If the Prophet Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_maklelan
_Emeritus
Posts: 4999
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 6:51 am

Post by _maklelan »

Jersey Girl wrote:
maklelan wrote:And what of value has come of this particular topic? Is activity the sign of value? The Godmakers gets a lot of traffic still today, but that doesn't mean it's worth anything.

P.S. I'm not comparing you to the Godmakers, I'm just saying that attention does not equate to value.


maklelan,

Did you by any chance read the post I suggested to you that explains the reasons for these "If" questions? My purpose and it's intended value is stated quite clearly there. You are under no obligation to participate in any of these threads. And please do not by any means of inferrence compare these threads to the Godmakers.

Jersey Girl


I realized that some would want to interpret it that way, which is why I immediately edited my comment. I was not trying to do that at all, I was just showing that many different kinds of people can claim popularity and attention without adding anything to the discussion. I just read your explanation and don't think that this individual is going to find anything of value in these threads. The veracity of the church is established by the power of the Holy Ghost, and if a person is unwilling to put their faith in the power of God to grant that testimony then no amount of rhetoric or debate is going to convince them.

My advice to the individual is to go read the Book of Mormon and pray. If God gives you an answer then what does it matter what anyone here says? Nothing else is going to convince you of anything beyond who's argument better assimilate your emotions. If you depend on the arm of the flesh then you will not transcend it. Anyone can raise issues and find problems with any situation, but if you really want to know the truth then ask God. I promise you He will answer. He answered me six years ago, and he's never failed to answer anyone I've ever invited to ask.
I like you Betty...

My blog
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

Post by _Mister Scratch »

maklelan wrote:
Jersey Girl wrote:
maklelan wrote:And what of value has come of this particular topic? Is activity the sign of value? The Godmakers gets a lot of traffic still today, but that doesn't mean it's worth anything.

P.S. I'm not comparing you to the Godmakers, I'm just saying that attention does not equate to value.


maklelan,

Did you by any chance read the post I suggested to you that explains the reasons for these "If" questions? My purpose and it's intended value is stated quite clearly there. You are under no obligation to participate in any of these threads. And please do not by any means of inferrence compare these threads to the Godmakers.

Jersey Girl


I realized that some would want to interpret it that way, which is why I immediately edited my comment. I was not trying to do that at all, I was just showing that many different kinds of people can claim popularity and attention without adding anything to the discussion. I just read your explanation and don't think that this individual is going to find anything of value in these threads. The veracity of the church is established by the power of the Holy Ghost, and if a person is unwilling to put their faith in the power of God to grant that testimony then no amount of rhetoric or debate is going to convince them.


The trouble with this is that there can often be a disconnect between the actions of men vs. the actions of God. I say this is problematic because it can sometimes be difficult to separate the two within the context of the LDS Church. A further issue is the fact that we are, generally speaking, expected to sustain the leaders on a regular basis, and refrain from criticizing them.

My advice to the individual is to go read the Book of Mormon and pray. If God gives you an answer then what does it matter what anyone here says? Nothing else is going to convince you of anything beyond who's argument better assimilate your emotions. If you depend on the arm of the flesh then you will not transcend it. Anyone can raise issues and find problems with any situation, but if you really want to know the truth then ask God. I promise you He will answer. He answered me six years ago, and he's never failed to answer anyone I've ever invited to ask.


I cannot help but feel that this is an oversimplification.
_maklelan
_Emeritus
Posts: 4999
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 6:51 am

Post by _maklelan »

Mister Scratch wrote:
I cannot help but feel that this is an oversimplification.


If God lives and this church is true then it is just as easy as that. You appear to believe this church is not true, so it has to be more difficult for you, and if you can convince someone investigating of the same, then your chances of jading him toward sprayer and revelation increase dramatically, but if God tells them it's true, how can anything you have to say matter at all?
I like you Betty...

My blog
_maklelan
_Emeritus
Posts: 4999
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 6:51 am

Post by _maklelan »

Mister Scratch wrote:The trouble with this is that there can often be a disconnect between the actions of men vs. the actions of God. I say this is problematic because it can sometimes be difficult to separate the two within the context of the LDS Church. A further issue is the fact that we are, generally speaking, expected to sustain the leaders on a regular basis, and refrain from criticizing them.


But we are also asked not to follow them blindly, but to pray about their callings, and their inspiration. Even a mission call comes with an invitation to pray to know it is of God. If it's true, then the leaders are inspired, and someone who follows that council and is still critical of leaders is doing something wrong. If it's not true then none of it matters.
I like you Betty...

My blog
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

Post by _Mister Scratch »

maklelan wrote:
Mister Scratch wrote:The trouble with this is that there can often be a disconnect between the actions of men vs. the actions of God. I say this is problematic because it can sometimes be difficult to separate the two within the context of the LDS Church. A further issue is the fact that we are, generally speaking, expected to sustain the leaders on a regular basis, and refrain from criticizing them.


But we are also asked not to follow them blindly, but to pray about their callings, and their inspiration. Even a mission call comes with an invitation to pray to know it is of God. If it's true, then the leaders are inspired, and someone who follows that council and is still critical of leaders is doing something wrong. If it's not true then none of it matters.


I'm glad that you agree that your initial claim was an oversimplification. Obviously, as you point out, discovering the truth is an ongoing process. Sometimes Church leaders are not inspired. Thus, we need to take care, and to try and look at issues from a variety of perspectives.

Or are you claiming that this is an "all or nothing" sort of scenario, as many TBMs tend to do?
_maklelan
_Emeritus
Posts: 4999
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 6:51 am

Post by _maklelan »

Mister Scratch wrote:I'm glad that you agree that your initial claim was an oversimplification. Obviously, as you point out, discovering the truth is an ongoing process. Sometimes Church leaders are not inspired. Thus, we need to take care, and to try and look at issues from a variety of perspectives.


Now you're twisting my words. I never said it was an oversimplification, or that inspiration is not always that. The need to receive a confirmation does not mean they are sometimes mistaken, it just means we should believe they are correct because God has told us.

Mister Scratch wrote:Or are you claiming that this is an "all or nothing" sort of scenario, as many TBMs tend to do?


If you want to reduce it to that, then sure.
I like you Betty...

My blog
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

D & C 9 was specifically about Cowdery's use of the rod. That's why it's formulated in a "yes" or "no" context. The rod would indicate yes or no, not produce entire sentences.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_Gazelam
_Emeritus
Posts: 5659
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:06 am

Urim and Thummim

Post by _Gazelam »

Maklelan,
I've known Jersey for a few months now (6 i think?) and she is not really an Anti-mormon. She has her faith base, and shows interest in Mormon things, but she is not anti in my opinion. Its ok to give her the benefit of the doubt and answer the questions she poses without thinking that shes up to something.



In regards to the Urim and Thummim:

Bible DICTIONARY
Urim and Thummim
Heb. term that means Lights and Perfections. An instrument prepared of God to assist man in obtaining revelation from the Lord and in translating languages. See Ex. 28: 30; Lev. 8: 8; Num. 27: 21; Deut. 33: 8; 1 Sam. 28: 6; Ezra 2: 63; Neh. 7: 65; JS-H 1: 35.
Using a Urim and Thummim is the special prerogative of a seer, and it would seem reasonable that such instruments were used from the time of Adam. However, the earliest mention is in connection with the brother of Jared (Ether 3: 21-28). Abraham used a Urim and Thummim (Abr. 3: 1-4), as did Aaron and the priests of Israel, and also the prophets among the Nephites (Omni 1: 20-21; Mosiah 8: 13-19; Mosiah 21: 26-28; Mosiah 28: 11-20; Ether 4: 1-7). There is more than one Urim and Thummim, but we are informed that Joseph Smith had the one used by the brother of Jared (Ether 3: 22-28; D&C 10: 1; D&C 17: 1). (See Seer.) A partial description is given in JS-H 1: 35. Joseph Smith used it in translating the Book of Mormon and in obtaining other revelations.
This earth in its celestial condition will be a Urim and Thummim, and many within that kingdom will have an additional Urim and Thummim (D&C 130: 6-11).

Emma gave this insight in an 1879 interview with her son, Joseph III:

"Q. Had he [Joseph Smith] not a book of manuscript from which to read from?

A. He had neither manuscript nor book to read from.

Q. Could he not have had, and you not know it?

A. If he had had anything of the kind he could not have concealed it from me.

Q. Are you sure that he had the plates at the time you were writing for him?

A. The plates often lay on the table, without any attempt at concealment, wrapped in a small linen tablecloth, which had been given him to fold them in. I once felt of the plates, as they thus lay on the table, tracing their outline and shape. They seemed to be pliable like thick paper, and would rustle with a metallic sound when the edges were moved by the thumb, as one does sometimes thumb the edges of a book.

Q. Where did Father and Oliver Cowdery write?

A. Oliver Cowdery and your father wrote in the room where I was at work.

Q. Could not Father have dictated the Book of Mormon to you, Oliver Cowdery, and the others who wrote for him, after having first written it, or having first read it out of some book?

A. Joseph Smith could neither write nor dictate a coherent and well-worded letter; let alone dictating a book like the Book of Mormon. And, though I was an active participant in the scenes that transpired, and was present during the translation of the plates, and had cognizance of things as they transpired, it is marvelous to me, 'a marvel and a wonder,' as much as to anyone else.

Q. I should suppose that you would have uncovered the plates and examined them?

A. I did not attempt to handle the plates, other than I have told you, nor uncover them to look at them. I was satisfied that it was the work of God, and therefore did not feel it to be necessary to do so.

Major Bidamon [Lewis Bidamon, Emma's second husband] here suggested: Did Mr. Smith forbid your examining the plates?

A. I do not think he did. I knew that he had them, and was not specially curious about them. I moved them from place to place on the table, as it was necessary in doing my work.

Q. Mother, what is your belief about the authenticity, or origin of the Book of Mormon?

A. My belief is that the Book of Mormon is of divine authenticity — I have not the slightest doubt of it. I am satisfied that no man could have dictated the writing of the manuscripts unless he was inspired; for, when acting as your scribe, your father would dictate to me hour after hour; and when returning after meals, or after interruptions, he would at once begin where he had left off, without either seeing the manuscript or having any portion of it read to him. This was a usual thing for him to do. It would have been improbable that a learned man could do this, and, for one so ignorant and unlearned as he was, it was simply impossible."(9)

Translation Process

What was this translation process that demanded so much of the Prophet? Those who knew the most about how it was accomplished, Joseph and Oliver, said the least about it. Emma, Martin, and David Whitmer left sketchy accounts, but these were recorded much later in life, and have some contradictions. Still, with that caution, their observations are fascinating.

Referring to the time when the translation was completed at his Fayette, New York home, David Whitmer gave us a picture of discipline, hard work and spirituality that went into the process. He said that, "each time before resuming the work all present would kneel in prayer and invoke the Divine blessing on the proceeding."(10)

A reporter of the Omaha Herald who interviewed David at length on the matter, said the stone would not work unless Joseph was cleansed of sin. "This rigorous exactment required him to be humble and spotless in his deportment in order that the work might progress. One occasion the Prophet had indulged in a ... quarrel with his wife. Without pacifying her or making any reparation for his ... treatment, he returned to the room in the Whitmer residence to resume the work with the plates. The surface of the magic stone remained blank, and all his persistent efforts to bring out the coveted words proved abortive. He went into the woods again to pray, and this time was gone fully an hour. His friends became positively concerned, and were about to institute a search, when Joseph entered the room, pale and haggard, having suffered a vigorous chastisement at the hands of the Lord. He went straight in humiliation to his wife, entreated and received her forgiveness, returned to his work, and much to the joy of himself and his anxious friends surrounding him, the stone again glared forth its letters of fire."

Above from :http://www.meridianmagazine.com/articles/031230bomtranslation.html
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. - Plato
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: Urim and Thummim

Post by _harmony »

A reporter of the Omaha Herald who interviewed David at length on the matter, said the stone would not work unless Joseph was cleansed of sin. "This rigorous exactment required him to be humble and spotless in his deportment in order that the work might progress. One occasion the Prophet had indulged in a ... quarrel with his wife. Without pacifying her or making any reparation for his ... treatment, he returned to the room in the Whitmer residence to resume the work with the plates. The surface of the magic stone remained blank, and all his persistent efforts to bring out the coveted words proved abortive. He went into the woods again to pray, and this time was gone fully an hour. His friends became positively concerned, and were about to institute a search, when Joseph entered the room, pale and haggard, having suffered a vigorous chastisement at the hands of the Lord. He went straight in humiliation to his wife, entreated and received her forgiveness, returned to his work, and much to the joy of himself and his anxious friends surrounding him, the stone again glared forth its letters of fire."

Above from :http://www.meridianmagazine.com/articles/031230bomtranslation.html


Well, that explains the lack of anything significant after Fanny.
_Jersey Girl
_Emeritus
Posts: 34407
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:16 am

Post by _Jersey Girl »

Gaz: Maklelan,
I've known Jersey for a few months now (6 i think?) and she is not really an Anti-mormon. She has her faith base, and shows interest in Mormon things, but she is not anti in my opinion. Its ok to give her the benefit of the doubt and answer the questions she poses without thinking that shes up to something.

Jersey Girl: I typically say upfront what I'm doing and why.
Post Reply