Book of Mormon Transliteration

[_mentalgymnast]

MG,

...why it makes little sense to have anyone fluent in Reformed Egyptian on the translation committee.

OK. Maybe I'm not getting it. But it seems as though on the 'committee' you would want to have some folks that could decipher the symbols off of the plates. Otherwise, unless God is right there 'on the plates' in real time, the plates are useless. But if God is there in real time and doing all the grunt work that presents some issues also.

If you understand Clark's point, in the main post about the KJV already being outdated in English usage by 1611, while in contrast, it's surge in popularity in Smith's day, then you should understand why it makes little sense to argue for the KJV as expansion resource material by a spirit-world committee at all.

Would the KJV be used exclusively...or as a resource along with other material and/or the input of others who were familiar with the New Testament content but from their own experience/knowledge? The concepts are mapped (flow charted) in a similar fashion but the expression...output...may vary in word usage/syntax.

I'm sure that you have additional and important insight that I may simply not be observing or seeing. I am open to your perspective and further enlightenment.

Regards,
MG

[_Gadianton]

I think your first answer is right, MG, but, unfortunately, I have serious administration duties as Dean to attend to and so I probably won't be able to respond further until either very late tonight or tomorrow. thank you for answering the question.

[_canpakes]

So for this reason Moroni couldn't have been involved in the translation process. Either that, or he took a backseat and let others overwrite/supplant what he would otherwise have written if he was the one putting the words upon the screen.

MG, the picture that this theory paints is that God wasn’t willing or able to fit this translation into his schedule; neither could Moroni manage to do so, despite being someone perfectly able to converse in Joseph’s vernacular during multiple visits. Instead, the second string collection of Folks with Impressive Names was assigned the task of fumbling through the translation, occasionally taking breaks and just copying over previously mangled or conjured past translations wherever we see D-I or KJV sections repeated basically word-for-word.

This seems to injure two of the most important premises behind Mormonism: that the bringing forth of ‘The Gospel’ was the single most important task before the Lord in these latter days (yet was subbed out to amateurs), and that LDS scripture in general - and the Book of Mormon in particular - are the most correct versions of any of God’s word.

Given this scenario, how can you be sure of the correctness of any LDS scripture or claims?

[_Themis]

[You] still [do] not understanding that I am not saying there are not differences between what you like to call warm fuzzies and other sensory experiences people have. I am asking how you know those sensory experiences cannot be created by the body and how you know they come from an unseen supernatural entity.

You've got me there. But again, I can only speak for myself and the way that I have interpreted/experienced certain phenomena.

Regards,
MG

Which tells me you don't really know the experience came from some unseen supernatural being. You just believe it did. I see many in different religions so convinced they just know, but can never articulate how they know they are right and someone else's interpretation is wrong.

[_Themis]

The ‘Moroni promise’ is certainly not very reliable. Only a small percentage of people who have tried it receive a positive confirmation that is sufficiently convincing (especially without being led by a confident believer such as a parent or missionary).

And then only a tiny percentage of those people actually continue on as believers long term.

It only needs to get a tiny percentage of people for the religious fraud to succeed, which is why a religious fraud would put something like Moroni's promise in a book.

[_I have a question]

It’s interesting that on this topic, all sides of the divide agree - the Book of Mormon contains content that matches KJV content, verbatim. In the time and place where Joseph first produced the Book of Mormon, this KJV content would have been advantageous to its claim of being ancient scripture akin to the Bible. It was still deemed advantageous when the chapter headings were produced, drawing the readers attention to the comparison between the parts of the Book of Mormon and the parts of the Bible which were similar, but also identical.

On this thread, we are all agreed that the Book of Mormon contains KJV Bible content. The divide is in explaining how it got there.

As further light and knowledge has come into the world, the KJV content within the Book of Mormon has gone from being an advantage to a disadvantage. That further light and knowledge has shown that actually the ancient people portrayed in the Book of Mormon couldn’t possibly have had access to some of the material within the Bible that also appeared in the Book of Mormon. It became an anachronism.

How and when did it get in there?

Apologists have decided that to accept the glaringly obvious - that it was placed in the manuscript at the point Joseph produced it in the 19th Century, is to accept a hole below the water line. It must be avoided at all costs. So an alternative must be found, no matter how incredible, convoluted, ridiculous and unbelievable it is. No matter how much time and money is spent. An alternative must be found. And so the ghost committee was created out of whole cloth to try and create a smidgeon of alternative plausibility. It wasn’t Joseph who put it in there, it was a bunch of ghosts in the 15th Century who put it in there.

I mean, come on.

[_I have a question]

But again, I can only speak for myself and the way that I have interpreted/experienced certain phenomena.

Regards,
MG

Exactly - You’re simply latching on to a sensation and deliberately interpreting it to justify what you already want to believe.

[_Themis]

But again, I can only speak for myself and the way that I have interpreted/experienced certain phenomena.

Regards,
MG

Exactly - You’re simply latching on to a sensation and deliberately interpreting it to justify what you already want to believe.

The other problem is his attachment to that interpretation which closes his mind to being wrong. This is why he ignores all the more objective evidences regarding LDS truth claims, and why he doesn't want to address, even to himself, how he knows his interpretation of those sensations are correct.

[_Morley]

This is why he ignores all the more objective evidences regarding LDS truth claims, and why he doesn't want to address, even to himself, how he knows his interpretation of those sensations are correct.

MG does not know he's correct. He suspects he's wrong. He's desperately trying to hold onto belief.

When he comes here, the exchanges churn up his defensiveness and self-righteousness, which he confuses with testimony. Which, in turn, is why he keeps coming back.

[_mentalgymnast]

MG, the picture that this theory paints is that God wasn’t willing or able to fit this translation into his schedule...

His schedule? He has a schedule? The fact is, I think that God delegates a whole lot of stuff to those that are willing to help Him do his work. THAT is part of His schedule...bringing to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. Through tutoring and guidance, but letting mankind pretty much run the show.

...neither could Moroni manage to do so, despite being someone perfectly able to converse in Joseph’s vernacular during multiple visits...

I think that Moroni may have been involved in the translation process in some way, especially where he had been tutoring Joseph previously. Why he may not have had editorial control over some things, I don't know. That's above my pay grade.

Instead, the second string collection of Folks with Impressive Names was assigned the task of fumbling through the translation, occasionally taking breaks and just copying over previously mangled or conjured past translations wherever we see D-I or KJV sections repeated basically word-for-word.

I think that there is a bit more going on than "Folks...fumbling through a translation".

Again, I will post a reference to some of the work that Nick Frederick has done. The 'folks' were not amateurs. They seemed to know exactly what they were doing.

https://www.churchistrue.com/blog/nick- ... of-mormon/

Intertextuality between the Book of Mormon and the New Testament is not a small thing. It is wide in scope and fairly complex. Hardly done 'on the fly'.

This seems to injure two of the most important premises behind Mormonism: that the bringing forth of ‘The Gospel’ was the single most important task before the Lord in these latter days (yet was subbed out to amateurs)...

This seems to be a common practice with the Man Upstairs.

1 Cor 1:27-29 But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God has chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty. And base things of the world, and things which are despised, has God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nothing things that are. That no flesh should glory in his presence.

...and that LDS scripture in general - and the Book of Mormon in particular - are the most correct versions of any of God’s word.

Yes, in that they will bring a person closer to God than any other book. Especially the Book of Mormon.

Given this scenario, how can you be sure of the correctness of any LDS scripture or claims?

I don't accept "this scenario" of yours.

Regards,
MG