Answering My Gospel Questions class

I know you readers are all eager for the next part of the series on From Darkness Unto Light (and it’s awesome), but I’m delaying it by a day because the new Religion 280 class has been in the news a bit. I mentioned it before. Here are some links.

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2022/07/21/latest-mormon-land-class/

and

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/new-institute-class-teaches-young-adults-how-to-find-answers-to-their-gospel-questions

This course is another very positive development for the establishment of Zion.

Here’s a link to the teacher material:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/answering-my-gospel-questions-teacher-material?lang=eng

I’d like to see this course added to the Self Reliance program along with the Emotional Resilience course, which every Latter-day Saint should take.

This class, like the Emotional Resilience class, will elevate the Latter-day Saints who take it above the logical and factual thinking errors we see among both our LDS apologists and our critics.

_____

A good example is the section “Microtraining 3, How to Assess the Reliability of Sources.”

I wish every Latter-day Saint would read and re-read this section. It articulates exactly what I’ve advocated ever since I started this blog. Like the introduction to the Gospel Topics Essays, this microtraining is the antithesis of the M2C/SITH citation cartel’s approach.

While people are free to believe whatever they want, it’s easy to assess the relative reliability of the teachings of the prophets vs. the teachings of the scholars.

No scholar alive today was present when Joseph and Oliver translated the plates, when they received the Priesthood, etc.

Section 2 below suggests we ask: “How closely connected is the author to the events being described? When a source addresses something from Church history, ask yourself how far removed the source is from the event it is discussing. Stories based on second- or thirdhand accounts are often less reliable.”

Let’s see how well SITH and M2C survive this guidance.

We have Joseph and Oliver both explaining, multiple times, that Joseph translated the record with the Urim and Thummim that came with the plates. Yet our modern scholars teach that Joseph and Oliver misled everyone because they, the modern scholars, know that Joseph actually didn’t use the plates or the Urim and Thummim but instead Joseph merely read words that appeared in the stone in the hat (SITH).

We have Oliver explaining it was a fact that Cumorah of Mormon 6:6 is in New York, we have Joseph’s mother explaining that Moroni identified the hill as Cumorah the first time he met Joseph, we have David Whitmer explaining that one of the Nephites took the abridged plates from Harmony to Cumorah, etc., but our modern scholars reject all of that. Why? Because they teach that Joseph and Oliver were ignorant speculators who misled everyone until they, our modern scholars, figured out that there were “two Cumorahs” and that the real Cumorah is somewhere in southern Mexico.

Seriously, how more obvious could this be?

In section 3 below, we read this: “Does the author intentionally ignore available evidence in order to mislead? Some authors deliberately omit important facts and ignore critical evidence to support their particular point of view.”

To promote both SITH and M2C, our modern scholars deliberately omit important facts and ignore critical evidence to support their points of view. We’ve seen how the book From Darkness Unto Light does this, and the next installment will provide more examples. The citation cartel consistently omits evidence that contradicts M2C and SITH. Even the Gospel Topics Essay on translation omits what Joseph and Oliver said about the translation in favor of the theories of the scholars who wrote the essay.

_____

As the principles of this new course permeate LDS culture, we will see a lot of new approaches to Church history and other topics. More and more Latter-day Saints will see that the evidence supports and corroborates the teachings of the prophets.

Who knows? Maybe even our scholars will someday value the teachings of the prophets over their own theories.

Patrick Mason was quoted in the article. He made a good point, but it’s a bit self-congratulatory, seeing that he’s a professional historian himself.

Sources are key. Patrick Mason, head of Mormon history and culture at Utah State University, recently told The Salt Lake Tribune that those researching church history, for instance, should stick with primary sources and the work of professional historians.

“Go look at the original stuff and make your own judgments,” he said. “Don’t just rely on what somebody on the internet happened to say about it.”

To the extent professional historians provide access to primary sources, they’re awesome. But to the extent they present their opinions as fact, they’re counterproductive. I discussed a significant example here:

https://www.academia.edu/67756647/Agenda_driven_editorial_content_in_the_Joseph_Smith_Papers

_____

Here’s the link to microtraining 3.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/answering-my-gospel-questions-teacher-material/4-appendix-a/19-microtraining-3?lang=eng

How to Assess the Reliability of Sources

Define

Display the following statement by President Dallin H. Oaks of the First Presidency:

We live in a time of greatly expanded and disseminated information. But not all of this information is true. We need to be cautious as we seek truth and choose sources for that search. (Dallin H. Oaks, “Truth and the Plan,” Ensign or Liahona, Nov. 2018, 25)

Model

Provide students with the following handout, and discuss how these questions can help us identify reliable sources.

Questions for Evaluating Sources

Answering My Gospel Questions—Microtraining 3: How to Assess the Reliability of Sources

What are the qualifications, intentions, and possible biases of the author?

President Dallin H. Oaks of the First Presidency taught that we should “be cautious about the motivation of the one who provides information. … Our personal decisions should be based on information from sources that are qualified on the subject and free from selfish motivations” (Dallin H. Oaks, “Truth and the Plan,” Ensign or Liahona, Nov. 2018, 25).
How closely connected is the author to the events being described?

When a source addresses something from Church history, ask yourself how far removed the source is from the event it is discussing. Stories based on second- or thirdhand accounts are often less reliable.
Does the author intentionally ignore available evidence in order to mislead?

Some authors deliberately omit important facts and ignore critical evidence to support their particular point of view.
Are the teachings and events addressed in this source presented in the proper context of their time, place, and circumstance?

Some teachings and historical events can become confusing when they are taken out of the context of their time and place. Historical context also includes other events happening at the time (such as wars, economic crises, and social and political movements) and the culture and demographics of a given time and setting.
Are the teachings and events supported by additional reliable sources?

Support from other reliable sources helps establish the accuracy of doctrine and historical events.

Source: About Central America

July 19, 2022Uncategorized

From Darkness Unto Light and Mormonism Unvailed part 1

In this post and the next one, we’ll discuss the way the book From Darkness Unto Light handles the book Mormonism Unvailed.

The book quotes or cites Mormonism Unvailed 31 times. We’ll look at those references in part 2, but today let’s look at how Joseph and Oliver dealt with Mormonism Unvailed.

[BTW, an editorial note: I fixed the formatting of the post about the Interpreter on TikTok:

https://www.bookofmormoncentralamerica.com/2022/07/the-interpreter-on-tiktok.html]

_____

The 1834 book Mormonism Unvailed made a big impact on the Church. It set out the Spalding theory that dominated the national media in the 1800s. It also spelled out the “stone-in-the-hat” theory (SITH) which modern LDS intellectuals have embraced.

Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery responded to Mormonism Unvailed in a series of eight essays about Church history, published as letters in the Messenger and Advocate in 1834-5. Joseph had his scribes copy these essays into his own history as part of his life story. An excerpt from Letter I is found in the Pearl of Great Price. Letter VII explains that it is a fact that the Hill Cumorah in western New York is the same Hill Cumorah of Mormon 6:6.

The essays were not Joseph’s only response to Mormonism Unvailed and related anti-Mormon literature. He wrote a serialized letter to “To the Elders of the Church of the Latter Day Saints” that was published in the Messenger and Advocate in September, November and December 1835. In the November issue, he explained that “I have been drawn into this course of proceeding, by persecution, that is brought upon us from false rumor, and misrepresentations concerning my sentiments.” (Messenger and Advocate II.2:209 ¶2)

Before reading the excerpt from the December issue below, think compare Joseph’s treatment of Mormonism Unvailed with the way our modern LDS apologists and historians have embraced that book.

Joseph used phrases such as “the enemy of righteousness,” “pitchfork of lies,” “adversary of truth,” and “cloud of darkness.”

Behold, then, is not this the kingdom of heaven that is raising its head in the last days, in the majesty of its God; even the church of the Latter day saints,—like an impenetrable, immovable rock in the midst of the mighty deep, exposed storms and tempests of satan, but has, thus far, remained steadfast and is still braving the mountain waves of opposition, which are driven by the tempestuous winds of sinking crafts, have and are still dashing with tremendous foam, across its triumphing brow, urged onward with redoubled fury by the enemy of righteousness, with his pitchfork of lies, as you will see fairly represented in a cut, contained in Mr. Howe’s “Mormonism Unveiled?”

And we hope that this adversary of truth will continue to stir up the sink of iniquity, that people may the more readily discern between the righteous and wicked. We also would notice one of the modern sons of Seeva, who would fain have made people believe that he could cast out devils by a certain pamphlet (viz. the “Millennial Harbinger,”) that went the rounds through our country, who felt so fully authorized to brand Jo Smith, with the appellation of Elymus the sorcerer, and to say with Paul, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord! We would reply to this gentleman—Paul we know, and Christ we know, but who are ye? And with the best of feelings, we would say to him, in the language of Paul to those who said they were John’s disciples, but had not so much as heard there was a Holy Ghost, to repent and be baptized for the remission of sins by those who have legal authority, and under their hands you shall receive the Holy Ghost, according to the scriptures.

… We might invite the gentleman to a public investigation of these matters; yea, and we do challenge him to an investigation upon any or all principles wherein he feel opposed to us, in public or in private.

We might farther say that, we could introduce him to “Mormonism Unveiled.” Also to the right honorable Doct. P. Hurlburt, who is the legitimate author of the same, who is not so much a doctor of physic, as of falsehood, or by name. We could also give him an introduction to the reverend Mr. Howe, the illegitimate author of “Mormonism Unveiled,” in order to give currency to the publication, as Mr. Hurlburt, about this time, was bound over to court, for threatening life. He is also an associate of the celebrated Mr. Clapp, who has of late immortalised his name by swearing that he would not believe a Mormon under oath; and by his polite introduction to said Hurlburt’s wife, which cost him (as we have been informed) a round sum. Also his son Mathew testified that, the book of Mormon had been proved false an hundred times, by Howe’s book: and also, that he would not believe a Mormon under oath. And also we could mention the reverend Mr. Bentley, who, we believe, has been actively engaged in injuring the character of his brother-in-law, viz: Elder S. [Sidney] Rigdon.

Now, the above statements are according to our best information: and we believe them to be true; and this is as fair a sample of the doctrine of Campbellism, as we ask, taking the statements of these gentlemen, and judging them by their fruits. And we might and [add] many more to the black catalogue; even the ringleaders, not of the Nazarenes, for how can any good thing come out of Nazareth, but of the far-famed Mentor mob: all sons and legitimate heirs of the same spirit of Alexander Campbell, and “Mormonism Unveiled,” according to the representation in the cut spoken of above.

The above cloud of darkness has long been beating with mountain waves upon the immovable rock of the church of the Latter Day Saints, and notwithstanding all this, the mustard seed is still towering its lofty branches, higher and higher, and extending itself wider and wider, and the charriot wheels of the kingdom are still rolling on, impelled by the mighty arm of Jehovah; and in spite of all opposition will still roll on until his words are all fulfilled.

Our readers will excuse us for deviating from the subject, when they take into consideration the abuses, that have been heaped upon us heretofore, which we have tamely submitted to, until forbearance is no longer required at our hands, having frequently turned both hand the right and left cheek, we believe it our duty now to stand up in our own defence.

[I reposted the entire letter here:

https://www.lettervii.com/p/1835-letter-by-joseph-smith-in.html

A facsimile of the original issue of the Messenger and Advocate is here:

https://archive.org/details/LDSMessengerAndAdvocate18341837/page/n225/mode/2up

A copy of the letter is available in the Joseph Smith Papers here:

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1838-1856-volume-b-1-1-september-1834-2-november-1838/101.]

_____

the end

Source: About Central America

July 18, 2022Uncategorized

From Darkness Unto Light–omitting sources to revise history

A little over five years ago I discussed this book, From Darkness unto Light.

https://www.bookofmormoncentralamerica.com/2018/05/from-darkness-unto-light.html

I pointed out there that the book omits important historical references that contradict the authors’ theories.

Now, five years later, people are still citing and quoting the book as authoritative. People who rely on this book, or the Gospel Topics Essay on Book of Mormon Translation, have no idea about what Joseph and Oliver actually taught about the translation.

In a time when so many are confused by the stone-in-the-hat (SITH) theory, this is a good time to revisit the book.

_____

The first time I read the book, I thought it was insightful and offered some new interpretations based on original documents from Church history. After all, the authors are two of the editors of Volume 1 of the Documents series of the Joseph Smith Papers. They are even cited in note 16 in the Gospel Topics Essay on Book of Mormon Translation.

Michael Hubbard MacKay, Gerrit J. Dirkmaat, Grand Underwood, Robert J. Woodford, and William G. Hartley, eds., Documents, Volume 1: July 1828–June 1831, vol. 1 of the Documents series of The Joseph Smith Papers, edited by Dean C. Jessee, Ronald K. Esplin, Richard Lyman Bushman, and Matthew J. Grow (Salt Lake City: Church Historian’s Press, 2013)

With this pedigree, we might expect the book to be an open-minded analysis of the relevant historical documents. However, as we’ll see here, it is less a book about history than an argument for the authors’ interpretation of history (basically SITH), bolstered by their penchant for ignoring important historical references.

_____

This book was published in 2015 and, so far as I know, has never been revised. I’m continually amazed that any current scholars would cite this book now that the authors’ omissions are so obvious and well known.

The authors set out their thesis as fact in this sentence at the end of Chapter 4.

With the “gift and power of God” Joseph read the translated words that appeared on the seer stones and his scribes recorded them as the text of the Book of Mormon, a concept that will be further elaborated upon in following chapters.

Notice how the authors present their theory (their “concept”) as a statement of fact, without qualification.

Now let’s read that sentence in the context of the entire paragraph, with commentary.

Joseph declared throughout the remainder of his life that he translated by the power of God.

This sentence is technically accurate but misleading by omission because the authors omitted Joseph’s declaration that he translated by means of the Urim and Thummim that came with the plates, as we’ll see below.

Beginning in the preface of the Book of Mormon, he wrote, “I would inform you that I translated, by the gift and power of God.”

This is another example of misleading by omission; i.e., the authors simply deleted the rest of Joseph’s sentence without even using an ellipsis to inform readers. The reason why becomes apparent when we read the complete sentence:

“I would inform you that I translated, by the gift and power of God, and caused to be written, one hundred and sixteen pages, the which I took from the Book of Lehi, which was an account abridged from the plates of Lehi, by the hand of Mormon.”

Here, Joseph explained that he translated 116 pages that he “took from the Book of Lehi.” By declaring the source of the translation–the Book of Lehi which was on the plates–Joseph contradicted rumors that he had not used the plates or that he had merely read words that appeared on a seer stone.

The authors of From Darkness Unto Light were familiar with the entire sentence; they quoted in in note 58 of Chapter 5 in a discussion of how many pages Martin Harris actually lost. But they don’t explain why they truncated Joseph’s sentence in the passage above.

If they had an argument against the plain language Joseph provided in this Preface, they should have made it instead of misleading readers by omitting it.

The paragraph continues.

That statement [from the preface] was distributed with the first five thousand copies of the Book of Mormon, and Joseph reiterated it in 1842 when he declared, “With the records was found a curious instrument which the ancients called Urim and Thummim, which consisted of two transparent stones set in the rim of a bow fastened to a breastplate. Through the medium of the Urim and Thummim I translated the record by the gift and power of God.”58 (emphasis added)

Note 58 cites the Wentworth letter, the source of this quotation, which anyone can read here:

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/times-and-seasons-1-march-1842/5

While the authors accurately observe that Joseph reiterated his claim that he “translated the record by the gift and power of God,” they fail to discuss the important clarification Joseph provided–again, because it contradicts their thesis.

Recall that Joseph wrote the letter at the request of Mr. Wentworth, who was asking on behalf of his publisher friend Mr. Bastow. Joseph explained, “As Mr. Bastow has taken the proper steps to obtain correct information all that I shall ask at his hands, is, that he publish the account entire, ungarnished, and without misrepresentation.” (Times and Seasons, March 1, 1842, III.9:706 ¶5)

The “correct information” Joseph provided here includes his specific claim that he translated the records (the plates) “through the medium of the Urim and Thummim” which he found “with the records.”

Thus, there is no room in Joseph’s statement for a seer stone he found in a well.

Surprisingly, the authors do not explain how they reconcile their claim about the seer stone with this key point about the origin, name and use of the Urim and Thummim. Nor do they quote or discuss this passage anywhere else in their book.

The authors entirely omitted two additional important statements by Joseph about the translation.

First, they forgot to tell readers that the Wentworth letter was later republished in 1844 as “Latter Day Saints” with some modifications, but the paragraph about the translation remained unchanged except for omitting the final comma.

With the records was found a curious instrument which the ancients called “Urim and Thummim,” which consisted of two transparent stones set in the rim on a bow fastened to a breastplate. Through the medium of the Urim and Thummim I translated the record, by the gift and power of God.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/latter-day-saints-1844/3

Second, they forgot to quote and cite what Joseph explained when he answered a question in the 1838 Elders’ Journal. Here, he reaffirmed that he translated the plates with the Urim and Thummim that came with the plates:

Question 4th. How, and where did you obtain the book of Mormon?

Answer. Moroni, the person who deposited the plates, from whence the book of Mormon was translated, in a hill in Manchester, Ontario County New York, being dead; and raised again therefrom, appeared unto me, and told me where they were; and gave me directions how to obtain them. I obtained them, and the Urim and Thummim with them; by the means of which, I translated the plates; and thus came the book of Mormon.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/elders-journal-july-1838/10

Continuing with the excerpt :

As the Book of Mormon prophesied, the word of God “shall shine forth in darkness unto light.”59

When read in context, the passage refers to a stone: “And the Lord said: I will prepare unto my servant Gazelem, a stone, which shall shine forth in darkness unto light, that I may discover unto my people who serve me, that I may discover unto them the works of their brethren, yea, their secret works, their works of darkness, and their wickedness and abominations.” (Alma 37:23)

The authors refer to “Gazelem” seven times in their book, stating at one point that “it is likely that the brown stone was the one referred to as Gazelem, which the Book of Mormon prophesied had been prepared to help translate ancient Nephite records like the Book of Mormon.”

Whether that is a “likely” interpretation is subjective, but there are two problems with the claim.

First, as we saw above, in words as plain as words can be, Joseph clarified that he translated the plates with the Urim and Thummim that came with the plates. He didn’t qualify his statements by saying he translated some of the plates with the Urim and Thummim that came with the plates, or that he used two or more different instruments.

Second, the passage in Alma goes on to explain that the prophecy in verse 23 was already fulfilled: “And now, my son, we see that they did not repent; therefore they have been destroyed, and thus far the word of God has been fulfilled; yea, their secret abominations have been brought out of darkness and made known unto us.” (Alma 37:26)

There is no statement, suggestion or implication that this stone would be used in the future.

[Some have been confused by the term “interpreters” in verses 21 and 24; e.g., “And now, my son, these interpreters were prepared that the word of God might be fulfilled, which he spake, saying:” (Alma 37:24) In the original text, the term used in this passage was “directors.” The term was changed for the 1920 LDS edition but the RLDS/Community of Christ edition retains the original reading. Thus, when Oliver said Joseph “translated with the Urim and Thummim, or, as the Nephites would have said, ‘Interpreters,’ the history or record called ‘The Book of Mormon,'” (Joseph Smith—History, Note, 1), he was not referring to Alma 37.]

By the way, here’s how the authors deal with Oliver’s statement, which they partially quote twice in their book.

They truncate the quotation after “Interpreters” to omit Oliver’s statement that Joseph “translated… the history or record called the ‘Book of Mormon’.” Unsuspecting readers would not realize that Oliver actually said Joseph translated the history or record, which is much different from saying Joseph read words off a stone. [Later, in note 44 of chapter 7, they provide the entire quotation without comment.]

Nevertheless, after quoting the truncated passage from JS-H, note 1, they write, “Whether he was using the spectacles or an individual stone, Joseph apparently used either instrument by placing it in the bottom of a hat in order to block out the ambient light so he could read the words that appeared on the stone.” [672 of 1233]

Obviously, nothing in Oliver’s statement states, suggests or implies any such practice.

This leads to another important historical source that the authors omitted from their book. Oliver reiterated his first-person testimony when he rejoined the Church in 1848.

I wrote with my own pen the entire Book of Mormon (save a few pages) as it fell from the lips of the Prophet as he translated it by the gift and power of God by means of the Urim and Thummim, or as it is called by that book, holy interpreters. I beheld with my eyes and handled with my hands the gold plates from which it was translated. I also beheld the Interpreters. That book is true. Sidney Rigdon did not write it. Mr. Spaulding did not write it. I wrote it myself as it fell from the lips of the Prophet.

https://www.lettervii.com/p/oliver-returning-to-church-reuben.html

Here again, nothing in Oliver’s statement states, suggests or implies that Joseph used a stone he found in a well and placed in a hat. This 1848 statement is all the more meaningful because on that occasion, Oliver possessed the brown stone that Joseph supposedly used. But he neither referenced it nor displayed it. Instead, he referred to the interpreters and the plates.

_____

Now we return to the authors’ thesis:

With the “gift and power of God” Joseph read the translated words that appeared on the seer stones and his scribes recorded them as the text of the Book of Mormon, a concept that will be further elaborated upon in following chapters.

The authors elaborate upon this “concept” by invoking a variety of sources, which is fine. But they simply omit the sources that disprove their thesis.

Readers should at least be alerted that the historical record includes sources that support and corroborate what Joseph, Oliver, and their successors in Church leadership have always taught about the translation.

the end

Source: About Central America

July 18, 2022Uncategorized

The Gospel Topics Essays – my view

There has been a lot of discussion about my comments regarding the Gospel Topics Essays. My position is simply and clear.

The Gospel Topics Essays are useful resources that point to reliable sources. They have not been canonized. They have been revised in the past and can be revised and improved at any moment. I point out errors and omissions in the essays because I’m hopeful that the essays will continue to be improved, particularly by including the relevant and reliable sources from the Joseph Smith Papers that have so far been omitted.

_____

I encourage people to read the essays partly because the introduction to those essays expresses my objection to the M2C/SITH citation cartel.

The introduction to the essays quotes D&C 88:118 and explains that “Seeking “out of the best books” does not mean seeking only one set of opinions, but it does require us to distinguish between reliable sources and unreliable sources.”

Contrary to that guidance, the citation cartel (the Interpreter, Book of Mormon Central, FAIRLDS, Meridian Magazine, and all their followers) insist on “only one set of opinions” regarding M2C and SITH.

The Interpreter Foundation’s very name reflects its arrogant assumption of authority as the “interpreter” for ordinary Latter-day Saints. Typical of the credentialed class, they claim superiority over the rest of us who lack their credentials and status because they think we are incapable of understanding the gospel without their “interpretations” which they enforce through their journal, radio show, and even their movie Witnesses.

Book of Mormon Central is so adamant that only one set of opinions is permissible that they’ve embedded M2C right in their logo.

It’s the same logo that FARMS (which has promoted M2C for decades now) used before the principals left to form the Interpreter Foundation and Book of Mormon Central.

If the intellectuals in the citation cartel heeded the guidance from the Gospel Topics Essays, there wouldn’t be a citation cartel.

They would be open to alternative “interpretations” of the scriptures, the teachings of the prophets, and authentic historical documents–including an interpretation that corroborates and supports those teachings, instead of M2C/SITH which expressly repudiate those teachings.

_____

To be clear, I agree with, embrace, and do not dispute, what Elder Ballard said about the essays being important. I encourage people to read and study the essays because they contain useful references to reliable sources.

But nowhere have Church leaders stated, suggested, or implied that these essays were ever intended to replace the scriptures, the teachings of the prophets, or authentic historical documents.

Nevertheless, some people (including my critics) refer to the essays as though they have been canonized.

The introduction to the Gospel Topics Essays is here:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/essays?lang=eng

The introduction also says, “The Church places great emphasis on knowledge and on the importance of being well informed about Church history, doctrine, and practices.”

That, too, perfectly expresses my approach to Church history, doctrine and practices. I encourage people to be well informed so they can make informed decisions. As President Nelson has said, “Good inspiration is based upon good information.”

My objection to the citation cartel is not that they promote different interpretations than I do. That’s fine with me. I fully endorse the concept of multiple working hypotheses. My problem with the cartel is the same as my problem with the critics such as CES Letter and Mormon Stories; both groups deprive people of good information through censorship and sophistry purely to promote their respective agendas.

_____

To repeat: the Gospel Topics Essays have been revised in the past and can be revised and improved at any moment.

I point out errors and omissions in the essays because I’m hopeful that the essays will continue to be improved, particularly by including the reliable sources from the Joseph Smith Papers that have so far been omitted.

Source: Book of Mormon Concensus

July 17, 2022Uncategorized

BYU’s fantasy map moved

BYU map showing that
Cumorah is definitely not in New York

Because I’ve mentioned it a few times and provided links, readers should know that the BYU fantasy map of Book of Mormon geography has been moved to this site:

https://virtualscriptures.org/book-of-mormon-map/

You can still see the old site here:

https://web.archive.org/web/20210303204715/http://bom.byu.edu/

The map itself hasn’t changed. It still teaches students that the prophets were wrong about the New York Cumorah, including President Oliver Cowdery, and Joseph Smith’s own mother, close associates, and successors, as well as members of the First Presidency speaking in General Conference.

Notice how they’ve changed the description of their map. The new description is an improvement in the sense that they have stopped claiming their fantasy map “matches” the text “as closely as possible.”

However, they are still putting their finger on the scale of “neutrality” by teaching students that the Hill Cumorah cannot be in New York as the prophets have taught.

Original

New (July 2022)

The Church and BYU stay neutral in questions of exactly where the Book of Mormon took place. The Lord could have removed all questions regarding the exact locations of these events but he did not. For that reason, our design team has chosen to develop an internal map that shows relational directions and approximate distances that match the approximately 550 geography descriptions in the text as closely as possible. These are artistic renditions.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not officially endorse any one particular geographical model for where the events in The Book of Mormon transpired in the New World. For that reason, we have designed and prepared this artistic rendering in such a way that you can get a basic idea of approximate directions and theoretical relationships between various geographical features mentioned in the stories.

Notice also the distinction between “any one particular geographical model” and their outright repudiation of the New York Cumorah. This is a euphemism, of course. A “model” is a framework for the overall geography.

The prophets have always taught that we don’t know where Book of Mormon events took place, with the exception of the Cumorah of Mormon 6:6. That makes sense because other than Cumorah, there are numerous ways to interpret the text and the extrinsic evidence; i.e., multiple working hypotheses.

Even when we accept the New York Cumorah, there are multiple working hypotheses about the rest of the locations mentioned in the text.

Although people have a variety of interpretations regarding geography, the New York Cumorah was well established as a fact if you read authentic documents from Church history. It wasn’t until L.E. Hills published a map in 1917 that scholars began teaching that there must be “two Cumorahs.”

By now, “two Cumorahs” is the de facto standard because it is being taught throughout the Church.

L.E. Hills 1917 map

L.E. Hills book

Cumorah detail from L.E. Hills

Cumorah detail from BYU’s map

Sorenson/Welch map moving Cumorah
a little east from the L.E. Hills map

Cumorah detail from CES map

Source: About Central America

July 15, 2022Uncategorized

The rising generation, SITH and M2C

Yesterday I discussed the way SITH affects the “rising generation.” The rising generation is smart. They can see the ramifications of SITH–as can the critics who bring it up all the time.

The rising generation (and everyone else) would greatly benefit from a simple new approach to LDS apologetics:

We should interpret Church history and the text of the Book of Mormon through the lens the prophets have provided, instead of interpreting the history, text, and the teachings of the prophets through the lens the scholars have provided.

_____

One obvious problem with SITH is how it detaches the Book of Mormon from the plates, giving rise to claims Joseph composed, copied or performed the text. But there’s another more fundamental problem.

There’s no getting around the plain reality that SITH says Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery lied about the translation.

Joseph expressly refuted SITH on specific occasions, yet our modern LDS apologists have revived it and are now aggressively pushing it, as we saw in the absurd Witnesses movie from the Interpreter Foundation.

I give Royal Skousen credit for being the most honest about the implications of SITH when he wrote that Joseph and Oliver deliberately misled people about the translation. Other LDS apologists and historians try to skirt this reality by employing clever sophistry. For example, people often cite the book From Darkness Unto Light to support SITH. We’ll discuss that book next week.

_____

Joseph and Oliver were familiar with the SITH narrative because it was a rumor that started as early as September 1829, published in local New York newspapers. The 1834 book Mormonism Unvailed openly ridiculed SITH. Whatever Joseph did with the stone-in-the-hat, it wasn’t translating the Book of Mormon.

We can’t know how many times Joseph and Oliver responded to SITH verbally, but they did leave published writings that unambiguously refute SITH.

For example, in 1838 Joseph answered a question in the Elders’ Journal by reaffirming that he translated the plates with the Urim and Thummim that came with the plates:

Question 4th. How, and where did you obtain the book of Mormon?

Answer. Moroni, the person who deposited the plates, from whence the book of Mormon was translated, in a hill in Manchester, Ontario County New York, being dead; and raised again therefrom, appeared unto me, and told me where they were; and gave me directions how to obtain them. I obtained them, and the Urim and Thummim with them; by the means of which, I translated the plates; and thus came the book of Mormon.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/elders-journal-july-1838/10

SITH sayers try to cram the peep stone into that statement by arguing that when Joseph wrote “Urim and Thummim” he actually meant the peep stone he found in a well years earlier. Yet anyone can see that he specified he obtained the Urim and Thummim with the plates.

Maybe Joseph anticipated the sophistry of our modern LDS apologists and historians when he repeated his declaration in 1842 when he wrote the Wentworth letter.

With the records was found a curious instrument which the ancients called “Urim and Thummim,” which consisted of two transparent stones set in the rim of a bow fastened to a breastplate. Through the medium of the Urim and Thummim I translated the record by the gift, and power of God.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/times-and-seasons-1-march-1842/5

The modern revival of SITH by LDS scholars is a fascinating story. As I’ve mentioned, I’ve been working on a book about LDS apologetics in which SITH plays a major role. Due to my other interests and activities, I thought I wouldn’t take the time to publish the book because a few blog posts would suffice to cover the topic. However, based on the interest the topic has generated, and the ongoing nonsense emanating from the SITH apologists, it looks like the book-length treatment would be useful.

But hope springs eternal, and if (as I hope) the upcoming FAIRLDS conference announces a course correction in LDS apologetics, the book won’t be necessary.

_____

Yesterday I mentioned a previous post about The Next Mormons.

https://www.bookofmormoncentralamerica.com/2019/03/the-next-mormons-by-jana-riess.html

BYU Fantasy/mythology map of
the Book of Mormon

In that post, I noted that it is difficult for young people to believe the Book of Mormon as a literal historical account when their BYU professors tell them that the best reconstruction of the setting is a computer-generated fantasy world that has more in common with a video game than any location in the real world.

The BYU map even depicts Cumorah in a fantasy location.

The promoters of this map don’t tell their students that the prophets have long taught that Cumorah–the Cumorah of Mormon 6:6–is in western New York.

The New York Cumorah has been erased from Church history in the Saints book, volume 1, in the Gospel Topics Essay on Book of Mormon geography, in the Book of Mormon videos, and pretty much everywhere else.

Except they can’t erase it from the historical record.

People can and will believe whatever they want, and that’s fine. Some people believe M2C, others believe other theories based on the “two-Cumorahs” idea, such as a setting in Baja or Panama or Chile or Malaysia or pretty much anywhere else in the world.

The reason the M2Cers don’t tell their followers what the prophets have taught is that, to believe any “two-Cumorahs” theory, people have to reject the express declaration of fact by Oliver Cowdery, writing as Assistant President of the Church with the assistance of Joseph Smith, when he wrote Letter VII.

Anyone can read this in Joseph’s own history right in the Joseph Smith Papers.

http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1834-1836/90

Anyone can read the other references to the New York Cumorah, including General Conference addresses by members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve.

It should not be surprising that some Latter-day Saints still believe what Joseph and Oliver and their successors taught about the New York Cumorah.

Even among these Latter-day Saints, there are multiple working hypotheses regarding the rest of the geography. This is consistent with the teachings of the prophets because other than Cumorah, they have not identified any specific site for Book of Mormon geography in the new world. That makes sense because there are so many possible matches even among archaeological sites that have been preserved, not even counting the untold numbers of sites that have long since been destroyed, overbuilt, etc.

But that doesn’t avoid the plain reality that we should interpret the text of the Book of Mormon through the lens the prophets have provided, instead of interpreting the text (and the teachings of the prophets) through the lens the scholars have provided.

Source: About Central America

July 14, 2022Uncategorized

The big choice

Jonathan Edwards made a useful observation about the choices all of us face.

Some have never come to a resolution in their own minds so much as whether there be a God or not. They don’t know that there is, and oftentimes very much doubt of it.

Second. There are some that never have come to any determination in their minds, whether to embrace religion in the practice of it. Religion don’t consist merely or chiefly in theory or speculation, but in practice.

— 96 —

It is a practical thing. The end of it is to guide and influence us in our practice. And [many] consider it in this view. And there are multitudes that never have come to a conclusion in their {own minds}, whether to embrace religion or no.

‘Tis probably pretty general for men to design to be religious sometime or other before they die; for none intend to go to hell. But they keep it at a distance: they put it off from time to time: they never come to any conclusion that shall determine them in their present practice. There are some that never so much as limit any time. They design to be religious sometime before they die, but they don’t know when.

There are many that have always hitherto continued unresolved about the necessity of striving, and being earnestly engaged for salvation. They flatter themselves that they may obtain salvation, though they ben’t so earnestly set, though they mind the world and worldly affairs more than salvation. They are often told how necessary it is that they should make haste and not delay, that they should do whatever their hand finds to do with their might, that they should be violent, that a dull, slack way of seeking salvation is never likely to be effective; but they are never convinced of it. Some seem to resolve to be in earnest, and set out with some engagedness of mind, but soon fail, because they never have been fully6 convinced of the necessity of it.

Many never have come to a determination, what to make choice of for their portion. There are but two things that God offers to mankind for their portion: one is this world with the pleasures and profits of sin, together with eternal misery ensuing; the other is heaven and eternal glory, with a life of self-denial and respect to all God’s commandments preceding. Many continue as long as they live without coming to any settled determination in their own minds which of these to choose. They must have one or the other, and can’t have both; but they are always held in suspense, never make their choice. They have a mind to have both: they would have heaven and the world, too; they would have salvation, and the pleasure and profits of sin, too.

But considering heaven and the world as God offers them, they would have neither. God offers heaven only with the self-denial and difficulty that is in the way to it, and they ben’t willing to have heaven thus. And God offers the world and the pleasures of sin to man not alone, but with eternal misery tached7 to it, and so they ben’t willing to have the world neither.

http://edwards.yale.edu/archive?path=aHR0cDovL2Vkd2FyZHMueWFsZS5lZHUvY2dpLWJpbi9uZXdwaGlsby9nZXRvYmplY3QucGw/Yy4xODo2LndqZW8uMjg0NTA5

Source: Book of Mormon Concensus

July 14, 2022Uncategorized

The Rising Generation, SITH and the GTE

Let’s discuss the “rising generation.”

Now it came to pass that there were many of the rising generation that could not understand the words of king Benjamin, being little children at the time he spake unto his people; and they did not believe the tradition of their fathers. (Mosiah 26:1 )

In our day, there are “many of the rising generation that cannot understand the words” of Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery because our LDS apologists “have rejected the words of the prophets” (1 Nephi 3:18) because of “the simpleness of their words” (2 Nephi 3:20). Not only has Cumorah been censored from the Saints book, volume 1, but the teachings of Joseph and Oliver about the Urim and Thummim have been all but erased as well.

A prime example is the Gospel Topics Essay on Book of Mormon Translation as we’ll discuss below. This essay has been criticized by outsiders, but it is more problematic from a faithful perspective.

There are two aspects of the Gospel Topics Essays that people seem to overlook.

1. They were written by committee, published anonymously, and are not canonized.

2. They are subject to revision at any time without notice, and have been revised from time to time in the past.

These two aspects lead me to hope and propose that the essays continue to be improved. As it is now, the Translation essay misleads readers–particularly the rising generation.

In all our discussion of LDS apologetics, we remember this important observation by Tad Callister:

If I were to ask my good Christian friends how they unquestionably know the Bible is the word of God, I do not believe they would cite archaeological discoveries or linguistic connections with ancient Hebrew or Greek as their prime evidence; rather, they would make reference to the Spirit. It always comes back to the Spirit. The Spirit that helps me know the Bible is true is the very same Spirit that helps me know the Book of Mormon is true.

https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/tad-r-callister/book-mormon-man-made-god-given/

_____

Joseph Smith used the term “rising generation” three times when he translated the Book of Mormon. (It’s a term Jonathan Edwards used numerous times as well.)

Joseph used the term once in the Doctrine and Covenants, in this verse: And also it is an imperative duty that we owe to all the rising generation, and to all the pure in heart— (D&C 123:11)

We all owe a duty to the rising generation to give them good information to help them make informed decisions. As President Nelson taught, “good inspiration is based upon good information.”

Some of that good information includes the original sources for what Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery taught about the events of the Restoration.

_____

Two years ago I blogged about the book The Next Mormons.

One datapoint the authors reported was the percentage of Latter-day Saints who believe the Book of Mormon is a literal, historical account.

The numbers are declining in younger generations.

SITH (the stone-in-the-hat theory) is one reason why so many of the “rising generation” disbelieve the Book of Mormon is an authentic historical account.

When Joseph Smith said he translated the plates–that he took his translation from the plates–he directly tied the text to an actual ancient document.

SITH explicitly separates the text from the plates. That’s why critics promoted SITH in the first place. Detaching the text from the ancient record undermines its authenticity.

In his preface to the 1830 edition (which was omitted from subsequent editions, including the one we use today), Joseph wrote:

I would inform you that I translated, by the gift and power of God, and caused to be written, one hundred and sixteen pages, the which I took from the Book of Lehi, which was an account abridged from the plates of Lehi, by the hand of Mormon.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/book-of-mormon-1830/9

It’s difficult to imagine more plain and simple language than this. Joseph “took” the translation from the Book of Lehi. He did not state or imply that he “took” the text from a stone he found in a well.

Actually, he never said or implied that he dictated the Book of Mormon from words that appeared on the stone in the hat (SITH).

But the rising generation does not know any of this.

They are not being taught to refer to original sources but instead are led to the Saints books and to the Gospel Topics Essay on Book of Mormon Translation.

That essay omits and edits important, relevant original sources, including the teachings of the prophets, to promote the narrative generated by David Whitmer and others, contrary to the plain teachings of Joseph, Oliver, and their successors in Church leadership.

For instance, readers cannot tell from this Gospel Topics essay that neither Joseph nor Oliver ever once said or implied that Joseph dictated a text that appeared on the seer stone he found in a well.

I’ve discussed this essay in more detail before, offering line-by-line analysis, but in this post, we’ll focus on one short paragraph that omits a key point:

The Mechanics of Translation

In the preface to the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith wrote: “I would inform you that I translated [the book], by the gift and power of God.”

Notice how the essay omits the rest of the sentence in the Preface quoted above, in which Joseph explains he took the text from the Book of Lehi.

It’s also interesting that “gift and power of God” is a nonbiblical phrase that occurs in only a handful of obscure pre-1830 sources. Not even Jonathan Edwards used it. Below we’ll see where it originated.

The essay continues:

When pressed for specifics about the process of translation, Joseph repeated on several occasions that it had been done “by the gift and power of God”24 and once added, “It was not intended to tell the world all the particulars of the coming forth of the book of Mormon.”25

Here, the essay repeats the excerpt from the 1830 Preface, again omitting the rest of the sentence.

The paragraph is misleading in several ways, as we can see by looking at the two notes.

_____

Note 24: Preface to the Book of Mormon, 1830 edition.

The note references the Preface but doesn’t even provide a link so readers can see it–in context–for themselves.

And although the essay refers to “several occasions,” it doesn’t quote, list or provide references to those occasions. Readers have to wonder why not.

If you search in the Joseph Smith Papers for the phrase, you will see that there are only four documented “occasions” when Joseph repeated that phrase outside of the Book of Mormon. There are a few additional statements from Joseph relating to the translation that don’t use the phrase “gift and power of God.” It is inexplicable that none of the sources below are quoted or cited in the essay, even though they each deal directly with the translation.

Maybe the essay omits these references because, in the best known of these occasions (the Wentworth letter), Joseph specifically explained that he translated with the Urim and Thummim that came with the plates. His explanation leaves no room for confusion with a seer stone he found years earlier while digging a well.

With the records was found a curious instrument which the ancients called “Urim and Thummim,” which consisted of two transparent stones set in the rim of a bow fastened to a breastplate. Through the medium of the Urim and Thummim I translated the record by the gift, and power of God.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/times-and-seasons-1-march-1842/5

The Wentworth letter was later republished in 1844 as “Latter Day Saints” with some modifications, but the paragraph about the translation remained unchanged except for omitting the final comma.

With the records was found a curious instrument which the ancients called “Urim and Thummim,” which consisted of two transparent stones set in the rim on a bow fastened to a breastplate. Through the medium of the Urim and Thummim I translated the record, by the gift and power of God.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/latter-day-saints-1844/3

In another direct, clear statement, Joseph answered a question in the 1838 Elders’ Journal by reaffirming that he translated the plates with the Urim and Thummim that came with the plates:

Question 4th. How, and where did you obtain the book of Mormon?

Answer. Moroni, the person who deposited the plates, from whence the book of Mormon was translated, in a hill in Manchester, Ontario County New York, being dead; and raised again therefrom, appeared unto me, and told me where they were; and gave me directions how to obtain them. I obtained them, and the Urim and Thummim with them; by the means of which, I translated the plates; and thus came the book of Mormon.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/elders-journal-july-1838/10

_____

The first known “occasion” for which Joseph used the term “gift and power of God” was when he translated the Title Page, which he said was “a literal translation, taken from the very last leaf, on the left hand side of the collection or book of plates, which contained the record which has been translated.”*

Because this was a “literal translation” of a specific part of the plates, we can reasonably infer that the phrase “gift and power of God” originated with Moroni and was not drawn from Joseph’s lexicon.

Written, and sealed up, and hid up unto the Lord, that they might not be destroyed; to come forth by the gift and power of God, unto the interpretation thereof; sealed by the hand of Moroni, and hid up unto the Lord, to come forth in due time by the way of Gentile; the interpretation thereof by the gift of God…

(Title Page)

Here, the “gift and power of God” involves the coming forth of the record, while the interpretation thereof is by the “gift of God.” That distinction will be relevant in the discussion below.

The next reference was in the text of the Book of Mormon, specifically in the plates of Nephi which Joseph translated in Fayette.

And it came to pass that the people of Zarahemla, and of Mosiah, did unite together; and Mosiah was appointed to be their king. And it came to pass in the days of Mosiah, there was a large stone brought unto him, with engravings on it ; and he did interpret the engravings, by the gift and power of God.

And they gave an account of one Coriantumr, and the slain of his people.

(Omni 1:19–21, or page 150 in the 1830 edition)

Here we see that Mosiah interpreted the engravings on the large stone. These engravings gave an account of Coriantumr. Nothing in this passage states, suggests or implies that Mosiah put a stone in a hat and read words that appeared on the stone. He could have done that without the people bringing the large stone to him. Instead, he interpreted the engravings on the large stone.

In his 1832 History, Joseph explained that he, too, translated characters: “the Lord had prepared spectacles for to read the Book therefore I commenced translating the characters.”

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-circa-summer-1832/5

Similarly, Joseph later explained that “I commenced copying the characters off the plates. I copied a considerable number of them, and by means of the Urim and Thummim I translated some of them.”

(Joseph Smith—History 1:62)

Returning to the phrase “gift and power of God,” the next reference comes from 4 January 1833, when Joseph wrote a letter to Noah Saxton.

The Book of Mormon is a reccord of the forefathers of our western Tribes of Indians, having been found through the ministration of an holy Angel translated into our own Language by the gift and power of God, after having been hid up in the earth for the last fourteen hundred years containing the word of God, which was delivered unto them, By it we learn that our western tribes of Indians are desendants from that Joseph that was sold into Egypt, and that the Land of America is a promised land unto them, and unto it all the tribes of Israel will come. with as many of the gentiles as shall comply with the requesitions of the new co[v]enant.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/letter-to-noah-c-saxton-4-january-1833/4

In this letter, Joseph’s brief outline of the discovery and translation of the record didn’t mention either the plates or the Urim and Thummim. The existence of both was well known at the time, however.

The claim that the text is a record “of the foregathers of our western tribes of Indians” and that these tribes are descendants from Joseph of Egypt is controversial among modern scholars. Perhaps that is why the Gospel Topics Essay omits this reference.

Yet every Latter-day Saint who studies the scriptures should know that the “western tribes of Indians” were the same tribes identified by the Lord as Lamanites in D&C 28, 30 and 32. These are the Lamanites to whom Oliver Cowdery, Parley P. Pratt, Ziba Peterson, and Peter Whitmer, Jr., were called to preach.

The next reference comes in a journal account of conversations with Robert Matthews, 9–11 November 1835.

I went and found the place, where the plates were, according to the direction of the Angel, also saw them, and the angel as before; the powers of darkness strove hard against me, I called on God, the Angel told me that the reason why I could not obtain the plates at this time was because I was under transgression, but to come again in one year from that time, I did so, but did not obtain them also the third and the fourth year, at which time I obtained them, and translated them into the english language; by the gift and power of God and have been preaching it ever since.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/journal-1835-1836/26

Here again, Joseph did not mention the Urim and Thummim, or any other translation instrument, but he affirms that he “translated them into the english language.” That leaves little room for an alternative translator (the Mysterious Incognito Supernatural Translator, or MIST, that supposedly put the words on the stone in the hat for Joseph to read).

Other sources relate Joseph translating by the gift and power of God, also referring to the Urim and Thummim, such as this anonymous article in the Times and Seasons:

and that the Book of Mormon had come forth as an “ensign to the nations,” containing an account of the gospel in much plainness, being translated by the gift and power of God by the use of the Urim and Thummim, that had come forth with the plates that contain the record.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/times-and-seasons-1-september-1842/6

This reference reiterates the plain teaching of the Wentworth letter, published a few months earlier in the same Times and Seasons.

Oliver Cowdery provided this statement in 1834, which now appears as a note in Joseph Smith-History:

* Oliver Cowdery describes these events thus: “These were days never to be forgotten—to sit under the sound of a voice dictated by the inspiration of heaven, awakened the utmost gratitude of this bosom! Day after day I continued, uninterrupted, to write from his mouth, as he translated with the Urim and Thummim, or, as the Nephites would have said, ‘Interpreters,’ the history or record called ‘The Book of Mormon.’

(Joseph Smith—History, Note, 1)

Oliver reiterated his first-person testimony when he rejoined the Church in 1848.

I wrote with my own pen the entire Book of Mormon (save a few pages) as it fell from the lips of the Prophet as he translated it by the gift and power of God by means of the Urim and Thummim, or as it is called by that book, holy interpreters. I beheld with my eyes and handled with my hands the gold plates from which it was translated. I also beheld the Interpreters. That book is true. Sidney Rigdon did not write it. Mr. Spaulding did not write it. I wrote it myself as it fell from the lips of the Prophet.

https://www.lettervii.com/p/oliver-returning-to-church-reuben.html

In conclusion regarding Note 24, while the Gospel Topics Essay accurately states that Joseph said he translated “by the gift and power of God,” it is misleading by omission. A partial truth is not helpful when it obscures the whole truth, particularly here when the partial truth is used to support SITH, which expressly contradicts the plain meaning of what Joseph and Oliver actually taught.

The essay misleads readers by omitting Joseph’s own explanations that he translated the plates with the Urim and Thummim that came with the plates. It should be revised to quote, cite and link these direct statements from Joseph and Oliver regarding the translation, instead of misleading readers by omitting them and relying instead on the speculations of scholars and the statements of those who never saw the plates or the Urim and Thummim during the translation because they were not authorized to do so.

Whatever Joseph may have done with the stone he found in a well, he and Oliver left no room in their accounts for its use in connection with the translation.

_____

Note 25: Minutes, Church conference, Orange, OH, Oct. 25–26, 1831, in Minute Book 2, Church History Library, Salt Lake City, available at josephsmithpapers.org; Welch, “Miraculous Translation,” 121–9.

Here, the note gives us a link to the cited reference, which consists of minutes of a conference from October 1831:

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/minutes-25-26-october-1831/4#josephsmithpapers

Recall the passage from the essay that includes this note:

When pressed for specifics about the process of translation, Joseph repeated on several occasions that it had been done “by the gift and power of God”24 and once added, “It was not intended to tell the world all the particulars of the coming forth of the book of Mormon.”25

When we read the actual reference in context, though, we see that Joseph was not “pressed for specifics about the process of translation.”

Br. Hyrum Smith said that he thought best that the information of the coming forth of the book of Mormon be related by Joseph himself to the Elders present that all might know for themselves.

Br. Joseph Smith jr. said that it was not intended to tell the world all the particulars of the coming forth of the book of Mormon, & also said that it was not expedient for him to relate these things &c.

The minutes here are incomplete, as we can see from the “&c.” at the end of the sentence. When considered in context and in light of subsequent events, the incomplete minutes of Joseph’s 1831 statement likely meant that it was not expedient at that meeting for Joseph to relate these things.

No reasonable historian can say that the 1831 statement precluded later statements about the “coming forth of the Book of Mormon,” particularly because Joseph himself did provide more details in the later statements. Other participants in the 1831 meeting, including Oliver Cowdery, John Whitmer, Orson Pratt, Martin Harris, and David Whitmer, certainly did not understand Joseph’s statement to preclude future discussions about the translation. They discussed it publicly.

This meeting took place in 1831. Joseph didn’t produce his first known account of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon until 1832. The first detailed account was not published until 1834-5 (Oliver Cowdery’s eight historical essays, with which Joseph assisted). The Elders’ Journal account of the translation was published in 1838. Joseph’s own detailed account was not compiled until 1838, and wasn’t published until 1842. The Wentworth letter was also published in 1842, and the Latter Day Saints article was published in 1844.

Recall that Joseph’s 1842 History was prompted by extrinsic events:

Owing to the many reports which have been put in circulation by evil-disposed and designing persons, in relation to the rise and progress of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, all of which have been designed by the authors thereof to militate against its character as a Church and its progress in the world—I have been induced to write this history, to disabuse the public mind, and put all inquirers after truth in possession of the facts, as they have transpired, in relation both to myself and the Church, so far as I have such facts in my possession.

(Joseph Smith—History 1:1)

The phrase “coming forth of the Book of Mormon” encompasses more than just the translation, and may not even include the translation. After all, the Title Page itself distinguishes between the coming forth and the interpretation, as we discussed above.

The gradual release of information about the “coming forth of the Book of Mormon” makes sense because circumstances changed. The growth and expansion of the Church meant that fewer people could have personal interactions with Joseph Smith. He and Oliver needed to document their experiences for future generations as well.

We can see from the 1834 Mormonism Unvailed that various accounts of the translation were circulating. That book pointed out that the idea of a “translation” produced by reading words of the stone in the hat (SITH) without reference to the plates not only undermined the credibility of the narrative Joseph provided, but made the testimony of the witnesses about those plates irrelevant.

Ultimately, the historical record establishes that Joseph and Oliver wanted people to know that Joseph Smith translated the engravings on the plates by means of the Urim and Thummim that came with the plates; i.e., that God had prepared the special instrument that Joseph used to translate the ancient record. This meant that there was no possibility of a source for the text that was not divine.

By omitting and editing original sources, the Gospel Topics Essay deprives readers of the very knowledge Joseph and Oliver tried so hard to impart.

_____

* Joseph’s full explanation was published in the Times and Seasons as part of the serialized History of Joseph Smith:

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/times-and-seasons-15-october-1842/1

I wish also to mention here, that the title page of the Book of Mormon is a literal translation, taken from the very last leaf, on the left hand side of the collection or book of plates, which contained the record which has been translated; the language of the whole running the same as all Hebrew writing in general; and that, said title page is not by any means a modern composition either of mine or of any other man’s who has lived or does live in this generation. Therefore, in order to correct an error which generally exists concerning it, I give below that part of the title page of the English version of the Book of Mormon, which is a genuine and literal translation of the title page of the Original Book of Mormon, as recorded on the plates.

The irony today is that another error generally exists concerning the Title Page (and the rest of the Book of Mormon) because some of our own LDS intellectuals actually teach that Joseph didn’t use the plates when he translated!

Yet here Joseph tells us specifically which part of the plates he translated. And he specifies that this was a genuine and literal translation. These claims would be pointless if Joseph was merely reading words off a stone in the hat.

One wonders what else Joseph and Oliver could have said or written to prevent the SITH error.

Source: About Central America

July 13, 2022Uncategorized

The Interpreter on TikTok

Tomorrow we’ll discuss the impact of SITH on the rising generation. Today let’s look at one way the Interpreter teaches SITH.

Last year the Interpreter produced and released the Witnesses movie. It grossed around $900,000 in as many as 90 theaters. https://www.boxofficemojo.com/title/tt13820428/?ref_=bo_se_r_1

The Interpreter helpfully extracted parts of the Witnesses movie and put them on tiktok. Today we’ll look at a clip of “Translating the Book of Mormon.”

If you didn’t see the movie, you have to see this excerpt to believe it. You can see it on tiktok, here:

https://www.tiktok.com/@interpreterfoundation/video/7110750617349508395

The comments on tiktok provide a useful survey of how people are dealing with SITH.

The title here announces that we’re going to get to see Joseph and Oliver “translating the Book of Mormon.”

But instead of the translation, they show Joseph reading words out of a hat!

When you watch the clip, notice how even Oliver Cowdery looks dubious.

No historians have produced a single historical account to support this depiction. There is no Martin Harris, David Whitmer, or Emma Smith witnessing this event. Joseph and Oliver both explained that, contrary to this depiction, Joseph translated the plates with the Urim and Thummim.

This scene is pure fiction. But, because it comes from the SITH sayers at the Interpreter, it is presented not only as fact, but as the only acceptable fact.

No wonder the rising generation is so confused.

Let’s look at the comments. It’s fascinating to see how thoroughly the SITH narrative has taken hold despite the obvious problems with SITH. The SITH sayers state as facts the philosophies of the scholars.

Original in blue, my comments in red.

Dymon Brady

Why is he looking at his hat? Where’s the Urim and Thummim? This doesn’t look accurate.

Everyone who watched this movie should have asked the same question. The movie shows the SITH (stone-in-the-hat) narrative, not the Urim and Thummim narrative that Joseph and Oliver related.

6-18

Metroid 1402

Joseph used the Urim and Thummin in the beginning, but found them uncomfortable, so he used his personal seer stone. He put the stone in a hat to help

This is the current narrative promoted by LDS apologists without any support from Joseph Smith or Oliver Cowdery. We’re supposed to believe that God prepared the Urim and Thummim, and that Moroni deposited them with the plates and instructed Joseph to use them, but both God and Moroni didn’t realize that they would be so “uncomfortable” for Joseph that he would discard them and instead use the stone he found in a well years before.

6-18

The Two Cumorah Fraud · Friend

No. The U&T was returned. D&C Sections 14,15,16,17 where received through the U&T. Section 17 was a revelation on who should be the Three Witnesses.

Finally, someone refers to the scriptures. On top of this, Lucy Mack Smith reported that Joseph had the Urim and Thummim when she visited him in Harmony and that he applied them to his eyes to look on the plates, but you won’t know that reading what the SITH apologists write.

6-19

BroBlueShirt

U&T also referred to the seer stone. Names were interchangeable.

This is the narrative that our SITH apologists are promoting, but it is historically indefensible. Even the 1834 book Mormonism Unvailed noted that there were two separate stories about the translation: the “peep stone” and the Urim and Thummim. No one conflated the two terms.

The SITH apologists claim that Wilford Woodruff later conflated the terms, but even then, he couldn’t have been referring to the stone Joseph supposedly used to produce the Book of Mormon because Joseph had given that stone to Oliver Cowdery, who was not present in Nauvoo when Woodruff claimed he saw the Urim and Thummim.

7-1

Metroid 1402

block out the light and make it easier to read the stone.

This explanation is not credible. If the MIST (mysterious incognito supernatural translator) could make words appear on an ordinary stone found in a well, why couldn’t the MIST make the words appear bright enough to be legible? It’s not like these 19th century cabins were brightly lit in the first place, with their small windows. If the light was too bright, people could draw the curtain. An alternative explanation is that no words were appearing on the stone and that Joseph was merely conducting a demonstration. Recall that the depiction in this clip from the movie is pure fiction in the first place, since neither Joseph nor Oliver said anything like this actually happened.

6-18

Dymon Brady

This is new.

Depicting SITH as fact is definitely new, particularly because it contradicts what Joseph and Oliver always said.

6-18

Meanwhile In Los Angeles

It’s been in the church history volumes for years. In the past memebers we’re uncomfortable with the idea that Joseph used a stone he found, vs U&T.

Members were “uncomfortable” with it because SITH not only contradicted what Joseph, Oliver, and the scriptures teach, but what the prophets have taught for decades. “Uncomfortable” is an apologetic euphemism. Many current Latter-day Saints are not merely “uncomfortable” with SITH, but reject it because they still believe what the prophets have taught.

1d ago

Meanwhile In Los Angeles

However, current church leadership wants a more accurate portrayal of past events. Saints talked a good deal about the stone.

This brings up a good point. If Saints provides a “more accurate portrayal,” why does it omit and edit the original sources? It’s good and healthy to relate the SITH accounts and their sources, but only when accompanied by the full historical record, which Saints fails to do.

1d ago

user9416775166074

Genuine question: why is his face not in the hat?

Great question. The SITH accounts all say Joseph put his face in the hat. But this depiction isn’t based on any actual historical sources anyway, so why not show Joseph with his face not in the hat?

6-18

Doingmybest

what’s the point of the plates then and all he and the ‘prophets’ had to go though to get the plates?

The SITH apologists claim the plates served as a sort of talisman that somehow inspired the MIST to display the words on the stone. But the entire SITH narrative, which contradicts what Joseph said about the translation, also contradicts the narrative about the origins and purposes of the plates in the first place.

6-19

Chris Shulz

Where is the urim and thummim and why is the gold plates covered.

The Interpreter teaches SITH instead of what Joseph and Oliver taught. They want their followers to believe Joseph didn’t use the Urim and Thummim or the plates because they want people to believe Joseph didn’t really translate anything.

6-18

Dymon Brady

I was wondering the same thing. So he didn’t need the plates or the Urim and Thumim buried with them. Why did this change?? I’m confused.

You are only confused if you believe the teachings of the SITH scholars instead of the teachings of the prophets, starting with Joseph and Oliver.

6-18

Metroid 1402

Joseph only used the urim and thummin for a little bit, but they were uncomfortable so he switched to his personal seer stone.

We discussed the “uncomfortable” narrative above.

6-18

Justin Stewart

That’s not right. He lost the ability to use them after the 116 pages were lost. So he used the seer stone.

That directly contradicts what Joseph said.

6-27

Meanwhile In Los Angeles

Oh interesting I never heard that part do you have a source?

Perfect question!

1d ago

Justin Stewart

The Saints Volume 1

Voila! Now we see how the Saints book has replaced the original historical sources and the teachings of the prophets.

1d ago

Metroid 1402

I assume you’re asking me. In Dirkmaat’s book he wrote, “Martin Harris further explained that at one point during the translation, in order to make

Dirkmaat is one of the historians who writes his own theories as fact.

1d ago

Metroid 1402

the mechanics of translation easier, Joseph stopped using the spectacles. He had already stopped using the cumbersome breastplate, and the apparently

More theory presented as fact.

1d ago

Metroid 1402

large and unwieldy spectacles were also making the long hours of translating more difficult.” – From Darkness Unto Light, ch 5

From Darkness Unto Light is a premiere example of the philosophies of men, mingled with actual sources.

1d ago

Dymon Brady

I heard once he found a stone that he tried to find buried treasure with. Was it this stone?

By some accounts, it was the same stone, but that’s not certain.

6-18

Dymon Brady

Just looked it up. He found the stone when digging, then used the stone to sell services of finding buried treasures to others- no success. Same stone

And this is not the stone he showed to the Twelve in Nauvoo, the one Woodruff supposedly called the Urim and Thummim.

6-19

Meanwhile In Los Angeles

Also true

Fun to see an interpretation of history declared to be “true.”

1d ago

BLT

Serious question, How is this a translation when on many occasions the plates were not present as Joseph peered into a hat and dictated to his scribe?

SITH is not a translation in any ordinary sense of the word. That’s why the SITH apologists started referring to the Book of Mormon as a “revelation” instead of a “translation.”

6-19

Meanwhile In Los Angeles

He always had the plates there while translating… it’s a bit of a misnomer he didn’t really translate, he was shown the words in a stone read them

Good summary of SITH: a “misnomer”

1d ago

Kram Noslo

It said he put his face in the hat to block out all the light. This is looking into a hat and not at all representative of what we are now told.

Forget what you’re “told” by the apologists and critics. Read the original sources for yourself.

6-19

Kram Noslo

In the gospel topic essays as well as the video of President Nelson covering the subject.

Watch that video again. President Nelson did a demonstration. He didn’t translate anything in that video. That’s exactly what Joseph Smith did with the stone in the hat–a mere demonstration. Joseph had been forbidden to display the plates or the Urim and Thummim.

As for the Gospel Topics essays, they are supposed to encourage readers to consult the original sources. They are not scripture. They were written by a committee, published anonymously, are subject to revision at any time without notice, and omit/edit original sources.

6-19

Meanwhile In Los Angeles

Lol it’s not that far off.

1d ago

Qwertydovarkyparky

Wasn’t their a curtain between them?

There are no sources regarding whether there was a curtain between Joseph and Oliver or shielding Joseph and Oliver from outside viewers.

6-21

Justin Stewart

There was when he had the plates out but at this point with the seer stone it wasn’t needed.

Because Joseph was commanded not to display the plates, he had to prevent people from seeing them when he was actually translating them. Because he wasn’t translating anything with SITH, he wouldn’t need a blanket; in fact, the point of the demonstration was to have several people present.

6-27

martlet

I was in this film! What a great time!

6-24

Meanwhile In Los Angeles

Really?? That’s so cool? Can you do a video talking about it? Did it begin everyday with prayer, who made sure it was accurate?

1d ago

martlet

Maybe I will do a video on it. I’ve done a few things. It was a great experience. Oddly, some of the actors didn’t even know about the Church.

That doesn’t seem odd. What is odd is anyone who is familiar with Church history who wrote the SITH part of the script or read the lines with a straight face.

22h ago

FTinstgeorge

Scribe was like “what is happening?”

Exactly. That’s the only plausible part of this clip, when Oliver doesn’t write anything because he can’t believe what he’s seeing.

6-19

lifeisgreat.2021

why doesn’t he wear the hat?

6-18

Frodo

I’m not a Mormon: but I love to learn more about Mormonism and other religions!

7-3

Meanwhile In Los Angeles

Go to comeuntochrist.org it will tell you everything you need!

1d ago

Source: About Central America

July 12, 2022Uncategorized

New video, Institute, chiasmus, and more on Edwards

New video: For a couple of years now, Paul DeBarthe has hosted a weekly discussion of topics related to the Book of Mormon. Presenters represent a wide range of perspectives, including scholars and laypersons from every imaginable background, each providing thoughtful and thought-provoking presentations.

This week, one of the discussions was uploaded to YouTube. You can see it here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSK7gE_mRMg

This is a presentation by James W. Lucas, a New York lawyer who also presented at the Mormon History Association in June in Logan, Utah.

The title of the video: How the Book of Mormon was translated using the Urim & Thummim interpreters (not a stone in a hat)

This is an important presentation that deserves a broader audience.

The presentation itself is about an hour long, with an additional hour of Q&A afterwards.

_____

This morning on my twitter feed, both “Joseph Smith” and “Mormonism” were trending. As you can imagine, all kinds of topics are being discussed.

Apparently the Twitter trend was generated by a letter announcing a new Institute course that was released yesterday:

(click to enlarge)

This could be an awesome course. As an Institute teacher (and Pathway missionary) myself, I know there is a need for such a course.

I’m hopeful this is a chance for students to learn how to find answers in reliable sources such as the scriptures and actual Church history, particularly the Joseph Smith Papers, instead of relying on the theories of a handful of LDS scholars.

The scriptures and the original sources are awesome.

The teachings of the scholars, particularly those in the M2C/SITH citation cartels, not so much.

I look forward to seeing the course when it is released.

_____

Along those lines, one of the topics on Twitter was chiasmus.

In an awesome book titled Poetic Parallelisms in the Book of Mormon, Donald W. Parry has published the entire text in parallel format. You can download it here:

https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/mi/61/

There are multiple working hypotheses regarding chiasmus, aka “inverted parallelism,” as well as other forms of Hebrew parallel structures.

In my view, the presence of these parallel structures is good evidence that Joseph Smith actually translated an ancient record. These structures were not only known before Joseph translated the plates, but they were embodied in the works of Jonathan Edwards and others. I think the Lord prepared Joseph for his role as translator by enabling Joseph to absorb this language and structure into his own lexicon so he could effectively translate the engravings on the plates.

For more background, see https://dailyjonathanedwards.blogspot.com/p/edwards-and-hebrew-parallelism.html

Critics of the Restoration predictably cite such evidence to suggest that Joseph composed the text. The forget the simple and obvious point that evidence of composition is also evidence of translation because a translator necessarily uses his/her own lexicon in the process of translation.

Some LDS scholars, particularly those who teach SITH, see it differently. For example, Jack Welch takes credit for having discovered chiasmus in the Book of Mormon when he was a missionary in Germany. He popularized the idea that no one knew about chiasmus in the Bible until after the Book of Mormon was published.

Michael Quinn, in an extended footnote, disputed Welch’s claim. You can read it here and make your own decisions about what to think:

https://faenrandir.github.io/a_careful_examination/early-mormonism-quinn-footnote-108-chiasmus/

For me, it’s difficult to disagree with Quinn’s well-supported conclusion:

As I told John W. Welch in a 1995 letter, I have always admired and praised his discovery of the ancient poetic technique of chiasmus in the Book of Mormon. However, I believe that he has done a disservice to all Mormon believers by his decades of misrepresenting America’s pre-1830 knowledge of this biblical parallelism. As stated in my text discussion, Hugh Nibley’s misstatements in 1975 occurred because of his lack of access to information that was not yet published or not easily available to him. That was not the case with John W. Welch, whose publications for the LDS audience since 1969, in my opinion, have manifested an escalating, intentional concealment of pre-1830 American publications about chiasmus.

I don’t think apologists are effective when they deny obvious evidence to promote their theories, especially when they elevate their theories over the teachings of the prophets.

In my view, the teachings of the prophets, particularly the teachings of Joseph and Oliver regarding the founding events of the Restoration, are the simplest, truthful, and trustworthy explanations. Their teachings are corroborated by extrinsic evidence.

It is continually inexplicable to me why so many LDS apologists promote SITH and M2C, especially when they have to repudiate the plain teachings of the prophets on these topics.

_____

Regarding the Jonathan Edwards material, I realize my preliminary database is long and complex. I’m excerpting it on my dailyjonathanedwards blog, here:

https://dailyjonathanedwards.blogspot.com/

This database involves nonbiblical terms and phrases. I have another database for passages that incorporate (blend) biblical terms and phrases.

Naturally, people can find other sources of these phrases. They can quibble about how close the text of the Book of Mormon tracks with Edwards’ writings, including Edwards’ rephrasing, paraphrasing, and even misquotations of biblical passages.

Nevertheless, the presence of Edwardsian language in the text of the Book of Mormon and Joseph’s other writings is good evidence that Joseph translated the text using his own lexicon and that the Lord spoke through him in the revelations by drawing upon that lexicon–just as he does to us in our day, regardless of what language we speak.

Source: About Central America