LDS.org posts Book of Mormon translation that opposes Peterson's PBS one

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Re: LDS.org posts Book of Mormon translation that opposes Peterson's PBS one

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

harmony wrote:Do you have a comment about the OP?

Sure.

Illustrators often get things wrong.

The various paintings of "The Flight of the Holy Family into Egypt" routinely depict Mary and Joseph and the infant Jesus traveling from Palestine to Egypt via what appear to be the Swiss Alps -- or, sometimes, the fields of Flanders -- dressed as Ottoman Turks.

I have a copy of the C. S. Lewis novel Out of the Silent Planet featuring a cover that depicts men in spacesuits walking around on what looks like the surface of the moon. It's painfully obvious that the illustrator hadn't read the novel.

My wife and kids and I once watched the movie The Greatest Story Ever Told while living in Jerusalem. The scenery in the film was wildly inaccurate, which I already knew, but it was particularly funny since we could look right out our window and see much of the real landscape. My kids got a huge kick out of it.

And so on and so forth.

I regret inaccurate artists' conceptions, but I've seen so very, very many of them that they don't cause me much heartburn in most cases.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: LDS.org posts Book of Mormon translation that opposes Peterson's PBS one

Post by _harmony »

Daniel Peterson wrote:I regret inaccurate artists' conceptions, but I've seen so very, very many of them that they don't cause me much heartburn in most cases.


I don't think it's the inaccuracy or the artwork itself. I think it's where it's located. Why would the church put inaccurate artistic conceptions on the official web page?
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Re: LDS.org posts Book of Mormon translation that opposes Peterson's PBS one

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

harmony wrote:I don't think it's the inaccuracy or the artwork itself. I think it's where it's located. Why would the church put inaccurate artistic conceptions on the official web page?

You'll have to ask the nameless bureaucrats who put it there.

I do my best to teach and write accurately. I can't control what others choose to do.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: LDS.org posts Book of Mormon translation that opposes Peterson's PBS one

Post by _harmony »

Daniel Peterson wrote:
harmony wrote:I don't think it's the inaccuracy or the artwork itself. I think it's where it's located. Why would the church put inaccurate artistic conceptions on the official web page?

You'll have to ask the nameless bureaucrats who put it there.

I do my best to teach and write accurately. I can't control what others choose to do.


Then the official website, put together under the umbrella of the First Presidency, isn't an accurate source of information about things LDS?
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Re: LDS.org posts Book of Mormon translation that opposes Peterson's PBS one

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

harmony wrote:Then the official website, put together under the umbrella of the First Presidency, isn't an accurate source of information about things LDS?

I would never base a historical claim on some illustrator's sketch.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: LDS.org posts Book of Mormon translation that opposes Peterson's PBS one

Post by _harmony »

Daniel Peterson wrote:
harmony wrote:Then the official website, put together under the umbrella of the First Presidency, isn't an accurate source of information about things LDS?

I would never base a historical claim on some illustrator's sketch.


I think it's the other way around: the illustrator's sketch is based on a [inaccurate] historical claim.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Re: LDS.org posts Book of Mormon translation that opposes Peterson's PBS one

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

harmony wrote:I think it's the other way around: the illustrator's sketch is based on a [inaccurate] historical claim.

It's both.

There's no support in the historical sources for the illustrator's version.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: LDS.org posts Book of Mormon translation that opposes Peterson's PBS one

Post by _harmony »

Daniel Peterson wrote:
harmony wrote:I think it's the other way around: the illustrator's sketch is based on a [inaccurate] historical claim.

It's both.

There's no support in the historical sources for the illustrator's version.


The website says: "Scribes helped Joseph by writing the words as he translated them from the gold plates."

You said (in the Ensign): "Peterson said the Book of Mormon was revealed to Smith through a seer stone. Smith never went through the golden pages of the ancient record, but instead put the seer stone in a hat, then buried his head in the hat to shut out ambient light.

- "Joseph Smith translated by revelation, professor says", Deseret News, Apr. 11, 2008"

Someone's not accurate.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Re: LDS.org posts Book of Mormon translation that opposes Peterson's PBS one

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

harmony wrote:The website says: "Scribes helped Joseph by writing the words as he translated them from the gold plates."

You said (in the Ensign): "Peterson said the Book of Mormon was revealed to Smith through a seer stone. Smith never went through the golden pages of the ancient record, but instead put the seer stone in a hat, then buried his head in the hat to shut out ambient light.

- "Joseph Smith translated by revelation, professor says", Deseret News, Apr. 11, 2008"

Someone's not accurate.

I agree with all of the statements cited above.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: LDS.org posts Book of Mormon translation that opposes Peterson's PBS one

Post by _harmony »

Daniel Peterson wrote:I agree with all of the statements cited above.


How can someone translate from the golden plates when he never went through the golden plates?
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
Post Reply