Recovery Board  : RfM
Recovery from Mormonism (RfM) discussion forum. 
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In
Posted by: TheIrrationalShark ( )
Date: July 14, 2012 11:34PM

Is the church currently in possession of the "Urim and Thummim" or "seer stones"? If so, it would be insanely easy to not only prove that the stones work, but that Joseph Smith was, in fact, a prophet and that the Book of Mormon is the word of God. All they would have to do is publicly translate the Book of Mormon into foreign languages using the stones.

Even if they don't have the stones, couldn't they use divine inspiration? Surely translating via the power of God would be perfect, as oppossed to conventional translation methods. We wouldn't need Google Translate; the church could start a website that allows you to translate things using a virtual "urim and thummim" made by God Himself! We wouldn't need nearly as much missionary work to be done! People all around the world would hear about this, and it would, without a doubt, prove Mormonism true.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: forbiddencokedrinker ( )
Date: July 15, 2012 01:45AM

Do the use the same fake Shakespearean language in the other translations?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: TheIrrationalShark ( )
Date: July 15, 2012 06:58PM

I've wondered that myself...

Has anyone here read the Book of Mormon in a foreign language? If so, do they use the modern, standard language or do they use a more archaic version?

I bet Richard Packham would know...

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: RPackham ( )
Date: July 20, 2012 12:16AM

TheIrrationalShark Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Has anyone here read the Book of Mormon in a foreign language? If so, do they use the modern, standard language or do they use a more archaic version?
>
> I bet Richard Packham would know...

I can't speak for all of the translations, but it is my understanding that some of the 19th century translations into European languages did try to use archaic forms, but the more recent ones are more modern.

Many modern translations replace "and it came to pass" with an asterisk, and simply say in the introductory material that " * represents the phrase 'and it came to pass'"

(Those versions are much shorter, of course! :-) )

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: imaworkinonit ( )
Date: July 15, 2012 02:06AM

It was dark brown, and I think it was opaque (this was probably 10 years ago, so I can't remember).

We were already out of the church, so I already knew it was BS. But I couldn't believe they would actually put that thing on display, because it didn't fit the image I had grown up with of it being a glass thing, like a spectacle or something.

Yeah, if the thing worked, they could lend it out to help people translate to other languages. Yep. Right.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: presbyterian ( )
Date: July 15, 2012 05:55PM

I've wondered that myself. If Joseph Smith isn't here to write it, how can it be correct?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: CTRringturnsmyfingergreen ( )
Date: July 15, 2012 06:06PM

Don't you love how no "divine" instrument works in the present day, regardless of religion?

Options: ReplyQuote
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In


Screen Name: 
Your Email (optional): 
Subject: 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 ********   **    **  **     **  **     **  **     ** 
 **     **   **  **   **     **  **     **   **   **  
 **     **    ****    **     **  **     **    ** **   
 ********      **     **     **  *********     ***    
 **            **      **   **   **     **    ** **   
 **            **       ** **    **     **   **   **  
 **            **        ***     **     **  **     **