Ask a Mormon! (Part Two)

[Jane Doe]

FFH,

Actually, that was informative. I've never really thought about the "urgency" of their message. I believe in reincarnation, so what I don't get around to in this life, I'll get to in the next.

I AM an educated woman. I was also born, as with every other creature, with free will. If I had chosen to follow the path of Jesus Christ or any other god, I would have. I respect your right to believe in your religion. Respect mine not to.

I just wish there were some way they could knock on the door once, ask, if the person says no, move on and cross that house off their list. We get knockers at least twice a month. I do joke around with them. I have never slammed the door in anyone's face. If I joke around and seem TOO friendly on the bus, they hang around and want to keep talking to me - even if it isn't about religion.

 

[Jane Doe]

Well, then, it's either option 1 or 2

Pushy Canadians. Whoda thunk it?

 

[jonny]

Sorry - I was wearing sunglasses and the tags were shiney... and I tried not to spend too much time lookin' 'cause that's an INSTANT invitation to start talking to me, apparently. Still wearin' nametags.

Get a peephole and don't open your door. Problem solved.

Most missionaries don't waste their time with people who don't act interested - they really do have better things to do. Tell them you're not interested and shut the door if you feel compelled to open it. They can handle it. I promise.

 

[FFH]

I AM an educated woman. I was also born, as with every other creature, with free will. If I had chosen to follow the path of Jesus Christ or any other god, I would have. I respect your right to believe in your religion. Respect mine not to.

Of course, forcing someone against their will is not God's way either....

Mutually respected...

 

[Bishka]

*Bump*

 

[Comprehend]

The exact details of translation are unknown, but we do find mention of the process in the Doctrine and Covenants, when the opportunity to translate is given to Oliver Cowdery for a brief time. It didn't turn out well for him, as the Lord explains in D&C Section 9:



Based on the italicized section, one might infer that Cowdery had a frame of mind similar to David Whitmer--one of the sources of the secondhand reports. That is, all he had to do was look through the lenses, or, in this case, ask God, and he would know what the words were. The bold words highlight what he actually had to do: study the words, and use his mind, and seek confirmation from the Lord.

For this reason, Joseph Smith Jr.'s influence is felt all over the Book of Mormon as translator. Folks who point out that this or that word betrays the influence of an 1800's American author are missing the point. If you think the influence goes beyond word and grammar choice--that is, beyond the role of a translator--then please start a debate thread on the topic. I haven't had anyone to talk to about Book of Mormon evidences in a long time, and I'd enjoy a friendly debate.

I was just reading through the example posts for DS's award and had to reply to this one.

While I agree that the "exact" details are unknown. I have to strongly disagree with your argument that Joseph chose the words and thus left his personal "influence" all over the Book of Mormon. This is not how the translating took place. I would suggest you are reading a little too much into the scripture you have provided.

Here is an explanation from Neal A. Maxwell, I would suggest brother Maxwell has a better idea than we might:

Neal A. Maxwell, Lord, Increase Our Faith , p.65

Only the Prophet Joseph knew the full process of translation, and he was deliberately reluctant to supply details. So we take passing notice of the words of David Whitmer, Joseph Knight, and Martin Harris, who were observers, not translators. Whitmer indicated that by Joseph's using the divine instrumentalities "the hieroglyphics would appear, and also the translation in the English language … in bright luminous letters"; and Joseph would read the words off to Oliver, "who would write it down as spoken." Martin Harris related of the seerstone, "sentences would appear and were read by the Prophet and written by Martin." Joseph Knight reported similar descriptions of the process.

Oliver Cowdery, who was much closer to the process, being involved daily as a scribe, is reported to have testified in court that the Urim and Thummim enabled Joseph "to read in English, the reformed Egyptian characters, which were engraved on the plates."

If the above reports are accurate, they suggest a process indicative of God's having given Joseph "sight and power to translate" (D&C 3:12).

If by means of these divine instrumentalities the Prophet was "seeing" ancient words rendered in English and then "dictating," Joseph was not simultaneously and constantly scrutinizing the characters on the actual plates-the usual translation process of going "back and forth" between pondering an ancient text and providing a modern rendering. The revelatory process was more crucial than the constant presence of opened plates, which, by instruction, were to be kept from the view of unauthorized eyes.

The revelatory process apparently did not require the Prophet to become expert in the ancient language.

 

[DeepShadow]

Let's make it a separate thread. Would you prefer a one-on-one debate or should we allow others their say?

 

[Comprehend]

Let's make it a separate thread. Would you prefer a one-on-one debate or should we allow others their say?

Your debate would be with Brother Maxwell it seems. You say Joseph chose the words, Maxwell says he didn't. I'm just saying I would take Maxwell in that debate.

EDIT: but I would like to know why you believe Joseph chose the words.

 

[Comprehend]

EDIT: but I would like to know why you believe Joseph chose the words.

Was your statement based upon D&C 9 or was there something else? I really would like to know.

 

[DeepShadow]

EDIT: but I would like to know why you believe Joseph chose the words.

D&C 9:7-14 Sounds to me like Oliver tried to translate, but he didn't use a vital element: he didn't study it out in his mind first. I suppose that these verses might be talking about something else, but then the verse summary above says "7–14, The Book of Mormon is translated by study and by spiritual confirmation."

Whoever wrote the D&C subheadings seems to agree with me. And here's where I feel a little slighted by your post. You said that it "seems like [my] debate is with Elder Maxwell." While I agree Elder Maxwell knows more than we do, most of what he's sharing here isn't his knowledge. Where in this quote does he assert his apostolic witness? He's sharing the same historical accounts that have been referenced elsewhere--accounts that he himself does not seem to put full stock in (hence his qualifiers "If the above reports are accurate" and "If by means of these divine instrumentalities"). If the conclusion that he's working toward is the statement "The revelatory process apparently did not require the Prophet to become expert in the ancient language," then I have no serious disagreement with Elder Maxwell.

It needs to be noted that the Whitmers' account of translation is critical to some of them leaving the Church. If Joseph is getting the words directly from God--as opposed to studying them out and choosing appropriate words from his own knowledge--why did he need to retranslate and change some of the words in the 1837 edition? Sure, many of the things changed were grammatical and transcription errors back to the original manuscript, but others were changes in word choice. If God made the word "directors" show up in the Urim and Thummim, why would Joseph change that to "interpreters" seven years later? What about the word "a-journeying?" It's an appropriate colloquialism for a Vermont farm boy, but after Joseph learned better English, he changed it to "journeying" for the 1837 edition. Even the grammatical errors seem to reflect a New England rural dialect: "now if there be fault, it be the mistake of men..."

Now I'm not saying that the words weren't simply read from the Urim and Thummim, but if they were, they included a number of grammatical errors. Why do you think this was so? I suppose the "mistakes of men" mentioned on the title page could be referring to Joseph's scribes, but I personally don't see how a transcription error can account for changing "directors" to "interpreters."

My opinion: I believe the translation of the Book of Mormon was similar to what happens during a priesthood blessing, where the words are directed by the Spirit but chosen by the speaker. This is the simplest explanation I can offer as to why the original Book of Mormon was written in King James-style English riddled with grammatical errors. If it turns out that God dictated every word for some purpose I don't understand, that's fine. I'm not going to lose my testimony over it either way.

 

[Comprehend]

D&C 9:7-14 Sounds to me like Oliver tried to translate, but he didn't use a vital element: he didn't study it out in his mind first. I suppose that these verses might be talking about something else, but then the verse summary above says "7–14, The Book of Mormon is translated by study and by spiritual confirmation."

Whoever wrote the D&C subheadings seems to agree with me. And here's where I feel a little slighted by your post. You said that it "seems like [my] debate is with Elder Maxwell." While I agree Elder Maxwell knows more than we do, most of what he's sharing here isn't his knowledge. Where in this quote does he assert his apostolic witness? He's sharing the same historical accounts that have been referenced elsewhere--accounts that he himself does not seem to put full stock in (hence his qualifiers "If the above reports are accurate" and "If by means of these divine instrumentalities"). If the conclusion that he's working toward is the statement "The revelatory process apparently did not require the Prophet to become expert in the ancient language," then I have no serious disagreement with Elder Maxwell.

It needs to be noted that the Whitmers' account of translation is critical to some of them leaving the Church. If Joseph is getting the words directly from God--as opposed to studying them out and choosing appropriate words from his own knowledge--why did he need to retranslate and change some of the words in the 1837 edition? Sure, many of the things changed were grammatical and transcription errors back to the original manuscript, but others were changes in word choice. If God made the word "directors" show up in the Urim and Thummim, why would Joseph change that to "interpreters" seven years later? What about the word "a-journeying?" It's an appropriate colloquialism for a Vermont farm boy, but after Joseph learned better English, he changed it to "journeying" for the 1837 edition. Even the grammatical errors seem to reflect a New England rural dialect: "now if there be fault, it be the mistake of men..."

Now I'm not saying that the words weren't simply read from the Urim and Thummim, but if they were, they included a number of grammatical errors. Why do you think this was so? I suppose the "mistakes of men" mentioned on the title page could be referring to Joseph's scribes, but I personally don't see how a transcription error can account for changing "directors" to "interpreters."

My opinion: I believe the translation of the Book of Mormon was similar to what happens during a priesthood blessing, where the words are directed by the Spirit but chosen by the speaker. This is the simplest explanation I can offer as to why the original Book of Mormon was written in King James-style English riddled with grammatical errors. If it turns out that God dictated every word for some purpose I don't understand, that's fine. I'm not going to lose my testimony over it either way.

ok. I just called a friend of mine who happens to be on the committee that is writing the new footnotes and summaries and also teaches BoM at BYU (Rex Reeve, Jr.). He said there is a lot of conflicting information about the process and he said he has stayed away from forming a definite opinion because Joseph was so adament for some reason about refusing to divulge anything about the process.

In short, he wouldn't give me an answer. But he said he would talk to Robert Millet and Cal Thompson (or Thomas?) at Weber State(I think that is who he said but I have never heard of this person) and call me back tomorrow.

I think the errors came not only from mistakes made by Joseph and the scribes but also from the original authors as well. In other words, I think the U&T worked perfectly, the humans involved did not.

I think it would be quite difficult to translate anything in the way you are suggesting in 65 days.


What do you think of Maxwell's statement : "The revelatory process was more crucial than the constant presence of opened plates"

If the plates weren't even open in some instances, wouldn't that preclude any "translation" in the traditional sense from occuring?

Anyway, I'll post what Rex tells me tommorrow as an FYI (I am not claiming that they are official but they are writing the footnotes and summaries, so it should count for something). Sorry that you feel slighted, wasn't my intention.

 

[DeepShadow]

ok. I just called a friend of mine who happens to be on the committee that is writing the new footnotes and summaries and also teaches BoM at BYU (Rex Reeve, Jr.). He said there is a lot of conflicting information about the process and he said he has stayed away from forming a definite opinion because Joseph was so adament for some reason about refusing to divulge anything about the process.

In short, he wouldn't give me an answer. But he said he would talk to Robert Millet and Cal Thompson (or Thomas?) at Weber State(I think that is who he said but I have never heard of this person) and call me back tomorrow.

I'm excited to hear what they have to say!

I think the errors came not only from mistakes made by Joseph and the scribes but also from the original authors as well. In other words, I think the U&T worked perfectly, the humans involved did not.

I agree with the italicized part. Perhaps the only thing we disagree on is exactly how the U&T worked.

I think it would be quite difficult to translate anything in the way you are suggesting in 65 days.

I never said anything about speed. I never said anything about whether Joseph would have to "study and get confirmation" over a whole sentence, or whether he could do so at a running pace. Do you have to mull over every word individually when you give a priesthood blessing? Does it take you more time to do so than, say, reading the words from a book?

What do you think of Maxwell's statement : "The revelatory process was more crucial than the constant presence of opened plates"

I believe the process of studying it out and getting confirmation is the revelatory process. Without that, there would have been no translation. Needless to say, I totally agree.

If the plates weren't even open in some instances, wouldn't that preclude any "translation" in the traditional sense from occuring?

Absolutely! Again, did I say it was a typical translation?

Anyway, I'll post what Rex tells me tommorrow as an FYI (I am not claiming that they are official but they are writing the footnotes and summaries, so it should count for something).

Of course. I take issue with the headers and footnotes all the time, hence I said "the person who wrote it agrees with me," rather than the D&C itself. Still, I feel it indicates that I'm not totally out in left field by taking these verses to refer to the translation process.

Sorry that you feel slighted, wasn't my intention.

Thank you.

 

[FFH]

I have to strongly disagree with your argument that Joseph chose the words and thus left his personal "influence" all over the Book of Mormon. This is not how the translating took place

I couldn't agree more.

The way I imagine it was the Urim and Thummim was hung around his neck and placed in front of the "gold" plates and he was thus able to read the ancient language. Sort of the same way we are able to view foreign language pages on the net, effortlessly, although he was required to be worthy in order for this to happen.

Nothing was written down that was not already recorded there on those plates. Word for word translation using the power of God, through the means of the Urim and Thummim...

 

[FFH]

I think the U&T worked perfectly, the humans involved did not.

Again, couldn't agree more.

What do you think of Maxwell's statement : "The revelatory process was more crucial than the constant presence of opened plates"

Again I agree...

 

[DeepShadow]

Nothing was written down that was not already recorded there on those plates. Word for word translation using the power of God, through the means of the Urim and Thummim...

I'd feel more comfortable with that if someone could offer me an alternative explanation for the changes that Joseph made. Why did he change "directors" to "interpreters," for example?

Like I said, I'm just leaning toward the side that makes the most sense to me. How do you explain the New England dialect indicated by "a-journeying"?

Shouldn't this be its own thread? Becky, do you mind us setting up camp like this in your living room?

 

[DeepShadow]

Okay, since people are willing to accept errors from other sources, what if I amended my original post as follows:

For this reason, Joseph Smith Jr.'s influence--or that of his scribes and/or printers--is felt all over the Book of Mormon, but only as it pertains to grammar and word choice. Folks who point out that this or that word betrays the influence of an 1800's American author are missing the point. If you think the influence goes beyond word and grammar choice then please start a debate thread on the topic. I haven't had anyone to talk to about Book of Mormon evidences in a long time, and I'd enjoy a friendly debate.

Changed from this original:

For this reason, Joseph Smith Jr.'s influence is felt all over the Book of Mormon as translator. Folks who point out that this or that word betrays the influence of an 1800's American author are missing the point. If you think the influence goes beyond word and grammar choice--that is, beyond the role of a translator--then please start a debate thread on the topic. I haven't had anyone to talk to about Book of Mormon evidences in a long time, and I'd enjoy a friendly debate.

 

[FFH]

I'd feel more comfortable with that if someone could offer me an alternative explanation for the changes that Joseph made. Why did he change "directors" to "interpreters," for example?

Just different wording, just as we have different words which refer to the same thing..

From what I understand there was more than one interpreter stone. There were the two seer stones as part of the Urim and Thummim, which probably looked like giant spectacles, which many refer to them as, which hung around the neck, and these clear seer stones could probably be taken out of their frame, and placed in an a box or hat, during the day, in order to shade them from the sun's glare, so Joseph could see the translation of the text more clearly. Just some guesses, based on what I've read, and I think I can dig up a reference concerning this, which I posted a while back.

Like I said, I'm just leaning toward the side that makes the most sense to me. How do you explain the New England dialect indicated by "a-journeying"?

Just as there would be different dialects in translation in order to appeal or make sense to those living in those times, so would there be necessary changes to the translation in modern times in order to make it better understood to people of our time. There have been many revisions of the Book of Mormon's original translation, of which I have a copy of the original manuscript/Book of Momon in which I could cite some examples. They were merely translations relevent to the particular dialect or way of speaking at the time to make it more relevant/better understood/relatable to those living at that time, just as we have made slight variations in modern English translations, which were approved by the First Presidency of course, but the original word or phrase was never lost.

Shouldn't this be its own thread? Becky, do you mind us setting up camp like this in your living room?

Why are we so reluctant to start our own threads? Is it because we don't want to take up any more hard drive/server space than we have to ???

 

[Bishka]

Shouldn't this be its own thread? Becky, do you mind us setting up camp like this in your living room?

I don't mind you setting up camp...but perhaps you could start another campfire to keep us warm!

 

[Comprehend]

I'm excited to hear what they have to say!

Me too. I doubt I will get a firm this or that though.

I agree with the italicized part. Perhaps the only thing we disagree on is exactly how the U&T worked.

I think the whole issue is whether Joseph chose the word or if the word was given to him (either by reading it or by the word appearing in his mind).

I never said anything about speed. I never said anything about whether Joseph would have to "study and get confirmation" over a whole sentence, or whether he could do so at a running pace. Do you have to mull over every word individually when you give a priesthood blessing? Does it take you more time to do so than, say, reading the words from a book?

maybe I don't know what you mean by study it out in your mind then.

I believe the process of studying it out and getting confirmation is the revelatory process. Without that, there would have been no translation. Needless to say, I totally agree.

ok.

Absolutely! Again, did I say it was a typical translation?

No. I guess I didn't/don't understand what you mean by study it out.

Of course. I take issue with the headers and footnotes all the time, hence I said "the person who wrote it agrees with me," rather than the D&C itself. Still, I feel it indicates that I'm not totally out in left field by taking these verses to refer to the translation process.

Agreed.

 

[Comprehend]

Okay, since people are willing to accept errors from other sources, what if I amended my original post as follows:



Changed from this original:

I'm resisting anything that has Joseph making the word choice... (unless I learn something new).