"Joseph Smith was the TRANSLATOR of the Book of Mormon"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Answersplease
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There is a very interesting, enlightening and thorough bit of scholarly work by Richard Stout, titled “A Singular Discovery”.

Stout gives very good evidence that the characters in the Anthon Script were sourced from the “Detroit Manuscript”. A book of 3 to 4 hundred pages written in Gaelic, with Latin shorthand (Trionian notes). It was discovered in 1823 in Detroit, and determined to be a book on Catholic doctrines.

(Tironian notes being a Latin shorthand invented by the Romans and favored by Irish monks in the middle ages.)

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
The column on the left is made up of
characters from the "Anthon transcript,
The column on the right contains
Tironian notes, the Latin shorthand
upon which early modern shorthand
was based. (“A Singular Discovery”, by Richard Stout, Part 4)
 
In Post # 1 of this thread, Answersplease quoted several items. One of those items was a question of mine from an earlier thread which was ignored by all of the LDS posters. I was simply commenting on the fact that my question was still being ignored. Rather than answer it, the topic keeps getting changed.
Regarding the translation, consider this:

David Whitmer, one of the three witnesses who attested to having seen the gold plates said: “I will now give you a description of the manner in which the BOM was translated. Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing. One character at a time would appear, and under it was the interpretation in English. Brother Joseph would read off the English to Oliver Cowdery, who was his principle scribe, and when it was written down and repeated to Brother Joseph to see if it was correct, then it would disappear and then another character with the interpretation would appear. Thus, the BOM was translated by the gift and power of God, and not by any man.” (An Address to All Believers in Christ, David Whitmer, 1887)

In the July 1993 Ensign, Elder Russell M. Nelson of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles said He (Martin Harris) also stated that the Prophet translated a portion of the BOM with a seerstone in his possession. The stone was placed in a hat that was used for that purpose, and with the aid of this seerstone the Prophet would read sentence by sentence as Martin wrote, and if he made any mistake the sentence would remain before the Prophet until corrected, when another sentence would appear.

Keep in mind that putting seer stones into a hat and looking for treasure was common American folk magic in Smith’s day, something he was brought up on charges for just a few years before the BOM was published. We also have accounts from Emma Smith, Lucy Mack Smith, and Oliver Cowdery about Smith’s face being buried in his hat to translate the plates, though the plates didn’t always have to be in the room with him for them to be translated.

Seer stones recur in Smith’s history several times: Martin Harris stated that Smith owned a stone that was found some 24 feet below the surface when digging a well for one Mason Chase in 1822, a stone with which he claimed that he could see “many things.” This account is confirmed by Willard Chase (the order of the names isn’t clear; Mason Willard Chase or Willard Mason Chase, the owner of the well). Chase’s account goes that he wanted to keep the stone but lent it to Hyrum Smith to accomplish “some business.” When Chase went back for the stone, Joseph told him he would not return it.

According to *Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought *(19:41, winter, 1986), Smith not only worked on his family’s farm, but also worked “…in blessing crops, finding lost articles, predicting future events or prophesying, and in using divine rods and seer stones.”

In March of 1826, Smith was charged with being a “disorderly person” and an “imposter” for allegedly defrauding one Josiah Stowe. Smith was charged with finding lost treasure.

The typesetter for the BOM also attests to Smith using a magic stone to discover treasure unconnected to the BOM.

The exact use and nature of the Urim and Thummim isn’t clear from the few references we have in the Bible. Assuming you’re right, that the stones were cast, the answer is no, Smith isn’t known or even alledged to have used them in that way. They are always used in his hat and his hat over his face.

In the account of Isaac Hale, Smith’s father-in-law: “The manner in which he pretended to read and interpret, was the same as when he looked for the money-diggers, with the stone in his hat, and his hat over his face, while the Book of Plates (sic) were at the same time hid in the woods.” (Eber D. Howe, Mormonism Unveiled, 1834)

This connects Smith’s use of the “Urim and Thummim” to American folk magic and Smith’s participation therein.

Early church member E. Cecil McGavin also said that there was a mania for peepstones and crystal balls in Palmyra just a few years before the recovery of the golden plates. (McGavin, Historical Background, 11)

The use of seer stones continued in the church for a few more years, too, and not just by Joseph Smith, who admits that Hirum Page possessed such a stone (D&C 28:11) through which he received revelations.

John A. Widtsoe said that "…there are men among us, holding the Holy Priesthood, who in events of their lives would rather stare into a bit of flint-glass that enetrprising dealers name a seer-stone, for the solution of their troubles, than to go with the power and authority of their Priesthood to the Almighty Father in prayer. (*Improvement Era *4, Feb 1901)

There are also a couple of accounts of Smith using spectacles with magic stones for lenses, but the overwhelming evidence points to Smith owning and using magic stones.

I’m sorry for the length, but it was necessary to prove the point. Does that clear things up for you?
 
There is a very interesting, enlightening and thorough bit of scholarly work by Richard Stout, titled “A Singular Discovery”.

Stout gives very good evidence that the characters in the Anthon Script were sourced from the “Detroit Manuscript”. A book of 3 to 4 hundred pages written in Gaelic, with Latin shorthand (Trionian notes). It was discovered in 1823 in Detroit, and determined to be a book on Catholic doctrines.

(Tironian notes being a Latin shorthand invented by the Romans and favored by Irish monks in the middle ages.)

http://olivercowdery.com/smithhome/2000s/charatr1.gif
The column on the left is made up of
characters from the "Anthon transcript,
The column on the right contains
Tironian notes, the Latin shorthand
upon which early modern shorthand
was based. (“A Singular Discovery”, by Richard Stout, Part 4)
Thank you for this! It promises to be very insightful.
 
There is a very interesting, enlightening and thorough bit of scholarly work by Richard Stout, titled “A Singular Discovery”.

Stout gives very good evidence that the characters in the Anthon Script were sourced from the “Detroit Manuscript”. A book of 3 to 4 hundred pages written in Gaelic, with Latin shorthand (Trionian notes). It was discovered in 1823 in Detroit, and determined to be a book on Catholic doctrines.

(Tironian notes being a Latin shorthand invented by the Romans and favored by Irish monks in the middle ages.)

http://olivercowdery.com/smithhome/2000s/charatr1.gif
The column on the left is made up of
characters from the "Anthon transcript,
The column on the right contains
Tironian notes, the Latin shorthand
upon which early modern shorthand
was based. (“A Singular Discovery”, by Richard Stout, Part 4)
Rebecca, I think this deserves its own dedicated thread, thanks for sharing. 🙂
 
no more than the speculation from Jeff…another LDS apologist that you keep trotting out. However, Journey’s speculation is a lot more grounded in fact.
If you so say. 🙂 However Jeff gives a rather good satire of how it would have needed to be done if LongJourney was correct. Which of course would be an impossibility. Most critics believe any story that may come along even if it contradicts a previous thread or thought that they had about the book of mormon.
 
There is a very interesting, enlightening and thorough bit of scholarly work by Richard Stout, titled “A Singular Discovery”.

Stout gives very good evidence that the characters in the Anthon Script were sourced from the “Detroit Manuscript”. A book of 3 to 4 hundred pages written in Gaelic, with Latin shorthand (Trionian notes). It was discovered in 1823 in Detroit, and determined to be a book on Catholic doctrines.
The problem is that we don’t know what the characters from the anton manucript were. It is pure speculation. And that is the problem. But we are certainly weaving a web of entanglement for a book that Joseph supposively wrote with the help of several conspirators. Aren’t we? 🙂

Especially because of this family connection, it would appear likely that Joseph Smith used the details surrounding the Detroit Manuscript as a template upon which to construct his story of the Book of Mormon’s “coming forth.”

Such is the evidence…that it appears likely…🙂

Speculation…speculation…speculation…only equals speculation. But where is the beef? But it seems that ol joe was a certainly a scholarly dude doing so much research undercover as a money digger and farmer. 🙂
 
The problem is that we don’t know what the characters from the anton manucript were. It is pure speculation. And that is the problem. But we are certainly weaving a web of entanglement for a book that Joseph supposively wrote with the help of several conspirators. Aren’t we?
Incorrect; we know exactly what they are: copies of the characters on the plates. My 1971 hardback BOM says this under the photo of the manuscript: “Facsimilie of Characters made from the Plates of the Book of Mormon by Joseph Smith and given to martin Harris and by him submitted to Professors Charles Anthon and Samuel I. Mitchell.” (p 569)

They are childish and obviously stylized versions of letters, numbers, and symbols common to Smith’s day and ours, along with some made-up nonsense for good measure.

And keep in mind that none of these characters (he spelled it “caracters”) are found anywhere in the alleged Nephite cities of Meso-America.
 
Incorrect; we know exactly what they are: copies of the characters on the plates. My 1971 hardback BOM says this under the photo of the manuscript: “Facsimilie of Characters made from the Plates of the Book of Mormon by Joseph Smith and given to martin Harris and by him submitted to Professors Charles Anthon and Samuel I. Mitchell.” (p 569)

They are childish and obviously stylized versions of letters, numbers, and symbols common to Smith’s day and ours, along with some made-up nonsense for good measure.

And keep in mind that none of these characters (he spelled it “caracters”) are found anywhere in the alleged Nephite cities of Meso-America.
I think that it is also claimed to be an ‘if’.

If this is the copy of the characters that
was taken to Anthon, then it comes from the part of the
Book of Mormon that was translated while Martin
Harris was the scribe, and thus is from the missing 116
pages. If this were the case, we should expect it to be
from Mormon’s abridgment of the Nephite record (see
Words of Mormon 1:3–7; D&C 10:30, 38–42).

maxwellinstitute.byu.edu//publications/pdf/review/1140355063-12-1.pdf
 
If you so say. 🙂 However Jeff gives a rather good satire of how it would have needed to be done if LongJourney was correct. Which of course would be an impossibility. Most critics believe any story that may come along even if it contradicts a previous thread or thought that they had about the book of mormon.
Yawn…as I said, Journey’sd was more grounded in fact.

Joe lied. And he lied to get what he wanted.
 
Ah, okay, it was buried in Answersplease’s post so I missed it. Sorry.

Okay, the source for the cypher? I assume you mean the characters in “Reformed Egyptian,” right? Those came from the “Anthon manuscript,” a paper that Smith allegedly copied BOM characters onto directly from the plates. Smith gave the paper to Martin Harris who took it to Professors Charles Anthon and Samuel Mitchell for authentication. The story goes that Anthon initially agreed that the characters were real, ancient symbols used by long-gone people. He then supposedly asked how old the prophet was, and at the time, I believe he was about 21 years of age. When told this, Anthon supposedly tore up the authentication and ordered Harris out of the office.

This account doesn’t make much sense because it seems to be missing something. My opinion is that Harris was unable to see Anthon for whatever reason and made up the story to cover his rear end. Perhaps he never went to see Anthon at all; I’m not sure. The original is in the church historian’s office, according to the 1971 BOM.

These characters, as we know, are directly from Smith’s hand. I have copies of them in my 1971 hardback illustrated BOM on page 569. The church also printed a paperback BOM (I own one) with gold covers front and back with the exact same characters on it. Therefore, we know that the church has told us that these are real symbols used on the gold plates. They look like various embellished English letters, numbers, musical symbols, and so forth.

That said, there exists not one single example of anything similar in the New World (or the Old World, for that matter). There’s not even one piece of evidence that there was any Judeo-Christian belief, practice, or concept prior to New World colonizers (except the Los Lunas Decalogue stone that was denounced by even Hugh Nibley).
This is interesting, I hadn’t actually heard anything about this before, thanks. It still doesn’t sound like a translation. Nor does the official story I was told while a young person in the LDS church. Okay, here’s another question that struck me. Is there another story similar to this in the Christian record. I mean, if this were true, surely God would have prepared his people for the possibility. So, is there a story in the Judeo-Christian record, which sounds like the story Joseph Smith told?

Again, this is just me thinking out loud,
Michael
 
Read I and II Maccabees. There are military chronicles which bear a striking resemblance to the ones in the BoM. There is even a story of hiding the Ark of the Covenant in a cave. Of course, many of the stories in the BoM are parodies of Biblical stories. Then , you also need to take a look at I Enoch, re-discovered in Ethiopia in the late 1700’s, and available in translation at about the time the BoM was written.

I am not sure how general your question is, so, for the sake of saving time, I hit a middle ground. :coffeeread::sleep:
 
WOW!! Rebecca, that is exactly what I have been looking for!! ( As you well know. ) :blessyou:
Originally Posted by RebeccaJ View Post
There is a very interesting, enlightening and thorough bit of scholarly work by Richard Stout, titled “A Singular Discovery”.
Stout gives very good evidence that the characters in the Anthon Script were sourced from the “Detroit Manuscript”. A book of 3 to 4 hundred pages written in Gaelic, with Latin shorthand (Trionian notes). It was discovered in 1823 in Detroit, and determined to be a book on Catholic doctrines.
 
I think that it is also claimed to be an ‘if’.
I don’t recall having seen the word ‘if’ anywhere in the quote. Not only that, but if God were going to go through all of the trouble to reestablish his church on earth, why would he let nonsense like this creep right back in? Does that make sense? Of course it doesn’t.

Unfortunately, this edition falls well within the clearly implied boundaries: anything that the church commissions, authorizes, prints, distributes, and sells comes under the umbrella of divine authorization because Jesus Christ is supposed to be the head of your church, is he not? It doesn’t make sense that he’d allow falsehoods, lies, and mere opinions to lead members astray, does it?

In keeping with the ‘most correct book on earth,’ these characters must be in the book for a reason in not one, but two different editions seven years apart.
 
The problem is that we don’t know what the characters from the anton manucript were. It is pure speculation. And that is the problem. But we are certainly weaving a web of entanglement for a book that Joseph supposively wrote with the help of several conspirators. Aren’t we? 🙂

Especially because of this family connection, it would appear likely that Joseph Smith used the details surrounding the Detroit Manuscript as a template upon which to construct his story of the Book of Mormon’s “coming forth.”

Such is the evidence…that it appears likely…🙂

Speculation…speculation…speculation…only equals speculation. But where is the beef? But it seems that ol joe was a certainly a scholarly dude doing so much research undercover as a money digger and farmer. 🙂
There is no denying that the “caractors” of the Anthon Script can all be found in the “Detroit Manuscript”. 70% of them Tironian notes, the others from the Irish alphabet ogham. It certainly isn’t “reformed Egyptian” as Smith and Harris wanted you to believe. It’s Latin and Irish, from the middle ages. This is not “likely”, it is proven.
 
I think that it is also claimed to be an ‘if’.

If this is the copy of the characters that
was taken to Anthon, then it comes from the part of the
Book of Mormon that was translated while Martin
Harris was the scribe, and thus is from the missing 116
pages. If this were the case, we should expect it to be
from Mormon’s abridgment of the Nephite record (see
Words of Mormon 1:3–7; D&C 10:30, 38–42).

maxwellinstitute.byu.edu//publications/pdf/review/1140355063-12-1.pdf
The “if” is coming from those whose interest is to keep the con going, for various reasons, but the main one being they don’t want to face the fact that they have been conned.
 
This is interesting, I hadn’t actually heard anything about this before, thanks. It still doesn’t sound like a translation. Nor does the official story I was told while a young person in the LDS church. Okay, here’s another question that struck me. Is there another story similar to this in the Christian record. I mean, if this were true, surely God would have prepared his people for the possibility. So, is there a story in the Judeo-Christian record, which sounds like the story Joseph Smith told?
You’re welcome, Michael. Again, I’m sorry for the length, but I thought it was necessary to drive the point home. No, the church doesn’t want you to know these things because they look at people in one of three ways: members, potential members, and anti-Mormons.

Is there something similar to the story that Joseph told? I assume you’re talking about the Furst Vision and him seein God and Jesus. In the Bible, not to my knowledge, but in his era, yes. Keep in mind that the New Englanders were very superstitious and we’ve already seen that Smith was engaged in “glass-looking” with stones in his hat the same way he “translated” the BOM.

Professor Richard L Bushman at Columbia University published a book called The Visionary World of Joseph Smith. Mr. Bushman found some 32 different pamphlets detailing visions or religious experiences and of those, 10 described visions of God, Jesus, or both.

One of those was written by one Norris Stearns 1815 account: “…I saw two spirits, which I knew at first sight. But if I had the tongue of an Angel I could not describe their glory, for they brought joys of heaven with them. One was God, my Maker, almost in bodily shape like a man. His face was, as it were a flame of Fire, and his body, as it had been a Pillar and a Cloud. In looking steadfastly to discern his features, I could see none, but a small glimpse would appear in some other place. Below him stood Jesus Christ my Redeemer, in perfect shape like a man–His face was not ablaze, but had the countenance of fire, being bright and shiing. His Father’s will appeared to be his! All was condescension, peace, and love.”(Norris Stearns, The Religious Experiences of Norris Stearns, Greenfield [MA], 1815)

What does this sound like? I’m not claiming that Smith copied his words because we have no evidence of such, but rather that this sort of thing was not uncommon in that day and age.

Keep in mind that we also have at least five differing versions of the Furst Vision in which Smith saw angels, God, God and Jesus, two unnamed personages, pillars of fire, pillars of light, and so forth. Really, if the man was making it all up, he’s got to be the world’s worst liar.

You might also make the point that the same God would say the same thing to all of his people (provided that Nephites, Lamanites, and Jaredites actually existed as the BOM claims). I would agree but the fact is that the Nephites didn’t have the New Testament so why would we find so many passages from it in the BOM? We’re also not talking about just the same general thoughts and concepts, but, at times, direct plagiarizations of the Bible. How would Lehi and Nephi be using the words of men not yet born who wrote books not yet compiled in dialect not yet evolved? That, indeed, would be miraculous! The evidence of the New Testament in the BOM shows that the author was familiar with the KJV, first published in 1611, some 2,200 years later.

But even if we could rectify all of those problems, we should then see a Biblical standard for this, right? Instead, we see exactly no evidence that this sort of thing occurred in the Old Testament.

For an example, look up 3 Nephi 20:23-25. “Jesus” says he’s going to quote Moses (Deut 18:15) but ends up quoting Peter’s (assuming he was the author of Acts, which I do) paraphrase of Moses’ words in Acts 3:22-23.

How could Jesus, part of the one and only God Almighty, creator of the universe and everything in it, make such a mistake? Compare Acts with 1 Nephi side-by-side and you’ll see without a doubt that Smith lifted the words directly from the Bible. True, he added a few of his own, but the basis for those passages is clearly the KJV.

I’ll also PM you a list of plagiarizations along these lines, too. But don’t take my word for it; look them up for yourself and you’ll see it, too.
 
The “if” is coming from those whose interest is to keep the con going, for various reasons, but the main one being they don’t want to face the fact that they have been conned.
If you say so. It is amazing that you know so much about the fraud and yet, the mormons don’t know. Have you ever thought to educate the mormons in Utah by ygiving public speeches to mormons? It could work well. I wish you luck. 🙂
 
You’re welcome, Michael. Again, I’m sorry for the length, but I thought it was necessary to drive the point home. No, the church doesn’t want you to know these things because they look at people in one of three ways: members, potential members, and anti-Mormons.
Who are they? Please clarify who they are. Also, who is the church? And if any church looked upon its members the way you said the lds church does, it would never be successful and the members would never be who they truly are: good people attempting to live according to god’s law.

Talk about generalizations…🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top