Joseph Smith didn't own KJV prior to Book of Mormon, some speculate. So what?

Post by **_cksalmon** » Sat Nov 10, 2007 1:09 am

See here.

Tvedtness writes:

Like others before him, Wright believes that Joseph Smith drew directly from the KJV when dictating the Book of Mormon, rather than translating from plates. Some Latter-day Saint scholars would disagree with this assessment, based both on the probability that Joseph Smith did not own a copy of the Bible until after the Book of Mormon had already gone to press [15] and on the fact that his wife Emma indicated that he had no materials from which he could read during the time of the translation. [16]

-----------
footnotes

[15] In October 1829, four months after completing the translation of the Book of Mormon, Joseph had Oliver Cowdery purchase a copy of the Bible for their use. See the discussion in John A. Tvedtnes and Matthew Roper, "'Joseph Smith's Use of the Apocrypha': Shadow or Reality?" FARMS Review of Books 8/2 (1996): 330–32. It is likely that the Bible from which Joseph Smith read as a young man remained with his father's family rather than being transported with the prophet to Harmony and then Fayette, where he dictated the Book of Mormon.

[16] In an interview published in the Saints' Advocate 2/4 (October 1879): 51, Emma declared that, during the translation process, Joseph "had neither manuscript nor book to read from" and that "if he had had anything of the kind he could not have concealed it from me."

Of course, the claims of footnotes 15 and 16 are quite different and not at all necessarily mutually inclusive.

Who are these "some Latter-day Saint scholars" who believe that it is more likely than not that Joseph Smith didn't even own a KJV prior to the translation of Book of Mormon?

Is Tvedtnes one? He doesn't say.

Granting the conjecture Tvedtnes places on the lips of some anonymous others, does not personally owning a KJV translation of the Bible somehow mean that Joseph Smith didn't have access to a KJV translation of the Bible prior to the translation of Book of Mormon? I hardly think that Tvedtnes would affirm that. So, what's his point, other than rather obliquely to suggest that Joseph Smith's possible lack of ownership of KJV entails that Book of Mormon Isaiah is not derivative of KJV Isaiah?

One might almost think that FARMS reviewers and writers don't read each others' work.

CKS

Post by **_Yong Xi** » Sat Nov 10, 2007 1:34 am

I would be astounded if the Smith family did not own a Bible. My guess is that most families living in upstate NY in the early 1800's would have owned at least one book, a Bible. This argument is beyond silly.

Post by **_ktallamigo** » Sat Nov 10, 2007 1:36 am

That's what I say: So what?

If he sent Oliver Cowdery to buy a shiny new version of the KJV, that doesn't mean that he didn't have access to another copy in someone else's home, or the farm where he lived with Emma, or borrowed one from somewhere else, or Oliver probably had one. It doesn't mean that he didn't own another copy. Maybe it was "for show" to "prove" that he didn't have access to it.

If Joseph didn't have access to a Bible, how was he supposed to read "If any man lack wisdom let him ask of God."

According to his mother, he read the Bible often growing up.

Back in those days, a family Bible was a prized family possession, and most families owned one. Kids were taught to read out of it.

Of course, according to the Spalding theory, Sidney Rigdon certainly would have a copy of the Bible, and knew it backwards and forwards. Solomon Spaulding was a theologian and priest, and certainly knew the Bible backwards and forwards.

Also, some speculate that all the Isaiah in 1st and 2nd Nephi is just filler - to put stuff in where the 116 pages were lost.

Anyone ever read the Tanner's article about the Black Hole in the Book of Mormon? Very interesting!!!!!

ktall

Post by **_cksalmon** » Sat Nov 10, 2007 1:37 am

Yes, I agree. But the argument is that the Smith family Bible stayed at the Smith home, and that Joseph Smith didn't have access to that copy when he was translating Book of Mormon elsewhere.

No one else in NY had a copy of KJV, I suppose, other than the Smith family.

CKS

Post by **_CaliforniaKid** » Sat Nov 10, 2007 1:39 am

Why wouldn't the Hale family have a Bible?

How very silly...

Post by **_MishMagnet** » Sat Nov 10, 2007 1:51 am

Perhaps there was a 2-for-1 on Bibles and Manuscript Found when you use your 5-finger discount.

(slaps knee)

Post by **_Jersey Girl** » Sat Nov 10, 2007 1:55 am

cksalmon wrote:Yes, I agree. But the argument is that the Smith family Bible stayed at the Smith home, and that Joseph Smith didn't have access to that copy when he was translating Book of Mormon elsewhere.

No one else in NY had a copy of KJV, I suppose, other than the Smith family.

CKS

None of what you copied and quoted constitutes an argument, CKS. It constitutes absurdity.

Post by **_karl61** » Sat Nov 10, 2007 3:16 am

If you read a section of the Bible and reread it and study it and then put yourself in a trance like state you can pull from that memory- a lot of people are brilliant and create things but don't claim to be a prophet. Joseph Smith claimed to be a Prophet but acted and dictated like a fool. Sometimes he was worse than a fool when dealing with other people wives or daughters.

Post by **_Sethbag** » Sat Nov 10, 2007 3:45 am

Whether he owned a Bible personally or not is not even really relevent to whether he could have used the KJV as a source, as has been pointed out, because all he needed was access to one, and that can't have been all that hard.

Post by **_KimberlyAnn** » Sat Nov 10, 2007 3:49 am

Yeah, CKS, I'd like to know which apologists think it was probable that Smith had no Bible prior to the Book of Mormon going to press. That's just absurd.

Did Emma not maintain until her death that Joseph wasn't a polygamist? I wonder why she is supposedly so credible when it comes to her statements re: the translation of the Book of Mormon?

KA