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

[Answersplease]

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6586298&postcount=526

dianaiad:

…Joseph Smith was the TRANSLATOR of the Book of Mormon.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6588604&postcount=529

mjf001:

Well, it would be nice to get a look at the source document and the cypher (I’m quite aware I’ve made this point before, I just felt it deserved repeating). I mean, that is traditionally how “translation” is done. This argument might make a little more sense if this really was a translation. However, he used the Urim and Thummin. I heard a lot of stories as a young person in the LDS, none which came close to matching the very specific description in the Old Testament. In the Bible these were used to cast lots. Did Joseph Smith cast lots to come up with his translation?

I promised myself I wouldn’t engage anymore, but really, this slow pitch was too much to resist.

Michael

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6627222&postcount=570

mjf001:

Please include the part where it was found on Gold Plates that no longer exist for a single person to examine. While you’re at it, maybe you’d like to try answering my other question I asked earlier related to this.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6649439&postcount=639

Answersplease:

It looks like your post was ignored.

Probably because they can’t answer it.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6613370&postcount=542

Answersplease:

I would like to take a look at the source documents as well, how very convenient that Joseph Smith was’nt allowed to keep the supposed original golden plates of the Book of Mormon.

Also how very convenient that Joseph Smith was “allowed” to use any words that he personally thought would best fit the translation (like the French word “adieu” and the Greek words “Alpha” and “Omega” found in the Book of Mormon).

How did the Greek words “alpha” and “omega” get into the Book of Mormon?

I suppose “alpha” and “omega” were as commonly used in ordinary everyday speech as “adieu” was.

3 Nephi Chapter 9 : 18
I am the light and the life of the world. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.

Please note that “Alpha” is the first letter in the Greek alphabet. And “Omega” is the last letter in the Greek alphabet.

THEN a translation is given: “the beginning and the end.”

This is supposedly the 3rd book of Nephi, HOW did the ancient Nephites know ANY GREEK?

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6619236&postcount=546

chris2009:

This arguement of how did the ancient Nephites know French or Greek makes me laugh. HOW did the ancient Nephites know ANY ENGLISH also? Duh…

The Lord’s translation of what words He felt we needed best were used. How many different translations are there of the Bible? Languages don’t always directly translate. There is no need to apologize for the Book of Mormon. It can hold it’s own weight against the critics.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6619819&postcount=550

lax16:

chris - What language did God use when speaking to JS?

Who did the translating - God or Joseph Smith???

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6631934&postcount=585

Answersplease:

Exactly.

Thats why I said I wanted to see the original source documents,

how very convenient that Joseph Smith was not “allowed” to keep the supposed golden plates.

**“Alpha” and “Omega” were already translated/interpreted inside the original text into “the beginning” and “the end”.

So why did’nt Joseph Smith just use the first letter and the last letter of the original language, instead of using the first letter and the last letter of the Greek alphabet?**

And as for the French word “adieu”, just because it is in the dictionary at the time, does’nt mean that it was commonly used. Unless there is a source document that says the French word “adieu” became commonly used, like a special dictionary of commonly used words, then people can be skeptical.

There are people that say Joseph Smith copied many parts of The Holy Bible,

the fact that he checked out a copy of The Holy Bible from a library several times makes people believe that Joseph Smith copied “Alpha” and “Omega” from the Book of Revelation.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6635407&postcount=608

Answersplease:

Also, where is the CYPHER and a COPY of the original text?

Conveniently, Joseph Smith was’nt allowed to keep the supposed golden plates, but why did’nt he MAKE A COPY of the original text USING THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE?

No cypher, no “key”, no alphabet of the “original” language from the supposed golden plates, AND most important NO COPY of the original text from the supposed golden plates IN THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE… (rolls eyes)

What kind of translator, does a translation WITHOUT keeping a RECORD of THE CYPHER and a COPY OF the ORIGINAL TEXT IN THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE? (rolls eyes)

How
very
very
very
CONVENIENT.

It’s either VERY VERY VERY CONVENIENT.

OR

Joseph Smith made it all up, by himself or with some help.

 

[DaveBj]

That’s one of my first questions on those rare occasions when Mormons come to my door. I can access the Old and New Testaments in their original languages; show me the original languages of the BoM.

Another question: The angels mentioned in the Bible have names that mean something (Rafa’el = God has healed; Gabri-el = warrier of God; Mi-kha-'el = Who is like God?). What does “Moroni” mean, and in what language?

And when they talk about the “burning in the bosom” that lets them know what is right, I confess that I get a burning in my bosom occasionally, but Gaviscon or Pepto-Bismal takes care of it right away.

DaveBj

 

[SirThomasMore]

Awesome post. These are the kinds of things Mormons try very hard to explain, but their apologetics are always hollow.

 

[dianaiad]

That’s one of my first questions on those rare occasions when Mormons come to my door. I can access the Old and New Testaments in their original languages; show me the original languages of the BoM.

Another question: The angels mentioned in the Bible have names that mean something (Rafa’el = God has healed; Gabri-el = warrier of God; Mi-kha-'el = Who is like God?). What does “Moroni” mean, and in what language?

And when they talk about the “burning in the bosom” that lets them know what is right, I confess that I get a burning in my bosom occasionally, but Gaviscon or Pepto-Bismal takes care of it right away.

DaveBj

It’s a very good thing that Jesus’ apostles and disciples didn’t use anti-acids to cure their ills when their “heart burn[ed] within [them]” (Luke 24:32) on the Emmaus road.

 

[why_me]

What I find interesting about answersplease is that all his threads rank five stars. And I am left to wonder just who is ranking his threads five stars. Now in the catholic faith, humility is a beautiful concept. I certainly hope that answers is not ranking his own threads.

I have not read his OP because I find it a waste of time to read blue and black sentences with at times the color red that take half a page in blocked boxes. And he also sounds like tommore. Not to say that he is. I would rather respond to tommore since both him and answers seem to be on a similiar level with their hostility toward mormonism.

 

[twopekinguys]

Awesome post. These are the kinds of things Mormons try very hard to explain, but their apologetics are always hollow.

I agree.

I also have to wonder why JS is listed as “Author” of the BoM instead of “Translator”. After all, there is a big difference between the two.

He is also listed as “proprietor”, which clearly indicates a financial position.

 

[why_me]

I agree.

I also have to wonder why JS is listed as “Author” of the BoM instead of “Translator”. After all, there is a big difference between the two.

He is also listed as “proprietor”, which clearly indicates a financial position.

I think that twopekinguys has me on ignore. Could someone give him this post of mine:

Critics charge that Joseph Smith slipped up by listing himself as the “author and proprietor” of the Book of Mormon on the title page of the first edition.

Copyright law in 1830 in New York, where the Book of Mormon was first published, provided for the granting of copyrights to “authors and proprietors” but did not offer the same to translators. In order to secure the copyright, Joseph had to apply as the “author and proprietor.” As one historian noted:

The fact is, Joseph Smith was complying with federal law (see I Statutes 124, 1790, as amended by 2 Stat. 171, 1802), which dictated the words the district clerk had to write when a person was taking out a copyright on a book. It can be demonstrated historically that many translators, including those who produced the 1824 edition of the King James Version of the Bible, were listed as "Author" to conform to this law.[1]

en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Joseph_as_author_and_proprietor

No big deal here and quite understandable. Next problem?

 

[why_me]

And this is quite interesting:

Book of Mormon transcript

The first edition of the Book of Mormon contained a transcript of the secured copyright making this clear:

Northern District of New York, to wit: 

BE IT REMEMBERED, That on the eleventh day of June, in the fifty-third year of the Independence of the United States of America, A. D. 1829, JOSEPH SMITH, JUN., of the said District, hath deposited in this office the title of a Book, the right whereof he claims as author, in the words following, to wit: "The Book of Mormon: an account written by the hand of Mormon, upon plates taken from the Plates of Nephi. Wherefore it is an abridgment of the Record of the People of Nephi; and also of the Lamanites; written to the Lamanites, who are a remnant of the House of Israel; and also to Jew and Gentile; written by way of commandment, and also by the spirit of Prophesy and of Revelation. Written, and sealed up, and hid up unto the Lord, that they might not be destroyed; to come forth by the gift and power of God, unto the interpretation thereof; sealed by the hand of Moroni, and hid up unto the Lord, to come forth in due time by the way of Gentile; the interpretation thereof by the gift of God; an abridgment taken from the Book of Ether. Also, which is a Record of the People of Jared, which were scattered at the time the Lord confounded the language of the people when they were building a tower to get to Heaven: which is to shew unto the remnant of the House of Israel, how great things the Lord hath done for their fathers; and that they may know the covenants of the Lord, that they are not cast off forever: and also to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile, that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting Himself unto all nations. And now if there be fault, it be the mistake of men; wherefore condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment seat of Christ.—By Joseph Smith. Jun. Author and Proprietor." 

In conformity to the act of the Congress of the United States, entitled, "An act for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of Maps, Charts, and Books, to the authors and proprietors of such copies, during the times therein mentioned;" and also the act, entitled, "An act supplementary to an act, entitled, "An act for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of Maps, Charts, and Books, to the authors and proprietors of such copies, during the times therein mentioned, and extending the benefits thereof to the arts of designing, engraving, and etching historical and other prints."

**
** R. R. LANSING
Clerk of the Northern District of New York **

It seems that Joseph Smith was perfectly clear just what the book of mormon was as he sought the copyright.**

 

[SirThomasMore]

It’s a very good thing that Jesus’ apostles and disciples didn’t use anti-acids to cure their ills when their “heart burn[ed] within [them]” (Luke 24:32) on the Emmaus road.

They were in the presence of Jesus Himself. How odd that you would compare that to a verse in moroni.

 

[SirThomasMore]

What I find interesting about answersplease is that all his threads rank five stars. And I am left to wonder just who is ranking his threads five stars. Now in the catholic faith, humility is a beautiful concept. I certainly hope that answers is not ranking his own threads.

I have not read his OP because I find it a waste of time to read blue and black sentences with at times the color red that take half a page in blocked boxes. And he also sounds like tommore. Not to say that he is. I would rather respond to tommore since both him and answers seem to be on a similiar level with their hostility toward mormonism.

you took a long time to respond saying you will not respond.

 

[SirThomasMore]

I think that twopekinguys has me on ignore. Could someone give him this post of mine:

Critics charge that Joseph Smith slipped up by listing himself as the “author and proprietor” of the Book of Mormon on the title page of the first edition.

Copyright law in 1830 in New York, where the Book of Mormon was first published, provided for the granting of copyrights to “authors and proprietors” but did not offer the same to translators. In order to secure the copyright, Joseph had to apply as the “author and proprietor.” As one historian noted:

Ah…so you admit Joseph lied just to get what he wanted and to make money?

Figures

 

[why_me]

why me;6739177:

I think that twopekinguys has me on ignore. Could someone give him this post of mine:

Critics charge that Joseph Smith slipped up by listing himself as the “author and proprietor” of the Book of Mormon on the title page of the first edition.

Copyright law in 1830 in New York, where the Book of Mormon was first published, provided for the granting of copyrights to “authors and proprietors” but did not offer the same to translators. In order to secure the copyright, Joseph had to apply as the “author and proprietor.” As one historian noted:

Ah…so you admit Joseph lied just to get what he wanted and to make money?

Figures

Tom, please read the post of what Joseph wrote for the clerk to get the copyright. Translators could not get copyrighted. Joseph explained what the book was and he was given copyright as author because that is the only way he could publish the book. The link also says that same went for the king james version of the bible at that time.

 

[why_me]

you took a long time to respond saying you will not respond.

I was responding to twopekinguys’ post. It needed to be challenged.

 

[SirThomasMore]

SirThomasMore;6739214:

Tom, please read the post of what Joseph wrote for the clerk to get the copyright. Translators could not get copyrighted. Joseph explained what the book was and he was given copyright as author because that is the only way he could publish the book. The link also says that same went for the king james version of the bible at that time.

right. So he lied.

 

[dianaiad]

I agree.

I also have to wonder why JS is listed as “Author” of the BoM instead of “Translator”. After all, there is a big difference between the two.

He is also listed as “proprietor”, which clearly indicates a financial position.

Let me find my cut and paste reply to this oft repeated criticism…

In the early 1800’s, copyrights were only issued to authors, not translators. Therefore, in order to legally obtain a copyright at that time, the clerk had to write 'author and proprietor." on the copyright page. Clarifications were made in introductions and prefaces. As a result, we have, for instance, the people printing the 1824 version of the King James Bible declaring that they were the authors.

This law was changed later to solve this problem, but at the time, ‘author and proprietor’ was the legal language required–no matter what.

 

[TheQuestioner]

Tom, you let these guys de-rail the thread. Forget about the copyright issue, give it to them, it doesn’t matter. Ask them to at least address the original argument with the Greek letters “alpha” and “omega” being used and the word “adieu” being used. Otherwise you will be arguing about something that doesn’t matter. (Edited)

 

[SirThomasMore]

True, but I still like the fact that Joe lied to make money

 

[dianaiad]

Tom, you let these guys de-rail the thread. Forget about the copyright issue, give it to them, it doesn’t matter. Ask them to at least address the original argument with the greek letters “alpha” and “omega” being used and the word “adieu” being used. Otherwise you will be arguing about something that doesn’t matter.(Edited)

ExCUSE me, but it wasn’t the MORMONS who came up with that oft repeated canard about Joseph Smith being the ‘author and proprietor’ of the Book of Mormon somehow being proof that he didn’t translate it.

(Edited)
As to the words ‘alpha and omega’ and ‘adieu,’ those are ALSO oft answered questions. It is perfectly permissible for any translator to use words that express the meaning of the original text if those words are available to him and would be understood by his readers, even if that word is “Adieu” for ‘goodbye’ or 'go with God." “Alpha and Omega…” meaning 'first and last…" are well translated as such, easily understood as such (Edited).

(Edited) Should Joseph have gone all the way back to Old English and translated it in terms more familiar to those who understood Beowulf?

James Nicoll summed up the English language this way…and got it exactly right: “The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don’t just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary”

…and in the case of ‘adieu,’ we did THAT back in the time that Sir Walter Scott wrote about in Ivanhoe. Come to think of it, there’s quite a conversation between two of the characters there about the problem with melding French and Old English…

…Diana, (Edited).

 

[SirThomasMore]

ExCUSE me, but it wasn’t the MORMONS who came up with that oft repeated canard about Joseph Smith being the ‘author and proprietor’ of the Book of Mormon somehow being proof that he didn’t translate it.
(Edited)

As to the words ‘alpha and omega’ and ‘adieu,’ those are ALSO oft answered questions.

Yes, with very weak apologetics. The points made in the OP are valid. The weak apologetics do not make sense

It is perfectly permissible for any translator to use words that express the meaning of the original text if those words are available to him and would be understood by his readers, even if that word is “Adieu” for ‘goodbye’ or 'go with God." “Alpha and Omega…” meaning 'first and last…" are well translated as such, easily understood as such, and you need to get over it already.

lolol…make up your mind. First you claim Joe was uneducated. Then you claim he used words like alpha and omega and adieu.

(Edited)

James Nicoll summed up the English language this way…and got it exactly right: “The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don’t just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary”

Nice try. But an uneducated 1800s American does not speak french, Greek, or KJV English

 

[dianaiad]

I do not use it to show anything other than Joe lied to make money’quote]

I wasn’t responding to you.
SirThomasMore;6740094:

Yes, with very weak apologetics. The points made in the OP are valid. The weak apologetics do not make sense

Your inability to accept fact and reasonable discourse is not our problem.

lolol…make up your mind. First you claim Joe was uneducated. Then you claim he used words like alpha and omega and adieu.

First, I have never made any claims at all about Joseph’s education. However, since you bring that up, “alpha and omega,” being terms found in the bible, would have been accessible to pretty much everybody who could read at all. Given that this phrase “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending…” shows up three times in the KJV and would therefore have been VERY much a part of Joseph’s experience, it makes perfect sense that he would use that phrase to translate something that meant the same thing.

As to “Adieu,’ at the time the word was much more in use than it is now; quite commonly used in literature and in daily life. Using 'adieu” was a most appropriate way to translate Jacob’s final words. Joseph probably thought it was a more graceful way to end it, and closer to the gentle meaning Jacob gave it, than ‘Good bye.’ Connotation means something, too.

…and "adieu’ would very much have been a word that Joseph knew, OBVIOUSLY, or he wouldn’t have USED it. In fact, this entire objection to the word ‘adieu’ is circular and really, really…well, it’s saying that Joseph was too stupid or uneducated to use the word ‘adieu,’ so it must have been in the original. However, it couldn’t have been in the original because the original didn’t exist; Joseph made it up. However, if Joseph made it up he wouldn’t have used “adieu” because he was too stupid and uneducated, so he wouldn’t have used the word, but he did, so it was obviously made up because Jacob, not speaking English OR French, wouldn’t have used “adieu.” He would have used a different word. Which Joseph translated as ‘adieu,’ but he shouldn’t have because ‘adieu’ isn’t English and Joseph was too stupid or uneducated to use it anyway, but he did, so…

…and on it goes, endlessly circling the argument. The fact is, Joseph used the word. It is an appropriate word for what Jacob was doing. Americans used that word a great deal more often in the early 1800’s than we do now. It makes perfect sense for him to have used it.

…but I’m sure that you will bring this up again and again as if your objection had never been addressed, much less answered. This is, after all, not the first time you have done so.

Yes, because adiue is NOT a common word. The "half: you are talkking about are common English words that we took from the French

You are wrong, sir. “Adieu’ IS a common word, and it was even more common 'back in the day.” For instance, did you have to look it up in an English/French dictionary to see what it meant? Do you know anybody who has to do so? It’s not as if he used “prieres” instead of prayer, or “petre” for “priest.” Now there you might have a point, but he used ‘adieu,’ which is a word that has been in use in English since 1400.

No, he did enough copying KJV English when he copied the Bible

Yes, he did. Of course, nobody in the New Testament quoted scripture to make their points, did they?

Nice try. But an uneducated 1800s American does not speak french, greek, or KJV English

Except, of course…he did.

Obviously, since those words are, y’know, THERE.