FYI, I started a series on agenda-driven history on my LetterVII blog.
https://www.lettervii.com/2021/04/steven-c-harper-and-agenda-driven.html
_____
One of the issues that our M2C scholars debate is the translation of the Book of Mormon.
Anyone who reads the Book of Mormon knows it describes nothing like Mayan culture. There are no references to jade, jungles and jaguars, nothing about massive stone pyramids, nothing about volcanoes, nothing about ubiquitous stone engravings relating the history of the people beginning long before Lehi arrived, etc.
This leads our M2C intellectuals to conclude that Joseph didn’t translate the plates literally, or even close to literally. They think the Book of Mormon is a “loose” translation.
Basically, the M2C proponents insist that Joseph Smith mistranslated the Book of Mormon. Here’s how Brant Gardner, one of the more prominent M2C proponents, puts it: “We have evidence that Joseph dictated ‘north.’ What we do not have evidence of is what the text on the plates said.”
Did you catch that? According to our M2C scholars, Joseph Smith’s translation is not evidence of what the plates said!
This is why, despite the language in the text, they “cannot unsee” Mesoamerican culture when they read it. A “horse” is a “tapir,” a “tower” is a “massive stone pyramid,” etc.
Such a “loose” translation seems to conflict with the idea of an “iron-clad” translation promoted by various LDS scholars; i.e., the idea that Joseph read words that appeared on the stone in the hat (SITH).
LDS scholars such as Royal Skousen say Joseph was not the translator. This excerpt discussing SITH is from his book on the King James language in the text.
What this means is that the Book of Mormon is a creative and cultural translation of what was on the plates, not a literal one. Based on the linguistic evidence, the translation must have involved serious intervention from the English-language translator, who was not Joseph Smith. Nonetheless, the text was revealed to Joseph Smith by means of his translation instrument, and he read it off word for word to his scribe. To our modern-day, skeptical minds, this is indeed “a marvelous work and a wonder.”
http://www.bookofmormoncentralamerica.com/2020/01/royal-skousen-translation-and-m2c.html
SITH depends on the theory that the Mysterious Unknown Supernatural Translator (MUST) somehow translated the plates into English and caused the words that they should appear on the stone in the hat.
To reconcile SITH with M2C, our M2C scholars have to conclude it was not Joseph who mistranslated the plates, but the MUST, who provided a “creative and cultural translation” but forgot to include all the elements of Mayan culture.
To many of us, this sounds ridiculous, but that is what M2C boils down to.
Of course, people can believe whatever they want. That’s fine with me. All we do on this blog is discuss the facts and ramifications of the various theories.
_____
Previously, we’ve discussed the awesome Gospel Topics Essay on Book of Mormon Translation (GTE).
http://www.bookofmormoncentralamerica.com/2020/06/review-of-gospel-topics-essay-on.html
The GTE forgot to even quote (let alone discuss) what Joseph and Oliver said about the translation with the Urim and Thummim.
Instead, the GTE mingles the theories of scholars with quotations dated decades after the events from people such as David Whitmer and Emma Smith.
For example, here’s a screen capture from the essay:
That quotation comes from Oliver Cowdery’s Letter I, an excerpt of which is found in the Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith-History, note 1. Here it is in context, with the omitted portion in red.
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) also at https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1834-1836/49
Many faithful Latter-day Saints find it astonishing that a Gospel Topics Essay on the Translation of the Book of Mormon would not even inform readers what Joseph and Oliver had to say.
But many of us also find it astonishing that the GTE on Book of Mormon Geography is silent about Cumorah, precisely the same way that the Saints book, volume 1, is silent on Cumorah.
That’s one of the topics I’ll be discussing in the series on the Letter VII blog.
https://www.lettervii.com/2021/04/steven-c-harper-and-agenda-driven.html
Source: About Central America
2 thoughts on “More fun with SITH and M2C”
Perhaps that explains why in his conference address, Elder Soares omitted the last part of Oliver Cowdery’s statement which describes the use of the Urim & Thummin….he was using the GTE version for his reference!
Sadly, Saints Vol I and the GTE on Book of Mormon Translation uses damning deception with the text of the narrative and corresponding footnotes as you illustrated in your blog about Footnote 7.
Here is another example. Footnote 3 which refers to JSH verses 33 and 34. However, the footnote conveniently EXCLUDES verse 35 which states, “35 Also, that there were two stones in silver bows—and these stones, fastened to a abreastplate, constituted what is called the bUrim and Thummim—deposited with the plates; and the possession and use of these stones were what constituted c“seers” in ancient or former times; and that God had prepared them for the purpose of translating the book.”
Here is the actual text in the GTE with the corresponding Footnote 3.
“He informed Joseph that “there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang.” The book could be found in a hill not far from the Smith family farm. This was no ordinary history, for it contained “the fullness of the everlasting Gospel as delivered by the Savior.”3”
I guess if you cherry-pick the narrative, it’s also ok to cherry-pick the text of the corresponding footnote.
Verse 33 should have been part of Footnote 2—doesn’t fit Footnote 3. Why is verse 35 kept hidden? The essay is about the translation! It looks like the narrative in the body of the essay was deliberately limited so the footnote could be limited—deliberate deception. Verse 35 either deserves its own footnote. Verse 35 is not cited anywhere in the essay because the essay is promoting the seer stone in a hat! Here is verse 35.
35 Also, that there were two stones in silver bows—and these stones, fastened to a abreastplate, constituted what is called the bUrim and Thummim—deposited with the plates; and the possession and use of these stones were what constituted c“seers” in ancient or former times; and that God had prepared them for the purpose of translating the book.
The Times and Seasons reference, Times and Seasons 3 (March 1, 1842): 706–7 is fine, but who reads the footnotes? This is the famous Wentworth Letter. Page 707 states, “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.”
Why is there limited verbiage about the Urim and Thummim in the body of the essay narrative—deliberate deception!
There are 34 footnotes in the GTE. There are references to the U&T that are not mentioned in the narrative or the footnotes!
Here is the narrative for Footnote 20.
“As Joseph grew to understand his prophetic calling, he learned that he could use this stone for the higher purpose of translating scripture.”20 Footnote 20 refers to Mark Ashurst-McGee’s 2000 Master’s Thesis at USU, So here we have scholars quoting scholars. Why don’t the scholars quote the scriptures? Mark was an editor of the Joseph Smith Papers.
Here are several additional scriptures NOT mentioned in the essay or footnotes!
D&C 17:1
D&C 10:1, means of the bUrim and Thummim
D&C 20:8, means
JSH Verses42, 52, 59, 62, 71*
Ether 3:23
At the end of the essay, it states, “The Church acknowledges the contribution of scholars to the historical content presented in this article; their work is used with permission.
Originally published December 2013.”
Why are we depending on scholars and rejecting the scriptures and Joseph and Oliver who were the most familiar with the translation process? What are the names of these scholars?
Comments are closed.