Book of Mormon questions

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
CuriousThinker
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1187

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by CuriousThinker »

iWriteStuff wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 8:41 pm
CuriousThinker wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 7:04 pm I do not believe Joseph looked in a hat. I believe that he used the Urim and Thummim to translate just as Joseph said and as had been prepared for him with the golden plates. I do not believe he used a brown stone.
Read “Rough Stone Rolling”? After he lost the 116 pages, apparently Moroni took away the plates and the Urim and Thummim. The majority of the remaining translation happened sans U&T or even the golden plates themselves.
I disagree with Bushman on that.
He didn't translate during that time bit waited to receive them back. Once he did, he resumed translating.

User avatar
kirtland r.m.
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5096

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by kirtland r.m. »

Emma Smith, Joseph Smith's wife and scribe for part of the Book of Mormon, made a clear distinction between the two in an 1870 letter, "The first that my husband translated, was translated by the use of the Urim, and Thummim [i.e. spectacles or interpreters], and that was the part that Martin Harris lost, after that he used a small stone, not exactly, black, but was rather a dark color." MacKay, M. H. (2016). Joseph Smiths seer stones. Provo: BYU Religious Studies Center.

CuriousThinker
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1187

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by CuriousThinker »

I believe this quote by Joseph. Wentworth letter, approved for publication in 1842: “Through the medium of the Urim and Thummim I translated the record by the gift and power of God.”

User avatar
BeNotDeceived
Agent38
Posts: 8960
Location: Tralfamadore
Contact:

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by BeNotDeceived »

larsenb wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 6:50 pm
BeNotDeceived wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 6:18 pm
Chris wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 12:56 pm
Mamabear wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 12:48 pm

“That strait course starts with Jacobs ladder ( Temple ), then Baptism by fire, 2nd anoiting and then Exaltation. You just cant skip any steps along the way.“
Besides d&c, where is this doctrine found? If the temple and the “2nd anointing” were needed for “exaltation” where was it restored from and why wasn’t it taught plainly by Christ and his disciples?
The term “exaltation” is not found in the Bible or the BOM.
It is actually all through out all of the scriptures, all of those things. Jacob is the Son of Isaac, Isaac was the son of Abraham and it is in the bible and does talk about his temple expereince. Most temples also use the symbolism of the his experience. bouniful Temple is just one example of this on the windows of the Celestial room. Exaltation is talked about everywhere as well.

Speaking of the bountiful temple. I know someone who was cleaning in the Bountiful temple at night. He was changing bulbs on that big beautiful chandaler. the chain snapped holding the chandaler up instead of it crushing him. The whole thing floated from one end of the room to the other and was gently set down on the floor. Not one crystal fell off. There were 9 people in the room that witnessed it happen. Pretty amazing miracle if it was not considered the Lords house.....
Once upon a time the Ultimate Warrior and I would go boonin’ beyond the big B. There I discovered a big bubble on the tip of a mountain that bears my middle name. Years later I worked there before and after training near where me strange photo was taken. The fact that a miracle occurred there comes as no surprise to me.

What was the date of said miracle?
I go boonin' a bit south of there all the time. Also ran into something quite disturbing in that locale . . . . .
I came across bloated deer carcass more than once. I went there with my son in 2008, and haven’t made it back since. What was it that you found disturbing?

Chris
captain of 100
Posts: 319

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by Chris »

iWriteStuff wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 5:05 pm
blitzinstripes wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 4:58 pm
iWriteStuff wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 4:40 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 4:30 pm

Plus, we literally have Abraham and Book of Mormon prophets using seer stones to receive revelation. Didn't Aaron use them, too? What's the difference whether a hat was used or not?
Other than sources Joseph wrote himself, point me to any other 1000 year, 500+ page history written solely off words magically appearing on the surface of a black and brown rock.
I seem to remember writing appearing on a wall in the king's palace. I seem to remember God himself writing (supernaturally) upon stone tablets for Moses. (Then why not on a small stone in a hat.) I seem to remember wool that was dry when there was dew on the ground and wet when the ground was dry. Revelation in the NT says that all who inherit the celestial glory receive a special white stone with a new name written on it. I'm not sure why you seem to want to put God in your own, tiny little box. He uses supernatural means to reveal his will quite frequently. I wonder what you think of the Ark of the Covenant?
I’m asking you to evaluate the claims of the translation method and ask why the church isn’t more forthcoming about it.

Suppose you’d never heard of the church before and two teenagers approach you on the street with a book they claim was translated using a rock and a top hat. How do you think most people react to that?

Or rather, imagine NOT hearing that your entire life as a LDS. In fact, you’ve been told that was anti material fabricated by the likes of Fawn Brodie and her ilk. Now all of a sudden RMN is showcasing the rock and top hat and you’re told the words magically appeared on the rock. Verbatim.

It’s a bit to swallow. Or maybe not because magic rocks are totally normal in your world and you’re currently receiving dictation for a 500 page history of the subterranean Christians of the lost tribes?
You do realize the urim and thumbim (sp) has two seer stones in it right? Also joseph did say he did not like using the urim etc because it was big and bulky and uncomfortable. So he took the seer stones out of it to use it.

I dont see the problem here, he put it in a hat to begin with because it made it easier. Eventually he ditched the hat. Then after awhile he didnt need anything.

User avatar
Niemand
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13999

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by Niemand »

iWriteStuff wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 7:30 am
Jashon wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 6:55 am Mamabear, do you think Joseph Smith authored the Book of Mormon? If not, what are you thinking?
Wouldn’t the better question be whether ancient Hebrew prophets authored the Book of Mormon?
By its own admission, mostly no. There is of course Isaiah and a couple of other prophets listed in there, but early on the writers leave the Middle East and end up becoming new nations with a new history. By the time Mormon and Moroni were writing they would have had a very different culture. The Jaredites wouldn't have been Hebrews either.

User avatar
Luke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10785
Location: England

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by Luke »

“Dec. 27, 1841: I met with the Twelve at Brother Joseph’s. He conversed with us in a familiar manner on a variety of subjects, and explained to us the Urim and Thummim which he found with the plates, called in the Book of Mormon the Interpreters. He said that every man who lived on the earth was entitled to a seer stone, and should have one, but they are kept from them in consequence of their wickedness, and most of those who do find one make an evil use of it; he showed us his seer stone.” (Manuscript History of Brigham Young, 27 December 1841, CHL)

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by iWriteStuff »

Chris wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 11:50 pm
iWriteStuff wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 5:05 pm
blitzinstripes wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 4:58 pm
iWriteStuff wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 4:40 pm

Other than sources Joseph wrote himself, point me to any other 1000 year, 500+ page history written solely off words magically appearing on the surface of a black and brown rock.
I seem to remember writing appearing on a wall in the king's palace. I seem to remember God himself writing (supernaturally) upon stone tablets for Moses. (Then why not on a small stone in a hat.) I seem to remember wool that was dry when there was dew on the ground and wet when the ground was dry. Revelation in the NT says that all who inherit the celestial glory receive a special white stone with a new name written on it. I'm not sure why you seem to want to put God in your own, tiny little box. He uses supernatural means to reveal his will quite frequently. I wonder what you think of the Ark of the Covenant?
I’m asking you to evaluate the claims of the translation method and ask why the church isn’t more forthcoming about it.

Suppose you’d never heard of the church before and two teenagers approach you on the street with a book they claim was translated using a rock and a top hat. How do you think most people react to that?

Or rather, imagine NOT hearing that your entire life as a LDS. In fact, you’ve been told that was anti material fabricated by the likes of Fawn Brodie and her ilk. Now all of a sudden RMN is showcasing the rock and top hat and you’re told the words magically appeared on the rock. Verbatim.

It’s a bit to swallow. Or maybe not because magic rocks are totally normal in your world and you’re currently receiving dictation for a 500 page history of the subterranean Christians of the lost tribes?
You do realize the urim and thumbim (sp) has two seer stones in it right? Also joseph did say he did not like using the urim etc because it was big and bulky and uncomfortable. So he took the seer stones out of it to use it.

I dont see the problem here, he put it in a hat to begin with because it made it easier. Eventually he ditched the hat. Then after awhile he didnt need anything.
Several points for you:

1) Joseph's story is the only one that describes the Urim and Thummim as being "seer stones". Anciently among the Hebrews, that is not what they were or how they were used. I recommend a little research on that. The presumption is always that Joseph knew the Jewish history better than the Jews. You can choose to believe that, but at least find out what the Jews actually say about the Urim and Thummim. Here's a hint:
urimth1.jpeg
urimth1.jpeg (42.42 KiB) Viewed 583 times
2) The seer stone Joseph used in the hat was not part of the Urim and Thummim. Those artifacts were taken from him. He relied on the black and brown rock I shared in an earlier post. This rock was found while digging a well. In fact, he "borrowed" it from the owner and never returned it (see: Willard Chase).

3) The rock and the hat replaced not only the Urim and Thummim but the golden plates themselves. The words appeared on the black and brown rock. If that is the case, why bother getting the plates and the Urim and Thummim in the first place? So he can say he had them at one point but didn't need them any more?

Get the whole picture of the seer stones / Urim and Thummim / golden plates / top hat and it starts to look kinda funny, even if you're a true believer.

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by iWriteStuff »

kirtland r.m. wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 9:00 pm Emma Smith, Joseph Smith's wife and scribe for part of the Book of Mormon, made a clear distinction between the two in an 1870 letter, "The first that my husband translated, was translated by the use of the Urim, and Thummim [i.e. spectacles or interpreters], and that was the part that Martin Harris lost, after that he used a small stone, not exactly, black, but was rather a dark color." MacKay, M. H. (2016). Joseph Smiths seer stones. Provo: BYU Religious Studies Center.
Emma has some support on this claim from David Whitmer, as quoted by Russell M. Nelson:

“The details of this miraculous method of translation are still not fully known. Yet we do have a few precious insights. David Whitmer wrote: ‘I will now give you a description of the manner in which the Book of Mormon was translated. 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 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’” (Russell M. Nelson, “A Treasured Testament,” Ensign, July 1993, p. 61. Citing David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ, p. 12).

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by iWriteStuff »

CuriousThinker wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 9:25 pm I believe this quote by Joseph. Wentworth letter, approved for publication in 1842: “Through the medium of the Urim and Thummim I translated the record by the gift and power of God.”
And yet the Wentworth letter and what RMN said in conference in 1993 don't seem to agree. Curious, right CuriousThinker?

I believe the popular reconciliation of these two versions is that Joseph used the Urim and Thummim for the 116 pages and the black and brown rock for the rest, which is essentially the portion we have now. In that way both can be right.

User avatar
BenMcCrea
captain of 100
Posts: 224

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by BenMcCrea »

:x
Last edited by BenMcCrea on October 23rd, 2022, 8:22 am, edited 1 time in total.

Jashon
captain of 100
Posts: 501

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by Jashon »

iWriteStuff wrote: October 23rd, 2022, 6:24 am 3) The rock and the hat replaced not only the Urim and Thummim but the golden plates themselves. The words appeared on the black and brown rock. If that is the case, why bother getting the plates and the Urim and Thummim in the first place? So he can say he had them at one point but didn't need them any more?

Get the whole picture of the seer stones / Urim and Thummim / golden plates / top hat and it starts to look kinda funny, even if you're a true believer.
Human ingenuity and creativity are such that reasons can be come up with for why the plates might have been necessary. For instance, perhaps the Lord required the plates to be close for the revelation (the (mostly English) Book of Mormon text) to be given to someone on earth. In terms of modern technology, an analogy might be bluetooth. That said, I'm not wedded to any reason that might be given for the need of the plates.

We're on surer footing with speculation when we look at the words of the text. As I've mentioned earlier in this thread, many Book of Mormon names indicate a revelation of words, as does Joseph Smith peering into a hat to shut out the light. Coriantumr etc. were spelled out as words for Joseph Smith to see. The first time he dictated that name to Oliver, in Helaman 1, Oliver crossed out his incorrect, English-like spelling (Coriantummer) and rewrote it, according to how Joseph spelled it for him, putting a flourish on the last letter, the syllabic r.

Jashon
captain of 100
Posts: 501

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by Jashon »

iWriteStuff wrote: October 23rd, 2022, 6:46 am
CuriousThinker wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 9:25 pm I believe this quote by Joseph. Wentworth letter, approved for publication in 1842: “Through the medium of the Urim and Thummim I translated the record by the gift and power of God.”
And yet the Wentworth letter and what RMN said in conference in 1993 don't seem to agree. Curious, right CuriousThinker?

I believe the popular reconciliation of these two versions is that Joseph used the Urim and Thummim for the 116 pages and the black and brown rock for the rest, which is essentially the portion we have now. In that way both can be right.
Here's a thorough comparison of witness statements on the production of the Book of Mormon text, by Royal Skousen. Those with genuine interest will want to read through this, even though it's 90 pages.

Chris
captain of 100
Posts: 319

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by Chris »

iWriteStuff wrote: October 23rd, 2022, 6:24 am
Chris wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 11:50 pm
iWriteStuff wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 5:05 pm
blitzinstripes wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 4:58 pm

I seem to remember writing appearing on a wall in the king's palace. I seem to remember God himself writing (supernaturally) upon stone tablets for Moses. (Then why not on a small stone in a hat.) I seem to remember wool that was dry when there was dew on the ground and wet when the ground was dry. Revelation in the NT says that all who inherit the celestial glory receive a special white stone with a new name written on it. I'm not sure why you seem to want to put God in your own, tiny little box. He uses supernatural means to reveal his will quite frequently. I wonder what you think of the Ark of the Covenant?
I’m asking you to evaluate the claims of the translation method and ask why the church isn’t more forthcoming about it.

Suppose you’d never heard of the church before and two teenagers approach you on the street with a book they claim was translated using a rock and a top hat. How do you think most people react to that?

Or rather, imagine NOT hearing that your entire life as a LDS. In fact, you’ve been told that was anti material fabricated by the likes of Fawn Brodie and her ilk. Now all of a sudden RMN is showcasing the rock and top hat and you’re told the words magically appeared on the rock. Verbatim.

It’s a bit to swallow. Or maybe not because magic rocks are totally normal in your world and you’re currently receiving dictation for a 500 page history of the subterranean Christians of the lost tribes?
You do realize the urim and thumbim (sp) has two seer stones in it right? Also joseph did say he did not like using the urim etc because it was big and bulky and uncomfortable. So he took the seer stones out of it to use it.

I dont see the problem here, he put it in a hat to begin with because it made it easier. Eventually he ditched the hat. Then after awhile he didnt need anything.
Several points for you:

1) Joseph's story is the only one that describes the Urim and Thummim as being "seer stones". Anciently among the Hebrews, that is not what they were or how they were used. I recommend a little research on that. The presumption is always that Joseph knew the Jewish history better than the Jews. You can choose to believe that, but at least find out what the Jews actually say about the Urim and Thummim. Here's a hint:

urimth1.jpeg

2) The seer stone Joseph used in the hat was not part of the Urim and Thummim. Those artifacts were taken from him. He relied on the black and brown rock I shared in an earlier post. This rock was found while digging a well. In fact, he "borrowed" it from the owner and never returned it (see: Willard Chase).

3) The rock and the hat replaced not only the Urim and Thummim but the golden plates themselves. The words appeared on the black and brown rock. If that is the case, why bother getting the plates and the Urim and Thummim in the first place? So he can say he had them at one point but didn't need them any more?

Get the whole picture of the seer stones / Urim and Thummim / golden plates / top hat and it starts to look kinda funny, even if you're a true believer.
I dont think so, i have read some research outside of the church that talked about the UM indeed having seers stones. They were fastened together like glasses.

You look at the facination the world has with crystal balls and seer stones, where did thst come from? Obviously from this.

You are assuming he was never given back the UM. But that assumption doesnt mean it didnt happen.

I know most current 12, and definitley prophet all have seer stones. President hinckley kept one in a ring he often wore. ( this is speculation on my part, i once shook his hand and he had a ring with a big stone in it. And immediatley i knew by looking at it what it was)

We are told during the millenium we will all get one.

Again i dont think anything is weird about it, the lord often uses things to help our faith grow and develope. Moses had a staff, healing with blessed pieces of cloth, several seer stones from beginning.


Joseph grew in revelation, first he needed a lot of help, then not as much and before long he very rarely needed any help. In kirtland he was promised if you ever find your self in a situation you dont know how to get out of prophesy anything you need to and it will happen. He used that several times. Especially with tge apostasy in kirtland

Towards the end of his life he said visions flow before his mind more than his meat and drink.

User avatar
Reluctant Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 15317
Location: “if thine eye offend thee, pluck him out.”
Contact:

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by Reluctant Watchman »

Do the origins and methods of translation have any impact on the theology of said book? I think not.

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10813
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by larsenb »

Niemand wrote: October 21st, 2022, 7:35 pm First verse of the Bible
בְּרֵאשִׁית בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ
Bereshit bara Elohim et hashamayim ve'et ha'aretz.
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
This is with the Masoretic vowel pointing (the dots and lines beneath and above the Hebrew letters). Note that not everyone agrees with this, so there is some room for interpretation. Remember Hebrew is written right to left unlike English, the Hebrew alphabet has also changed from a more angular form into the curvy variety we see today.

In this verse we can see "אֱלֹהִים" (Elohim), a plural form of El for God. More than one.

The very first word of the Bible "בְּרֵאשִׁית" ( bereshit) has various things hidden inside it. These have tended to pass by any of those Hebrew scholars who reject Christ.

* It includes both "א" aleph and "ת" tav, since these are the first and last letters of the Hebrew alphabet, they are sort of equivalent to Alpha and Omega in Greek (but not phonetically), i.e. the beginning and end. The same combination appears three times in the sentence, in the fourth word of the verse "אֵת" and in the second last word between the words for Heaven and Earth.
* There is a hidden cross in the last letter "ת" or tav. In the current Hebrew alphabet this is not obvious, but in the old Hebrew script which Moses would have used this would be "𐤁𐤓𐤀𐤔𐤉𐤕" — with the last letter tav being "𐤕".
* The first two letters bet and resh (with no vowel pointing) give us "בּר" (or "𐤁𐤓" in old script br), which can be read as "bar" meaning "son". The first letter of the Bible is "bet" and the last is the Greek letter "nu", whose equivalent is "nun" in Hebrew. The first and the last letters create the Hebrew word "BeN" which also means "son".
* The names of the first two letters "bet" and "resh" mean "house-head".
* If we turn it into two words, we get "in the firstfruits". This is a concept we find in 1 Corinthians 15.23 used to refer to Jesus.

There are a lot of other hidden meanings in the verse which are less relevant.
Is this your analysis? I'm impressed, if so.
Last edited by larsenb on October 24th, 2022, 10:46 am, edited 1 time in total.

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10813
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by larsenb »

BeNotDeceived wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 11:23 pm
larsenb wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 6:50 pm
BeNotDeceived wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 6:18 pm
Chris wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 12:56 pm

It is actually all through out all of the scriptures, all of those things. Jacob is the Son of Isaac, Isaac was the son of Abraham and it is in the bible and does talk about his temple expereince. Most temples also use the symbolism of the his experience. bouniful Temple is just one example of this on the windows of the Celestial room. Exaltation is talked about everywhere as well.

Speaking of the bountiful temple. I know someone who was cleaning in the Bountiful temple at night. He was changing bulbs on that big beautiful chandaler. the chain snapped holding the chandaler up instead of it crushing him. The whole thing floated from one end of the room to the other and was gently set down on the floor. Not one crystal fell off. There were 9 people in the room that witnessed it happen. Pretty amazing miracle if it was not considered the Lords house.....
Once upon a time the Ultimate Warrior and I would go boonin’ beyond the big B. There I discovered a big bubble on the tip of a mountain that bears my middle name. Years later I worked there before and after training near where me strange photo was taken. The fact that a miracle occurred there comes as no surprise to me.

What was the date of said miracle?
I go boonin' a bit south of there all the time. Also ran into something quite disturbing in that locale . . . . .
I came across bloated deer carcass more than once. I went there with my son in 2008, and haven’t made it back since. What was it that you found disturbing?
PM me if you want to explore this. I would also like to know where you are coming from and what you may know about the location in question.

User avatar
Niemand
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13999

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by Niemand »

larsenb wrote: October 24th, 2022, 10:43 am
Niemand wrote: October 21st, 2022, 7:35 pm First verse of the Bible
בְּרֵאשִׁית בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ
Bereshit bara Elohim et hashamayim ve'et ha'aretz.
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
This is with the Masoretic vowel pointing (the dots and lines beneath and above the Hebrew letters). Note that not everyone agrees with this, so there is some room for interpretation. Remember Hebrew is written right to left unlike English, the Hebrew alphabet has also changed from a more angular form into the curvy variety we see today.

In this verse we can see "אֱלֹהִים" (Elohim), a plural form of El for God. More than one.

The very first word of the Bible "בְּרֵאשִׁית" ( bereshit) has various things hidden inside it. These have tended to pass by any of those Hebrew scholars who reject Christ.

* It includes both "א" aleph and "ת" tav, since these are the first and last letters of the Hebrew alphabet, they are sort of equivalent to Alpha and Omega in Greek (but not phonetically), i.e. the beginning and end. The same combination appears three times in the sentence, in the fourth word of the verse "אֵת" and in the second last word between the words for Heaven and Earth.
* There is a hidden cross in the last letter "ת" or tav. In the current Hebrew alphabet this is not obvious, but in the old Hebrew script which Moses would have used this would be "𐤁𐤓𐤀𐤔𐤉𐤕" — with the last letter tav being "𐤕".
* The first two letters bet and resh (with no vowel pointing) give us "בּר" (or "𐤁𐤓" in old script br), which can be read as "bar" meaning "son". The first letter of the Bible is "bet" and the last is the Greek letter "nu", whose equivalent is "nun" in Hebrew. The first and the last letters create the Hebrew word "BeN" which also means "son".
* The names of the first two letters "bet" and "resh" mean "house-head".
* If we turn it into two words, we get "in the firstfruits". This is a concept we find in 1 Corinthians 15.23 used to refer to Jesus.

There are a lot of other hidden meanings in the verse which are less relevant.
Is this your analysis? I'm impressed, if so.
It would be flattering if it I did, but I can't take credit for most of this. Mostly taken from elsewhere but one or two other things jumped out at me. The aleph and tav vs alpha and omega (first and last letters of the respective alphabets) certainly although others have probably spotted it, because many have pored over it.

The first sentence of Genesis alone has an incredible amount of information coded into it, a level of symmetry and so on. There are numerical things in there getting into Kabbalah territory, most of that is above my payscale. (There are Greek numbers encoded into the WHO logo as well, I have found those independently.)

The Paleo-Hebrew is not mine, although I did spot one thing that hasn't been mentioned elsewhere. "𐤁𐤓𐤀𐤔𐤉𐤕" doesn't just contain aleph and tav (the first and last Hebrew letters) in their own forms, it also appears to contain something resembling the Greek alpha and omega visually.

Alpha and Omega in Greek are Α & Ω (capitals), α & ω (small/lower case).

I've underlined the two relevant letters of Bereshit in the old Hebrew script "𐤁𐤓𐤀𐤔𐤉𐤕" — which resemble Α & ω (alpha and omega). These are the old forms of the Hebrew letters aleph and shin which are pronounced differently to the Greek, but have a visual resemblance.

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10813
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by larsenb »

Niemand wrote: October 24th, 2022, 3:34 pm
larsenb wrote: October 24th, 2022, 10:43 am
Niemand wrote: October 21st, 2022, 7:35 pm First verse of the Bible
בְּרֵאשִׁית בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ
Bereshit bara Elohim et hashamayim ve'et ha'aretz.
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
This is with the Masoretic vowel pointing (the dots and lines beneath and above the Hebrew letters). Note that not everyone agrees with this, so there is some room for interpretation. Remember Hebrew is written right to left unlike English, the Hebrew alphabet has also changed from a more angular form into the curvy variety we see today.

In this verse we can see "אֱלֹהִים" (Elohim), a plural form of El for God. More than one.

The very first word of the Bible "בְּרֵאשִׁית" ( bereshit) has various things hidden inside it. These have tended to pass by any of those Hebrew scholars who reject Christ.

* It includes both "א" aleph and "ת" tav, since these are the first and last letters of the Hebrew alphabet, they are sort of equivalent to Alpha and Omega in Greek (but not phonetically), i.e. the beginning and end. The same combination appears three times in the sentence, in the fourth word of the verse "אֵת" and in the second last word between the words for Heaven and Earth.
* There is a hidden cross in the last letter "ת" or tav. In the current Hebrew alphabet this is not obvious, but in the old Hebrew script which Moses would have used this would be "𐤁𐤓𐤀𐤔𐤉𐤕" — with the last letter tav being "𐤕".
* The first two letters bet and resh (with no vowel pointing) give us "בּר" (or "𐤁𐤓" in old script br), which can be read as "bar" meaning "son". The first letter of the Bible is "bet" and the last is the Greek letter "nu", whose equivalent is "nun" in Hebrew. The first and the last letters create the Hebrew word "BeN" which also means "son".
* The names of the first two letters "bet" and "resh" mean "house-head".
* If we turn it into two words, we get "in the firstfruits". This is a concept we find in 1 Corinthians 15.23 used to refer to Jesus.

There are a lot of other hidden meanings in the verse which are less relevant.
Is this your analysis? I'm impressed, if so.
It would be flattering if it I did, but I can't take credit for most of this. Mostly taken from elsewhere but one or two other things jumped out at me. The aleph and tav vs alpha and omega (first and last letters of the respective alphabets) certainly although others have probably spotted it, because many have pored over it.

The first sentence of Genesis alone has an incredible amount of information coded into it, a level of symmetry and so on. There are numerical things in there getting into Kabbalah territory, most of that is above my payscale. (There are Greek numbers encoded into the WHO logo as well, I have found those independently.)

The Paleo-Hebrew is not mine, although I did spot one thing that hasn't been mentioned elsewhere. "𐤁𐤓𐤀𐤔𐤉𐤕" doesn't just contain aleph and tav (the first and last Hebrew letters) in their own forms, it also appears to contain something resembling the Greek alpha and omega visually.

Alpha and Omega in Greek are Α & Ω (capitals), α & ω (small/lower case).

I've underlined the two relevant letters of Bereshit in the old Hebrew script "𐤁𐤓𐤀𐤔𐤉𐤕" — which resemble Α & ω (alpha and omega). These are the old forms of the Hebrew letters aleph and shin which are pronounced differently to the Greek, but have a visual resemblance.
Keep up the good work. Very much in line with the early Brethren trying to learn Hebrew in their attempt to understand scripture better. They hired Joshua Seixas to teach them Hebrew over a 7 week period of time in early 1836, and actually completed his course, as outlined in his book, Hebrew Grammar.

I've got a reprint of Seixas' grammar republished by UofU in 1981 by Louis Zucker, and have been trying to master it. It's astonishing to me what they actually covered in that time.

I highly recommend: The Torah, a Modern Commentary, 'authored' by W. Gunther Plaut, Bernard J. Bamberger, and William W. Hallo, 1980. The commentary and supporting essays, alone, are worth it, whether you really try to parse the Hebrew or not. It uses the Masoretic alphabet and vowel additions with some of the 'repetition' removed.

User avatar
Niemand
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13999

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by Niemand »

larsenb wrote: October 25th, 2022, 2:51 pm
Niemand wrote: October 24th, 2022, 3:34 pm
larsenb wrote: October 24th, 2022, 10:43 am
Niemand wrote: October 21st, 2022, 7:35 pm First verse of the Bible




This is with the Masoretic vowel pointing (the dots and lines beneath and above the Hebrew letters). Note that not everyone agrees with this, so there is some room for interpretation. Remember Hebrew is written right to left unlike English, the Hebrew alphabet has also changed from a more angular form into the curvy variety we see today.

In this verse we can see "אֱלֹהִים" (Elohim), a plural form of El for God. More than one.

The very first word of the Bible "בְּרֵאשִׁית" ( bereshit) has various things hidden inside it. These have tended to pass by any of those Hebrew scholars who reject Christ.

* It includes both "א" aleph and "ת" tav, since these are the first and last letters of the Hebrew alphabet, they are sort of equivalent to Alpha and Omega in Greek (but not phonetically), i.e. the beginning and end. The same combination appears three times in the sentence, in the fourth word of the verse "אֵת" and in the second last word between the words for Heaven and Earth.
* There is a hidden cross in the last letter "ת" or tav. In the current Hebrew alphabet this is not obvious, but in the old Hebrew script which Moses would have used this would be "𐤁𐤓𐤀𐤔𐤉𐤕" — with the last letter tav being "𐤕".
* The first two letters bet and resh (with no vowel pointing) give us "בּר" (or "𐤁𐤓" in old script br), which can be read as "bar" meaning "son". The first letter of the Bible is "bet" and the last is the Greek letter "nu", whose equivalent is "nun" in Hebrew. The first and the last letters create the Hebrew word "BeN" which also means "son".
* The names of the first two letters "bet" and "resh" mean "house-head".
* If we turn it into two words, we get "in the firstfruits". This is a concept we find in 1 Corinthians 15.23 used to refer to Jesus.

There are a lot of other hidden meanings in the verse which are less relevant.
Is this your analysis? I'm impressed, if so.
It would be flattering if it I did, but I can't take credit for most of this. Mostly taken from elsewhere but one or two other things jumped out at me. The aleph and tav vs alpha and omega (first and last letters of the respective alphabets) certainly although others have probably spotted it, because many have pored over it.

The first sentence of Genesis alone has an incredible amount of information coded into it, a level of symmetry and so on. There are numerical things in there getting into Kabbalah territory, most of that is above my payscale. (There are Greek numbers encoded into the WHO logo as well, I have found those independently.)

The Paleo-Hebrew is not mine, although I did spot one thing that hasn't been mentioned elsewhere. "𐤁𐤓𐤀𐤔𐤉𐤕" doesn't just contain aleph and tav (the first and last Hebrew letters) in their own forms, it also appears to contain something resembling the Greek alpha and omega visually.

Alpha and Omega in Greek are Α & Ω (capitals), α & ω (small/lower case).

I've underlined the two relevant letters of Bereshit in the old Hebrew script "𐤁𐤓𐤀𐤔𐤉𐤕" — which resemble Α & ω (alpha and omega). These are the old forms of the Hebrew letters aleph and shin which are pronounced differently to the Greek, but have a visual resemblance.
Keep up the good work. Very much in line with the early Brethren trying to learn Hebrew in their attempt to understand scripture better. They hired Joshua Seixas to teach them Hebrew over a 7 week period of time in early 1836, and actually completed his course, as outlined in his book, Hebrew Grammar.

I've got a reprint of Seixas' grammar republished by UofU in 1981 by Louis Zucker, and have been trying to master it. It's astonishing to me what they actually covered in that time.

I highly recommend: The Torah, a Modern Commentary, 'authored' by W. Gunther Plaut, Bernard J. Bamberger, and William W. Hallo, 1980. The commentary and supporting essays, alone, are worth it, whether you really try to parse the Hebrew or not. It uses the Masoretic alphabet and vowel additions with some of the 'repetition' removed.
Thank you. My knowledge of Hebrew and Greek is very rudimentary, but with a crib and a dictionary I can find out a few things. I also find the alphabet harder to pick up than Greek.

I picked up a good copy of a bilingual Torah (bound) a few years ago. It includes some commentary that I've found helpful although one should always bear in mind that rabbinical commentary is nearly always slanted against Christianity. Judaism has become a self-selecting group, i.e. those who follow Christ tend to step away from it and those who reject him stay within it.

Christians have been as bad, and have not really searched for Christ in the origjnal Hebrew.

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10813
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by larsenb »

Regarding Book of Mormon questions, specifically the charge that there is no or scant evidence for horses existing in the Americas post-Pleistocence and pre-Columbian, here is some amazing evidence that situation has changed. Leading the charge is our own Wade Miller:

POST-PLEISTOCENE HORSES (EQUUS) FROM MÉXICO, Research Article| October 12 2022, Wade Miller; Gilberto Pérez-Roldán; Jim I. Mead; Rosario Gómez-Núñez; Jorge Madrazo-Fanti; Isaí Ortiz-Pérez; from The Texas Journal of Science (2022) 74 (1): Article 5., located at: https://doi.org/10.32011/txjsci_74_1_Article5
Abstract

For more than a century many paleontologists, biologists, paleoecologists, and archaeologists have contended that Equus species (American horse) became extinct on the North American continent by about 13,000 calibrated years BP – all part of the Late Pleistocene (Ice Age) extinction event. The paleontological project presented here that focuses on Equus from Rancho Carabanchel, San Luis Potosí, México became chronologically intriguing to us in having the horse consistently radiometrically dating into the Holocene, well beyond the presumed extinction event. Our approach to this observation was to conduct successive radiocarbon dates (n=19) tied as closely as possible to fossil remains and to stratigraphic units. The remains of the extant horse, Equus caballus, were recovered only in the upper-most Unit I while the extinct Equus cf. mexicanus, E. cf. conversidens, and E. cf. tau were recovered from the underlying Units II – VI of the late Holocene to approximately 45,000 calibrated years ago. We discuss how our data adds to the growing information which implies that horses may have persisted in this region of México well after the classical Late Pleistocene extinction event. Our conclusions may well illustrate that the extinction episode was actually a process lasting well into the Holocene and was not the event that many paleoecologists and archaeologist envision.
This is huge, in my strongly held opinion in terms of providing concrete evidence for the Book of Mormon

Here is an article about this finding from Book of Mormon Central:

When Lehi’s Party Arrived in the Land, Did They Find Horses There? ; Post contributed by BMC Team, October 17, 2022; located here: https://knowhy.bookofmormoncentral.org/ ... rses-there .
The Know

When Lehi and his family arrived in the promised land, according to Nephi’s account, they found “beasts in the forests of every kind, … the @#$ and the horse, … and all manner of wild animals” (1 Nephi 18:25). The inclusion of horses in the Book of Mormon is a subject that has long perplexed many readers since conventional thinking among scientists maintains that horses went extinct in the Americas around the end of the last Ice Age (ca. 10,000 BC). Some have used this apparent discrepancy to try to discredit the Book of Mormon. Others, however, have argued that various possibilities could account for it.1

For example, some have suggested that the use of the term “horse” is an instance of what scholars call “loanshifting” or “referential extension,” where a familiar word is applied to a foreign item or concept.2 This has happened frequently when new cultures encountered the horse in both the Old and New Worlds.3 Some scholars suggest something similar may have happened when Lehi’s family first explored the promised land—that is, they may have extended their term for “horse” to a new, unfamiliar species.4 Others have noted that translation sometimes introduces anachronisms into a text and so propose that words like “horse” may be a result of the Book of Mormon’s translation into English.5

While these remain important possibilities to consider, a recent study published in the Texas Journal of Science indicates that horses may have been in the Americas during Book of Mormon times after all.6 An international team of scholars—including experts in geology, biology, paleontology, and archaeozoology—recovered specimens of horse and other megafauna from a stratified context at Rancho Carabanchel, near Cedral, San Luis Potosí, Mexico. To establish the chronology of the site, several radiocarbon dates were obtained at each layer of strata from charcoal and other organic material recovered during excavations. Importantly, several horse specimens were recovered in close association with materials carbon dated to Book of Mormon times (see table).

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10813
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by larsenb »

larsenb wrote: October 25th, 2022, 4:55 pm Regarding Book of Mormon questions, specifically the charge that there is no or scant evidence for horses existing in the Americas post-Pleistocence and pre-Columbian, here is some amazing evidence that situation has changed. Leading the charge is our own Wade Miller:

POST-PLEISTOCENE HORSES (EQUUS) FROM MÉXICO, Research Article| October 12 2022, Wade Miller; Gilberto Pérez-Roldán; Jim I. Mead; Rosario Gómez-Núñez; Jorge Madrazo-Fanti; Isaí Ortiz-Pérez; from The Texas Journal of Science (2022) 74 (1): Article 5., located at: https://doi.org/10.32011/txjsci_74_1_Article5
Notice also that the findings are in keeping with a MesoAmerican location for the majority of the Book of Mormon happenings. Now, this isn't conclusive, but certainly supports this theory.

I have to thank Daniel Peterson for posting this info on his Sic et Non blog.

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10813
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by larsenb »

larsenb wrote: October 25th, 2022, 4:55 pm Regarding Book of Mormon questions, specifically the charge that there is no or scant evidence for horses existing in the Americas post-Pleistocence and pre-Columbian, here is some amazing evidence that situation has changed. Leading the charge is our own Wade Miller:

POST-PLEISTOCENE HORSES (EQUUS) FROM MÉXICO, Research Article| October 12 2022, Wade Miller; Gilberto Pérez-Roldán; Jim I. Mead; Rosario Gómez-Núñez; Jorge Madrazo-Fanti; Isaí Ortiz-Pérez; from The Texas Journal of Science (2022) 74 (1): Article 5., located at: https://doi.org/10.32011/txjsci_74_1_Article5
Abstract

For more than a century many paleontologists, biologists, paleoecologists, and archaeologists have contended that Equus species (American horse) became extinct on the North American continent by about 13,000 calibrated years BP – all part of the Late Pleistocene (Ice Age) extinction event. The paleontological project presented here that focuses on Equus from Rancho Carabanchel, San Luis Potosí, México became chronologically intriguing to us in having the horse consistently radiometrically dating into the Holocene, well beyond the presumed extinction event. Our approach to this observation was to conduct successive radiocarbon dates (n=19) tied as closely as possible to fossil remains and to stratigraphic units. The remains of the extant horse, Equus caballus, were recovered only in the upper-most Unit I while the extinct Equus cf. mexicanus, E. cf. conversidens, and E. cf. tau were recovered from the underlying Units II – VI of the late Holocene to approximately 45,000 calibrated years ago. We discuss how our data adds to the growing information which implies that horses may have persisted in this region of México well after the classical Late Pleistocene extinction event. Our conclusions may well illustrate that the extinction episode was actually a process lasting well into the Holocene and was not the event that many paleoecologists and archaeologist envision.
This is huge, in my strongly held opinion in terms of providing concrete evidence for the Book of Mormon

Here is an article about this finding from Book of Mormon Central:

When Lehi’s Party Arrived in the Land, Did They Find Horses There? ; Post contributed by BMC Team, October 17, 2022; located here: https://knowhy.bookofmormoncentral.org/ ... rses-there .
The Know

When Lehi and his family arrived in the promised land, according to Nephi’s account, they found “beasts in the forests of every kind, … the @#$ and the horse, … and all manner of wild animals” (1 Nephi 18:25). The inclusion of horses in the Book of Mormon is a subject that has long perplexed many readers since conventional thinking among scientists maintains that horses went extinct in the Americas around the end of the last Ice Age (ca. 10,000 BC). Some have used this apparent discrepancy to try to discredit the Book of Mormon. Others, however, have argued that various possibilities could account for it.1

For example, some have suggested that the use of the term “horse” is an instance of what scholars call “loanshifting” or “referential extension,” where a familiar word is applied to a foreign item or concept.2 This has happened frequently when new cultures encountered the horse in both the Old and New Worlds.3 Some scholars suggest something similar may have happened when Lehi’s family first explored the promised land—that is, they may have extended their term for “horse” to a new, unfamiliar species.4 Others have noted that translation sometimes introduces anachronisms into a text and so propose that words like “horse” may be a result of the Book of Mormon’s translation into English.5

While these remain important possibilities to consider, a recent study published in the Texas Journal of Science indicates that horses may have been in the Americas during Book of Mormon times after all.6 An international team of scholars—including experts in geology, biology, paleontology, and archaeozoology—recovered specimens of horse and other megafauna from a stratified context at Rancho Carabanchel, near Cedral, San Luis Potosí, Mexico. To establish the chronology of the site, several radiocarbon dates were obtained at each layer of strata from charcoal and other organic material recovered during excavations. Importantly, several horse specimens were recovered in close association with materials carbon dated to Book of Mormon times (see table).
No comments on this new find of multiple sites for pre-Columbian horses in the New World??!! This evidence is huge, in terms of archaeological/paleontological evidence for the Book of Mormon.

One of the key objections to the Book of Mormon by almost every critic was its mention of horses, multiple times, in the book. And of course, as we all knew, no horses were known here since the end of the Pleistocene.

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10813
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by larsenb »

Niemand wrote: October 25th, 2022, 3:19 pm
larsenb wrote: October 25th, 2022, 2:51 pm
Niemand wrote: October 24th, 2022, 3:34 pm
larsenb wrote: October 24th, 2022, 10:43 am
Is this your analysis? I'm impressed, if so.
It would be flattering if it I did, but I can't take credit for most of this. Mostly taken from elsewhere but one or two other things jumped out at me. The aleph and tav vs alpha and omega (first and last letters of the respective alphabets) certainly although others have probably spotted it, because many have pored over it.

The first sentence of Genesis alone has an incredible amount of information coded into it, a level of symmetry and so on. There are numerical things in there getting into Kabbalah territory, most of that is above my payscale. (There are Greek numbers encoded into the WHO logo as well, I have found those independently.)

The Paleo-Hebrew is not mine, although I did spot one thing that hasn't been mentioned elsewhere. "𐤁𐤓𐤀𐤔𐤉𐤕" doesn't just contain aleph and tav (the first and last Hebrew letters) in their own forms, it also appears to contain something resembling the Greek alpha and omega visually.

Alpha and Omega in Greek are Α & Ω (capitals), α & ω (small/lower case).

I've underlined the two relevant letters of Bereshit in the old Hebrew script "𐤁𐤓𐤀𐤔𐤉𐤕" — which resemble Α & ω (alpha and omega). These are the old forms of the Hebrew letters aleph and shin which are pronounced differently to the Greek, but have a visual resemblance.
Keep up the good work. Very much in line with the early Brethren trying to learn Hebrew in their attempt to understand scripture better. They hired Joshua Seixas to teach them Hebrew over a 7 week period of time in early 1836, and actually completed his course, as outlined in his book, Hebrew Grammar.

I've got a reprint of Seixas' grammar republished by UofU in 1981 by Louis Zucker, and have been trying to master it. It's astonishing to me what they actually covered in that time.

I highly recommend: The Torah, a Modern Commentary, 'authored' by W. Gunther Plaut, Bernard J. Bamberger, and William W. Hallo, 1980. The commentary and supporting essays, alone, are worth it, whether you really try to parse the Hebrew or not. It uses the Masoretic alphabet and vowel additions with some of the 'repetition' removed.
Thank you. My knowledge of Hebrew and Greek is very rudimentary, but with a crib and a dictionary I can find out a few things. I also find the alphabet harder to pick up than Greek.

I picked up a good copy of a bilingual Torah (bound) a few years ago. It includes some commentary that I've found helpful although one should always bear in mind that rabbinical commentary is nearly always slanted against Christianity. Judaism has become a self-selecting group, i.e. those who follow Christ tend to step away from it and those who reject him stay within it.

Christians have been as bad, and have not really searched for Christ in the origjnal Hebrew.
This particular commentary is quite impartial and objective. I've even encountered one comment on how LDS/Mormon theology weighs in on certain issues, having to do w/Adam, as I recall.

You might benefit by locating a copy of Seixas' reprinted grammar. I've learned the various vowel markings fairly well but still have a tough time parsing them out while attempting to read. For me that will probably take a lot more effort to immediately pick up on those markings.

I'm highly impressed that the early brethren went through Seixas' 7 week course. Doing so would have laid an excellent foundation (in so far as they were able to assimilate it) in really learning Hebrew. From there, it would be mostly vocabulary, vocabulary.

There was an instance decades after they took the course that one of the polymath auto-dictat students, possibly Orson Pratt, was able to debate and win an arguments about some Hebrew question raised about the LDS scriptures

Mamabear
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3351

Re: Book of Mormon questions

Post by Mamabear »

iWriteStuff wrote: October 23rd, 2022, 6:32 am
kirtland r.m. wrote: October 22nd, 2022, 9:00 pm Emma Smith, Joseph Smith's wife and scribe for part of the Book of Mormon, made a clear distinction between the two in an 1870 letter, "The first that my husband translated, was translated by the use of the Urim, and Thummim [i.e. spectacles or interpreters], and that was the part that Martin Harris lost, after that he used a small stone, not exactly, black, but was rather a dark color." MacKay, M. H. (2016). Joseph Smiths seer stones. Provo: BYU Religious Studies Center.
Emma has some support on this claim from David Whitmer, as quoted by Russell M. Nelson:

“The details of this miraculous method of translation are still not fully known. Yet we do have a few precious insights. David Whitmer wrote: ‘I will now give you a description of the manner in which the Book of Mormon was translated. 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 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’” (Russell M. Nelson, “A Treasured Testament,” Ensign, July 1993, p. 61. Citing David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ, p. 12).
60728796-1285-4422-A7E5-E1779D97E080.jpeg
60728796-1285-4422-A7E5-E1779D97E080.jpeg (204.59 KiB) Viewed 111 times

Post Reply