Book of Mormon translation as per LDS manuals

[_Radex]

From reading though the primary manuals I am quite frustrated. These lessons give the impression that Joseph used the urim and thummim to translate the whole Book of Mormon and that he could read/understand the characters on the plates. If I understand correctly the UT was taken from Joseph and not returned after the 116 pages were lost, is that right? Is there any evidence that Joseph could read(by read I mean read without a medium) the characters on the plates?

Is this a good forum to post this type of question on? I kind of wanted responses from the pro LDS side of things. Thanks.

Good evening mikuu:

Rest assured, these are legitimate questions and I encourage you to satiate your curiosity by doing as the Doctrine and Covenants suggest in section 88

And as all have not faith, seek ye diligently and teach one another words of wisdom;
yea, seek ye out of the best books words of wisdom; seek learning, even by study and also by faith.

For me, this is one of the most important scriptures. It tells us to seek wisdom and learning from the best books, but doesn't specifically say which books those might be. It is up to each individual to decide that for him or herself.

In the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, under the heading "Book of Mormon Translation," we learn some important things

Little is known about the translation process itself. Few details can be gleaned from comments made by Joseph's scribes and close associates. Only Joseph Smith knew the actual process, and he declined to describe it in public.

And

Most reports state that throughout the project Joseph used the "Nephite interpreters" or, for convenience, he would use a seer stone (see CHC 1:128-30). Both instruments were sometimes called by others the Urim and Thummim.

In my opinion, it seems there was (and still may be) some confusion about the translation process, and tools used in that process. This is because little is actually known about the process, and scribes and associates may have been misusing terms.

In the end, we do know that Joseph Smith used both the Urim and Thummim and a seer stone in the translation process. Discussion of these can be found in official church materials, though perhaps not for primary aged children.

[_thews]

In my opinion, it seems there was (and still may be) some confusion about the translation process, and tools used in that process. This is because little is actually known about the process, and scribes and associates may have been misusing terms.

There is a lot known about the translation process. Your injection of "misusing terms" is an overt attempt (painfully lacking in supporting data) to introduce distortion. Let me show you how this fact is proven with data:

http://www.mrm.org/translation

Martin Harris was one of the scribes Joseph Smith used to record the writing on the plates. This enabled him to give a first-hand account of how Smith performed this translation. Harris noted,

"By aid of the Seer Stone, sentences would appear and were read by the Prophet and written by Martin, and when finished he would say 'written;' and if correctly written, the sentence would disappear and another appear in its place; but if not written correctly it remained until corrected, so that the translation was just as it was engraven on the plates, precisely in the language then used" (CHC 1:29).

http://www.mrm.org/translation

Harris' description concurs with that of David Whitmer, another one of the three witnesses whose testimony appears at the front of the Book of Mormon. Whitmer details exactly how the stone produced the English interpretation. On page 12 of his book An Address to All Believers in Christ, Whitmer wrote,

"I will now give you a description of the manner in which the Book of Mormon was translated. Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and under it was the interpretation in English. Brother Joseph would read off the English to Oliver Cowdery, who was his principal scribe, and when it was written down and repeated to brother Joseph to see if it was correct, then it would disappear, and another character with the interpretation would appear. Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, and not by any power of man."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emma_Smith

Emma acting as a scribe. She became a physical witness of the plates, reporting that she felt them through a cloth, traced the pages through the cloth with her fingers, heard the metallic sound they made as she moved them, and felt their weight. She later wrote in an interview with her son, Joseph Smith III: "In writing for your father I frequently wrote day after day, often sitting at the table close by him, he sitting with his face buried in his hat, with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us."

Do you discount these three accounts?

In the end, we do know that Joseph Smith used both the Urim and Thummim and a seer stone in the translation process. Discussion of these can be found in official church materials, though perhaps not for primary aged children.

We do not "know" that Joseph Smith used seer stones and the Urim and Thummim, and that's because there was no Urim and Thummim. The use of "conflate" to name Joseph Smith's seer stones the Urim and Thummim doesn't change what they were, which were occult objects used to contact the dead before the Book of Mormon was written. Care to prove me wrong? Please enlighten all of us as to the origin of the supposed Urim and Thummim. When were they given to Joseph Smith? When were they taken back?

More factual data to support my argument:

http://books.google.com/books?id=vLgUAA ... 42&f=false

Hyrum very urgently requested Joseph to write the revelation by means of the Urim and Thummim, but Joseph in reply, said he did not need to, for he knew the revelation perfectly from beginning to end.

This puts the supposed Urim and Thummim in Joseph Smith's possession in 1842.

And, for good measure, we have this from our very own Dr. Peterson:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=11896&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=21

What are the reasons the church does not accurately show how the translation took place?

Here are three reasons:

1) Most members don't know much about Church history.

2) Mormon artists and their editors are pretty representative, in this sense, of the general membership.

3) Artistic representations of historical events are often quite inaccurate, in and out of the Church.

To summarize Radex, your arguments from silence are based on nothing... care to back up what you said with any data whatsoever?

[_Radex]

In my opinion, it seems there was (and still may be) some confusion about the translation process, and tools used in that process. This is because little is actually known about the process, and scribes and associates may have been misusing terms.

There is a lot known about the translation process. Your injection of "misusing terms" is an overt attempt (painfully lacking in supporting data) to introduce distortion. Let me show you how this fact is proven with data:

Hi thews:

My, as you call it, "injection of misusing terms" is an appropriate way to describe the confusion some of Smith's associates had when referencing the Urim and Thummim versus the seer stone. There was no conscious effort on my part to be dodgy. This was made quite clear in my quotations and link to the article in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, I thought.

Dr. Ricks makes an important observation of which I've added some stylistic emphasis

Concerning the manner in which the seerstone or the "interpreters" functioned, Joseph Smith reported only that they operated "by the gift and power of God." This is particularly unfortunate, since only he was in a position to describe from personal experience how these instruments enhanced his power to translate.

What that means, for both you and me, is that accounts of associates and scribes are not as reliable as if Smith had said himself how everything functioned. Unfortunately, according to Dr. Ricks, he wrote very little about it. So, when I assert that Smith used both the Urim and Thummim and seer stones, I believe I am making a correct assumption based upon a weighted average (of sorts) of what Smith actually said (great weight), and what his scribes and associates said (lesser weight).

You seem to be attempting to demonstrate that Smith used a seer stone; but I am in full accord with you on this point. In fact, I explicitly stated it.

And, for good measure, we have this from our very own Dr. Peterson:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=11896&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=21

What are the reasons the church does not accurately show how the translation took place?

Here are three reasons:

1) Most members don't know much about Church history.

2) Mormon artists and their editors are pretty representative, in this sense, of the general membership.

3) Artistic representations of historical events are often quite inaccurate, in and out of the Church.

I am unsure what you're getting at with this point. I agree with these three things.

To summarize Radex, your arguments from silence are based on nothing... care to back up what you said with any data whatsoever?

I am sorry, thews. I assumed my links to well-researched articles coupled with selected in-context quotations from said articles constituted data.

[_Simon Belmont]

This is the actual page of how it was originally (1829) written in the Book of Commandments...
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_YaFmOpBEBtY/R ... 33-p22.gif

Thews, that isn't the usual page you post. I really miss that old gem of yours. Please post the other page!

[_sock puppet]

This is the actual page of how it was originally (1829) written in the Book of Commandments...
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_YaFmOpBEBtY/R ... 33-p22.gif

Thews, that isn't the usual page you post. I really miss that old gem of yours. Please post the other page!

Simon, why did LDS Church retrofit language about use of U&T into this revelation?

[Guest]

In my opinion, it seems there was (and still may be) some confusion about the translation process, and tools used in that process. This is because little is actually known about the process, and scribes and associates may have been misusing terms.

There is a lot known about the translation process. Your injection of "misusing terms" is an overt attempt (painfully lacking in supporting data) to introduce distortion. Let me show you how this fact is proven with data:

Hi thews:

My, as you call it, "injection of misusing terms" is an appropriate way to describe the confusion some of Smith's associates had when referencing the Urim and Thummim versus the seer stone. There was no conscious effort on my part to be dodgy. This was made quite clear in my quotations and link to the article in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, I thought.

Dr. Ricks makes an important observation of which I've added some stylistic emphasis

Concerning the manner in which the seerstone or the "interpreters" functioned, Joseph Smith reported only that they operated "by the gift and power of God." This is particularly unfortunate, since only he was in a position to describe from personal experience how these instruments enhanced his power to translate.

Hello Radex. When you state there is confusion, I believe the "confusion" is manufactured to introduce distortion. As I've clearly pointed out in the above posts, the use of a seer stone in a hat is clearly documented as the means of translation. We know the "interpreters" were taken back per the D&C 10 after the lost 116 pages (before the Book of Mormon was started), so every word of the Book of Mormon was translated using the exact same seer stones Joseph Smith owned before the Book of Mormon to "see" evil treasure guardians, making them occult objects.

Also explained previously (with a lot of supporting data), the use of the term "Urim and Thummim" was not used until 1833, or three years after the Book of Mormon. When the Book of Commandments was written, if there was a second set of interpreters (along with the supposed "Nephite interpreters") that were given to Joseph Smith at a later date, wouldn't logic dictate this would be explained? ... it wasn't. All we know, based on three different documented accounts from those very close to Joseph Smith, is that he used seer stones placed in a hat. The term "Urim and Thummim" to conflate seer stones is not warranted, as your argument assumes they are not the same thing.

From FairMormon on the subject:

http://fairwiki.org/Joseph_Smith/Seer_stones

How many seer stones were there?

Joseph first used a neighbor's seer stone (probably Sally Chase, on the balance of historical evidence, though there are other possibilities) to discover the location of a brown, baby's foot-shaped stone. The vision of this stone likely occurred in about 1819–1820, and he obtained his first seer stone in about 1821–1822.[6]

Joseph then used this first stone to find a second stone (a white one). The color and sequence of obtaining these stones has often been confused,[7] and readers interested in an in-depth treatment are referred to the endnotes.[8]

Note that the seer stones are dated between 1821 and 1822... long before any angels appeared, when Joseph Smith used those exact same seer stones to see evil treasure guardians for hire.

How were the stone(s) involved in the translation of the Book of Mormon?

There is considerable evidence that the location of the plates and Nephite interpreters (Urim and Thummim) were revealed to Joseph via his second, white seer stone. In 1859, Martin Harris recalled that "Joseph had a stone which was dug from the well of Mason Chase...It was by means of this stone he first discovered the plates."[17]

Note in the above the Urim and Thummim are defined as the Nephite interpreters, leaving only Joseph Smith's seer stones.

What that means, for both you and me, is that accounts of associates and scribes are not as reliable as if Smith had said himself how everything functioned. Unfortunately, according to Dr. Ricks, he wrote very little about it. So, when I assert that Smith used both the Urim and Thummim and seer stones, I believe I am making a correct assumption based upon a weighted average (of sorts) of what Smith actually said (great weight), and what his scribes and associates said (lesser weight).

This doesn't make sense. You have direct quotes from Emma Smith, David Whitmer and Martin Harris defining the translation process as seer stone placed in a hat. There is no need to cast doubt based what Joseph Smith supposedly said, as all three of these explanations state the exact same thing.

You seem to be attempting to demonstrate that Smith used a seer stone; but I am in full accord with you on this point. In fact, I explicitly stated it.

Ok, then we agree. Joseph Smith, with his seer stone placed in his hat, translated the Book of Mormon. These were not glasses used with a breastplate. In looking though "pro" Mormon websites, can you show me one that depicts the use of a seer stone placed in a hat? I contend you can't, which is outright deception.

And, for good measure, we have this from our very own Dr. Peterson:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=11896&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=21

What are the reasons the church does not accurately show how the translation took place?

Here are three reasons:

1) Most members don't know much about Church history.

2) Mormon artists and their editors are pretty representative, in this sense, of the general membership.

3) Artistic representations of historical events are often quite inaccurate, in and out of the Church.

I am unsure what you're getting at with this point. I agree with these three things.

My point is that Dr. Peterson admits most LDS members do not know the truth about the church's history. The reason they don't, is because of the distortion, which is intentionally placed to cast doubt and label the truth "anti" Mormon. The facts, as I have demonstrated, is there never was an Urim and Thummim, and only seer stones were used to translate the Book of Mormon.

To summarize Radex, your arguments from silence are based on nothing... care to back up what you said with any data whatsoever?

I am sorry, thews. I assumed my links to well-researched articles coupled with selected in-context quotations from said articles constituted data.

Links to data must be interpreted with layers of distortion. What I was looking for is how you claim that the Urim and Thummim are not Joseph smith's seer stones, as I have proven, based on the facts, that they are one and the same. The Nephite interpreters were taken back (according to Mormon doctrine), so how can the term "Urim and Thummim" be used to define Joseph Smith's seer stones when it wasn't even used until three years after the Book of Mormon was published?

Thank you for engaging me on this topic Radex. If I offended you I apologize, but I simply cannot understand how you can imply "we just don't know" how the Book of Mormon was translated when you have identical statements to define exactly how it was done.

Another note worth mentioning, Brant Gardner uses the term "finger on book" to define a supposed method of translation. What is "finger on book" anyway? It's simply a distortion of the facts based on the LDS depiction of the translation. I like Brant, and one of the reasons is he has no problem with calling a spade a spade, or a seer stone a seer stone. As a Christian, I find the distortion of "Urim and Thummim" to define seer stones deceptive, because, as i have clearly pointed out, when using LDS history there never was an Urim and Thummim, and if one chooses to "conflate" the two (seer stones), it's labeling occult objects as Christian, which they simply are not.

[_thews]

This is the actual page of how it was originally (1829) written in the Book of Commandments...
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_YaFmOpBEBtY/R ... 33-p22.gif

Thews, that isn't the usual page you post. I really miss that old gem of yours. Please post the other page!

And again you add nothing to the conversation. For the (self-professed) most knowledgeable person regarding Joseph Smith, why not add something worth discussing Simon? Please explain the history of the Urim and Thummim according to Mormon history.

[_Simon Belmont]

Joseph Smith used a Urim and Thummim, which contained stone-like objects. He also used a seer stone which he placed in a hat.

This is well known and documented.

What is the issue?

[_Themis]

Joseph Smith used a Urim and Thummim, which contained stone-like objects. He also used a seer stone which he placed in a hat.

This is well known and documented.

What is the issue?

I believe the issue is that church teaching that the U & T were used to translate the Book of Mormon we have today is incorrect and therefore deceptive. It was not used on any of the current Book of Mormon Joseph claimed to translate. Only the lost 116 pages was it supposed to be used on. The problem is that the church tends to avoid the seer stone in a hat. I can certainly understand why they would. :)

[_sock puppet]

Joseph Smith used a Urim and Thummim, which contained stone-like objects. He also used a seer stone which he placed in a hat.

This is well known and documented.

What is the issue?

I believe the issue is that church teaching that the U & T were used to translate the Book of Mormon we have today is incorrect and therefore deceptive. It was not used on any of the current Book of Mormon Joseph claimed to translate. Only the lost 116 pages was it supposed to be used on. The problem is that the church tends to avoid the seer stone in a hat. I can certainly understand why they would. :)

If the Church doesn't lie for the Lord, who will?