Comments on: Book of Mormon Written in Modern-day English

By: Timothy B. Wilson

Timothy B. Wilson — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 19:55:33 +0000

As I always say, “Truth is independent of words.” No matter the original language, if men are inspired and / or shown by revelation, specific words that appear on seer stones inside of a hat, or any other device the Lord is apart of, then the result is a work that, when people read, they feel the Spirit of the Lord and are brought closer to His truth. And that is the intent of the Lord…..to bring us closer to truth.

People have a fear of being deceived, mostly because they don’t trust the whole process of revelation, or are not used to it in their lives. People are more used to TV, radio stations, downloading songs in their iPod, and reading text messages from people who can’t spell out a single word.

So when the real deal comes along, 1830 Book of Mormon, or 1993 Mormon’s Story, based on the former, then people tend to freak out when their safe haven (the one and only original they know), is brought to light by men inspired by the Lord.

And what of the calling? What of the authority? Hmmm, last I check there was this great scripture in the D&C about being “anxiously engaged in a good cause”, and not sitting around on your duff, waiting to be “commanded in all things” like a latter-day aint. That’s why I spend two solid years of my life, not preaching in New England (commanded to be a missionary), but sitting in front of a monitor working my brains out day and night, with four kids and a wife to support.

That all worked out well, by the way. The Lord takes care of His own.

Tim

By: George

George — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 02:23:49 +0000

Tim, you wrote:

“I will say that the “language of scripture” so dear to many people’s hearts, and that Joel encourages us to stick with, is totally lost to LDS members who read the Book of Mormon in languages other than English.”

You have really landed on the right spot here. Those who believe that Jacobean English is the sine qua non of scripture need to ask themselves why the LDS church is growing by leaps and bounds in foreign countries with modern translations into nonEnglish languages, whereas in countries like the U.S., Canada, and the U.K. the church’s missionary growth is much slower, and more dependent upon births
than upon evangelism..

George

By: George

George — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 02:19:55 +0000

Tim, some of your critics, who insist on the “pure version” may be completely unaware that no “pure” version exists. The only thing close to an absolutely correct Book of Mormon text would be the Original Manuscript, of which only a very small percentage still survives. The secondary manuscript copied out for the printer to typeset disagrees in quite a few places with the Original Ms., in the portions of the original that survive. And with the entire Book of Lehi and the forepart of Mosiah irretrievably lost, per LDS sources, the Book of Mormon is rather incomplete.

All these comments atributing immutable perfection to the 1921 Book of Mormon resemble a statement that an elderly lady made to my father, who was a traveling elder in the Methodist Church. In the 1950′s, no one knew what to do about the Revised Standard Version of the Bible, and many were completely unaware that there were two post KJV versions that preceded it. The old lady told my father that she wanted to keep the KJV because she “wanted the same Bible that Paul and Silas had.”

Since none of us can read Nephite, and the Nephite text is no longer extant, none of us can read the Book of Mormon that Mormon actually wrote. We are even a step down from Mosiah’s day, when Benjamin told his sons that they knew the brass plates were true because God had preserved them — and because they had them physically present as a witness of their historical authenticity both of the plates themselves and their message “before our eyes,” — an admonition that is completely lost on modern saints.

Maintaining the authority of the KJV as a sort of “inspired translation” resembles the claim of the medieval Roman church that the Vulgate was an inspired translation whose value superceded that of any preserved ms. of the Greek or Hebrew text. And the Greek Orthodox Church claims similar status for the Septuagint as being “authentic.”

The only thing close to being authentic as far as the Book of Mormon is concerned would be the original text on the gold codex, translated by modern scholars. And so the traditional Restored Church will never be able to go forward and take its place in the modern world, because in the mind of many LDS, the Bible remains as frozen as the Book of Mormon — because lacking an original language text of the BoM is perceived as a tacit commandment that the KJV is itself an inspired translation superceding the Greek and Hebrew from which it was translated..

By: George

George — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 02:02:45 +0000

Seaumax, the instruction “that it cause no harm, do as thou wilt” is simple, but the fact that every person on earth has his own personal interpretation of “harm” makes it inoperable. One need look no further than the “war on drugs” to see examples of this.

By: George

George — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 01:59:17 +0000

If the original letter was sent to Mr. Wilson, how is it that you have the original in your possession? Just curious. You know, by law, any letter sent to an individual becomes the physical property of that recipient, although the copyright to the material in the letter remains with the writer.

By: maclouie

maclouie — Wed, 07 Nov 2012 19:52:10 +0000

“A possible conclusion from Skousen’s work is that the Book of Mormon was translated into the English of an earlier era by a non-native speaker of that language.” I came to this same conclusion watching the Joseph Smith Papers episode. I’ve re-watched it several times before I came to an understanding of how the BOM was probably translated (I mean the details that we dont talk about). BTW, a non-native speaker of which language? Maybe neither language?

Also, your comments about the BOM being translated to other languages and not being translated into modern English is very interesting – never thought of it that way.

By: seaumas

seaumas — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 06:34:38 +0000

“That it cause no harm, do as thou wilt.” This is the motto of the Wiccan. Of course, there are a lot of people who have and still do disagree with this very sensible philosophy. and about hurting others’ feelings with rhetoric, thank goodness its still not against the law; Abraham Lincoln remarked about a particularly severe critic of his presidency: “His freedom of speech stops where his fist meets my nose.” The dude abides.

By: seaumas

seaumas — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 06:21:05 +0000

the Plain English version of BOM is in Wiki. I have, with great difficulty, read it in the original and find it hard to follow and bewilderingly repetitive, especially Nephi’s ongoing strife with those others on the boat. The worst were the continuing “It came to pass..” which almost wrecked any attempts at chronological order. The most shocking in Nephi I was the account of the blonde haired and blue eyed people who were supposedly evil being turned by The Lord into “ugly” and “Black skinned”. The account of the reason for the color of the Native American, though preposterous, at least had some action attached to it. The account of animals present in the New Land who simple never existed there and exemptions of those remarkably unique there (here) destroyed any credibility the work might have attempted. Of course, if a believer is one who is a teleological literalist: “Jesus said it; I believe it and that’s that.” may also be inclined to suspensions of the morally and legally ethical with “God made me do it.” or “God said he would kill me it I didn’t do it.”- and there are plenty of examples of that. I would add that in that “Plain English” version I found no discussions, but was prompted, even invited, to add my own ‘two cents’.
I ask readers to remember that this is America and though one can have any religion or none at all (Emerson v BOE, 1949), it is tough enough to be a Muslim, a Wiccan or in some places, even a Jew. As long as no one interferes with me and mine I abide.

By: Doug

Doug — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 03:09:41 +0000

I don’t think this is the venue to air your dirty laundry. We desire civility and neither one of you reflect that. Your pain must be great and I ,a non-LDS Christian, will be praying for you.

By: Timothy Wilson

Timothy Wilson — Sun, 13 Nov 2011 14:44:29 +0000

Oh, now I remember the letter that my ex-wife has in her posssesion, from Elaine Jack. That’s a letter I received from her AFTER I publshed my 346 page hard bound book. I had made a second trip to her office after publishing. The first visit was when I took my manuscript to her, which she thumbed through briefly, and said, “I hope this goes”. She encouraged me to publish.

If Ramona (my angry ex-wife) cared to look at the date on my letter, sent to me by the then General R.S. President, Elaine Jack, (which if Ramona had any decency she would send to me as a cherished momento of mine), then she would see a date AFTER the date that my book was published.

The part of that letter Ramona does not tell about is Elaine thanking me for a copy of my book (which I left for her on my second visit to her office, after publishing). The first visit I tell people about was BEFORE I published, during which visit, in her office, Elaine encouranged me to publish, telling me “I hope it goes”.

Again, a bitter ex-wife with her facts and dates mixed up (who didn’t even come into my life until eight years after my two visits to the R.S. Building in SLC took place), has only one agenda in mind….to slander my character. Apparently she’s not over me yet, as our divorce was just last May. She just can’t focus on anything that doesn’t have to do with my life. It’s kinda creepy. LIke being stalked.

I don’t think there are more than three people getting this post, as it was mostly commented on when created last March. So I got spend my time on something more worthwhile now.