Book of Mormon translation as per LDS manuals

[_Buffalo]

Look here for some further discussion you might find pertinent to your quest.

I read that, I think that buffalo may have started his post after reading my post on MDD.

Yes, your thread is what prompted me to start that thread. Welcome to the forum!

[_Fence Sitter]

Here is an article that deals with translation methods used by Joseph Smith.

http://content.lib.utah.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/dialogue&CISOPTR=16574&REC=16

Look under the article shown on the left "Joseph Smith- The Gift of Seeing" starting on page 48.

[_Chap]

Here is an article that deals with translation methods used by Joseph Smith.

http://content.lib.utah.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/dialogue&CISOPTR=16574&REC=16

Look under the article shown on the left "Joseph Smith- The Gift of Seeing" starting on page 48.

That is, bluntly, an astonishing article. Its careful review of numerous early sources seems to make it quite clear that the weight of testimony is overwhelmingly on the side of Joseph Smith having translated the Book of Mormon by looking at some kind of peep-stone, and not at the plates at all.

Daniel Peterson (the well known anti-Mormon TV pundit) was evidently in the right on this one.

One striking quotation that I have never seen before in this connection (op. cit p. 51) comes from Oliver Cowdery in 1838:

I have sometimes had seasons of skepticism, in which I did seriously wonder whether the Prophet and I were men in our sober senses, when he would be translating from plates, through 'the Urim and Thummim', and the plates not be in sight at all.

Of course, when he wrote that Cowdery had (temporarily) lost the Spirit, so he was an anti-Mormon and we can ignore what he said because it must be lies. The Church would definitely not be publishing pictures of Joseph Smith translating by looking at the plates if it didn't really happen that way.

[_bcspace]

and then put his face down in that hat too

Are you willing to go further and explain why he did that or are you still stuck in yellow journalism?

[_Fence Sitter]

and then put his face down in that hat too

Are you willing to go further and explain why he did that or are you still stuck in yellow journalism?

I know you are asking Sock but bear with me.

From a faithful perspective it would be done to enhance concentration by eliminating distractions and make it easier to read the text on the seer stone.

From a critical view it would simply make it impossible for others to see that nothing was happening on the stone.

Can you think of any other reasons for either side?

[_Buffalo]

and then put his face down in that hat too

Are you willing to go further and explain why he did that or are you still stuck in yellow journalism?

Obviously so he could see the illuminated parchment pieces being projected from the magic rock. Happy?

[_Equality]

Isn't there also a problem with the phrase "Urim and Thummim" meaning different things to different people at different times? I believe the phrase was used not only to refer to the "spectacles" that were allegedly recovered from the stone box along with the plates and breastplate but also was used to refer to the peepstones that Joseph Smith used on various occasions. I think a lot of the confusion comes from the early sources' indiscriminate use of the term Urim and Thummim. Seems to me I read an article about that somewhere but I can't for the life of me remember where.

[_mikuu]

Look here for some further discussion you might find pertinent to your quest.

That is what I was looking for, I wish I had read that before I posted at MDD. That is the story I had in my mind from reading on the internet, reading "Rough Stone rolling" and one converstation with an apologist, but I had not read it put together like that.

Are there any accounts of Joseph runnnig his finger over the plates reading from the characters as is depicted in most LDS media?

It seems fairly straight forward that the stone was the method for "translating" the Book of Mormon that we have today.

Are there other accounts that make the singular use of the stone depicted in that article fuzzy?

[_mikuu]

Welcome to the forum!

Thanks.

[_why me]

This thread is deja vu for me from the MDD.