FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Difference between revisions of "Book of Mormon/Translation"
(mod) |
(mod) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}} | {{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}} | ||
| + | {{Resource Title|Articles related to the translation of the Book of Mormon}} | ||
{{summary}} | {{summary}} | ||
{{BoMPortal}} | {{BoMPortal}} | ||
Revision as of 22:15, 2 September 2013
- REDIRECTTemplate:Test3
Contents
- 1 Articles related to the translation of the Book of Mormon
- 2 Book of Mormon Translation
- 2.1 Questions
- 2.2 Answer
- 2.3 Related Articles
- 2.4
- 2.5 Detailed Analysis
- 2.6
- 2.7 Topics
- 2.7.1 The lost 116 pages
- 2.7.2 Anthon transcript
- 2.7.3 Description of the plates
- 2.7.4 Chronology of events
- 2.7.5 Chronology of translation methods
- 2.7.6 Tight versus loose translation
- 2.7.7 Relationship between the Nephite interpreters, seer stones and the "Urim and Thummim"
- 2.7.8 Artistic depictions of the Book of Mormon translation
- 2.7.9 Location of the plates during translation
- 2.7.10 Relationship of the JST to the Book of Mormon
- 2.8
- 2.9 Further reading and additional sources responding to these claims
| Answers portal |
| Book of Mormon |
|
 RESOURCES
|
|---|
|
General information: Book of Mormon & Bible: Criticisms: |
 PERSPECTIVES
|
 MEDIA
|
| OTHER PORTALS
|
Book of Mormon Translation
Questions
- What do we know about the method used to translate the Book of Mormon?
- Were the plates sometimes not in the room while Joseph was translating them?
- Critics claim that each sentence and word in the 1830 Book of Mormon "had supposedly come directly from God."
To see citations to the critical sources for these claims, click here
==Answer
== It is important to remember that what we do know for certain is that the translation of the Book of Mormon was carried out "by the gift and power of God." These are the only words that Joseph Smith himself used to describe the translation process.
As Elder Russel M. Nelson stated in the July 1993 Ensign, the "details of this miraculous method of translation are still not fully known." We do know, based upon witness accounts, that Joseph employed instruments designated for that purpose: The Nephite interpreters and his own seer stone. Many have offered their own opinions about how these devices "functioned" in the process, but it should be kept in mind that these opinions are given by people who never performed the translation process itself: They can only report on what they observed the Prophet doing at the time. We also know that at some later point in time, both the Nephite interpreters and Joseph's seer stone were referred to using the term "Urim and Thummim." Whether Joseph used the "original" Urim and Thummim (i.e. Nephite interpreters or "spectacles") or his own seer stone to perform this sacred task is beside the point, and it does not diminish the power of the resulting work. One should read the Book of Mormon itself and evaluate its message rather than get wrapped up in the detail of its exact method of translation.
Related Articles
- The Spectacles, the Stone, the Hat, and the Book: A Twenty-first Century Believer’s View of the Book of Mormon Translation (Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture). This essay seeks to examine the Book of Mormon translation method from the perspective of a regular, nonscholarly, believing member in the twenty-first century, by taking into account both what is learned in Church and what can be learned from historical records that are now easily available. What do we know? What should we know? How can a believing Latter-day Saint reconcile apparently conflicting accounts of the translation process? An examination of the historical sources is used to provide us with a fuller and more complete understanding of the complexity that exists in the early events of the Restoration. These accounts come from both believing and nonbelieving sources, and some skepticism ought to be employed in choosing to accept some of the interpretations offered by some of these sources as fact. However, an examination of these sources provides a larger picture, and the answers to these questions provide an enlightening look into Church history and the evolution of the translation story. This essay focuses primarily on the methods and instruments used in the translation process and how a faithful Latter-day Saint might view these as further evidence of truthfulness of the restored Gospel.
Detailed Analysis
Church response
In 1993, Elder Russell M. Nelson stated that "[t]he details of this miraculous method of translation are still not fully known." [1]
All that we know for certain is that Joseph translated the record "by the gift and power of God." (DC 135:3)
FAIR commentary
We are given some insight into the spiritual aspect of the translation process, when the Lord says to Oliver Cowdery:
"But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right." (DC 9:8)
Beyond this, the Church does not take any sort of official stand on the exact method by which the Book of Mormon translation occurred. Joseph Smith himself never recorded the precise physical details of the method of translation:
=="Brother Joseph Smith, Jun., said that it was not intended to tell the world all the particulars of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon; and also said that it was not expedient for him to relate these things" [2]
Topics
==
The lost 116 pages
Summary: Critics assert that Joseph Smith did not retranslate the 116 lost pages of the Book of Lehi because he knew that he could not reproduce the exact same text. They claim that alterations in a different handwriting to the stolen manuscript would have been readily apparent. Some suggest that the writing of the 116 pages served as an “apprenticeship” to allow Joseph to improve his writing skills.Anthon transcript
Summary: What do we know about the Anthon transcript and the translation of the Book of Mormon? What is the current scholarly thought on the transcript? Didn't Charles Anthon deny having "validating" the characters?Description of the plates
Summary: A variety of persons who handled and/or saw the plates left descriptions. We list these descriptions in this sub-article.Chronology of events
Summary: A chronology of events related to the Book of Mormon translation and publication.Chronology of translation methods
Summary: We have a number of accounts of the translation process from the perspective of various contemporary second-hand witnesses who viewed the Prophet as he dictated to his scribes. The only person other than Joseph who attempted to directly translate was Oliver Cowdery. Oliver, however, did not record any details regarding the exact physical process that he employed during his attempt—we only have the spiritual aspect of the process.- Mainly italics altered in the portions dependent on the KJV?—
Brief Summary: Some have claimed that the differences between the KJV and the Book of Mormon text (in, for example, the Isaiah passages in 2 Nephi) differ mainly in the italics of the KJV version. (Click here for full article)∗ ∗ ∗
- Mainly italics altered in the portions dependent on the KJV?—
Tight versus loose translation
Summary: Was the Prophet provided with the exact wording of every sentence in the Book of Mormon or was he simply given impressions which he then dictated within the context of his own understanding?Relationship between the Nephite interpreters, seer stones and the "Urim and Thummim"
Summary: What physical aids were employed by the Prophet during translation?Artistic depictions of the Book of Mormon translation
Summary: People are sometimes troubled when they see artists' depictions of the Prophet and Oliver sitting at a table while Joseph views the plates as they sit in plain sight. Obviously, the plates never sat exposed in plain view, and these artistic interpretations originate purely in the mind of the artist. Some accounts indicate that the plates sat on a table covered with a cloth "in plain view," with Emma indicating that she actually moved them around in order to perform her household chores. [3]Location of the plates during translation
Summary: Some witness accounts suggest that Joseph was able to translate while the plates were covered, or when they were not even in the same room with him.[4] Therefore, if the plates themselves were not being used during the translation process, why was it necessary to have plates at all?Relationship of the JST to the Book of Mormon
Summary: Some passages from the Bible (parts of Isaiah, for example) were included in the Book of Mormon text. However, the same passages were later revised for the Joseph Smith Translation of the Holy Bible. In some cases these passages are not rendered identically. Critics claim that if the JST was an accurate translation, it would match the supposedly more 'pure' Isaiah text possessed by the Nephites.
==
Notes
==
- [note] Russell M. Nelson, "A Treasured Testament," Ensign (July 1993): 61.off-site
- [note] Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 volumes, edited by Brigham H. Roberts, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1957), 1:220. Volume 1 link
- [note] Interview of Emma Smith by her son Joseph Smith III, "Interview with Joseph Smith III, 1879," Dan Vogel (editor), Early Mormon Documents (Salt Lake City, Signature Books, 1996–2003), 5 vols, 1:541–542.
- [note] Interview of Emma Smith by her son Joseph Smith III, "Interview with Joseph Smith III, 1879," in Dan Vogel (editor), Early Mormon Documents (Salt Lake City, Signature Books, 1996–2003), 5 vols, 1:539.