close work if it could be attributed to Joseph or someone else. 

They still did that, though.  They said whatever he wrote was written by either himself or somebody else.  What I imagine is the look on their face when they tried to find the content of those 116 pages in what was published as the Book of Mormon.  Where was it?  And where to look for it?  Do we even know what it was?  2 Nephi seems to have a natural ending so I don't think it was more that would have been there.  After 2 Nephi we have small accounts with other person's names on them.  What would the 116 pages have been called?  Later in the Book of Mormon there is a section called 3 Nephi so I don't think the 116 pages would have fit in there.  From what I've been told the content of the 116 pages was replaced by those small accounts after 2 Nephi, in the time period between 2 Nephi and 3 Nephi.  But what would they have been called and how would anyone who found those 116 pages have known where to look to find the same content or something close to what was on those pages?

Edited by Ahab
Link to post
2 hours ago, Ahab said:

They still did that, though.  They said whatever he wrote was written by either himself or somebody else.  What I imagine is the look on their face when they tried to find the content of those 116 pages in what was published as the Book of Mormon.  Where was it?  And where to look for it?  Do we even know what it was?  2 Nephi seems to have a natural ending so I don't think it was more that would have been there.  After 2 Nephi we have small accounts with other person's names on them.  What would the 116 pages have been called?  Later in the Book of Mormon there is a section called 3 Nephi so I don't think the 116 pages would have fit in there.  From what I've been told the content of the 116 pages was replaced by those small accounts after 2 Nephi, in the time period between 2 Nephi and 3 Nephi.  But what would they have been called and how would anyone who found those 116 pages have known where to look to find the same content or something close to what was on those pages?

Yes, we know what it was. Mormon tells us explicitly what time period it covers.

In the original 3 Nephi and 4 Nephi were just the Book of Nephi (we added numbers to clarify references) so that observation explains nothing.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
41 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Yes, we know what it was. Mormon tells us explicitly what time period it covers.

In the original 3 Nephi and 4 Nephi were just the Book of Nephi (we added numbers to clarify references) so that observation explains nothing.

 

Ah, I think I see now.  So if the 116 pages had not been lost, and we had them in our translation of the Book of Mormon, it's possible that we likely wouldn't have the accounts between 2 Nephi and 3 Nephi and what we would have instead could have been called 3 Nephi with the current 3 Nephi called 4 Nephi instead and what we have now called 4 Nephi could have been called 5 Nephi instead.  Hmm, okay.

I wonder if Jacob, Enos, Jarom, Omni, etc wrote more in what could have been called 3 Nephi if we didn't have the smaller accounts we have of them now and what we now call 3 Nephi? 

Do you think those 116 pages covered the period after what we now call 2 Nephi was written up until the reign of King Benjamin, as Mormon seemed to indicate in his writings which we call the 'Words of Mormon'?

If that's true then maybe Jacob, Enos. Jarom, Omni etc wrote a lot more than we realize since all we have now are their small accounts instead of the lost 116 pages and can't see what they might have written.

Link to post
23 minutes ago, Ahab said:

I wonder if Jacob, Enos, Jarom, Omni, etc wrote more

What we call the small plates were kept by Jacob and his descendants.  The large plates, which includes the lost book of Lehi, seem to have been kept by the kings on down to the time of the last king, Mosiah.  These seem to have been descendants of Nephi.  It would then seem unlikely that writings from those you named would be on the lost portion.

  • Like 1
Link to post
On 11/23/2019 at 12:48 PM, Avatar4321 said:

Why do you think it would be necessary to make it obvious that the changes weren't made? All Satan needs is an excuse.  A reason, no matter how flimsy, to disbelieve and he could get people to disbieve. Just look at all he does with the obvious nonsense out there about the Church

Whether we attribute the plan to Lucy Harris or Satan, either way the "plan" makes no sense.

If you're Satan and you want to stop the Book of Mormon from coming forth, you don't steal the pages, hide them, and then wait for a the BoM to be published months or years later and then alter and produce the previous pages (while depending entirely on readers of the Book of Mormon to rationally compare between the published book and your altered pages and make a reasoned judgement based on their critical thinking skills).  You destroy the pages.

If you're Lucy Harris and your husband is pouring his time and money into an endeavor that you see leading to your financial and marital ruin, you don't create a plan that will require your husband to spend even more time and money to finish the project at which point you then act to destroy your best shot at getting your money back.  You destroy the work in progress in the hopes that he and his partner get discouraged and give up.

Edited by cinepro
  • Like 4
Link to post
7 minutes ago, cinepro said:

If you're Lucy Harris and your husband is pouring his time and money....

Lucy may have gotten a bad rap.  Perhaps all she did was speak of her frustration and how her husband was trying to persuade her to friends and one of them took things farther.

Link to post
1 hour ago, ksfisher said:

What we call the small plates were kept by Jacob and his descendants.  The large plates, which includes the lost book of Lehi, seem to have been kept by the kings on down to the time of the last king, Mosiah.  These seem to have been descendants of Nephi.  It would then seem unlikely that writings from those you named would be on the lost portion.

So what was written on the lost 116 pages?  Or who wrote them?  Am I correct in understanding you to be suggesting those lost 116 pages were written by descendants of Nephi? 

Edited by Ahab
Link to post
13 minutes ago, Ahab said:

So what was written on the lost 116 pages?  Or who wrote them?  Am I correct in understanding you to be suggesting those lost 116 pages were written by descendants of Nephi? 

Yes, they were the records kept by the kings, who seem to have been Nephi and his descendants. 

To find out what's on them I guess we'll just have to read Don Bradley's book 😉  I think my copy arrives tomorrow.

  • Like 1
Link to post
8 hours ago, cinepro said:

Whether we attribute the plan to Lucy Harris or Satan, either way the "plan" makes no sense.

If you're Satan and you want to stop the Book of Mormon from coming forth, you don't steal the pages, hide them, and then wait for a the BoM to be published months or years later and then alter and produce the previous pages (while depending entirely on readers of the Book of Mormon to rationally compare between the published book and your altered pages and make a reasoned judgement based on their critical thinking skills).  You destroy the pages.

If you're Lucy Harris and your husband is pouring his time and money into an endeavor that you see leading to your financial and marital ruin, you don't create a plan that will require your husband to spend even more time and money to finish the project at which point you then act to destroy your best shot at getting your money back.  You destroy the work in progress in the hopes that he and his partner get discouraged and give up.

I agree with you that the "plan" doesn't make a lot of sense. That said, in my experience, the plans and thinking of those heavily influenced by the adversary often don't make much sense. From what I've seen, listening to Satan tends to produce the most irrational decision making.

The "reasoning" and plans behind most murders that I've read about, for example, are completely irrational.

  • Like 3
Link to post
15 hours ago, ksfisher said:

Yes, they were the records kept by the kings, who seem to have been Nephi and his descendants. 

To find out what's on them I guess we'll just have to read Don Bradley's book 😉  I think my copy arrives tomorrow.

But how does Don know these things, is he just surmising? Connecting dots? 

Link to post
16 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

But how does Don know these things, is he just surmising? Connecting dots? 

He is pulling comments of those who were told or read the manuscript perhaps out of journals and such things as well as connecting dots.

Here is a podcast if you prefer:

https://interpreterfoundation.org/ldsp-the-lost-116-pages-with-don-bradley/

Quote

Over the past decades, Don sought to discover the missing meanings and narratives of the 116 pages through research. But how does one go about discovering lost words, lost pages, and lost content? He explains there are a couple of ways. There are “internal evidences” like how the “small plates” of 1 Nephi through Omni or Words of Mormon cover the same period as the lost pages. Even though these small plates are rather light on history, they give us at least a thumbnail sketch of what was in the lost 116 pages.

Another internal evidence is comprised of echoes or flashbacks where later Book of Mormon accounts refer back to an earlier narrative that we don’t have. One example of this would be in Mosiah 11 that mentions King Noah building a tower on this hill that was north of the land Shilom, “which had been a resort for the children of Nephi at the time they fled out of the land.” The current Book of Mormon does not mention any details about this “resort” or the time they “fled out of the land,” but it assumes that we already know about this story, indicating that it had been in the part of the Book of Mormon that is now lost.

Don also speaks of “external evidences” like statements or other sources outside of the available text of the Book of Mormon, like Joseph Smith’s earliest revelations. The most obvious of those is in section 10 of the Doctrine and Covenants where it actually says to Joseph Smith, in essence, “You’ll remember that it was said in what you translated before, that the plates of Nephi had a more extensive account of these things referring to the large plates.”

The most significant types of external evidence are direct statements. The only one of these that has been very widely known is by Apostle Franklin D. Richards, who left an account that when he was in Nauvoo, he heard the prophet Joseph Smith explaining to someone how the Book of Mormon could be the stick of Ephraim. His explanation was that it said in the lost pages that although Lehi was a descendant of Manasseh, Ishmael was a descendant of Ephraim.

There are other sources that give more significant details. Sometimes, they supply extra information regarding accounts we already have and sometimes whole narratives are found that we don’t have. While the details can’t always be verified secondarily, they fit hand in glove with what we do know.

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
16 hours ago, Calm said:

Lucy may have gotten a bad rap.  Perhaps all she did was speak of her frustration and how her husband was trying to persuade her to friends and one of them took things farther.

Came across this today:

Quote

Pilkington said, “She [Lucy Harris] took the manuscript from him and she was perusing them when someone jerked them from her, and then another got it, and Martin told me it disappeared, and he never saw it any more.” In “Interviews with William Pilkington, 1874–1875,” in Vogel, EMD, 2:361–362).

https://rsc.byu.edu/es/archived/coming-forth-book-mormon/lost-116-pages-story-what-we-do-know-what-we-don-t-know-and-what

  • Like 2
Link to post
On 11/23/2019 at 12:08 AM, Calm said:

Only when someone else points me there, do I venture.  There is no real way to search and it is difficult to pull up long conversations all at once.  

I have to say I really, really dislike it and don't understand the appeal unless one wants to just notify people of things rather than discuss.

Far flung family.

That's the only reason I use it.  Get the pics of the grandbabies etc.  It's good for that- !

  • Like 3
Link to post
On 11/25/2019 at 9:35 AM, the narrator said:

Don addresses these in the first part of the book. In short, Martin missed both the prime planting season for his farm and his daughter's wedding and was about to lose his marriage. He was desperate and wanted to show that the he was busy doing something big and important.

If mama ain't happy, ain't nobody happy. ;)

Oft said in Elder's quorums hereabouts.  But don't tell any sisters- they get upset if you say that online. ;)   Shhhhh....

PS- love that cover, you must have gotten someone very talented to design that.  ;)

 

Edited by mfbukowski
Link to post

Who was it who posted here who said he HAS the lost manuscript?  Or at least a fragment?

I think I remember his avatar but don't want to post it in case I get it wrong....

Link to post
Quote

Mosiah 11 . . mentions King Noah building a tower on this hill that was north of the land Shilom, “which had been a resort for the children of Nephi at the time they fled out of the land.” The current Book of Mormon does not mention any details about this “resort” or the time they “fled out of the land,” but it assumes that we already know about this story, indicating that it had been in the part of the Book of Mormon that is now lost.

How does he get that the text assumes we already know about this story?

Link to post
1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

Who was it who posted here who said he HAS the lost manuscript?  Or at least a fragment?

I think I remember his avatar but don't want to post it in case I get it wrong....

I remember that fellow.  I don't remember if he posted here or if we just talked about him here.  He was a wealthy weirdo collector who hinted at a really important acquisition that had the name "Joseph Smith" on it and the total number of pages was around 116 ( a few more I think).  I don't think he ever came out and said that he had the lost manuscript though, but he sure seemed to hint towards it.  I don't know if that is the same guy you are thinking of.

Edited by pogi
  • Like 1
Link to post
2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Who was it who posted here who said he HAS the lost manuscript?  Or at least a fragment?

I think I remember his avatar but don't want to post it in case I get it wrong....

 

37 minutes ago, pogi said:

I remember that fellow.  I don't remember if he posted here or if we just talked about him here.  He was a wealthy weirdo collector who hinted at a really important acquisition that had the name "Joseph Smith" on it and the total number of pages was around 116 ( a few more I think).  I don't think he ever came out and said that he had the lost manuscript though, but he sure seemed to hint towards it.  I don't know if that is the same guy you are thinking of.

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/71707-brass-plates-gold-plates/

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...