@@ScriptureNotes Hi Oak and Jonathan. Members of the Church hunger for accuracy in the sacred history of the Church. Even though members love each other and continue to do so, there still exists the silent "disputations" that divide us to some degree. Jonathan, your method of presenting evidence in a spirit of sharing is unparalleled among academics and students of our history. It would be awesome to not only have a more plausible, accurate portrayal of the historical story of our church but also a comprehensive objective presentation of the different hypotheses of where the Book of Mormon events took place. Crowdfund the production like the "Reign of Judges". I would gladly contribute.
As I was listening the thought occurred to me that if Moroni traveled 3000 miles from Guatemala to Western New York, and was living by himself in the wilderness, how did he obtain cement to construct the stone box? Also, did the hostiles seeking to take his life in Central America follow him all the way to New York?
Hi James, that issue resolves itself if we accept that when Joseph and Oliver said the final Nephite battles took place in that valley to the side of the NY Hill Cumorah, that that's where Moroni started from, not Guatemala.
Jonathan, thank you for all of your insight. After watching this video, I have a couple questions. Number one, why did Moroni go through the trouble of making a stone and concrete box to bury the plates in the hillside when he could’ve just kept them in the repository to deliver to the Prophet later on? My second question is regarding the seer stone. I read somewhere that Wilford Woodruff dedicated Joseph’s clear seer stone on the altar of the Manti temple. What do you make of that? Is that true?
It's a good question. Joseph mentioned how he had to wait four years to obtain the plates, but Oliver explained in more detail in Letter VIII how Joseph had to deal with the temptation the first time he saw the plates in 1823. "No sooner did he behold this sacred treasure than his hopes were renewed, and he supposed his success certain; and without first attempting to take it from its long place of deposit, he thought, perhaps, there might be something more, equally as valuable, and to take only the plates, might give others an opertunity of obtaining the remainder, which could he secure, would still add to his store of wealth." Had Joseph known about the repository of all the records, the temptation may have been overwhelming. It wasn't until the messenger on the road to Fayette said he was taking the abridged plates to Cumorah that Joseph realized the entire repository was in the hill Cumorah. That's why he turned pale, as David Whitmer described. As for Manti, Woodruff recorded "“Consecrated upon the Altar the seers Stone that Joseph Smith found by Revelation some 30 feet under the Earth Carried by him through life.” Some think it was a white stone, but Woodruff didn't describe it. He also doesn't say how he knew where Joseph found it, so there's lots of speculation about that, but it seems likely this was Joseph's stone that he used to help his contemporaries exercise faith, such as when they would ask Joseph to use a stone to give them a revelation.
@@jonathann3d It always made sense to me that the small plates of Nephi were a completely different set of plates but I was hoping you could help me with a question. I was a little confused on how “Words of Mormon” fits into that theory. Words of Mormon makes it sound like Mormon included the Small Plates in his abridgment.. perhaps I need to get your other book “Whatever Happened to the Gold Plates?” To get that answer? (I apologize if the answer is in this video, I have not watched the whole thing) On an unrelated note, I also just bought and am about to read your book “A Man that Can Translate”. I’m finishing Don Bradley’s book and he suggests the SITH/Urim and Thummim combo, but I’m not convinced!
Great question. The answer, at least to me, is that as Jonathan points out in these 3 presentations, that Joseph was doing a translation, not being dictated to by reading words off a stone in a hat. He was very familiar with the KJV having grown up reading it and the language he assembled the translation in probably felt natural to use what he was familiar with. There are some changes introduced, but much of it is the same.
Concerning the account of the messenger greeting Joseph's group in the wagon: my understanding is that translated beings are not subject to the conditions of the world. So why would he be feeling the hot weather and sweating? Climate should have no effect on him.
I think this could easily be passed off as the messenger acting like a normal person would on such a day and not that the weather was truly affecting him. Just a possibility.
Is there any record of any Latter Day leader identifying Shem? I know there was a lot of revelation about other places and events identified over the years.
That topic isn't really related to this video, but yes. I'll share this quote but it still seems there is controversy about it. Writing of the JST Genesis 14 account, John Taylor wrote: "From this definite account of driving the 'nations apart, when the ancient hills did bow,' all reflecting minds may judge that man was scattered over the whole face of the earth. And with the superior knowledge of men like Noah, Shem (who was Melchizedek) and Abraham, the father of the faithful, three contemporaries, holding the keys of the highest order of the priesthood: connecting the creation, and fall; memorizing the righteousness of Enoch; and glorying in the construction of the ark for the salvation of a world; still retaining the model and pattern of that ark, than which a great, ah, we might say, half so great a vessel has never been built since; for another ark, be it remembered, with such a ponderous living freight will never be prepared as a vessel of mercy by command of Jehovah." -Times and Seasons, Vol. 5, p. 746. Nauvoo, Illinois, December 15, 1844. Elder John Taylor, Editor.)
2 different plates makes sense. Abridged record vs small plates of Nephi. 30 pounds vs 60 pounds. Abridged record was sealed the record of nephi wasn't and that's why none of the witnesses mentioned a sealed portion. Brigham young said plates went back to repository Joseph said the angel took them back. 2 different sets.
I was surprised Jonathan endorsed Richard Bushman and didn’t think he was a big fan of him . Due to the fact Richard Bushman is the one of the historians spear heading certain ideas of cultic magical forces during the translation process, using the seer stone to translate instead of the UT, and the use of 2nd, 3rd hand accounts over first hand accounts. I like Jonathan , but it seems he is riding on the coat tails of all the work Hannah Stoddard has done but people seem to brush her aside and not take her seriously. I think the church historians have not done any favors to the church with the Saints book and church essays. It was their chance to come clean but they blew it again. Did it shake my testimony. No. It just only enforces the idea that we all need to do our own research like the Stoddards and Jonathan ,who are not “trained” experts . If they can figure it out then so can we. Most importantly stay close to the basics of Joseph Smith was called of God, the Book of Mormon was translated by the power of God, Jesus is the Christ and God is our Father in Heaven. The rest as you were trying to say is fluff.
I don't think he endorsed him. Bushman just thought Jonathan's book deserves a look and wrote a statement for it. It contradicts some of the things Bushman has published.
This whole episode seems to contradict what Mormon said in Words of Mormon where he says, he "PUT THEM WITH the remainder of my record." That seems to imply that he removed them from the repository and put them with the abridgement. Nevertheless, all of this, to me is like trying to decide if the pearly gates swing right or left. The Book of Mormon is true or it isn't. Moroni 10:4 works for it doesn't. Everything else, including all this apparently Herculean effort by Brother Neville, seems a lot like fluff to me.
Hi Michael, Jonathan explains in his book that verse 6 that you are quoting from, has further light shed on it in verse 10 which reads: "10. Wherefore, it came to pass that after Amaleki had delivered up these plates into the hands of king Benjamin, he took them and **put them with** the other plates, which contained records which had been handed down by the kings, from generation to generation until the days of king Benjamin." In other words, put them with doesn't mean attach to, it means in proximity to. There's a very real possibility that Mormon took the small plates with him as he was preaching the gospel and kept them along with the record he was writing. Verse 11 hints at this when he says his people will be judged out of them at the last day. How could they be if they didn't get a taste of what was in them from Mormon's preaching. Of course this is just good clean fun trying to figure out some of these intricacies. The important this is as you mentioned, Moroni 10:4 and gaining a testimony of the book's truthfulness.
It is not a lot of fluff to people who are trying to believe that the BofM is True, but are not there all the way! Jonathan’s research has made a lot of difference to me, and is far more credible than SITH imo, which seems problematic. Nor do I like embracing the critics viewpoint i.e. Dehlin. I hope you don’t want to exclude members who are seeking truth and trying to hang on to everything they have!
Well gee bud, the fundamental principles of our religion is the testimony of the apostles that Jesus lived, died, and rose the 3rd day. So really who cares about the Book of Mormon?? Since it’s just fluff ya know?!
I wonder why the abridged plates had to be placed in their own box instead of left in the repository with the other records. Maybe it was to test Joseph's trustworthiness before giving him full knowledge of the repository?
This idea that Mormon did not attach the small plates of Nephi to the abridgment of the large plates directly contradicts the record. Read the Words of Mormon verses 3-7. Then answer a single question: Did Mormon go through the labor of abridging and inscribing upon metal plates because he was directed to by the Lord and not preform the simple task of attaching records as directed by "the Spirit of the Lord"? Sure the small plates were put with the other plates by king Benjamin about 130BC, likely where Mormon found them before 385AD. How does this indicate that the small plates were not attached to the abridgment around 385AD? Then Mormon prays to God that the records will be preserved which also indicates that the small plates were attached to the abridgment to come forth in the latter days. Mormon was tasked with preparing an abridgment to be sealed up to be brought forth by the gift and power of God many hundred years after the destruction of his people, and he knew this was what he was tasked to do. Does this mean that Mormon did not complete the work he was directed to do by the Lord? Do you preserve something by sealing it up, or by passing it around?
Did Mormon go through the labor of abridging and inscribing upon metal plates because he was directed to by the Lord and not preform the simple task of attaching records as directed by "the Spirit of the Lord"? >>> Nowhere in Words of Mormon or anywhere else in the BoM does it say Mormon "attaches" the small plates of Nephi to his record. The fact that Moroni does not mention the small plates of Nephi in creating the title page (wherein he gives a clear overview of what the BoM will include) indicates they were not there to start with. WoM 1: 6 indicates, "But behold, I shall take these plates, which contain these prophesyings and revelations, and put them with the remainder of my record, for they are choice unto me; and I know they will be choice unto my brethren. He does not say within, but with." Tough to tell either way what "with" means, but given other proof which Jonathan covers, it is tough to assume he meant within. Keep in mind that Mormon does not know that the 116 pp will be lost. He continues to abridge the large plates of Nephi all the way through to his time period. Further, if the small plates had been included within the rest of Mormon's record, would Oliver/Joseph not have arrived at them eventually, without having to inquire of the Lord if they should start again from the beginning? The fact that they arrive at the end of the plates (those that they received - Mormon's abridgment) and then have no where else to go but back to the beginning indicates they did not have the small plates at their disposal. This is why they go to the Lord in D&C 9-10, and he instructs them 2 And then, behold, other records have I, that I will give unto you power that you may assist to translate. IN section 10, the Lord indicates further, "38 And now, verily I say unto you, that an account of those things that you have written, which have gone out of your hands, is engraven upon the plates of Nephi; 39 Yea, and you remember it was said in those writings that a more particular account was given of these things upon the plates of Nephi. 40 And now, because the account which is engraven upon the plates of Nephi is more particular concerning the things which, in my wisdom, I would bring to the knowledge of the people in this account- 41 Therefore, you shall translate the engravings which are on the plates of Nephi, down even till you come to the reign of king Benjamin, or until you come to that which you have translated, which you have retained; 42 And behold, you shall publish it as the record of Nephi; and thus I will confound those who have altered my words. Sure the small plates were put with the other plates by king Benjamin about 130BC, likely where Mormon found them before 385AD. How does this indicate that the small plates were not attached to the abridgment around 385AD? >>>It doesn't. I don't understand what you are driving at. All he said, was that the records were placed with others and they eventually end up with Mormon. It does not speak to what he did with them. Then Mormon prays to God that the records will be preserved which also indicates that the small plates were attached to the abridgment to come forth in the latter days. >>>Not sure how you are arriving at that conclusion. WoM 1: 8 And my prayer to God is concerning my brethren, that they may once again come to the knowledge of God, yea, the redemption of Christ; that they may once again be a delightsome people. This is a general hope that he is praying for, but does not speak to a specific set of plates specifically. Mormon was tasked with preparing an abridgment to be sealed up to be brought forth by the gift and power of God many hundred years after the destruction of his people, and he knew this was what he was tasked to do. Does this mean that Mormon did not complete the work he was directed to do by the Lord? >>>Mormon did exactly what you indicated. He prepared an abridgment of the large plates (his writing was likely influenced by the teaching in the small plates) to be sealed up to be brought forth by the gift and power of God many hundred years after the destruction of his people. Do you preserve something by sealing it up, or by passing it around? >>>Technically, Mormon did not complete the project for he was killed, but he lived long enough to hand the record and his project/abridgment to his son whom he knew would finish the hide the record. They already knew that they would preserve it so that it would come to another at a later date (this is clearly outlined in Nephi's panoptic vision and also foretold by Isaiah). Both Mormon and Moroni knew this and trusted in the Lord that he would get it to the right person at the right time.
If you are really interested in this topic you should check out Jonathan Neville and James Lucas' book, "By Means of the Urim & Thummim" (www.digitalegend.com/products/by-means-of-the-urim-thummim). I have done 3 webinars with Jonathan in the last several months and he covers this topic particularly well in the 3rd one. You can also see on the church website that they clearly state Joseph stated he used the Urim & Thummim. Some historians have worked on the gospel essays on the church website, but even these are not claiming 100% with a seer stone in a hat. They take a view that the U&T was used but then when it was convenient, Joseph used the seer stone. I think Jonathan does a good job explaining this away. If a seer stone could be used to translate, why couldn't Oliver translate when he had a chance if it was simply a matter of reading words off a stone. While either method could be said to be a process "by the gift and power of God," looking at the facts of what Joseph and Oliver claimed (the 2 most involved), and reasonable explanations of other statements, it seems much more likely that Joseph just used the U&T for translation.
@@ScriptureNotes Jonathan Neville does not speak for the church, he is one of their Fringe Scholars as it were. Good at firesides but without any professional credentials. He falls right in with the rod Meldrum and Heartland crowd
Richard Bushman gave a nice endorsement of his latest book. Fringe is a meaningless word these days. It's gets tossed around like it's a total dismissal of someone's beliefs or research no matter how good and accurate it is.
@@ScriptureNotes Agreed ... you have explained it well. In addition, it should be noted that the essay on the Church website indicates, "These two instruments-the interpreters and the seer stone-were apparently interchangeable and worked in much the same way such that, in the course of time, Joseph Smith and his associates often used the term “Urim and Thummim” to refer to the single stone as well as the interpreters". The word "apparently" is not exactly concrete but covers all possibilities. I also believe that like Jonathan, the case is very clear that they translated the BoM using the Urim and Thumim. Certainly the accounts of Oliver and Joseph are consistent in always referring to the ancient interpreters.
Just love Jonathan Neville!! His POV just makes the most sense to me. Thanks so much for this presentation!!
I've enjoyed Jonathan's books and feel he approaches these topics using all information available not leaving 'any stone unturned'. Great job!!
I too appreciate Jonathan’s work in this area. It resonates with me. Makes so much sense.
Jonathan, this has been the best historical narrative of the translation of the Book of Mormon. This is a perfect movie script-- do a movie.
That would be really cool.
@@ScriptureNotes Hi Oak and Jonathan. Members of the Church hunger for accuracy in the sacred history of the Church. Even though members love each other and continue to do so, there still exists the silent "disputations" that divide us to some degree. Jonathan, your method of presenting evidence in a spirit of sharing is unparalleled among academics and students of our history. It would be awesome to not only have a more plausible, accurate portrayal of the historical story of our church but also a comprehensive objective presentation of the different hypotheses of where the Book of Mormon events took place. Crowdfund the production like the "Reign of Judges". I would gladly contribute.
I love your presentations, very clear and well-illustrated.
Great breakdown and use of media. Good job, Jonathan.
Wow, this is wonderful, a personal lecture. Great job!
As I was listening the thought occurred to me that if Moroni traveled 3000 miles from Guatemala to Western New York, and was living by himself in the wilderness, how did he obtain cement to construct the stone box? Also, did the hostiles seeking to take his life in Central America follow him all the way to New York?
Hi James, that issue resolves itself if we accept that when Joseph and Oliver said the final Nephite battles took place in that valley to the side of the NY Hill Cumorah, that that's where Moroni started from, not Guatemala.
@@ScriptureNotes Agreed. One more evidence that NY Cumorah makes a lot more sense than two-Cumorah hypothesis
Jonathan, thank you for all of your insight. After watching this video, I have a couple questions. Number one, why did Moroni go through the trouble of making a stone and concrete box to bury the plates in the hillside when he could’ve just kept them in the repository to deliver to the Prophet later on? My second question is regarding the seer stone. I read somewhere that Wilford Woodruff dedicated Joseph’s clear seer stone on the altar of the Manti temple. What do you make of that? Is that true?
It's a good question. Joseph mentioned how he had to wait four years to obtain the plates, but Oliver explained in more detail in Letter VIII how Joseph had to deal with the temptation the first time he saw the plates in 1823. "No sooner did he behold this sacred treasure than his hopes were renewed, and he supposed his success certain; and without first attempting to take it from its long place of deposit, he thought, perhaps, there might be something more, equally as valuable, and to take only the plates, might give others an opertunity of obtaining the remainder, which could he secure, would still add to his store of wealth." Had Joseph known about the repository of all the records, the temptation may have been overwhelming. It wasn't until the messenger on the road to Fayette said he was taking the abridged plates to Cumorah that Joseph realized the entire repository was in the hill Cumorah. That's why he turned pale, as David Whitmer described. As for Manti, Woodruff recorded "“Consecrated upon the Altar the seers Stone that Joseph Smith found by Revelation some 30 feet under the Earth Carried by him through life.” Some think it was a white stone, but Woodruff didn't describe it. He also doesn't say how he knew where Joseph found it, so there's lots of speculation about that, but it seems likely this was Joseph's stone that he used to help his contemporaries exercise faith, such as when they would ask Joseph to use a stone to give them a revelation.
@@jonathann3d It always made sense to me that the small plates of Nephi were a completely different set of plates but I was hoping you could help me with a question. I was a little confused on how “Words of Mormon” fits into that theory. Words of Mormon makes it sound like Mormon included the Small Plates in his abridgment.. perhaps I need to get your other book “Whatever Happened to the Gold Plates?” To get that answer? (I apologize if the answer is in this video, I have not watched the whole thing)
On an unrelated note, I also just bought and am about to read your book “A Man that Can Translate”. I’m finishing Don Bradley’s book and he suggests the SITH/Urim and Thummim combo, but I’m not convinced!
How did 1769 KJV translation errors end up on gold plates from 400 CE?
🤔🤔🤔
Great question. The answer, at least to me, is that as Jonathan points out in these 3 presentations, that Joseph was doing a translation, not being dictated to by reading words off a stone in a hat. He was very familiar with the KJV having grown up reading it and the language he assembled the translation in probably felt natural to use what he was familiar with. There are some changes introduced, but much of it is the same.
@@ScriptureNotesbut Joseph Smith didn't say he was using what he was familiar with, he said he was translating 🤔
Please watch the video before posting.
Concerning the account of the messenger greeting Joseph's group in the wagon: my understanding is that translated beings are not subject to the conditions of the world. So why would he be feeling the hot weather and sweating? Climate should have no effect on him.
I think this could easily be passed off as the messenger acting like a normal person would on such a day and not that the weather was truly affecting him. Just a possibility.
Is there any record of any Latter Day leader identifying Shem? I know there was a lot of revelation about other places and events identified over the years.
That topic isn't really related to this video, but yes. I'll share this quote but it still seems there is controversy about it. Writing of the JST Genesis 14 account, John Taylor wrote:
"From this definite account of driving the 'nations apart, when the ancient hills did bow,' all reflecting minds may judge that man was scattered over the whole face of the earth. And with the superior knowledge of men like Noah, Shem (who was Melchizedek) and Abraham, the father of the faithful, three contemporaries, holding the keys of the highest order of the priesthood: connecting the creation, and fall; memorizing the righteousness of Enoch; and glorying in the construction of the ark for the salvation of a world; still retaining the model and pattern of that ark, than which a great, ah, we might say, half so great a vessel has never been built since; for another ark, be it remembered, with such a ponderous living freight will never be prepared as a vessel of mercy by command of Jehovah." -Times and Seasons, Vol. 5, p. 746. Nauvoo, Illinois, December 15, 1844. Elder John Taylor, Editor.)
@@ScriptureNotes thanks. There was a discussion about another repository of scriptures in Shem. I wasn't familiar with that.
@@bradhardisty1652 oh you mean the hill Shim. :) Mormon 1:3 and others talk about it.
@@OakNorton thanks. I was meaning current location but yes.
2 different plates makes sense. Abridged record vs small plates of Nephi.
30 pounds vs 60 pounds.
Abridged record was sealed the record of nephi wasn't and that's why none of the witnesses mentioned a sealed portion.
Brigham young said plates went back to repository Joseph said the angel took them back. 2 different sets.
Wow this just makes sense
Cement is just limestone heated up then pound it to powder add water add some gravel you got concrete
I was surprised Jonathan endorsed Richard Bushman and didn’t think he was a big fan of him . Due to the fact Richard Bushman is the one of the historians spear heading certain ideas of cultic magical forces during the translation process, using the seer stone to translate instead of the UT, and the use of 2nd, 3rd hand accounts over first hand accounts. I like Jonathan , but it seems he is riding on the coat tails of all the work Hannah Stoddard has done but people seem to brush her aside and not take her seriously. I think the church historians have not done any favors to the church with the Saints book and church essays. It was their chance to come clean but they blew it again. Did it shake my testimony. No. It just only enforces the idea that we all need to do our own research like the Stoddards and Jonathan ,who are not “trained” experts . If they can figure it out then so can we. Most importantly stay close to the basics of Joseph Smith was called of God, the Book of Mormon was translated by the power of God, Jesus is the Christ and God is our Father in Heaven. The rest as you were trying to say is fluff.
I don't think he endorsed him. Bushman just thought Jonathan's book deserves a look and wrote a statement for it. It contradicts some of the things Bushman has published.
@@ScriptureNotes ok fair enough. I do apologize if I came across a little cranky. I woke up on the wrong side of the bed. Great video though.
This whole episode seems to contradict what Mormon said in Words of Mormon where he says, he "PUT THEM WITH the remainder of my record." That seems to imply that he removed them from the repository and put them with the abridgement.
Nevertheless, all of this, to me is like trying to decide if the pearly gates swing right or left. The Book of Mormon is true or it isn't. Moroni 10:4 works for it doesn't. Everything else, including all this apparently Herculean effort by Brother Neville, seems a lot like fluff to me.
Hi Michael, Jonathan explains in his book that verse 6 that you are quoting from, has further light shed on it in verse 10 which reads: "10. Wherefore, it came to pass that after Amaleki had delivered up these plates into the hands of king Benjamin, he took them and **put them with** the other plates, which contained records which had been handed down by the kings, from generation to generation until the days of king Benjamin."
In other words, put them with doesn't mean attach to, it means in proximity to. There's a very real possibility that Mormon took the small plates with him as he was preaching the gospel and kept them along with the record he was writing. Verse 11 hints at this when he says his people will be judged out of them at the last day. How could they be if they didn't get a taste of what was in them from Mormon's preaching.
Of course this is just good clean fun trying to figure out some of these intricacies. The important this is as you mentioned, Moroni 10:4 and gaining a testimony of the book's truthfulness.
It is not a lot of fluff to people who are trying to believe that the BofM is True, but are not there all the way! Jonathan’s research has made a lot of difference to me, and is far more credible than SITH imo, which seems problematic. Nor do I like embracing the critics viewpoint i.e. Dehlin.
I hope you don’t want to exclude members who are seeking truth and trying to hang on to everything they have!
@@MotherEarth52, we definitely don't exclude anyone seeking truth. :)
Well gee bud, the fundamental principles of our religion is the testimony of the apostles that Jesus lived, died, and rose the 3rd day. So really who cares about the Book of Mormon?? Since it’s just fluff ya know?!
@@Idk40003 and on the other hand, it's the keystone of our religion which provides a second witness of the life and atonement of Jesus Christ... :)
The attitude of the host when he shrugs things off is telling…
Hi Rusty, I'm not sure what you mean by that. :) I don't remember shrugging anything off that Jonathan shared.
I wonder why the abridged plates had to be placed in their own box instead of left in the repository with the other records. Maybe it was to test Joseph's trustworthiness before giving him full knowledge of the repository?
This idea that Mormon did not attach the small plates of Nephi to the abridgment of the large plates directly contradicts the record.
Read the Words of Mormon verses 3-7.
Then answer a single question:
Did Mormon go through the labor of abridging and inscribing upon metal plates because he was directed to by the Lord and not preform the simple task of attaching records as directed by "the Spirit of the Lord"?
Sure the small plates were put with the other plates by king Benjamin about 130BC, likely where Mormon found them before 385AD.
How does this indicate that the small plates were not attached to the abridgment around 385AD?
Then Mormon prays to God that the records will be preserved which also indicates that the small plates were attached to the abridgment to come forth in the latter days. Mormon was tasked with preparing an abridgment to be sealed up to be brought forth by the gift and power of God many hundred years after the destruction of his people, and he knew this was what he was tasked to do.
Does this mean that Mormon did not complete the work he was directed to do by the Lord?
Do you preserve something by sealing it up, or by passing it around?
Did Mormon go through the labor of abridging and inscribing upon metal plates because he was directed to by the Lord and not preform the simple task of attaching records as directed by "the Spirit of the Lord"?
>>> Nowhere in Words of Mormon or anywhere else in the BoM does it say Mormon "attaches" the small plates of Nephi to his record. The fact that Moroni does not mention the small plates of Nephi in creating the title page (wherein he gives a clear overview of what the BoM will include) indicates they were not there to start with. WoM 1: 6 indicates, "But behold, I shall take these plates, which contain these prophesyings and revelations, and put them with the remainder of my record, for they are choice unto me; and I know they will be choice unto my brethren. He does not say within, but with." Tough to tell either way what "with" means, but given other proof which Jonathan covers, it is tough to assume he meant within. Keep in mind that Mormon does not know that the 116 pp will be lost. He continues to abridge the large plates of Nephi all the way through to his time period. Further, if the small plates had been included within the rest of Mormon's record, would Oliver/Joseph not have arrived at them eventually, without having to inquire of the Lord if they should start again from the beginning? The fact that they arrive at the end of the plates (those that they received - Mormon's abridgment) and then have no where else to go but back to the beginning indicates they did not have the small plates at their disposal. This is why they go to the Lord in D&C 9-10, and he instructs them 2 And then, behold, other records have I, that I will give unto you power that you may assist to translate. IN section 10, the Lord indicates further, "38 And now, verily I say unto you, that an account of those things that you have written, which have gone out of your hands, is engraven upon the plates of Nephi; 39 Yea, and you remember it was said in those writings that a more particular account was given of these things upon the plates of Nephi. 40 And now, because the account which is engraven upon the plates of Nephi is more particular concerning the things which, in my wisdom, I would bring to the knowledge of the people in this account- 41 Therefore, you shall translate the engravings which are on the plates of Nephi, down even till you come to the reign of king Benjamin, or until you come to that which you have translated, which you have retained; 42 And behold, you shall publish it as the record of Nephi; and thus I will confound those who have altered my words.
Sure the small plates were put with the other plates by king Benjamin about 130BC, likely where Mormon found them before 385AD.
How does this indicate that the small plates were not attached to the abridgment around 385AD?
>>>It doesn't. I don't understand what you are driving at. All he said, was that the records were placed with others and they eventually end up with Mormon. It does not speak to what he did with them.
Then Mormon prays to God that the records will be preserved which also indicates that the small plates were attached to the abridgment to come forth in the latter days. >>>Not sure how you are arriving at that conclusion. WoM 1: 8 And my prayer to God is concerning my brethren, that they may once again come to the knowledge of God, yea, the redemption of Christ; that they may once again be a delightsome people. This is a general hope that he is praying for, but does not speak to a specific set of plates specifically.
Mormon was tasked with preparing an abridgment to be sealed up to be brought forth by the gift and power of God many hundred years after the destruction of his people, and he knew this was what he was tasked to do.
Does this mean that Mormon did not complete the work he was directed to do by the Lord?
>>>Mormon did exactly what you indicated. He prepared an abridgment of the large plates (his writing was likely influenced by the teaching in the small plates) to be sealed up to be brought forth by the gift and power of God many hundred years after the destruction of his people.
Do you preserve something by sealing it up, or by passing it around?
>>>Technically, Mormon did not complete the project for he was killed, but he lived long enough to hand the record and his project/abridgment to his son whom he knew would finish the hide the record. They already knew that they would preserve it so that it would come to another at a later date (this is clearly outlined in Nephi's panoptic vision and also foretold by Isaiah). Both Mormon and Moroni knew this and trusted in the Lord that he would get it to the right person at the right time.
The church says that only a rock in a hat was involved. Is the church lying?
If you are really interested in this topic you should check out Jonathan Neville and James Lucas' book, "By Means of the Urim & Thummim" (www.digitalegend.com/products/by-means-of-the-urim-thummim). I have done 3 webinars with Jonathan in the last several months and he covers this topic particularly well in the 3rd one. You can also see on the church website that they clearly state Joseph stated he used the Urim & Thummim. Some historians have worked on the gospel essays on the church website, but even these are not claiming 100% with a seer stone in a hat. They take a view that the U&T was used but then when it was convenient, Joseph used the seer stone. I think Jonathan does a good job explaining this away. If a seer stone could be used to translate, why couldn't Oliver translate when he had a chance if it was simply a matter of reading words off a stone. While either method could be said to be a process "by the gift and power of God," looking at the facts of what Joseph and Oliver claimed (the 2 most involved), and reasonable explanations of other statements, it seems much more likely that Joseph just used the U&T for translation.
@@ScriptureNotes Jonathan Neville does not speak for the church, he is one of their Fringe Scholars as it were. Good at firesides but without any professional credentials. He falls right in with the rod Meldrum and Heartland crowd
Richard Bushman gave a nice endorsement of his latest book. Fringe is a meaningless word these days. It's gets tossed around like it's a total dismissal of someone's beliefs or research no matter how good and accurate it is.
@@ScriptureNotes Agreed ... you have explained it well. In addition, it should be noted that the essay on the Church website indicates, "These two instruments-the interpreters and the seer stone-were apparently interchangeable and worked in much the same way such that, in the course of time, Joseph Smith and his associates often used the term “Urim and Thummim” to refer to the single stone as well as the interpreters". The word "apparently" is not exactly concrete but covers all possibilities. I also believe that like Jonathan, the case is very clear that they translated the BoM using the Urim and Thumim. Certainly the accounts of Oliver and Joseph are consistent in always referring to the ancient interpreters.