Did Joseph Smith understand the Book of Mormon?

[_beastie]

Something odd about...

Joseph Smith, the chosen prophet of the dispensation, restorer of the true church of Christ, chosen of God, next to Jesus Christ in stature didn't understand the Book of Mormon as he mingled with anglels, received revelations, and communed with Jehovah, but apologists have it all figured out.

As a believer I had a difficult time with this train of thought!

Even odder given the fact that supposedly he was taught about the ancient civilization from angelic visitors as well.

[_CaliforniaKid]

Celestial Kingdom, if I understand your interlinear example, this is still a "joseph as reader" theory. It would require a bit more from Joseph since he would have to figure out the correct order of the various phrases, but someone else (ie, God) just gave him the specific English words that constitute the phrases. So this "joseph as reader" (which I believe is actually the one consistent with contemporary statements) is compatible with Joseph Smith not understanding the Book of Mormon, but then one loses the "translation errors" bonus of particular words that are anachronistic.

Well, yes and no. I do think this leaves substantially more room for Joseph Smith expansion than if he were reading complete English sentences off the stone, but it certainly doesn't turn tapirs into horses unless "horse" is the word the Nephites originally used.

A conceptual-inspiration alternative might suggest that Joseph was given the conceptual meaning of single words, one word at a time, rather than the conceptual meaning of the whole, so that he was making word-choices based on his modern framework but still didn't have a clear picture of how it all fit together. But that view isn't tenable until we call "bulls***" on the way Joseph himself described the translation process.

-CK

[_beastie]

Well, yes and no. I do think this leaves substantially more room for Joseph Smith expansion than if he were reading complete English sentences off the stone, but it certainly doesn't turn tapirs into horses unless "horse" is the word the Nephites originally used.

And this is exactly why the apologists who focus on the Mesoamerican side of the story can never use this model. They have to have a model that allows for myriad anachronisms, even beyond individual words - entire concepts.

A conceptual-inspiration alternative might suggest that Joseph was given the conceptual meaning of single words, one word at a time, rather than the conceptual meaning of the whole, so that he was making word-choices based on his modern framework but still didn't have a clear picture of how it all fit together. But that view isn't tenable until we call "bulls***" on the way Joseph himself described the translation process.

I'm trying to see how this would work with translating a phrase like "and all those who would go with me". Can you help me out here?

(just out of curiosity, we've already established that this model does not resolve anachronisms)

by the way, my theory is that "and all those who would go with me" actually referred to random family members (like children) of the "bad guys". You know, maybe Laman had a kid who was really in tune with the Lord, so he followed Nephi instead of his father. The amount apologists read into that phrase is amazing.

[_CaliforniaKid]

I'm trying to see how this would work with translating a phrase like "and all those who would go with me". Can you help me out here?

Hi Beastie,

I have a great image in my mind of what this might be like, but I'm not sure I can put words to it. Have you ever seen a dream sequence in a movie where you can hear voices in the background, and some are a little louder than others? If I were making a movie of the translation process using this word-by-word conceptual model, it might go something like this:

(A strange Egyptian script appears in the stone with a fiery glow, like the ring on Lord of the Rings. Voices start to chatter incomprehensibly in the background. We get a sort of memory-like image transposed on the screen with someone gesturing broadly with their hands to indicate something all-encompassing. A few voices can be heard saying things like "all", "every one," "the whole". Then the seer stone rotates to the right to reveal the next word, with its glowing letters. With a flash, our memory-image pans to the left and we see a little girl pointing and saying, "those ones". Another voice says, "those people over there!"

And so on for the rest of the phrase. So Joseph is getting sort of a general idea what the word means, but ultimately he's the one who makes the final word selection.

Of course, I'm just letting my imagination run wild now. :-)

-CK

[_The Nehor]

Something odd about...

Joseph Smith, the chosen prophet of the dispensation, restorer of the true church of Christ, chosen of God, next to Jesus Christ in stature didn't understand the Book of Mormon as he mingled with anglels, received revelations, and communed with Jehovah, but apologists have it all figured out.

As a believer I had a difficult time with this train of thought!

:-)

~dancer~

I didn't mean my comments to suggest that we're doing better at understanding it than he was. I bet if we put 3 apologists in the same room as Joseph he would shoot many of their theories to pieces in minutes, probably laughing at some of them.

[_The Nehor]

Nehor,

Under this proposition, then it is useless to try and use the actual text of the Book of Mormon to parse out anything, including whether or not "and all who would go with me" meant indigenous others. The book is the product of Joseph Smith' understanding, under the loose translation theory, and if that understanding was flawed (as the theory "Joseph Smith did not understand the Book of Mormon" requires), then the text is flawed. With the loose translation theory, there can be no battle between what the text "actually says" and what Joseph Smith "thought" the text said. They are one and the same. That's how the text got there - it's what Joseph Smith thought it was saying. So if Joseph Smith didn't understand the book, it is his flawed misconception of the book that is now the Book of Mormon.

Mostly I agree with you. Scripture can only be understood with the spirit of prophecy. The ideal reading would be to go through the same process Joseph did. When I reach that point I'll have a lot more to say about apologetics :)

[_beastie]

Hi Beastie,

I have a great image in my mind of what this might be like, but I'm not sure I can put words to it. Have you ever seen a dream sequence in a movie where you can hear voices in the background, and some are a little louder than others? If I were making a movie of the translation process using this word-by-word conceptual model, it might go something like this:

(A strange Egyptian script appears in the stone with a fiery glow, like the ring on Lord of the Rings. Voices start to chatter incomprehensibly in the background. We get a sort of memory-like image transposed on the screen with someone gesturing broadly with their hands to indicate something all-encompassing. A few voices can be heard saying things like "all", "every one," "the whole". Then the seer stone rotates to the right to reveal the next word, with its glowing letters. With a flash, our memory-image pans to the left and we see a little girl pointing and saying, "those ones". Another voice says, "those people over there!"

And so on for the rest of the phrase. So Joseph is getting sort of a general idea what the word means, but ultimately he's the one who makes the final word selection.

Of course, I'm just letting my imagination run wild now. :-)

Kind of sounds like a nightmare!

I highlighted the portion that still seems problematic to me in suggesting this could result in Joseph Smith not understanding the text. Joseph gets an idea what the word means, picks one, and it becomes the Book of Mormon. The text is the end result of Joseph Smith getting an idea what the word meant and picking a word. In other words, the text itself is a reflection of what Joseph Smith understood about what the words meant - so Joseph Smith' understanding of the text is a crucial element. So what good does it do to parse the text as if it could mean something other than what Joseph Smith thought it meant?

Mostly I agree with you. Scripture can only be understood with the spirit of prophecy. The ideal reading would be to go through the same process Joseph did. When I reach that point I'll have a lot more to say about apologetics :)

Let us know if it looks anything like Celestial Kingdom's dream sequence!

[_CaliforniaKid]

I highlighted the portion that still seems problematic to me in suggesting this could result in Joseph Smith not understanding the text. Joseph gets an idea what the word means, picks one, and it becomes the Book of Mormon. The text is the end result of Joseph Smith getting an idea what the word meant and picking a word. In other words, the text itself is a reflection of what Joseph Smith understood about what the words meant - so Joseph Smith' understanding of the text is a crucial element. So what good does it do to parse the text as if it could mean something other than what Joseph Smith thought it meant?

I think I understand what you're saying, but my point is that one can understand the meanings of individual words but still not understand the meaning of a text as a whole. For example, I can know the meaning of a word like "those", but I may not understand the contextual referent of this particular occurrence of the word. Or I might know that black means the color black, and that heart is the cardiopulmonary organ, but if you told me that Daniel Peterson has a heart as black as coal I might not understand what you were saying unless I had been steeped in the English language and idiom all my life.

[_truth dancer]

Hi Nehor...

:-)

Ohhh that post was not directed at you!

I have had many discussions with apologists in the past, and read enough material to know that some feel Joseph had a "superficial" understanding of the Book of Mormon, while they believe they have the correct understanding.

For a prophet of God to restore the fullness of the gospel, translate an ancient text, be taught by angles, receive revelations, and be the very spokesperson for Jesus Christ, I find it odd that apologists assert have a better understanding than the prophet!

Ya know? It just seems strange!

~dancer~

[_The Nehor]

Hi Nehor...

:-)

Ohhh that post was not directed at you!

I have had many discussions with apologists in the past, and read enough material to know that some feel Joseph had a "superficial" understanding of the Book of Mormon, while they believe they have the correct understanding.

For a prophet of God to restore the fullness of the gospel, translate an ancient text, be taught by angles, receive revelations, and be the very spokesperson for Jesus Christ, I find it odd that apologists assert have a better understanding than the prophet!

Ya know? It just seems strange!

~dancer~

I don't find it just strange, I find it incredibly arrogant.

However I worry about then swinging too far the other way. Prophets are people....people working out their salvation just like everyone else. God has an easy line to them but to my knowledge they don't get the uninhibited ability to ask endless questions and get immediate answers nor has the mind of God supplanted theirs.