Replies

Since I do not know any of the original languages I have to rely on other people.

Me too; but, thank god, these 'other people' have had their hands on multiple sources of the copies of the original scriptures, written in Hebrew and Greek, to refer to.

I don't know how any non-English speaking folks can rely on a 'translation' of the Book of Mormon since there are NO manuscripts, or even pieces of any, to refer to.

The Book of Abraham that JS supposedly 'translated' has turned out to be a ____________ (supply your own descriptor here).

Take for example the FRENCH BoM.

Was it translated from the early BoM JS had printed or the later ones that had a lot of the error removed from them?

...since there are NO manuscripts, or even pieces of any, to refer to.

Well; not quite.

JS did come up with SOMETHING that he claimed was on the plates...

The "Caractors" are the only tangible evidence in existence related to Smith's story.

No gold plates, no brass plates, no peep stones, no Urim and Thummim...

only these "Caractors," not a single one of which is in the purported languages.

Smith's translation of the Caractors. According to Martin Harris (Joseph Smith - History, 1:64), "I went to the city of New York, and presented the characters which had been translated, with the translation thereof, to Professor Charles Anthon, a gentleman celebrated for his literary attainments. Professor Anthon stated that the translation was correct, more so than any he had before seen translated from the Egyptian. I then showed him those which were not yet translated,* and he said they were Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac, and Arabic; and he said they were true characters."

Speak right up now in all truthfulness. Isn't it revealing how Smith started out making a stab at creating believable "caractors" but quckly gave up and produced nothing but squiggles, ending up wih a series of nothing more than crude little scribbles? Yet Professor Anthon supposedly translated them!

*Harris must have had two or three pieces of paper with him—one with characters and a translation of them (on the same paper or a separate one) and one with untranslated characters—quite likely the "Caractors." Some Mormon "scholars" have gone out on a limb, sawed it off, and knocked themselves out trying to translate from these true Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac, and Arabic characters a segment that would correspond with a verse from 1 Nephi.

Modern-day experts in Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac, and Arabic. In 1829, any knowledge of these languages possessed by U.S. scholars would have been rudimentary at best. Expertise in them has vastly improved since then. So go ahead, do it. Get any modern expert in these languages to identify which of these "Caractors" are Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac and Arabic. Better still, accept the claim of Mormon apologists that Anthon did indeed so testify and that his appraisal of the Caractors was correct. (Op. cit, pp. 73-75)

Save your money! Samples of Assyriac/Aramaic and Arabic writing:

What say you? Which of Smith's "Caractors" resemble the Assyriac and Arabic ones? No need to pay experts for their analysis. A child could accurately check this out. These writing systems have remained constant for well over 3000 years.

However; it appears that JS did come up with the two button mouse and the four input NAND gate.

There are two and three of them in the picture.

Thank you fou showing how hard it is to keep information correct with only one layer of being copied.
It just points out how much harder it is working from copies of copies of copies, even without betng translated from the language of the original documents.