Your point falls a bit short, the BofM does not claim to be a perfect book, just the most perfect book. That implies imperfections. It is certainly much closer to the original author's version than the Bible. Of course, we don't have the original copies of the Bible manuscripts, not even copies of the original copies, nor the even copies of those copies.
put to bed the mormon “scribal error” excuse
No can do. Again your point falls short. What you are providing is the recollection of the scribes on how the text was transmitted to them. I submit this is only speculation on their part on how the translation, as opposed to the transmission, took place. You did not provide an account by Joseph Smith on how the translation was accomplished, because there is none available. Also, not every word was spelled out, just names the first time they were transmitted to the scribe.
As a prophet, Joseph certainly had the inspiration to make any corrections to the BofM, and he did.
For more on that I would refer you to: "The Parallel Book of Mormon"
A prophet by definition was getting information directly from God and the idea of having to revise info direct from God involves some kind of a breakdown in logic.
Worse, there is every reason to believe that the last real prophet died some time prior to Alexander. The first paragraph of the book of Romans notes that God had spoken to Jewish ancestors in times long distant (to the author of the book of Romans) but that in these later times (the age of Christ) God had sent his son directly to commune with humankind and that supports Julian Jaynes' claim that all such artifacts of the ancient paradigm for the human mind had passed out of existence somewhere around the time of Zechariah.
this is laughable at face value. 4000 changes to a document written in 1830's. Since there are no gold plates to examine, and according to mormon history, the hand written extant first edition 'translations' should be the most perfect. You admit they are not. Isn't the mormon god significant enought to get it right the first time?
No can do. Again your point falls short. What you are providing is the recollection of the scribes on how the text was transmitted to them. I submit this is only speculation on their part on how the translation, as opposed to the transmission, took place.
Ah, good 'ol mormon cognative dissonance. The testimony of the scribes (particularly those who are also the 'witnessess') is only speculation. LOL, how can they speculate on what they 'participated' in, relating their first hand interaction with smith.
You did not provide an account by Joseph Smith on how the translation was accomplished, because there is none available.
I'll let LDS apologist Stephen Ricks answer:
"His reticence was probably well justified and may have been due to the inordinate interest which some of the early Saints had shown in the seer stone or to the negative and sometimes bitter reactions he encountered when he had reported some of his sacred experiences to others."
Again, divination used - NOT translation.
Also, not every word was spelled out, just names the first time they were transmitted to the scribe.
Again, I would refer you to the first hand account by mormon witness Whitmer, endorsed by Elder Nelson previous post.
As a prophet, Joseph certainly had the inspiration to make any corrections to the BofM, and he did.
Then he failed BY THE POWER OF GOD to 'translate it correctly the first time. That does not lend credability to his credentials as a real prophet.