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

[_Scottie]

Dan, what are your thoughts about why Oliver Cowdery was unable to do any translation?

Why would he be able to?

[_Daniel Peterson]

I don't believe the gold plates existed in the first place

I'm too committed to the evidence to be able to believe that.

However, that being said, IF the gold plates did exist and Mormonism is true, I would say this...

As loathe as I am to defer to the supernatural, the entire translation process was supernatural, so there is really no way around it. Joseph Smith simply could not read the plates. God had to intervene somehow and show Joseph the words on the plate.

Although I have issues with using the word "translate", as Joseph Smith merely dictated what appeared to him, the words that appeared were done by the power of God. So, why would it matter if Joseph Smith were looking at the plates and God refracted the light in the seer stones to English or if God used his projector to flash words on a rock in Joseph Smith hat? The words still came from what was written on the plates.

Yup. Exactly.

[_Ray A]

I don't know why Oliver Cowdery wasn't able to translate.

FAIRMormon doesn't seem to have a theory either, but at least they are open to other possibilities:

We do not fully understand the method that the Lord used to give the gift of translation to Brother Joseph. Whether Joseph Smith received the translation of the Book of Mormon through automatic writing or not, the essential point is to know if that translation is from God, and therefore another testament of Jesus Christ.

Book of Mormon and automatic writing

I think this was unique to Joseph Smith.

[_antishock8]

I don't believe the gold plates existed in the first place

I'm too committed to the evidence to be able to believe that.

...

Yup. Exactly.

Only in Mormonlandia is the absence of evidence, and contrived "witness statements" written by Mr. Smith himself is evidence.

No plates.

No plates used for "translating".

Contrived testimonials.

It's a wrap!

[_Neo]

If you'd never learned a word of German or Arabic in your life, your demonstration might have made a point.

It has a point. The question was whether a text needed to be physically present for translation. I've shown that it didn't.

You have shown that it didn't need to be physically present for 7 lines of text, that is not exactly the same as translating the entire Book of Mormon.
I will agree that someone could translate "small" amounts of text like you have demonstrated, but not the amount of text contained in the Book of Mormon.
Are you saying that Joseph memorized the entire Book of Mormon in the same manner that you have memorized the text of that poem?

The question of whether an inspired translation is possible for a text whose language the translator doesn't (humanly) know is an entirely separate one.

This is another unbelievable detail of this so called "translation".

By the way, Joseph's "translation" of the Book of Abraham shows his true translation abilities. Or in this case, disabilities.

[_Daniel Peterson]

You have shown that it didn't need to be physically present for 7 lines of text, that is not exactly the same as translating the entire Book of Mormon.

The principle remains exactly the same.

I could easily have a display device -- e.g., a computer screen -- that allowed me to view one page of a text that was physically distant to some degree or another, and that would allow me, once done with it, to "turn" to the next page. This isn't even slightly problematic. If I wanted to spend time proving the obvious, I could probably link you to several such documents without much difficulty.

Are you saying that Joseph memorized the entire Book of Mormon in the same manner that you have memorized the text of that poem?

It would be equally easy, once the existence of a intervening God is postulated, for such a being to place more than one idea in my mind, or to place a succession of ideas (or images) in my mind.

I will agree that someone could translate "small" amounts of text like you have demonstrated, but not the amount of text contained in the Book of Mormon.

I see absolutely no theoretical difficulty.

This is another unbelievable detail of this so called "translation".

I see no reason why a God who could create the universe, raise the dead, etc., would find this impossible.

By the way, Joseph's "translation" of the Book of Abraham shows his true translation abilities. Or in this case, disabilities.

You and I apparently disagree about the Book of Abraham. (What a surprise!)

But that's another subject.



GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG

[_Ray A]

Are you saying that Joseph memorized the entire Book of Mormon in the same manner that you have memorized the text of that poem?

Perhaps Joseph had this sort of ability:

Pearl explained that as the words flowed into her head, she would feel a pressure and then scenes and images would appear to her. She would see the details of each scene. If two characters were talking along a road, she would see the roadway, the grass on either side of it and perhaps the landscape in the distance. If they spoke a foreign language, she would hear them speaking but above them, she would hear the voice of Patience as she interpreted the speech and indicated what part of the dialogue she wanted in the story. She would sometimes even see herself in the scenes, standing as an onlooker or moving between the characters. The experience was so sharp and so vivid that she became familiar with things that she could have never known about living in St. Louis. These items included lamps, jugs and cooking utensils used long ago in distant countries, types of clothing and jewelry worn by people in other times and the sounds and smells of places that she had never even heard of before.

On one occasion, Pearl was shown a small yellow bird sitting on a hedge. Patience wished to include it in a poem, but Pearl had no idea what type of bird it was. Finally, Patience became frustrated and said, "He who knoweth the hedgerows knoweth the yellow-hammer." Pearl and her husband later consulted an old encyclopedia and saw that the yellow-hammer in her vision was not a type seen in America, but only in England.

Pearl Curran excerpt.

[_Neo]

You have shown that it didn't need to be physically present for 7 lines of text, that is not exactly the same as translating the entire Book of Mormon.

The principle remains exactly the same.

I could easily have a display device -- e.g., a computer screen -- that allowed me to view one page of a text that was physically distant to some degree or another, and that would allow me, once done with it, to "turn" to the next page. This isn't even slightly problematic. If I wanted to spend time proving the obvious, I could probably link you to several such documents without much difficulty.

Can you provide some evidence that supports that such a device would have existed in the 1830 timeframe? Otherwise it is more than slightly problematic.

Are you saying that Joseph memorized the entire Book of Mormon in the same manner that you have memorized the text of that poem?

It would be equally easy, once the existence of a intervening God is postulated, for such a being to place more than one idea in my mind, or to place a succession of ideas (or images) in my mind.

If this were the case, then it would not really be translating any longer. It would be divine inspiration. I have not seen any evidence that supports the claim that the Book of Mormon was divine inspiration.

I will agree that someone could translate "small" amounts of text like you have demonstrated, but not the amount of text contained in the Book of Mormon.

I see absolutely no theoretical difficulty.

I disagree. Translating such a large amount of text from memory, would seem impossible.

This is another unbelievable detail of this so called "translation".

I see no reason why a God who could create the universe, raise the dead, etc., would find this impossible.

I would agree with you here, if I had a reason to believe that God had anything to do with Joseph Smith.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Can you provide some evidence that supports that such a device would have existed in the 1830 timeframe? Otherwise it is more than slightly problematic.

Good grief, Neo. It's a religious claim. About a miracle.

Nobody's claimed that electronics and computer technology were available in the early 1800s.

Your response is as weird as somebody demanding, as proof of the resurrection of Christ, evidence that medical resuscitation techniques were sufficiently advanced in the first century to bring patients back who had flatlined on the EKG.

If this were the case, then it would not really be translating any longer. It would be divine inspiration. I have not seen any evidence that supports the claim that the Book of Mormon was divine inspiration.

The claim is that the English text represents the English equivalent of the non-English text on the plates. That makes it a translation.

If Text A is older than Text B, and Text B represents the content of Text A in a different language than that of Text A, Text B is a translation of Text A.

Was it done by inspiration? Yes. Of course. That's always been the claim.

I disagree. Translating such a large amount of text from memory, would seem impossible.

I didn't say that it was done by memory.

[_Neo]

Can you provide some evidence that supports that such a device would have existed in the 1830 timeframe? Otherwise it is more than slightly problematic.

Good grief, Neo. It's a religious claim. About a miracle.
Nobody's claimed that electronics and computer technology were available in the early 1800s.

I could easily have a display device -- e.g., a computer screen -- that allowed me to view one page of a text that was physically distant to some degree or another, and that would allow me, once done with it, to "turn" to the next page. This isn't even slightly problematic. If I wanted to spend time proving the obvious, I could probably link you to several such documents without much difficulty.

You are the one that keeps bringing up a computer screen or display device.
I am simply stating that in 1830 such technology would not have been possible.

I shall now demonstrate two different ways of doing this:
(1) I shall translate the first few lines of a poem by Rainer Maria Rilke that happens to be in my head at the moment.

I disagree. Translating such a large amount of text from memory, would seem impossible.

I didn't say that it was done by memory.

You did not directly say it was done by memory, but your earlier demonstration which is what I was replying to stated that the original text was in your head (memory).