Book of Mormon Translation
- Joseph Smith used seer stones
- Statements of translation process
- How the Church taught the process
- The translation process depicted in artwork
- "You should've known this"
“I will begin by saying that we still have pictures on our Ward bulletin boards of Joseph Smith with the Gold Plates in front of him. That has become an irksome point and I think it is something the church should pay attention to. Because anyone who studies the history knows that is not what happened. There is no church historian who says that is what happened and yet it is being propagated by the church and it feeds into the notion that the church is trying to cover up embarrassing episodes and is sort of prettifying its own history.
So, I think we ought to just stop that immediately. I am not sure we need a lot of pictures in our chapels of Joseph looking into his hat, but we certainly should tell our children that is how it worked... It’s weird. It’s a weird picture. It implies it’s like darkening a room when we show slides. It implies that there is an image appearing in that stone and the light would make it more difficult to see that image. So, that implies a translation that’s a reading and so gives us a little clue about the whole translation process. It also raises the strange question, ‘What in the world are the plates for? Why do we need them on the table if they are just wrapped up into a cloth while he looks into a seer stone?’”
– RICHARD BUSHMAN, LDS SCHOLAR, HISTORIAN, PATRIARCH FAIRMORMON PODCAST, EPISODE 3: RICHARD L. BUSHMAN P.1, 47:25
Unlike the story I've been taught in Sunday School, Priesthood, General Conferences, Seminary, EFY, Ensigns, Church history tour, Missionary Training Center, and BYU...Joseph Smith used a rock in a hat for translating the Book of Mormon.
In other words, Joseph used the same magic device or “Ouija Board” that he used during his treasure hunting days. He put a rock – called a “peep stone” – in his hat and put his face in the hat to tell his customers the location of buried treasure on their property.Jeremy mentioned treasure hunting once before in the segment on Captain Kidd. He mentions it again here, but he won't go into his actual criticisms of treasure hunting until a much later section, but I think it's worth going into here. The way Jeremy brings it up here without much detail makes it sound like the treasure hunting part was common knowledge to him, and it is just the translation part that he didn't know. And that might be the case, but he speaks of it dismissively here, which makes me wonder.
First, some history. Joseph Smith actually had a couple seer stones (it is more commonly called a "seer stone" by those who believe in them, while "peep stone" is used by those dismissive of them—David Whitmer even corrected an interviewer who used the wrong term). Not all historical accounts agree, and it seems like people have conflated the two seer stones that Joseph Smith had. But I'll go off of Mark Ashurst-McGee's 2000 thesis paper, A Pathway to Prophethood: Joseph Smith Junior as Rodsman, Village Seer, and Judeo-Christian Prophet.
Around late 2019 to early 1820, Joseph Smith went over to visit a neighbor girl, Sally Chase. He had heard that she had a green stone that allowed her to see where things were located. After asking, she let him look in her stone. He placed it in a hat to block out outside light, and in her stone, all she could see was a brilliant shining light, a small stone buried under the roots of a small tree or shrub a mile up a small stream on the south of Lake Erie.
He was able to look in her stone several other times, and with the same result. After a couple years, he made the 150-mile journey to the location, and after digging 15 feet underground found a metal container, inside of which was a small brown stone.
In 1822, probably from looking in his first stone, it was revealed to Joseph the location of a second stone on the Chase property. Under the pretext of digging a well, he and Willard Chase dug until they found water and a small white stone 20–30 feet down.
Joseph used his seer stones to find lost or hidden objects. Jeremy talks about "customers" but as far as I know, there was just one. Josiah Stowell had heard about Joseph's talent, and so went to Palmyra to seek him out, and hired him for $14 a month to try and find a Spanish silver mine. However, they were unsuccessful, and after working nearly a month, Joseph finally convinced him to quit.
For me, I knew that Joseph was said to be a money digger, since he talks about it in his history. But I did not know that a "money digger" meant using a seer stone to find buried treasure. I did know that seer stones were a thing though from D&C 28 where Joseph receives a revelation that the revelations that Hiram Page had been receiving from a seer stone were not from the Lord, and that Satan was deceiving him.
A seer stone is not a Ouija board (also called a spirit board). A Ouija board has a bunch of letters on it and a pair or more people place their hands on movable wooden indicator, and spirits are said to make contact with the individuals, moving their hands to spell out messages.
A better comparison with a modern popular culture item might be a crystal ball. A seer stone, like a spirit board, is said to be supernatural, not magical. However, in contrast to a spirit board, only one person uses it, and they directly see messages within the stone. Joseph Smith placed his stone inside his hat, apparently to provide a dark space to see the glow better, much like how one today might shade their smart phone with their hand if in sunny weather to see their screen better.
He also used this same method for translating the Book of Mormon, while the gold plates were covered, placed in another room, or even buried in the woods. The gold plates were not used for the Book of Mormon we have today.There are over 200 accounts of the translation process (many of them here). Taking them all at face value, they don't always agree. For example, many of them say that Joseph did have the plates out, but he was concealed from his scribe by a curtain. (As an aside, this is how Pomeroy Tucker described it in the same book Jeremy used as a source in the segment on Captain Kidd and criticized Latter-day Saint apologists for only accepting the parts that supported our view.)
It is possible that multiple methods were used during the translation. The most reliable accounts are those that were either written by those who witnessed the translation, or who were interviewed, and their interview was published soon after. This would be Emma Smith, Martin Harris, Oliver Cowdery, Joseph Knight, David Whitmer, Elizabeth Whitmer, and Michael Morse. Together, they provide a more consistent picture.
In the first issue (1 October 1834) of the Messenger and Advocate, Oliver Cowdery was first to publish a reminiscence of acting as a scribe, though he does so with few details:
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 whould have said, "Interpreters," the history, or record, called "The book of Mormon."Joseph Smith never described in detail the translation process. At a general conference in 25-26 October 1831, "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." So for example, in the Wentworth letter, published 1 March 1842, in Times and Seasons, he briefly said
Through the medium of the Urim and Thummim I translated the record by the gift, and power of God.
Joseph Knight Senior wrote a reminiscence, undated, but between 1835-1847 with this description:
Now the way he translated was he put the urim and thummim into his hat and Darkened his Eyes than he would take a sentance and it would aper in Brite Roman Letters then he would tell the writer and he would write it Then <that would go away> the next sentance would Come and so on But if it was not Spelt rite it would go away till it was rite so we see it was marvelous thus was the hol [whole] translated.
In an 1870 affidavit, Elizabeth Ann Whitmer Cowdery wrote of her experience when Joseph dictated the Book of Mormon. In 1829, she was 14 and living at the home of her father, Peter Whitmer Sr., years before she married Oliver Cowdery.
I cheerfully certify that I was familiar with the manner of Joseph Smith's translating the book of Mormon. He translated the most of it at my Father's house. And I often sat by and saw and heard them translate and write for hours together. Joseph never had a curtain drawn between him and his scribe while he was translating. He would place the director in his hat, and then place his [face in his] hat, so as to exclude the light, and then [read] to his scribe the words as they appeared before him.
The Chicago Times interviewed David Whitmer and published a summary on 7 August 1875. This included a description of the translation process in his fathers home:
During all these months David had free access to their room and was
An Eye-Witness to the method of procedure
The plates were not before Joseph while he translated, but seem to have been removed by the custodian angel. The method pursued was commonplace but nevertheless effective. Having placed the Urim and Thummim in his hat, Joseph placed the hat over his face, and with prophetic eyes read the invisible syllable by syllable and word by word while Cowdery or Harris acted as recorder. "So illiterate was Joseph at the time," said Mr. Whitmer, "that he didn't even know that Jerusalem was a walled city, and he was utterly unable to pronounce many of the names which the magic power of the Urim and Thummim revealed, and therefore spelled them out in syllables, and the more erudite scribe put them together. The stone was the same used by the Jaredites at Babel. I have frequently placed it to my eyes but could see nothing through it. I have seen Joseph, however, place it to his eyes and instantly read signs 160 miles distant and tell exactly what was transpiring there. When I went to Harmony after him he told me the name of every hotel at which I had stopped on the road, read the signs, and described various scenes without having ever received any information from me." The unbelievers frequently attempted to confound the faithful few by asking them if they supposed
"that fool boy"
could write anything, or that God would select such a wretch as a medium of communicating His will. The ready answer was that God was not very particular as to the instruments used to accomplish certain desired ends, and that devils as well as angels had their places in His economy.
This was reprinted in the Salt Lake Herald and someone was a member of another faith doubted how genuine the article was, so he wrote to David Whitmer to ask about the reliability of the statements attributed to him. He replied August 17th, and it was published in the Salt Lake Herald on 18 September 1875.
"The conversation which I gave the outlines of my experience and history to the reporter of the Chicago Times, and published by them—which was copied by the HERALD—is substantially correct. There may be a few minor errors, but they do not interfere at all with what I gave him in substance, or the purposes of the Almighty Father in disseminating his truth."
W. W. Blair interviewed Emma's brother-in-law, Michael Morse, and published it a few days later on 15 June 1879 in The Saints' Herald, a publication of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. In the interview, he tells that he was able to witness the translation process first hand.
It should be premised that Mr. Morse is not, and has never been a believer in the prophetic mission of Joseph
He states that he first knew Joseph when he came to Harmony, Pa., an awkward, unlearned youth of about nineteen years of age. This was in 1825. Joseph was then in the employ of a Mr. Stowell, a man of some wealth, of mature age, and an active professor of religion. Joseph and others were employed by him to dig for a silver deposit, said to have been made at some time previous. Joseph and others of the company boarded at a Mr. Isaac Hale's, whose daughter Emma he subsequently married. He states that the sons of Mr. Hale seemed opposed to and at enmity with Joseph from the first, and took occasions to annoy and vex him, and that at one of these times, when out fishing, Joseph threw off his coat and proposed to defend himself.
He states that Joseph told him that he found the gold plates, from whence it is claimed the Book of Mormon was translated, in a stone box. (Some of late have said that Joseph at first professed to have found them in an iron box).
He further states that when Joseph was translating the Book of Mormon, he, (Morse), had occasion more than once to go into his immediate presence, and saw him engaged at his work of translation.
The mode of procedure consisted in Joseph's placing the Seer Stone in the crown of a hat, then putting his face into the hat, so as to entirely cover his face, resting his elbows upon his knees, and then dictating word after word, while the scribe—Emma, John Whitmer, O. Cowdery, or some other, wrote it down.
Bro. Cadwell enquired as to whether Joseph was sufficiently intelligent and talented to compose and dictate of his own ability the matter written down by the scribes. To this Mr. Morse replied with decided emphasis, No. He said he then was not at all learned, yet was confident he had more learning than Joseph then had.
Joseph Smith III interviewed his mother, Emma Smith Bidamon in 1879 and published their interview soon afterward, which included a description of the translation:
Q. What of the truth of Mormonism?
A. I know Mormonism to be the truth; and believe the Church to have been established by divine direction. I have complete faith in it. In writing for your father I frequently wrote day after day, often sitting at the table close by him, he sitting with his face buried in his hat, with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us.
Q. Had he not a book or manuscript from which he read, or dictated to you?
A. He had neither manuscript nor book to read from.
Q. Could he not have had, and you not know it?
A. If he had anything of the kind he could not have concealed it from me.
Q. Are you sure that he had the plates at the time you were writing for him?
A. The plates often lay on the table without any attempt at concealment, wrapped in a small linen table cloth, which I had given him to fold them in. I once felt of the plates, as they thus lay on the table, tracing their outline and shape. They seemed to be pliable like thick paper, and would rustle with a metallic sound when the edges were moved by the thumb, as one does sometimes thumb the edges of a book.
Q. Where did father and Oliver Cowdery write?
A. Oliver Cowdery and your father wrote in the room where I was at work.
Q. Could not father have dictated the Book of Mormon to you, Oliver Cowdery and the others who wrote for him, after having first written it, or having first read it out of some book?
A. Joseph Smith [and for the first time she used his name direct, having usually used the words, "your father," or "my husband"] could neither write nor dictate a coherent and well-worded letter; let alone dictating a book like the Book of Mormon. And, though I was an active participant in the scenes that transpired, and was present during the translation of the plates, and had cognizance of things as they transpired, it is marvelous to me, "a marvel and a wonder," as much so as to any one else.
Q. I should suppose that you would have uncovered the plates and examined them?
A. I did not attempt to handle the plates, other than I have told you, nor uncover them to look at them. I was satisfied that it was the work of God, and therefore did not feel it to be necessary to do so.
Major Bidamon here suggested: Did Mr. Smith forbid your examining the plates?
A. I do not think he did. I knew that he had them, and was not specially curious about them. I moved them from place to place on the table, as it was neccessary in doing my work.
Q. Mother, what is your belief about the authenticity, or origin of the Book of Mormon?
A. My belief is that the Book of Mormon is of divine authenticity—I have not the slightest doubt of it. I am satisfied that no man could have dictated the writing of the manuscripts unless he was inspired; for, when acting as his scribe, your father would dictate to me hour after hour; and when returning after meals, or after interruptions, he would at once begin where he had left off, without either seeing the manuscript or having any portion of it read to him. This was a usual thing for him to do. It would have been improbable that a learned man could do this; and, for one so ignorant and unlearned as he was, it was simply impossible.
On 5 June 1881 the Kansas City Journal published an interview with David Whitmer. Kansas City is right next to Independence, and the article expressed a desire to tell "the other side of the story." David said he had been "imposed upon and misrepresented so many times" in newspapers before, so was hesitant, but ultimately went ahead. In the interview, David describes how he learned of Joseph Smith through Oliver Cowdery. After Oliver had served as a scribe for Joseph for some time in Harmony, they came up to stay at the house of David's father. While there, they finished the translation.
"I, as well as all of my father's family, Smith's wife, Oliver Cowdery, and Martin Harris, were present during the translation. The translation was by Smith, and the manner as follows:
He went on to explain how after the loss of the 116 pages, the angel took the plates. "When Joseph was again allowed to resume the translation, the plates were taken care of by a messenger of God, and when Joseph wanted to see the plates, this messenger was always at hand." He also affirmed his own witness of the plates in detail."He had two small stones of a chocolate color, nearly egg shape, and perfectly smooth, but not transparent, called interpreters, which were given him with the plates. He did not use the plates in the translation, but would hold the interpreters to his eyes and cover his face with a hat, excluding all light, and before his eyes would appear what seemed to be parchment, on which would appear the characters of the plates in a line at the top, and immediately below would appear the translation, in English, which Smith would read to his scribe, who wrote it down exactly as it fell from his lips. The scribe would then read the sentence written, and if any mistake had been made the characters would remain visible to Smith until corrected, when they faded from sight to be replaced by another line. The translation at my father's occupied about one month, that is from June 1 to July 1, 1829."
After the interview was published, David Whitmer wrote a letter to the editor on 13 June 1881 to correct a few of the statements. Corrections regarding what I quoted above included:
I did not wish to be understood as saying that those referred to as being present were all of the time in the immediate presence of the translator, but were at the place and saw how the translation was conducted. I did not say that Smith used "two small stones" as stated nor did I call the stone "interpreters." I stated that "he used one stone (not two) and called it a sun stone ['Seers Stone' correction did not make it into the paper.]." The "interpreters" were as I understood taken from Smith and were not used by him after losing the first 116 pages as stated. It is my understanding that the stone referred to was furnished him when he commenced translating again after losing the 116 pages.
This correction was then published on the 19th, along with a note that the errors were "purely accidental and entirely unintentional" and that their intent was to publish his statement just as he made it.My statement was and now is that in translating he put the stone in his hat and putting his face in his hat so as to exclude the light and that then the light and characters appeared in the hat together with the interpretation which he uttered and was written by the scribe and which was tested at the time as stated.
The initial interview was reprinted in the Deseret Evening News, the Saints' Herald, and Millennial Star, and Kingston Times.
The same year, a reporter from the Chicago Times interviewed David Whitmer for an hour, and published an article on 17 October 1881
Many of the earliest hostile articles that mentioned the translation process referenced Martin Harris as a source, however they don't seem clear that they were actually from an interview, but appear to be things that they had heard. One that does claim to be from an interview is from a letter by Charles Anthon, talking about his experience about 13 years later. Since I'm only referencing accounts either that they wrote or published soon after the interview, I'm not counting these. But for reference, many of those tell of Joseph translating from the plates using the interpreters, separated from the scribe by a curtain.The tablets or plates were translated by Smith, who used a small oval or kidney-shaped stone, called Urim and Thummim, that seemed endowed with the marvelous power of converting the characters on the plates, when used by Smith, into English, who would then dictate to Cowdery what to write. Frequently one character would make two lines of manuscript, while others made but a word or two words. Mr. Whitmer emphatically asserts, as did Harris and Cowdery, that while Smith was dictating the translation he had
No manuscript, notes or other means of knowledge
save the seer-stone and the characters as shown on the plates, he being present and cognizant how it was done.
I will share one though despite being published 12 years after, and 7 years after he died. Martin Harris, after coming to Utah in 1870 spoke in the tabernacle. Many wrote in their journals that he bore his testimony. Edward Stevenson wrote that Martin Harris talked about the translation process, but this may have been in a later interview. If it were shared publicly, it might count even though it wasn't actually published until until 1881 by the Derseret News (and republished in 1882 in the Latter-day Saints' Millenial Star). It seems likely though that it may have been shared privately with Edward Stevenson shortly after. But this publication does get referenced in later Church materials, so I think it is worth quoting anyway.
Martin Harris related an incident that occurred during the time that he wrote that portion of the translation of the Book of Mormon which he was favored to write direct from the mouth of the Prophet Joseph Smith. He said that the Prophet possessed a seer stone, by which he was enabled to translate as well as from the Urim and Thummim, and for convenience he then used the seer stone. Martin explained the translation as follows: By aid of the seer stone, sentences would appear and were read by the Prophet and written by Martin, and when finished he would say, "Written," and if correctly written, that sentence would disappear and another appear in its place, but if not written correctly it remained until corrected, so that the translation was just as it was engraven on the plates, precisely in the language then used. Martin said, after continued translation they would become weary, and would go down to the river and exercise by throwing stones out on the river, etc. While so doing on one occasion, Martin found a stone very much resembling the one used for translating, and on resuming their labor of translation, Martin put in place the stone that he had found. He said that the Prophet remained silent, unusually and intently gazing in darkness, no traces of the usual sentences appearing. Much surprised, Joseph exclaimed, "Martin! What is the matter? All is as dark as Egypt!" Martin's countenance betrayed him, and the Prophet asked Martin why he had done so. Martin said, to stop the mouths of fools, who had told him that the Prophet had learned those sentences and was merely repeating them, etc.
Martin said further that the seer stone differed in appearance entirely from the Urim and "Thummim that was obtained with the plates, which were two clear stones set in two rims, very much resembling spectacles, only they were larger. Martin said there were not many pages translated while he wrote, after which Oliver Cowdery and others did the writing.
On 16 July 1884, the St. Louis Republican published another interview with David Whitmer:
"The translation was done in my father's house; at least two months of the time, was thus taken up with it there. Oliver Cowdery was the principal amanuensis. Cowdery died in [1850], near my house, in Richmond. I saw the stone which formed the box or receptacle in which the metallic plates were found, on the hillside, Commarah. Joseph Smith claimed that an angel informed him of the place where the plates were hidden. I saw the plates; they were bound together with leaves, and held together by rings, two at each corner of the bundle and one in the centre.
"Joseph Smith dictated every word in the book. The understanding we have about it was that when the book was discovered an angel was present and pointed the place out. In translating from the plates, Joseph Smith looked through the Urim and Thumminim, consisting of two transparent pebbles set in the rim of a bow, fastened to a breastplate. He dictated by looking through them to his scribes."
On 15 December 1885, the Chicago Tribune published an article that they went to interview David Whitmer. His health was failing, so a member of the family related David's experience. It was done in his presence, and he frequently gave corrections and interpolations. There are some obvious errors, but it does provide some good details.
Whitmer and Cowdery were greatly impressed by the recital of this strange story, and were conducted to the hill, where they personally viewed the receptacle in which Moroni, at the beginning of the fifth century, had concealed the history of his fathers. Smith also said that he had been commanded to at once begin the translation of the work in the presence of three witnesses. In accordance with this command, Smith, Cowdery, and Whitmer proceeded to the latter's home, accompanied by Smith's wife, and bearing with them the precious plates and spectacles. The house of the senior Whitmer was a primitive and poorly designed structure, but it was deemed the most secure for carrying out the sacred trust on account of the threats that had been made against Smith by his mercenary neighbors. In order to give privacy to the proceeding a blanket, which served as a portière, was stretched across the family living room to shelter the translators and the plates from the eyes of any who might call at the house while the work was in progress. This, Mr. Whitmer says, was the only use made of the blanket, and it was not for the purpose of concealing the plates or the translator from the eyes of the amanuensis. In fact, Smith was at no time hidden from his collaborators, and the translation was performed in the presence of not only the persons mentioned, but of the entire Whitmer household and several of Smith's relatives besides.
The work of translating the tablets consumed about eight months, Smith acting as the seer and Oliver Cowdery, Smith's wife, and Christian Whitmer, brother of David, performing the duties of amanuenses, in whose handwriting the original manuscript now is. Each time before resuming the work all present would kneel in prayer and invoke the Divine blessing on the proceeding. After prayer Smith would sit on one side of a table and the amanuenses, in turn as they became tired, on the other. Those present and not actively engaged in the work seated themselves around the room and then the work began. After affixing the magical spectacles to his eyes, Smith would take the plates and translate the characters one at a time. The graven characters would appear in succession to the seer, and directly under the character, when viewed through the glasses, would be the translation in English. Sometimes the character would be a single word, and frequently an entire sentence. In translating the characters Smith, who was illiterate and but little versed in Biblical lore, was ofttimes compelled to spell the words out, not knowing the correct pronunciation, and Mr. Whitmer recalls the fact that at that time Smith did not even know that Jerusalem was a walled city. Cowdery, however, being a school-teacher, rendered invaluable aid in pronouncing hard words and giving their proper definition.
More Miraculous Developments
A miracle is related by Mr. Whitmer as occurring while the translation was in progress. It seems that Smith, who was puffed up with his great importance as a confidential secretary to the Lord, displeased the Master by entering into some carnal confab in relation tot he work. For this offense he was punished by having the celestial visitant, who first commissioned him to inaugurate the work, suddenly appear and carry off the plates and spectacles. In this connection it might also be mentioned that Martin Harris, one of the witnesses to the translation, a farmer in the same county and a man of simple mind and taste, was sent by Smith with a copy of the characters to Prof. Charles Anthon, a professor of languages in Columbia College and author of several well-known works, who pronounced the language inscribed on the plates Reformed Egyptian.
About this time Harris, inspired by curiosity and elation, took sixteen of the golden of the golden tablets home to show his wife, who is alleged to have stolen them from a bureau drawer and peddled them among her friends. For this offense Harris was severely reprimanded by the Lord, through Smith, but the angel afterwards recovered the plates and restored them. Smith's offense of tattling the secrets of the work among his neighbors was less readily condoned, and for a long time the work was suspended, the angel being in possession of the plates and spectacles. Finally, when Smith had fully repented of his rash conduct, he was forgiven. The plates, however, were not returned, but instead Smith was given by the angel a Urim and Thummim of another pattern, it being shaped in oval or kidney form. This seer's stone he was instructed to place in his hat, and on covering his face with the hat the character and translation would appear on the stone.
This worked just as satisfactorily as the old method, but at no time thereafter was the backsliding Joseph intrusted with the precious plates.
In 1887, David Whitmer published An Address to All Believers in Christ. In it he described the translation process:
Some people disagree with the narrative presented in these quotes, preferring others. And that's okay, when presented with conflicting accounts, there are many ways one may choose to resolve them. Royal Skousen believes that the more reliable statements are either first-hand or from interviews published soon after (which is why I selected the ones I did). However, he also says they are only correct as far as what they actually saw. Some of the accounts talk about Joseph not being able to continue until everything was spelled correctly, however the original manuscript has spelling errors and mistakes in it, so that can't be correct.Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing. One character at a time would appear, and under it was the interpretation in English. Brother Joseph would read off the English to Oliver Cowdery, who was his principal scribe, and when it was written down and repeated to Brother Joseph to see if it was correct, then it would disappear, and another character with the interpretation would appear. Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, and not by any power of man.
However, the manuscript does support that it was dictated, errors are of the type that would occur from mishearing a word rather than misreading a word. Evidence shows that errors were immediately corrected, supporting what was said about the scribe reading it back, and if it was incorrect, corrections were immediately made. The first time a name appeared, evidence supports that Joseph would spell it out, but other times when the name appeared again, these were often misspelled.
Isaac Hale said that he felt the weight of the box the plates were kept in, but because he wasn't allowed to see them, he told Joseph that he didn't want anything he couldn't see in his house. He understood that after that, Joseph kept them hidden in the forest.
Some time after that, Joseph made copies of the characters for Martin to take to scholars. Joseph and Emma moved out of her parent's house and into a small house on their property. While there, Emma worked as a scribe, and she reported that the plates were covered on the table, and she sometimes had to move them around. Martin said Joseph could use either the Nephite interpreters or his seer stone, which he used sometimes "for convenience."
After Joseph let Martin take the 116 pages, the angel took the plates and the interpreters. After Joseph learned the pages were lost, the angel gave Joseph the interpreters, and he received what is now D&C 3, and afterwards Joseph's history says the plates and the interpreters were taken from him again. Joseph said "I was not able to obtain them for a season and it came to pass afte[r] much humility and affliction of Soul I obtained them again" and Oliver Cowdery then served as his scribe.
David Whitmer came to Harmony, and moved took Joseph and Emma and Oliver back to his father's house. According to David, "the plates were taken care of by a messenger of God, and when Joseph wanted to see the plates, this messenger was always at hand." There were stories of Joseph being separated from the scribe by a blanket, however, these witnesses reported that Joseph was always in full view, and seems to be a misunderstanding from a blanket being used to divide the work of translation from the rest of the house.
I have always thought the complaint that Joseph "did not use the plates" is a little strange. Even before I learned about Joseph's seer stones, if you had asked me "what did Joseph Smith use during the translation?" I would have answered "the Urim and Thummim." I don't know how one would "use" a book but by reading it, but Joseph never claimed to know Reformed Egyptian, so in this case, when people say, "Joseph didn't use the plates" they really mean, "Joseph didn't look at the plates." I would say that looking at the plates provides no meaningful benefit if one cannot read them.
Joseph Smith always said that he translated them "by the gift and power of God" without going into more details. Others have provided the details, but the end result is the same: The translation was revealed to Joseph Smith from God. God is all-powerful, and so an argument that insists that Joseph had to look at the plates with one set of rocks instead of looking at a different rock in a hat in order to translate doesn't make any sense to me.
UPDATE: These facts are now officially confirmed in the Church’s December 2013 Book of Mormon Translation essay. The Church later admitted these facts in its October 2015 Ensign, where they include a photograph of the actual rock that Joseph Smith used to place in his hat for the Book of Mormon translation. Additional photos of the rock can be viewed on lds.org. In June 2016, President Dieter F. Uchtdorf posted on his Facebook page comparing the seer stone in the hat Book of Mormon translation to his iPhone. FairMormon posted new Book of Mormon translation artwork showing Joseph Smith’s face in a hat.
7 Behold, you have not understood; you have supposed that I would give it unto you, when you took no thought save it was to ask me.8 But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right.9 But if it be not right you shall have no such feelings, but you shall have a stupor of thought that shall cause you to forget the thing which is wrong; therefore, you cannot write that which is sacred save it be given you from me.
When God speaks to the people, he does it in a manner to suit their circumstances and capacities. He spoke to the children of Jacob through Moses, as a blind, stiff-necked people, and when Jesus and his Apostles came they talked with the Jews as a benighted, wicked, selfish people. They would not receive the Gospel, though presented to them by the Son of God in all its righteousness, beauty and glory. Should the Lord Almighty send an angel to re-write the Bible, it would in many places be very different from what it now is. And I will even venture to say that if the Book of Mormon were now to be re-written, in many instances it would materially differ from the present translation. According as people are willing to receive the things of God, so the heavens send forth their blessings. If the people are stiff-necked, the Lord can tell them but little.
It was no sooner noised abroad that Joseph Smith was preaching the Gospel in its purity and administering its ordinances than a howl went up from all the world that he was an impostor, an ignorant fellow, a man without education, and the Book of Mormon was denounced as ungrammatical. An argument was raised that if it had been translated by the gift and power of God it would have been strictly grammatical. Now so far as grammer is concerned we have King James' Bible before us which was translated two hundred and fifty years ago, by a large number of the most learned men that could be found in Great Britain, and it was put into the best language of that time; but since that day the English language has undergone so many changes and improvements that societies have been formed in various countries for the express purpose of re-translating the Bible so as to make it in accordance with the modern usages of our language. When the Lord reveals anything to men He reveals it in language that accords with their own.
the Prophet Joseph Smith looked into the "Interpreters" or "Seer Stone," saw there by the power of God and the gift of God to him, the ancient Nephite characters, and by bending every power of his mind to know the meaning thereof, the interpretation wrought out in his mind by this effort—by studying it out in his mind, to use the Lord's phrase—was reflected in the sacred instrument there to remain until correctly written by the scribe.
A "theory" already existed, based upon the statements of Messrs. Whitmer and Harris, which, as generally understood, was untenable. This had to be corrected; and the truth, so far as possible, ascertained and expounded. It was not the desire to create a new theory respecting the translation of the Book of Mormon that prompted the writer of the Manual to advance such explanations as are there made. Indeed, the theory set forth in the Manual did not originate with him. The difficulties involved in the hitherto commonly accepted theory of translation have long been recognized by Book of Mormon students; and often have been the subject of conversation between this writer and Elder George Reynolds, President Anthon H. Lund, members of the Manual committee, and others; and this writer by no means regards himself as the originator of what is sometimes called the new theory of the Book of Mormon translation.
If all that was necessary for the Seer was to look into the instrument given to him as an aid in the work of translation, there would have been no real necessity for his possession of the plates, which he had to guard with such care. And if every word in English was supplied to him in the way supposed, it is not likely that any errors either in grammar or composition would be seen.
in many respects a nearly literal translation. Thus, many of the expressions found therein do not properly belong to the English language from which the book was translated. Indeed, in most cases thus far investigated, Book of Mormon expressions which are ungrammatical in English are perfect Hebrew grammar. (In view of the fact that Joseph Smith did not know Hebrew in those early years, this is good evidence for the authenticity of the translation.)
Another example that leads to a misunderstanding in our scriptures is the word translate, as in the eighth article of faith: "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly." The ordinary reader tends to interpret this as meaning that the only errors in the text of the Bible are the result of trying to translate the original languages into another language. Of course, there are many other errors besides translation errors in the biblical text. We can, however, make better sense of the word translate in this article of faith when we consider Joseph Smith's use of this word. We should first note that the word translate is ultimately derived from the Latin transferee and literally means 'to carry across'. Language translation was originally viewed as a "carrying across" since in older manuscript practice the original language was often put in one column and the translation was put beside it in a parallel column. In addition there are other meanings of the word translate that show its older meaning of 'to carry across'; for instance, we talk about the city of Enoch or various prophets being translated.
In fact, Joseph Smith's use of the word translate seems to agree with the original, more general meaning of this word. In referring to the translation of a text, Joseph Smith very often seemed to be referring to how it had been carried down through time. For instance, the Joseph Smith Translation (more commonly known as the Inspired Version) was not really a translation in our present-day sense of the word, but instead was an attempt to restore through inspiration the original meaning of the biblical text. In fact, Robert J.Matthews has argued that "by using the word translated [Joseph Smith] apparently meant to convey the meaning that is generally assigned to the term transmitted, for, as the prophets own statements on the matter show, there was more involved in the history of the Bible than mere translation of languages." So the intended sense of the eighth Article of Faith, given Joseph Smith's usage, is probably, "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it has come down to us correctly."
If these reports are accurate, they suggest a process indicative of God's having given Joseph "sight and power to translate" (D&C 3:12).
If by means of these divine instrumentalities the Prophet was seeing ancient words rendered in English and then dictating, he was not necessarily and constantly scrutinizing the characters on the plates—the usual translation process of going back and forth between pondering an ancient text and providing a modern rendering.The revelatory process apparently did not require the Prophet to become expert in the ancient language. The constancy of revelation was more crucial than the constant presence of opened plates, which, by instruction, were to be kept from the view of unauthorized eyes anyway.While the use of divine instrumentalities might also account for the rapid rate of translation, the Prophet sometimes may have used a less mechanical procedure. We simply do not know the details.We do know that this faith-filled process was not easy, however. This fact was clearly demonstrated in Oliver Cowdery’s own attempt at translation. Oliver failed because he “did not continue as [he] commenced,” and because, lacking faith and works, he “took no thought save it was to ask” (D&C 9:5, 7). He was not properly prepared to do it. Even so, we owe so much to Oliver Cowdery for his special service as a scribe.Whatever the details of the process, it required Joseph’s intense, personal efforts along with the aid of the revelatory instruments. The process may have varied as Joseph’s capabilities grew, involving the Urim and Thummim but perhaps with less reliance upon such instrumentalities in the Prophet’s later work of translation. Elder Orson Pratt of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles said Joseph Smith told him that he used the Urim and Thummim when he was inexperienced at translation but that later he did not need it, which was the case in Joseph’s translation of many verses of the Bible (see Latter-day Saints’ Millennial Star, 11 Aug. 1874, 498–99).
So why did the Lord reveal such a Hebraistic text? We do not know why, but we do know that he did do it! And why did the Lord allow the text to be given in nonstandard English? We do not know why, but it was! And why did the Lord choose to have the biblical quotations based on the King James Bible when some of its language was unrecognizable to Joseph Smith and his scribes (as in the indecipherable “the besom of destruction”)? If one assumes that the Lord would only reveal a perfectly understandable text, then we must assume that all of these strange linguistic uses must be mistakes that Joseph or his scribes introduced into the text.
The point is this: we go where the evidence leads us. And we consider all the evidence, not picking and choosing only those interpretations that support our own conceptions.
Some accounts indicate that Joseph studied the characters on the plates. Most of the accounts speak of Joseph’s use of the Urim and Thummim (either the interpreters or the seer stone), and many accounts refer to his use of a single stone. According to these accounts, Joseph placed either the interpreters or the seer stone in a hat, pressed his face into the hat to block out extraneous light, and read aloud the English words that appeared on the instrument. The process as described brings to mind a passage from the Book of Mormon that speaks of God preparing “a stone, which shall shine forth in darkness unto light.”
He knew the interpreters were supposed to help him translate the plates, but he had never used seer stones to read an ancient language. He was anxious to begin the work, but it was not obvious to him how to do it. …
Assisted by Emma, he copied many of the strange characters from the plates to paper. Then, for several weeks, he tried to translate them with the Urim and Thummim. The process required him to do more than look into the interpreters. He had to be humble and exercise faith as he studied the characters.
A few months later, Martin came to Harmony. He said he felt called by the Lord to travel as far as New York City to consult experts in ancient languages. He hoped they could translate the characters.Joseph copied several more characters from the plates, wrote down his translation, and handed the paper to Martin. He and Emma then watched as their friend headed east to consult with distinguished scholars.
After Martin came back, and told Joseph that if they couldn't translate the book, Joseph had to do it.
In April 1828, Emma and Joseph were living in a home along the Susquehanna River, not far from her parents’ house. Now well along in her pregnancy, Emma often acted as Joseph’s scribe after he began translating the record. One day, while he translated, Joseph suddenly grew pale. “Emma, did Jerusalem have a wall around it?” he asked.“Yes,” she said, recalling descriptions of it in the Bible.“Oh,” Joseph said with relief, “I was afraid I had been deceived.”Emma marveled that her husband’s lack of knowledge in history and scripture did not hinder the translation. Joseph could hardly write a coherent letter. Yet hour after hour she sat close beside him while he dictated the record without the aid of any book or manuscript. She knew only God could inspire him to translate as he did.In time, Martin returned from Palmyra and took over as scribe, giving Emma a chance to rest before the baby came. … Looking into the interpreters or another seer stone, he was able to translate whether the plates were in front of him or wrapped in one of Emma’s linen cloths on the table.Throughout April, May, and early June, Emma listened to the rhythm of Joseph dictating the record. He spoke slowly but clearly, pausing occasionally to wait for Martin to say “written” after he had caught up to what Joseph had said. Emma also took turns as scribe and was amazed how after interruptions and breaks, Joseph always picked up where he left off without any prompting.
Joseph also told his parents that Moroni had since returned the plates and interpreters. … The record was now safely stowed in the house, hidden in a trunk. “Emma writes for me now,” Joseph told them, “but the angel said that the Lord would send someone to write for me, and I trust that it will be so.” …
Joseph and Oliver started translating. They worked well together, weeks on end, frequently with Emma in the same room going about her daily work. Sometimes Joseph translated by looking through the interpreters and reading in English the characters on the plates.Often he found a single seer stone to be more convenient. He would put the seer stone in his hat, place his face into the hat to block out the light, and peer at the stone. Light from the stone would shine in the darkness, revealing words that Joseph dictated as Oliver rapidly copied them down.
It speaks of Oliver's failed attempt to translate, and of their ordination by John the Baptist. Chapter 7 continues the translation. David Whitmer and Oliver had been writing each other. One day, David received a letter informing him that it was God's will to bring them to the Whitmer home so that they could finish the translation in peace. He shared the letters with his parents and siblings who agreed to welcome Joseph, Emma, and Oliver into their home.
The heat in Fayette that summer was sweltering. As Mary washed clothes and prepared meals, Joseph dictated the translation in an upstairs room. Oliver usually wrote for him, but occasionally Emma or one of the Whitmers took a turn with the pen. Sometimes, when Joseph and Oliver tired of the strain of translating, they would walk out to a nearby pond and skip stones across the surface of the water. …
At the Whitmer farm, Joseph translated rapidly, but some days were challenging. His mind would wander to other matters, and he could not focus on spiritual things. The Whitmers’ small house was always busy and full of distractions. Moving there had meant giving up the relative privacy he and Emma had enjoyed in Harmony.
One morning, as he was getting ready to translate, Joseph became upset with Emma. Later, when he joined Oliver and David in the upstairs room where they worked, he could not translate a syllable.
He left the room and walked outside to the orchard. He stayed away for about an hour, praying. When he came back, he apologized to Emma and asked for forgiveness. He then went back to translating as usual. …
When Joseph translated the writing on the final plate, he found that it explained the record’s purpose and gave it a title, The Book of Mormon, after the ancient prophet-historian who had compiled the book.
BOOK OF MORMON TRANSLATION THAT THE CHURCH
PORTRAYED AND STILL PORTRAYS TO ITS MEMBERS:
AS IT ACTUALLY HAPPENED
  | The top-left painting is Joseph Smith Translating the Book of Mormon by Del Parson. Painted in 1996, it first appeared in the January 1997 Ensign article "By the Gift and Power of God" quoted above where Elder Neal A. Maxwell discussed how David Whitmer and Martin Harris said that Joseph Smith used seer stones to translate. It has since appeared fourteen other times in the Ensign magazine, and it also appears in the Institute manual for the Book of Mormon. It used to be in the Preach My Gospel manual, but they removed it in the 2018 edition. They also seem to have removed it from the gospel media library, replacing it with this image of the translation using a curtain, also by Del Parson (similar to a 1980 painting by Earl Jones, interestingly used in the 1993 article I mentioned above). Del Parson's original painting still seems accessible as of this writing through media links from a resources for teaching children page. |
The bottom-right painting is Joseph Smith Translates the Gold Plates by Dale Kilbourn, who also painted the top picture. It appeared in at least four Ensign articles, the earliest I can find is October 1973 but is possibly older, since that one wasn't printed in color. This one has Joseph Smith writing without a scribe, however, only 28 words in the original manuscript (in Alma 45:22) are in Joseph Smith's handwriting.
We all know that art is not truth. Art is a lie that makes us realize truth, at least the truth that is given us to understand. The artist must know the manner whereby to convince others of the truthfulness of his lies. If he only shows in his work that he has searched, and re-searched, for the way to put over his lies, he would never accomplish anything.
Over the years, artists have sought to portray the Book of Mormon translation, showing the participants in many settings and poses with different material objects. Each artistic interpretation is based upon its artist’s own views, research, and imagination, sometimes aided by input and direction from others.
Since learning this disturbing new information and feeling betrayed, I have been attacked and gaslighted by revisionist Mormon apologists claiming that it’s my fault and the fault of anyone else for not knowing this. “The information was there all along,” they say. “You should’ve known this,” they claim.
Respected LDS historian and scholar Richard Bushman, as quoted above, understands the problem. Unlike these gaslighting revisionist apologists, he has compassion, understanding, and empathy for those who are shocked to learn this faith challenging information.
In 2000, two BYU religion professors, Joseph Fielding McConkie (son of Elder Bruce R. McConkie) and Craig J. Ostler, wrote an essay titled, “The Process of Translating the Book of Mormon.” They wrote:
“Thus, everything we have in the Book of Mormon, according to Mr. Whitmer, was translated by placing the chocolate-colored stone in a hat into which Joseph would bury his head so as to close out the light. While doing so he could see ‘an oblong piece of parchment, on which the hieroglyphics would appear,’ and below the ancient writing, the translation would be given in English. Joseph would then read this to Oliver Cowdery, who in turn would write it. If he did so correctly, the characters and the interpretation would disappear and be replaced by other characters with their interpretation.”
After laying the groundwork, the professors continue:
“Finally, the testimony of David Whitmer simply does not accord with the divine pattern. If Joseph Smith translated everything that is now in the Book of Mormon without using the gold plates, we are left to wonder why the plates were necessary in the first place. It will be remembered that possession of the plates placed the Smith family in considerable danger, causing them a host of difficulties. If the plates were not part of the translation process, this would not have been the case. It also leaves us wondering why the Lord directed the writers of the Book of Mormon to take a duplicate record of the plates of Lehi. This provision which compensated for the loss of the 116 pages would have served no purpose either.Further, we would be left to wonder why it was necessary for Moroni to instruct Joseph each year for four years before he was entrusted with the plates. We would also wonder why it was so important for Moroni to show the plates to the three witnesses, including David Whitmer. And why did the Lord have the Prophet show the plates to the eight witnesses? Why all this flap and fuss if the Prophet didn’t really have the plates and if they were not used in the process of translation?What David Whitmer is asking us to believe is that the Lord had Moroni seal up the plates and the means by which they were to be translated hundreds of years before they would come into Joseph Smith’s possession and then decided to have the Prophet use a seer stone found while digging a well so that none of these things would be necessary after all. Is this, we would ask, really a credible explanation of the way the heavens operate?”
How could it have been expected of me and any other member to know about and to embrace the rock in the hat translation when even these two faithful full-time professors of religion at BYU rejected it as a fictitious lie meant to undermine Joseph Smith and the truth claims of the Restoration?
- What benefit is there for Joseph to actually look at the plates? Nobody claims Joseph knew the language.
- What purpose do the interpreters serve if Joseph was supposed to get the translation from studying it out?
- Oliver Cowdery didn't become a witness of the Book of Mormon until after the translation was complete. How do we explain "study it out" for Oliver if he could not look at the plates?
No comments:
Post a Comment