Page 1 of 3
More obfuscation in the current Ensign (Oct 2011)
Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 7:38 pm
by _Abaddon
I can't link to it because it's not online at LDS.org yet, but I received my magazine in the mail and I read a little from it this morning.
The whole issue is dedicated to the Book of Mormon and on the inside front cover is wonderful artwork of Joseph Smith pondering and studying over the Gold Plates in plain view (which we all know is exactly how it happened)
But better than that is the common questions people ask about the Book of Mormon that is mentioned toward the end of the magazine. One of the questions was (I paraphrase) "Weren't there changes in the text from one edition to another?"
I thought, Ok, perhaps they are really going to mention some of the bigger changes (I'm thinking the Mosiah/King Benjamin change and the big one: God to Son of God). What did they really mention? The same old tired excuse of spelling and grammatical errors. They didn't even give the idea it was anything more than that.
Once again the church is less than forthright about its history...
Re: More obfuscation in the current Ensign (Oct 2011)
Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 8:03 pm
by _why me
I am sure that Joseph Smith did do this too. For after all he did have the plates and I am sure that he took them to look at them. Also, we really don't know much about the translation process and how it was done. But of course one way was with Joseph Smith sticking his head in a hat and this comes from david whitmer and emma.
Re: More obfuscation in the current Ensign (Oct 2011)
Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 8:14 pm
by _DarkHelmet
The grammar and spelling errors were incredibly bad. It was as if an uneducated farm boy wrote it. The church has been cleaning it up ever since, while also updating their evolving theology. The current product isn't too bad relative to what it was in 1830. Although, I recently sat down and started reading it and was shocked with how bad even the current version is. It is no wonder the missionaries have trouble giving those things away. But as to the point of this thread, the church didn't really lie. There were grammar and spelling changes made, they just left out the doctrinal changes. No need to upset people.
Re: More obfuscation in the current Ensign (Oct 2011)
Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 8:23 pm
by _Abaddon
DarkHelmet wrote:But as to the point of this thread, the church didn't really lie. There were grammar and spelling changes made, they just left out the doctrinal changes. No need to upset people.
The point of this thread was not to imply the church is lying.
It was to point out that once again the church is trying to keep subscribers of the Ensign in the dark as to what the changes consisted of from one edition to the next of the Book of Mormon. In other words, implying it was nothing substantial.
No need to upset people? Are you upset? I was just giving information with a little commentary
Re: More obfuscation in the current Ensign (Oct 2011)
Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 8:27 pm
by _jon
I think it would be right and proper for the Church to publish exactly what changes have been made - excluding punctuation. Then members can see for themselves that they are only 'minor' in nature.
Re: More obfuscation in the current Ensign (Oct 2011)
Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 9:32 pm
by _Nomad
jon wrote:I think it would be right and proper for the Church to publish exactly what changes have been made - excluding punctuation. Then members can see for themselves that they are only 'minor' in nature.
It's really easy to do it yourself. Buy a copy of Royal Skousen's
The Book of Mormon - The Earliest Text.
Re: More obfuscation in the current Ensign (Oct 2011)
Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 9:37 pm
by _why me
Nomad wrote:jon wrote:I think it would be right and proper for the Church to publish exactly what changes have been made - excluding punctuation. Then members can see for themselves that they are only 'minor' in nature.
It's really easy to do it yourself. Buy a copy of Royal Skousen's
The Book of Mormon - The Earliest Text.
Or they can read this issue of the ensign which you linked to in a different thread:
http://LDS.org/ensign/1983/12/understan ... n?lang=eng
Re: More obfuscation in the current Ensign (Oct 2011)
Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 10:22 pm
by _Themis
Stop helping the OP. It barely mentions the Benjamin/Mosiah problem(inadequately) and avoids the big ones like the one the OP is talking about and another it doesn't mention. You just helping to confirm what he is saying. I would help you out, but I think it would be better if you familiarized yourself with LDS issues. The grammatical and spelling changes are really just fluff.
Re: More obfuscation in the current Ensign (Oct 2011)
Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:06 pm
by _mentalgymnast
jon wrote:I think it would be right and proper for the Church to publish exactly what changes have been made - excluding punctuation. Then members can see for themselves that they are only 'minor' in nature.
This might be of help.
http://LDS.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnex ... 6f620a____Regards,
MG
Re: More obfuscation in the current Ensign (Oct 2011)
Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:09 pm
by _mentalgymnast
Abaddon wrote:It was to point out that once again the church is trying to keep subscribers of the Ensign in the dark as to what the changes consisted of from one edition to the next of the Book of Mormon. In other words, implying it was nothing substantial.
http://LDS.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnex ... 6f620a____You guys need to become familiar with google search. Any member that has internet access can find this table and the accompanying information within a minute. I did.
Regards,
MG