You may be disappointed to hear that the second had quotes about the method of translation by Martin Harris, David Whitmer and Emma Smith, are not correct. How do I know? They are second hand quotes and Martin, David and Emma never saw the translation process. Maybe they saw a hat or a peep stone Joseph owned, but they never saw the breastplate, the spectacles or the gold plates during the time of translation. They never even say the words on the peep stone did they?
THE 2 QUOTES THAT SHOULD STAND ALONE
-1- “In the Wentworth Letter, the Prophet wrote: “With the records was found a curious instrument, which the ancients called “Urim and Thummim,” which consisted of two transparent stones set in the rim of a bow fastened to a breast plate. Through the medium of the Urim and Thummim I translated the record by the gift and power of God” (History of the Church, 4:537).
-2- In the October 1834 Messenger and Advocate [the Church newspaper in Kirtland, Ohio], Oliver Cowdery wrote: “These were days never to be forgotten to sit under the sound of a voice dictated by the inspiration of heaven, awakened the utmost gratitude of this bosom! Day after day I continued, uninterrupted, to write from his mouth, as he translated, with the Urim and Thummim, or, as the Nephites would have said, ‘Interpreters,’ the history or record called ‘The Book of Mormon’” (Messenger and Advocate, 1:14; Also known as Letter I Oliver Cowdery to William W. Phelps, 7 September 1834). Here is more Scriptural Evidence that Joseph used the Interpreters or Urim and Thummim or Spectacles. Not a Stone in a Hat! See JSH 1:35,52,62,75*; Mosiah 28:13, 20; Ether 3:22-23; 4:5; Alma 37:21, 24-25
I believe Scripture below, not the opinions of David, Martin and Emma
Book of Mormon “Hard Evidence” – Proper Translation Scriptures
1- ” He said there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang. He also said that the fulness of the everlasting Gospel was contained in it, as delivered by the Savior to the ancient inhabitants; Also, that there were two stones in silver bows—and these stones, fastened to a breastplate, constituted what is called the Urim and Thummim—deposited with the plates; and the possession and use of these stones were what constituted “seers” in ancient or former times; and that God had prepared them or the purpose of translating the book.” (Joseph Smith—History 1:34–35) 2- I looked in, and there indeed did I behold the plates, the Urim and Thummim, and the breastplate, as stated by the messenger. The box in which they lay was formed by laying stones together in some kind of cement. In the bottom of the box were laid two stones crossways of the box, and on these stones lay the plates and the other things with them.: JSH 1:52 3- “I commenced copying the characters off the plates. I copied a considerable number of them, and by means of the Urim and Thummim I translated some of them, which I did between the time I arrived at the house of my wife’s father, in the month of December, and the February following.” JSH 1:62 4- Joseph Smith said, “I inquired of the Lord through the Urim and Thummim and received from him the following.” (Note: See the preface to the Doctrine and Covenants 3,6,7,11,14,15,16,17) (History of the Church V.1p.45) 5- “I continued to translate, and he [Oliver Cowdery] to write, with little cessation, during which time we received several revelations. A difference of opinion arising between us about the account of John the Apostle, mentioned in the New Testament, as to whether he died or continued to live, we mutually agreed to settle it by the Urim and Thummim.” (History of the Church, 1:35–36.) 6- “These were days never to be forgotten—to sit under the sound of a voice dictated by the inspiration of heaven, awakened the utmost gratitude of this bosom! Day after day I continued, uninterrupted, to write from his mouth, as he translated with the Urim and Thummim, or, as the Nephites would have said, ‘Interpreters,’ the history or record called ‘The Book of Mormon.’ JSH 1:75* 7- “And now he translated them by the means of those two stones which were fastened into the two rims of a bow…” Mosiah 28:13“And whosoever has these things is called seer, after the manner of old times.” Mosiah 28:16 “And now, as I said unto you, that after king Mosiah had done these things, he took the plates of brass, and all the things which he had kept, and conferred them upon Alma, who was the son of Alma; yea, all the records, and also the interpreters, and conferred them upon him, and commanded him that he should keep and preserve them, and also keep a record of the people, handing them down from one generation to another, even as they had been handed down from the time that Lehi left Jerusalem.” Mosiah 28:20 8- “And now, I will speak unto you concerning those twenty-four plates, that ye keep them, that the mysteries and the works of darkness, and their secret works, or the secret works of those people who have been destroyed, may be made manifest unto this people; yea, all their murders, and robbings, and their plunderings, and all their wickedness and abominations, may be made manifest unto this people; yea, and that ye preserve these interpreters…“And now, my son, these interpreters were prepared that the word of God might be fulfilled, which he spake, saying: I will bring forth out of darkness unto light all their secret works and their abominations; and except they repent I will destroy them from off the face of the earth; and I will bring to light all their secrets and abominations, unto every nation that shall hereafter possess the land.” Alma 37:21, 24-25 (The word “Directors” was changed to “Interpreters” in the 1920 version & forward of the Book of Mormon) 9- “And behold, these two stones [different than the previous 16 stones]will I give unto thee, and ye shall seal them up also with the things which ye shall write. For behold, the language which ye shall write I have confounded; wherefore I will cause in my own due time that these stones [2 stones] shall magnify to the eyes of men these things which ye shall write.” Ether 3:23:24(Parenthesis Added) 10- Wherefore the Lord hath commanded me to write them; and I have written them. And he commanded me that I should seal them up; and he also hath commanded that I should seal up the interpretation thereof; wherefore I have sealed up the interpreters, according to the commandment of the Lord.”Ether 4:5 (Parenthesis added)
Book of Mormon Hard Evidence Proper Translation
Why do many Church Historians believe David, Martin and Emma more than scriptures?
Professor of Church Ancient Scripture, Craig Ostler says, “As to David Whitmer’s explanation, it should be remembered that he never looked into the Urim and Thummim nor translated anything. His testimony of how the Book of Mormon was translated is hearsay. Spanning a period of twenty years (1869-1888), some seventy recorded testimonies about the coming forth of the Book of Mormon claim David Whitmer as their source. Though there are a number of inconsistencies in these accounts, David Whitmer was repeatedly reported to have said that after the loss of the 116 pages, the Lord took both the plates and the Urim and Thummim from the Prophet, never to be returned. “Ostler Continues: [Both the Urim and Thummim and the Plates were returned. See Joseph Smith — History 1:60. Also, minutes of a meeting on April 17, 1853 represent Brigham Young as stating that “Joseph put the U.T. back with the plates when he had done translating.“ Brigham Young, minutes, 17 April 1853, in The Complete Discourses of Brigham Young, vol. 2, ed. Richard S. Van Wagoner (Salt Lake City: Smith-Pettit Foundation, 2009)]. Brother Ostler continues, “In their stead, David Whitmer maintained, the Prophet used an oval-shaped, chocolate-colored seer stone slightly larger than an egg. Thus, everything we have in the Book of Mormon, according to Mr. Whitmer, was translated by placing the chocolate-colored stone in a hat into which Joseph would bury his head so as to close out the light. While doing so he could see “an oblong piece of parchment, on which the hieroglyphics would appear,” and below the ancient writing, the translation would be given in English. Joseph would then read this to Oliver Cowdery, who in turn would write it. If he did so correctly, the characters and the interpretation would disappear and be replaced by other characters with their interpretation. (Cook, David Whitmer Interviews, 115, 157-58). The Process of Translating the Book of Mormon by Joseph Fielding McConkie (Professor of Ancient Scripture, BYU) and Craig J. Ostler (Assistant Professor of Church History and Doctrine, BYU) Jonathan Neville said,
“We wonder, why do the revisionist Church historians prefer the stone-in-a-hat theory over the definitive, consistent explanations from Joseph and Oliver?
We can’t read minds, and so far as I know the intellectuals have not articulated the rationale for their preference, but it is deliberate, as we’ve just seen from the selection of quotations in the Gospel Topics Essay on Book of Mormon Translation. One possibility is that the revisionist historians think they have discovered something in Church history that was “covered up” for decades. In the interest of openness, they have brought forth the stone-in-a-hat theory. That makes sense from an academic perspective. To get a PhD and have a career, historians have to contribute something new to their field, and because the prophets have consistently taught that Joseph translated with the Urim and Thummim, the idea that Joseph “really” used a seer stone instead would have appeal to an academic. The problem, of course, is that the stone-in-a-hat theory is 185 years old. Those familiar with Church history have always known about Mormonism Unvailed. Rather than contributing something new, these revisionist historians have resurrected an old, discredited claim made by critics to undermine faith in the accounts of Joseph and Oliver… BTW, if Church historians want to write about something new, I recommend that they republish President Cowdery’s eight historical essays in the Ensign so members of the Church can see how he and Joseph responded to the critics. Those eight essays provide a far more effective response to the critics than the current Gospel Topics Essays that largely embrace the arguments of the critics instead of refute them. Another possible rationale for the stone-in-a-hat theory is good old academic arrogance. There’s nothing an intellectual enjoys more than showing that he/she knows more than the prophets. IOW, the revisionist historians have “discovered” that the teachings of the prophets about the translation, consistently taught for 180 years, were “incomplete” or even “misleading.” Among other things, the historians usually cite statements from Emma Smith, David Whitmer, and Martin Harris, which I’ve discussed in detail in my upcoming book on the translation.” Jonathan Neville http://www.moronisamerica.com/peep-stones-vs-urim-and-thummim-part-2/
