FAIR - Contribuciones del usuario [es]

Discusión:Página principal

2007-11-17T08:19:44Z

AndresSilva: /* ¿Por qué es que la Biblia del Rey Santiago y el Libro de Mormón se parecen entonces? */

{draft}}
==La acusación==
Ciertos pasajes de la Biblia (por ejemplo, partes de Isaías) fueron incluidos en el Libro de Mormón. Sin embargo, estos mismos pasajes fueron revisados para realizar la Traducción de José Smith de la Biblia. En algunos casos, estos pasajes no fueron escritos de forma idéntica. Los críticos afirman que si TJS (Traducción de la Biblia de José Smith) es una traducción precisa, entonces correspondería al texto más "puro" que tenían los nefitas.


==La respuesta==
===¿Por qué es que el Libro de Mormón se parece tanto a la Biblia del Rey Santiago?===

Desde hace mucho tiempo que los críticos han adoptado la posición cínica de que José Smith simplemente copió la Biblia del Rey Santiago en ciertos pasajes, como por ejemplo los de Isaías. Incluso miembros de la Iglesia has presumido que esta similitud entre estos textos demuestra que José Smith simplemente abrió la Biblia y copio capítulos que él reconoció provenían de la Biblia a medida que traducía material de las planchas de oro.

====José Smith copio el texto de la Biblia del Rey Santiago?====
Existen varios problemas con esta idea.

1) Los testigos del proceso de la traducción indican unánimemente que José Smith tenia libros, manuscritos, o notas a las que referirse cuando traducía. En una entrevista Emma recuerda:

:Sé que el Mormonismo es la verdad; y creo que la iglesia fue establecido por media de guía divina. Tengo completa fe en ella. Mientras escribía para (José) día tras día, generalmente sentada cerca de él, él sentado con su cara metida en su sombrero, con la piedra adentro, y dictando hora tras hora sin nada que nos separa.

:Pregunta. ¿No tenía algún libro o manuscrito del cual leer, o él le dictaba?
:Respuesta. No tenía ni libro ni manuscrito del cual leer.

:Pregunta. ¿Pudo haber tenido algo de donde leer y usted no lo sabia?
:Respuesta. Si acaso el tenía tal cosa entonces él no pudo haberlo ocultado de mí.{{ref|emma1}}

Martín Harris también menciono que José traducía con su cara metida en su sombrero para poder ver las piedras visoras/urim y tummim. Esta situación hace imposible el hecho de que él se refiriera a la Biblia o notas:

:José Smith ponía las piedras en su sombrero, y su cara en el sombrero, poniendo este muy cerca de su cara para cubrir la luz; y en la oscuridad la luz espiritual brillaba...{{ref|harris1}}

2) Es incierto si acaso José Smith tenía una Biblia "propia" durante el proceso de traducción del Libro de Mormón. Más tarde, él junto a Oliver Cowdery compraron una Biblia, lo que sugiere (sin olvidar la difícil situación económica de José Smith) que él no tenía una Biblia propia desde antes.{{ref|roper1}}

3) Tampoco es claro si José Smith tenía un vasto conocimiento de la Biblia al momento de la traducción del Libro de Mormón. Parece bastante improbable que él hubiera reconocido pasajes de Isaías por ejemplo, si se hubiera encontrado con ellos en las planchas. Emma Smith comenta:

:Cuando mi esposo traducía el Libro de Mormón, yo escribí parte de él, a medida que él dictaba cada oración, palabra por palabra, y cuando se encontraba con nombres propios los cuales no podía pronunciar, o palabras muy largas, él las deletreaba, y mientras yo las escribía, si yo cometía algún error ortográfico, él me detenía para corregir la ortografía, a pesar de que era imposible para él ver como yo estaba escribiendo las palabras. .?. . Cuando él se detenía por cualquier razón que fuera, él empezaba nuevamente, y comenzaba desde donde se había quedado sin tambalear, y una vez mientras estaba traduciendo repentinamente se detuvo, pálido como una hoja blanca, y me dijo, "Emma, Jerusalén tenía muros alrededor?" le dije que "Sí," él dijo, "Oh! pensé que yo me había engañado." Él tenia un conocimiento tan limitado de la historia en aquel entonces que ni siquiera sabía que Jerusalén estaba rodeada de muros.{{ref|emma2}}

Emma también comento que

:José Smith no podía escribir o dictar una carta coherente y bien escrita; que mas queda para pensar en cuanto al Libro de Mormón. Y, a pesar de que yo formé parte de lo que sucedió, . . . me parece maravilloso, "una obra y un prodigio," como a cualquier otra persona.{{ref|emma3}}

Y si José nada más invento la historia del Libro de Mormón, el escogió algunos de los pasajes mas oscuros y difíciles de la Biblia.

4) Si José Smith estaba falsificando el Libro de Mormón, ¿por qué incluyó pasajes de la Biblia? Evidentemente José era capaz de producir un libro vasto y complejo que no tuviera referencias a la Biblia. Si José Smith estaba tratando de montar una estafa ¿por qué entonces incluyó citas casi copiadas del libro (la Biblia del Rey Santiago) con la cual su audiencia estaba familiarizada?

====¿Por qué es que la Biblia del Rey Santiago y el Libro de Mormón se parecen entonces?====

Incluso traductores profesionales a veces copian una traducción previa si esta sirve el propósito de su traducción. Por ejemplo, el descubrimiento de los Rollos del Mar Muerto (DSS en Ingles) proveyó muchos textos desconocidos a los textos Bíblicos. Sin embargo, en algunas traducciones de los DSS, aproximadamente el 90% son simplemente copias de la Biblia del Rey Santiago.

!Obviamente que no se supone que debamos creer que los traductores de los Rollos del Mar Muerto se volvieron a los modismos de la Biblia del Rey Santiago que de pronto resulto en un texto casi identico! De hecho, ellos si copiaron, sin ninguna verguenza la KJV, exepto en aquellas partes en que los Rollos eran substancianlemente diferentes de "mnauscritos Hebreos ya conocidos."{{ref|DSS1}} - ''need ref!!''

Por que sucedio asi? Es debido a que la traduccion de los DSS tiene el proposito de enfatizar las diferencias entre los manuscritos recientemente descubiertos y aquellos a los que los eruditos ya tenian acceso. Asi, la traduccion de la Biblia del Rey Santiago es usada para indicar aquellas secciones en las que los manuscritos de los DSS que ya se conocen tienen diferencias.

Esto no quiere decir que no hay alguna manera mejor para interpretar el texto de la Biblia; pero, pdoria ser contraproducente ya que el comite de los DSS ha tomado mucho tiempo en mejorar la traduccion basada en la Biblia del Rey Santiago. El lector que no tiene acceso a los manuscritos originales nuca podra estar seguro si la diferencia entre la traduccion de los DSS y la traduccion de la Biblia del Rey Santiago representa una verdadera diferencia en los DSS, o simplementee la decision que tomaron los traductores de mejorar su traduccion de la Biblia del Rey Santiago.

La situacion con el Libro de Mormon es analoga. Por ejemplo, un gran parte de los escritos a los cuales los Nefitas tenian acceso no debieron haber sido significativamente diferentes a los escritos Hebreos usados en las traducciones de la Biblia. Las diferencias entre la Biblia del Rey Santiago y el Libro de Mormon enfatizan las areas en las que habian "significativas" diferencias "teologicas" aentre las versiones Nefita y Masoretica, desde el cual la Biblia fue traducida. Existen otras areas en las que podemos asumir esencialmente de la misma manera. Si uno quiere tener una traduccion que sea mejor o mas clara de algun pasaje que sea identico en el Libro de Mormon y la Biblia del Rey Santiago, uno tendria solamente que dirigirse a los manuscritos originales disponibles para los todos los eruditos. El hecho de basar el texto en la Biblia del Rey Santiago hace que el lector se enfoque en las clarificaciones que son importantes, que no es lo mismo que traducir todo desde cero, y distraer al lector con diferencias que solo tienen que ver con un asunto de preferencia del traductor.

===Why is the JST different from the Book of Mormon?===

The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible is not, as some members have presumed, simply a restoration of lost Biblical text or an improvement on the translation of known text. Rather, the JST also involves harmonization of doctrinal concepts, commentary and elaboration on the Biblical text, and explanations to clarify points of importance to the modern reader. (See main article on the [[Joseph_Smith_Translation_as_a_restoration_of_the_original_Bible_text|nature of the JST]] for a more detailed discussion.)

Thus, the Book of Mormon is likely a relatively "tight" translation of the Nephite records, with the focus on the important differences between the Nephite textual tradition and the Masoretic text.

By contrast, the JST comes from a more prophetically mature and sophisticated Joseph Smith, and provides doctrinal expansion based upon additional revelation, experience, and understanding.

It is important to remember that Joseph did not consider one 'translation' of anything to be perfect or 'the final word.' Joseph had indicated that Moroni quoted Malachi to him using different wording than the KJV (See [http://scriptures.lds.org/js_h/1/36#39 Joseph Smith History 1:36–39]). However, when Joseph quoted the same passage years later in a discussion about vicarious baptism for the dead, he said:

:I might have rendered a plainer translation to this, but it is sufficiently plain to suit my purpose as it stands. It is sufficient to know, in this case, that the earth will be smitten with a curse unless there is a welding clink of some kind or other between the fathers and the children, upon some subject or other-and behold what is that subject? It is the baptism. for the dead.([http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/128/18#18 D&C 128:18].)

Thus, to Joseph, the adequacy of a translation depended upon the uses to which a given text will be employed. For one discussion, the KJV was adequate; for others, not. A key element of LDS theology is that living prophets are the primary instrument through which God continues to give knowledge and understanding to his children. Scriptures are neither inerrant, nor somehow "perfect," but are instead produced by [[Fallibility_of_prophets|fallible mortals]]. Despite this, because of current prophets and the revelation granted each individual, the writings of past prophets are sufficient to teach the principles essential for salvation. Additional revelation is sought and received as required.

===An Example===

There is a great example of this kind of difference in the Lord's prayer. Compare the following:

:And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil (Book of Mormon).
:And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil (KJV Bible).
:And ''suffer us not to be led into'' temptation, but deliver us from evil (JST Bible).

The JST changes the statement to passive voice whereas the KJV Bible and the Book of Mormon are in active voice. According to E. W. Bullinger, this particular scripture contains a Hebraism, namely, "active verbs were used by the Hebrews to express not the doing of the thing, but the permission of the thing which the agent is said do." Consequently, Bullinger interprets the passage this way: "Lead us not (i.e., suffer us not to be led) into temptation." {{ref|Bullinger}}

Adam Clarke agrees with Bullinger. He wrote this scripture means "'Bring not in,' or 'lead us not into.' (This is a mere Hebraism. God is said to do a thing which He only permits or suffers to be done)." {{ref|clarke}}

In Barnes' Notes on the New Testament we read the same interpretation. "This phrase then must be used in the sense of permitting. Do not suffer us or permit us, to be tempted to sin. In this it is implied that God 'has such control over us and the tempter, as to save us from it if we call on him." {{ref|Barnes}}

When properly considered, this passage is an example of where the JST reading and the KJV/Book of Mormon are both correct. The KJV and Book of Mormon are literal interpretations while the JST is an interpretive translation that is also correct.

==Conclusion==

The purposes of the Book of Mormon and JST translations were not identical. The LDS do not believe in one fixed, inviolate, "perfect" rendering of a scripture or doctrinal concept. The Book of Mormon likely reflects differences between the Nephite textual tradition and the commonly known Biblical manuscripts. The JST is a harmonization, expansion, commentary, and clarification of doctrinally important points. Neither is intended as "the final word" on a given concept or passage—continuing revelation, adapted to the circumstances in which members of the Church find themselves, precludes such an intent.

Critics impose their own inerrantist assumptions on LDS scriptures, but such assumptions simply do not apply to LDS doctrine or scripture.

==Endnotes==
#{{note|emma1}} Joseph Smith III, “Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” ''Saints’ Advocate'' 2 (Oct. 1879): 51
#{{note|harris1}} David Whitmer, ''An Address to All Believers in Christ'' (Richmond, Mo.: n.p., 1887), 12; cited frequently, including by {{Ensign|author=Neal A. Maxwell|article=By the Gift and Power of God|date=January 1997|start=34|end=41}}{{link|url=http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1997.htm/ensign%20january%201997.htm/by%20the%20gift%20and%20power%20of%20god.htm}}
#{{note|roper1}}{{FR-8-2-13}}
#{{note|emma2}} Emma Smith to Edmund C. Briggs, "A Visit to Nauvoo in 1856," ''Journal of History'' 9 (January 1916): 454.
#{{note|emma3}} Joseph Smith III, “Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” ''Saints’ Advocate'' 2 (Oct. 1879): 51
#{{note|DSS1}} {{NeedCite}}
#{{note|Bullinger}}See E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech used In the Bible: Explained and Illustrated. [London: Messrs. Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1898], 819-824.
#{{note|clarke}} Adam Clark, Commentary an the Bible. Abridged by Ralph Earle. [Grand Rapids: Baker Book, 1979], 778.
#{{note|Barnes}} Barnes' Notes on the New Testament. Ed. by Ingram Cobbin [Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1980], 30.

==Further reading==

===FAIR wiki articles===
{{JSTWiki}}

===FAIR web site===
{{JSTFAIR}}

===External links===
{{JSTLinks}}

===Printed material===
{{JSTPrint}}

Discusión:Página principal

2007-11-16T09:45:39Z

AndresSilva: /* ¿Por qué es que la Biblia del Rey Santiago y el Libro de Mormón se parecen entonces? */

{draft}}
==La acusación==
Ciertos pasajes de la Biblia (por ejemplo, partes de Isaías) fueron incluidos en el Libro de Mormón. Sin embargo, estos mismos pasajes fueron revisados para realizar la Traducción de José Smith de la Biblia. En algunos casos, estos pasajes no fueron escritos de forma idéntica. Los críticos afirman que si TJS (Traducción de la Biblia de José Smith) es una traducción precisa, entonces correspondería al texto más "puro" que tenían los nefitas.


==La respuesta==
===¿Por qué es que el Libro de Mormón se parece tanto a la Biblia del Rey Santiago?===

Desde hace mucho tiempo que los críticos han adoptado la posición cínica de que José Smith simplemente copió la Biblia del Rey Santiago en ciertos pasajes, como por ejemplo los de Isaías. Incluso miembros de la Iglesia has presumido que esta similitud entre estos textos demuestra que José Smith simplemente abrió la Biblia y copio capítulos que él reconoció provenían de la Biblia a medida que traducía material de las planchas de oro.

====José Smith copio el texto de la Biblia del Rey Santiago?====
Existen varios problemas con esta idea.

1) Los testigos del proceso de la traducción indican unánimemente que José Smith tenia libros, manuscritos, o notas a las que referirse cuando traducía. En una entrevista Emma recuerda:

:Sé que el Mormonismo es la verdad; y creo que la iglesia fue establecido por media de guía divina. Tengo completa fe en ella. Mientras escribía para (José) día tras día, generalmente sentada cerca de él, él sentado con su cara metida en su sombrero, con la piedra adentro, y dictando hora tras hora sin nada que nos separa.

:Pregunta. ¿No tenía algún libro o manuscrito del cual leer, o él le dictaba?
:Respuesta. No tenía ni libro ni manuscrito del cual leer.

:Pregunta. ¿Pudo haber tenido algo de donde leer y usted no lo sabia?
:Respuesta. Si acaso el tenía tal cosa entonces él no pudo haberlo ocultado de mí.{{ref|emma1}}

Martín Harris también menciono que José traducía con su cara metida en su sombrero para poder ver las piedras visoras/urim y tummim. Esta situación hace imposible el hecho de que él se refiriera a la Biblia o notas:

:José Smith ponía las piedras en su sombrero, y su cara en el sombrero, poniendo este muy cerca de su cara para cubrir la luz; y en la oscuridad la luz espiritual brillaba...{{ref|harris1}}

2) Es incierto si acaso José Smith tenía una Biblia "propia" durante el proceso de traducción del Libro de Mormón. Más tarde, él junto a Oliver Cowdery compraron una Biblia, lo que sugiere (sin olvidar la difícil situación económica de José Smith) que él no tenía una Biblia propia desde antes.{{ref|roper1}}

3) Tampoco es claro si José Smith tenía un vasto conocimiento de la Biblia al momento de la traducción del Libro de Mormón. Parece bastante improbable que él hubiera reconocido pasajes de Isaías por ejemplo, si se hubiera encontrado con ellos en las planchas. Emma Smith comenta:

:Cuando mi esposo traducía el Libro de Mormón, yo escribí parte de él, a medida que él dictaba cada oración, palabra por palabra, y cuando se encontraba con nombres propios los cuales no podía pronunciar, o palabras muy largas, él las deletreaba, y mientras yo las escribía, si yo cometía algún error ortográfico, él me detenía para corregir la ortografía, a pesar de que era imposible para él ver como yo estaba escribiendo las palabras. .?. . Cuando él se detenía por cualquier razón que fuera, él empezaba nuevamente, y comenzaba desde donde se había quedado sin tambalear, y una vez mientras estaba traduciendo repentinamente se detuvo, pálido como una hoja blanca, y me dijo, "Emma, Jerusalén tenía muros alrededor?" le dije que "Sí," él dijo, "Oh! pensé que yo me había engañado." Él tenia un conocimiento tan limitado de la historia en aquel entonces que ni siquiera sabía que Jerusalén estaba rodeada de muros.{{ref|emma2}}

Emma también comento que

:José Smith no podía escribir o dictar una carta coherente y bien escrita; que mas queda para pensar en cuanto al Libro de Mormón. Y, a pesar de que yo formé parte de lo que sucedió, . . . me parece maravilloso, "una obra y un prodigio," como a cualquier otra persona.{{ref|emma3}}

Y si José nada más invento la historia del Libro de Mormón, el escogió algunos de los pasajes mas oscuros y difíciles de la Biblia.

4) Si José Smith estaba falsificando el Libro de Mormón, ¿por qué incluyó pasajes de la Biblia? Evidentemente José era capaz de producir un libro vasto y complejo que no tuviera referencias a la Biblia. Si José Smith estaba tratando de montar una estafa ¿por qué entonces incluyó citas casi copiadas del libro (la Biblia del Rey Santiago) con la cual su audiencia estaba familiarizada?

====¿Por qué es que la Biblia del Rey Santiago y el Libro de Mormón se parecen entonces?====

Incluso traductores profesionales a veces copian una traducción previa si esta sirve el propósito de su traducción. Por ejemplo, el descubrimiento de los Rollos del Mar Muerto (DSS en Ingles) proveyó muchos textos desconocidos a los textos Bíblicos. Sin embargo, en algunas traducciones de los DSS, aproximadamente el 90% son simplemente copias de la Biblia del Rey Santiago.

!Obviamente que no se supone que debamos creer que los traductores de los Rollos del Mar Muerto se volvieron a los modismos de la Biblia del Rey Santiago que de pronto resulto en un texto casi identico! De hecho, ellos si copiaron, sin ninguna verguenza la KJV, exepto en aquellas partes en que los Rollos eran substancianlemente diferentes de "mnauscritos Hebreos ya conocidos."{{ref|DSS1}} - ''need ref!!''

Why was this done? Because, the purpose of the DSS translation is to highlight the differences between the newly discovered manuscripts and those to which scholars already had access. Thus, in areas where the DSS manuscripts agree with the Biblical texts that were already known, the KJV translation is used to indicate this.

This is not to argue that there may not be a better way to render the text than the KJV—but, it would be counterproductive for the DSS committee spent a lot of time improving on the KJV translation. A reader without access to the original manuscripts could then never be sure if a difference between the DSS translation and the KJV translation represented a true difference in the DSS, or simply the choice of the DSS translators to improve the KJV.

The situation with the Book of Mormon is likely analagous. For example, most of the text to which the Nephites had access would not have differed significantly from the Hebrew texts used in Bible translations. The differences in wording between the KJV and the Book of Mormon highlight the areas in which there were ''theologically significant'' differences between the Nephite versions and the Masoretic text, from which the Bible was translated. Other areas can be assumed to be essentially the same. If one wants an improved or clearer translation of a passage that is identical in the Book of Mormon and the KJV, one has only to go to the original manuscripts available to all scholars. Basing the text on the KJV focuses the reader on the important clarifications, as opposed to doing a new translation from scratch, and distracting the reader with many differences that might be due simply to translator preference.

===Why is the JST different from the Book of Mormon?===

The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible is not, as some members have presumed, simply a restoration of lost Biblical text or an improvement on the translation of known text. Rather, the JST also involves harmonization of doctrinal concepts, commentary and elaboration on the Biblical text, and explanations to clarify points of importance to the modern reader. (See main article on the [[Joseph_Smith_Translation_as_a_restoration_of_the_original_Bible_text|nature of the JST]] for a more detailed discussion.)

Thus, the Book of Mormon is likely a relatively "tight" translation of the Nephite records, with the focus on the important differences between the Nephite textual tradition and the Masoretic text.

By contrast, the JST comes from a more prophetically mature and sophisticated Joseph Smith, and provides doctrinal expansion based upon additional revelation, experience, and understanding.

It is important to remember that Joseph did not consider one 'translation' of anything to be perfect or 'the final word.' Joseph had indicated that Moroni quoted Malachi to him using different wording than the KJV (See [http://scriptures.lds.org/js_h/1/36#39 Joseph Smith History 1:36–39]). However, when Joseph quoted the same passage years later in a discussion about vicarious baptism for the dead, he said:

:I might have rendered a plainer translation to this, but it is sufficiently plain to suit my purpose as it stands. It is sufficient to know, in this case, that the earth will be smitten with a curse unless there is a welding clink of some kind or other between the fathers and the children, upon some subject or other-and behold what is that subject? It is the baptism. for the dead.([http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/128/18#18 D&C 128:18].)

Thus, to Joseph, the adequacy of a translation depended upon the uses to which a given text will be employed. For one discussion, the KJV was adequate; for others, not. A key element of LDS theology is that living prophets are the primary instrument through which God continues to give knowledge and understanding to his children. Scriptures are neither inerrant, nor somehow "perfect," but are instead produced by [[Fallibility_of_prophets|fallible mortals]]. Despite this, because of current prophets and the revelation granted each individual, the writings of past prophets are sufficient to teach the principles essential for salvation. Additional revelation is sought and received as required.

===An Example===

There is a great example of this kind of difference in the Lord's prayer. Compare the following:

:And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil (Book of Mormon).
:And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil (KJV Bible).
:And ''suffer us not to be led into'' temptation, but deliver us from evil (JST Bible).

The JST changes the statement to passive voice whereas the KJV Bible and the Book of Mormon are in active voice. According to E. W. Bullinger, this particular scripture contains a Hebraism, namely, "active verbs were used by the Hebrews to express not the doing of the thing, but the permission of the thing which the agent is said do." Consequently, Bullinger interprets the passage this way: "Lead us not (i.e., suffer us not to be led) into temptation." {{ref|Bullinger}}

Adam Clarke agrees with Bullinger. He wrote this scripture means "'Bring not in,' or 'lead us not into.' (This is a mere Hebraism. God is said to do a thing which He only permits or suffers to be done)." {{ref|clarke}}

In Barnes' Notes on the New Testament we read the same interpretation. "This phrase then must be used in the sense of permitting. Do not suffer us or permit us, to be tempted to sin. In this it is implied that God 'has such control over us and the tempter, as to save us from it if we call on him." {{ref|Barnes}}

When properly considered, this passage is an example of where the JST reading and the KJV/Book of Mormon are both correct. The KJV and Book of Mormon are literal interpretations while the JST is an interpretive translation that is also correct.

==Conclusion==

The purposes of the Book of Mormon and JST translations were not identical. The LDS do not believe in one fixed, inviolate, "perfect" rendering of a scripture or doctrinal concept. The Book of Mormon likely reflects differences between the Nephite textual tradition and the commonly known Biblical manuscripts. The JST is a harmonization, expansion, commentary, and clarification of doctrinally important points. Neither is intended as "the final word" on a given concept or passage—continuing revelation, adapted to the circumstances in which members of the Church find themselves, precludes such an intent.

Critics impose their own inerrantist assumptions on LDS scriptures, but such assumptions simply do not apply to LDS doctrine or scripture.

==Endnotes==
#{{note|emma1}} Joseph Smith III, “Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” ''Saints’ Advocate'' 2 (Oct. 1879): 51
#{{note|harris1}} David Whitmer, ''An Address to All Believers in Christ'' (Richmond, Mo.: n.p., 1887), 12; cited frequently, including by {{Ensign|author=Neal A. Maxwell|article=By the Gift and Power of God|date=January 1997|start=34|end=41}}{{link|url=http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1997.htm/ensign%20january%201997.htm/by%20the%20gift%20and%20power%20of%20god.htm}}
#{{note|roper1}}{{FR-8-2-13}}
#{{note|emma2}} Emma Smith to Edmund C. Briggs, "A Visit to Nauvoo in 1856," ''Journal of History'' 9 (January 1916): 454.
#{{note|emma3}} Joseph Smith III, “Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” ''Saints’ Advocate'' 2 (Oct. 1879): 51
#{{note|DSS1}} {{NeedCite}}
#{{note|Bullinger}}See E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech used In the Bible: Explained and Illustrated. [London: Messrs. Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1898], 819-824.
#{{note|clarke}} Adam Clark, Commentary an the Bible. Abridged by Ralph Earle. [Grand Rapids: Baker Book, 1979], 778.
#{{note|Barnes}} Barnes' Notes on the New Testament. Ed. by Ingram Cobbin [Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1980], 30.

==Further reading==

===FAIR wiki articles===
{{JSTWiki}}

===FAIR web site===
{{JSTFAIR}}

===External links===
{{JSTLinks}}

===Printed material===
{{JSTPrint}}

Discusión:Página principal

2007-11-16T09:44:16Z

AndresSilva: /* ¿Por qué es que la Biblia del Rey Santiago y el Libro de Mormón se parecen entonces? */

{draft}}
==La acusación==
Ciertos pasajes de la Biblia (por ejemplo, partes de Isaías) fueron incluidos en el Libro de Mormón. Sin embargo, estos mismos pasajes fueron revisados para realizar la Traducción de José Smith de la Biblia. En algunos casos, estos pasajes no fueron escritos de forma idéntica. Los críticos afirman que si TJS (Traducción de la Biblia de José Smith) es una traducción precisa, entonces correspondería al texto más "puro" que tenían los nefitas.


==La respuesta==
===¿Por qué es que el Libro de Mormón se parece tanto a la Biblia del Rey Santiago?===

Desde hace mucho tiempo que los críticos han adoptado la posición cínica de que José Smith simplemente copió la Biblia del Rey Santiago en ciertos pasajes, como por ejemplo los de Isaías. Incluso miembros de la Iglesia has presumido que esta similitud entre estos textos demuestra que José Smith simplemente abrió la Biblia y copio capítulos que él reconoció provenían de la Biblia a medida que traducía material de las planchas de oro.

====José Smith copio el texto de la Biblia del Rey Santiago?====
Existen varios problemas con esta idea.

1) Los testigos del proceso de la traducción indican unánimemente que José Smith tenia libros, manuscritos, o notas a las que referirse cuando traducía. En una entrevista Emma recuerda:

:Sé que el Mormonismo es la verdad; y creo que la iglesia fue establecido por media de guía divina. Tengo completa fe en ella. Mientras escribía para (José) día tras día, generalmente sentada cerca de él, él sentado con su cara metida en su sombrero, con la piedra adentro, y dictando hora tras hora sin nada que nos separa.

:Pregunta. ¿No tenía algún libro o manuscrito del cual leer, o él le dictaba?
:Respuesta. No tenía ni libro ni manuscrito del cual leer.

:Pregunta. ¿Pudo haber tenido algo de donde leer y usted no lo sabia?
:Respuesta. Si acaso el tenía tal cosa entonces él no pudo haberlo ocultado de mí.{{ref|emma1}}

Martín Harris también menciono que José traducía con su cara metida en su sombrero para poder ver las piedras visoras/urim y tummim. Esta situación hace imposible el hecho de que él se refiriera a la Biblia o notas:

:José Smith ponía las piedras en su sombrero, y su cara en el sombrero, poniendo este muy cerca de su cara para cubrir la luz; y en la oscuridad la luz espiritual brillaba...{{ref|harris1}}

2) Es incierto si acaso José Smith tenía una Biblia "propia" durante el proceso de traducción del Libro de Mormón. Más tarde, él junto a Oliver Cowdery compraron una Biblia, lo que sugiere (sin olvidar la difícil situación económica de José Smith) que él no tenía una Biblia propia desde antes.{{ref|roper1}}

3) Tampoco es claro si José Smith tenía un vasto conocimiento de la Biblia al momento de la traducción del Libro de Mormón. Parece bastante improbable que él hubiera reconocido pasajes de Isaías por ejemplo, si se hubiera encontrado con ellos en las planchas. Emma Smith comenta:

:Cuando mi esposo traducía el Libro de Mormón, yo escribí parte de él, a medida que él dictaba cada oración, palabra por palabra, y cuando se encontraba con nombres propios los cuales no podía pronunciar, o palabras muy largas, él las deletreaba, y mientras yo las escribía, si yo cometía algún error ortográfico, él me detenía para corregir la ortografía, a pesar de que era imposible para él ver como yo estaba escribiendo las palabras. .?. . Cuando él se detenía por cualquier razón que fuera, él empezaba nuevamente, y comenzaba desde donde se había quedado sin tambalear, y una vez mientras estaba traduciendo repentinamente se detuvo, pálido como una hoja blanca, y me dijo, "Emma, Jerusalén tenía muros alrededor?" le dije que "Sí," él dijo, "Oh! pensé que yo me había engañado." Él tenia un conocimiento tan limitado de la historia en aquel entonces que ni siquiera sabía que Jerusalén estaba rodeada de muros.{{ref|emma2}}

Emma también comento que

:José Smith no podía escribir o dictar una carta coherente y bien escrita; que mas queda para pensar en cuanto al Libro de Mormón. Y, a pesar de que yo formé parte de lo que sucedió, . . . me parece maravilloso, "una obra y un prodigio," como a cualquier otra persona.{{ref|emma3}}

Y si José nada más invento la historia del Libro de Mormón, el escogió algunos de los pasajes mas oscuros y difíciles de la Biblia.

4) Si José Smith estaba falsificando el Libro de Mormón, ¿por qué incluyó pasajes de la Biblia? Evidentemente José era capaz de producir un libro vasto y complejo que no tuviera referencias a la Biblia. Si José Smith estaba tratando de montar una estafa ¿por qué entonces incluyó citas casi copiadas del libro (la Biblia del Rey Santiago) con la cual su audiencia estaba familiarizada?

====¿Por qué es que la Biblia del Rey Santiago y el Libro de Mormón se parecen entonces?====

Incluso traductores profesionales a veces copian una traducción previa si esta sirve el propósito de su traducción. Por ejemplo, el descubrimiento de los Rollos del Mar Muerto (DSS en Ingles) proveyó muchos textos desconocidos a los textos Bíblicos. Sin embargo, en algunas traducciones de los DSS, aproximadamente el 90% son simplemente copias de la Biblia del Rey Santiago.

!Por supuesto que no se supone que debamos creer que los traductores de los Rollos del Mar Muerto se volvieron a los modismos de la Biblia del Rey Santiago que de pronto resulto en un texto casi identico! De hecho, ellos si compiaron, sin ninguna verguenza la KJV, exepto en aquellas partes en que los Rollos eran substancianlemente diferentes de "mnauscritos Hebreos ya conocidos."{{ref|DSS1}} - ''need ref!!''

Why was this done? Because, the purpose of the DSS translation is to highlight the differences between the newly discovered manuscripts and those to which scholars already had access. Thus, in areas where the DSS manuscripts agree with the Biblical texts that were already known, the KJV translation is used to indicate this.

This is not to argue that there may not be a better way to render the text than the KJV—but, it would be counterproductive for the DSS committee spent a lot of time improving on the KJV translation. A reader without access to the original manuscripts could then never be sure if a difference between the DSS translation and the KJV translation represented a true difference in the DSS, or simply the choice of the DSS translators to improve the KJV.

The situation with the Book of Mormon is likely analagous. For example, most of the text to which the Nephites had access would not have differed significantly from the Hebrew texts used in Bible translations. The differences in wording between the KJV and the Book of Mormon highlight the areas in which there were ''theologically significant'' differences between the Nephite versions and the Masoretic text, from which the Bible was translated. Other areas can be assumed to be essentially the same. If one wants an improved or clearer translation of a passage that is identical in the Book of Mormon and the KJV, one has only to go to the original manuscripts available to all scholars. Basing the text on the KJV focuses the reader on the important clarifications, as opposed to doing a new translation from scratch, and distracting the reader with many differences that might be due simply to translator preference.

===Why is the JST different from the Book of Mormon?===

The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible is not, as some members have presumed, simply a restoration of lost Biblical text or an improvement on the translation of known text. Rather, the JST also involves harmonization of doctrinal concepts, commentary and elaboration on the Biblical text, and explanations to clarify points of importance to the modern reader. (See main article on the [[Joseph_Smith_Translation_as_a_restoration_of_the_original_Bible_text|nature of the JST]] for a more detailed discussion.)

Thus, the Book of Mormon is likely a relatively "tight" translation of the Nephite records, with the focus on the important differences between the Nephite textual tradition and the Masoretic text.

By contrast, the JST comes from a more prophetically mature and sophisticated Joseph Smith, and provides doctrinal expansion based upon additional revelation, experience, and understanding.

It is important to remember that Joseph did not consider one 'translation' of anything to be perfect or 'the final word.' Joseph had indicated that Moroni quoted Malachi to him using different wording than the KJV (See [http://scriptures.lds.org/js_h/1/36#39 Joseph Smith History 1:36–39]). However, when Joseph quoted the same passage years later in a discussion about vicarious baptism for the dead, he said:

:I might have rendered a plainer translation to this, but it is sufficiently plain to suit my purpose as it stands. It is sufficient to know, in this case, that the earth will be smitten with a curse unless there is a welding clink of some kind or other between the fathers and the children, upon some subject or other-and behold what is that subject? It is the baptism. for the dead.([http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/128/18#18 D&C 128:18].)

Thus, to Joseph, the adequacy of a translation depended upon the uses to which a given text will be employed. For one discussion, the KJV was adequate; for others, not. A key element of LDS theology is that living prophets are the primary instrument through which God continues to give knowledge and understanding to his children. Scriptures are neither inerrant, nor somehow "perfect," but are instead produced by [[Fallibility_of_prophets|fallible mortals]]. Despite this, because of current prophets and the revelation granted each individual, the writings of past prophets are sufficient to teach the principles essential for salvation. Additional revelation is sought and received as required.

===An Example===

There is a great example of this kind of difference in the Lord's prayer. Compare the following:

:And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil (Book of Mormon).
:And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil (KJV Bible).
:And ''suffer us not to be led into'' temptation, but deliver us from evil (JST Bible).

The JST changes the statement to passive voice whereas the KJV Bible and the Book of Mormon are in active voice. According to E. W. Bullinger, this particular scripture contains a Hebraism, namely, "active verbs were used by the Hebrews to express not the doing of the thing, but the permission of the thing which the agent is said do." Consequently, Bullinger interprets the passage this way: "Lead us not (i.e., suffer us not to be led) into temptation." {{ref|Bullinger}}

Adam Clarke agrees with Bullinger. He wrote this scripture means "'Bring not in,' or 'lead us not into.' (This is a mere Hebraism. God is said to do a thing which He only permits or suffers to be done)." {{ref|clarke}}

In Barnes' Notes on the New Testament we read the same interpretation. "This phrase then must be used in the sense of permitting. Do not suffer us or permit us, to be tempted to sin. In this it is implied that God 'has such control over us and the tempter, as to save us from it if we call on him." {{ref|Barnes}}

When properly considered, this passage is an example of where the JST reading and the KJV/Book of Mormon are both correct. The KJV and Book of Mormon are literal interpretations while the JST is an interpretive translation that is also correct.

==Conclusion==

The purposes of the Book of Mormon and JST translations were not identical. The LDS do not believe in one fixed, inviolate, "perfect" rendering of a scripture or doctrinal concept. The Book of Mormon likely reflects differences between the Nephite textual tradition and the commonly known Biblical manuscripts. The JST is a harmonization, expansion, commentary, and clarification of doctrinally important points. Neither is intended as "the final word" on a given concept or passage—continuing revelation, adapted to the circumstances in which members of the Church find themselves, precludes such an intent.

Critics impose their own inerrantist assumptions on LDS scriptures, but such assumptions simply do not apply to LDS doctrine or scripture.

==Endnotes==
#{{note|emma1}} Joseph Smith III, “Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” ''Saints’ Advocate'' 2 (Oct. 1879): 51
#{{note|harris1}} David Whitmer, ''An Address to All Believers in Christ'' (Richmond, Mo.: n.p., 1887), 12; cited frequently, including by {{Ensign|author=Neal A. Maxwell|article=By the Gift and Power of God|date=January 1997|start=34|end=41}}{{link|url=http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1997.htm/ensign%20january%201997.htm/by%20the%20gift%20and%20power%20of%20god.htm}}
#{{note|roper1}}{{FR-8-2-13}}
#{{note|emma2}} Emma Smith to Edmund C. Briggs, "A Visit to Nauvoo in 1856," ''Journal of History'' 9 (January 1916): 454.
#{{note|emma3}} Joseph Smith III, “Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” ''Saints’ Advocate'' 2 (Oct. 1879): 51
#{{note|DSS1}} {{NeedCite}}
#{{note|Bullinger}}See E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech used In the Bible: Explained and Illustrated. [London: Messrs. Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1898], 819-824.
#{{note|clarke}} Adam Clark, Commentary an the Bible. Abridged by Ralph Earle. [Grand Rapids: Baker Book, 1979], 778.
#{{note|Barnes}} Barnes' Notes on the New Testament. Ed. by Ingram Cobbin [Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1980], 30.

==Further reading==

===FAIR wiki articles===
{{JSTWiki}}

===FAIR web site===
{{JSTFAIR}}

===External links===
{{JSTLinks}}

===Printed material===
{{JSTPrint}}

Discusión:Página principal

2007-11-11T09:07:59Z

AndresSilva: /* Why then the KJV and Book of Mormon similarities? */

{draft}}
==La acusación==
Ciertos pasajes de la Biblia (por ejemplo, partes de Isaías) fueron incluidos en el Libro de Mormón. Sin embargo, estos mismos pasajes fueron revisados para realizar la Traducción de José Smith de la Biblia. En algunos casos, estos pasajes no fueron escritos de forma idéntica. Los críticos afirman que si TJS (Traducción de la Biblia de José Smith) es una traducción precisa, entonces correspondería al texto más "puro" que tenían los nefitas.


==La respuesta==
===¿Por qué es que el Libro de Mormón se parece tanto a la Biblia del Rey Santiago?===

Desde hace mucho tiempo que los críticos han adoptado la posición cínica de que José Smith simplemente copió la Biblia del Rey Santiago en ciertos pasajes, como por ejemplo los de Isaías. Incluso miembros de la Iglesia has presumido que esta similitud entre estos textos demuestra que José Smith simplemente abrió la Biblia y copio capítulos que él reconoció provenían de la Biblia a medida que traducía material de las planchas de oro.

====José Smith copio el texto de la Biblia del Rey Santiago?====
Existen varios problemas con esta idea.

1) Los testigos del proceso de la traducción indican unánimemente que José Smith tenia libros, manuscritos, o notas a las que referirse cuando traducía. En una entrevista Emma recuerda:

:Sé que el Mormonismo es la verdad; y creo que la iglesia fue establecido por media de guía divina. Tengo completa fe en ella. Mientras escribía para (José) día tras día, generalmente sentada cerca de él, él sentado con su cara metida en su sombrero, con la piedra adentro, y dictando hora tras hora sin nada que nos separa.

:Pregunta. ¿No tenía algún libro o manuscrito del cual leer, o él le dictaba?
:Respuesta. No tenía ni libro ni manuscrito del cual leer.

:Pregunta. ¿Pudo haber tenido algo de donde leer y usted no lo sabia?
:Respuesta. Si acaso el tenía tal cosa entonces él no pudo haberlo ocultado de mí.{{ref|emma1}}

Martín Harris también menciono que José traducía con su cara metida en su sombrero para poder ver las piedras visoras/urim y tummim. Esta situación hace imposible el hecho de que él se refiriera a la Biblia o notas:

:José Smith ponía las piedras en su sombrero, y su cara en el sombrero, poniendo este muy cerca de su cara para cubrir la luz; y en la oscuridad la luz espiritual brillaba...{{ref|harris1}}

2) Es incierto si acaso José Smith tenía una Biblia "propia" durante el proceso de traducción del Libro de Mormón. Más tarde, él junto a Oliver Cowdery compraron una Biblia, lo que sugiere (sin olvidar la difícil situación económica de José Smith) que él no tenía una Biblia propia desde antes.{{ref|roper1}}

3) Tampoco es claro si José Smith tenía un vasto conocimiento de la Biblia al momento de la traducción del Libro de Mormón. Parece bastante improbable que él hubiera reconocido pasajes de Isaías por ejemplo, si se hubiera encontrado con ellos en las planchas. Emma Smith comenta:

:Cuando mi esposo traducía el Libro de Mormón, yo escribí parte de él, a medida que él dictaba cada oración, palabra por palabra, y cuando se encontraba con nombres propios los cuales no podía pronunciar, o palabras muy largas, él las deletreaba, y mientras yo las escribía, si yo cometía algún error ortográfico, él me detenía para corregir la ortografía, a pesar de que era imposible para él ver como yo estaba escribiendo las palabras. .?. . Cuando él se detenía por cualquier razón que fuera, él empezaba nuevamente, y comenzaba desde donde se había quedado sin tambalear, y una vez mientras estaba traduciendo repentinamente se detuvo, pálido como una hoja blanca, y me dijo, "Emma, Jerusalén tenía muros alrededor?" le dije que "Sí," él dijo, "Oh! pensé que yo me había engañado." Él tenia un conocimiento tan limitado de la historia en aquel entonces que ni siquiera sabía que Jerusalén estaba rodeada de muros.{{ref|emma2}}

Emma también comento que

:José Smith no podía escribir o dictar una carta coherente y bien escrita; que mas queda para pensar en cuanto al Libro de Mormón. Y, a pesar de que yo formé parte de lo que sucedió, . . . me parece maravilloso, "una obra y un prodigio," como a cualquier otra persona.{{ref|emma3}}

Y si José nada más invento la historia del Libro de Mormón, el escogió algunos de los pasajes mas oscuros y difíciles de la Biblia.

4) Si José Smith estaba falsificando el Libro de Mormón, ¿por qué incluyó pasajes de la Biblia? Evidentemente José era capaz de producir un libro vasto y complejo que no tueviera referencias a la Biblia. Si José Smith estaba tratando de montar una estafa ¿por qué entonces incluyó citas casi copiadas del libro (la Biblia del Rey Santiago) con la cual su audiencia estaba familiarizada?

====Por uqe es que la Biblia del Rry Santiago y el Libro de Mormon se parencen entonces?====

Incluso traductores profesionales a veces copian una traduccion previa si esta sirve el proposito de su traduccion. Por ejemplo, el descubrimiento de los Rollos del Mar Muerto (DSS en Inles) proveyo muchos textos deconocidos a los textos Biblicos. Sin embargo, en algunas traducciones de los DSS, aproximdamente el 90% son simplemente copias de la Biblia del Rey Santiago.

Surely we are not expected to believe that the DSS translators dropped back into King James idiom and just happened to come up with a nearly identical text! They, in fact, unabashedly copied the KJV, except where the DSS texts were substantially different from ''already known Hebrew manuscripts''.{{ref|DSS1}} - ''need ref!!''

Why was this done? Because, the purpose of the DSS translation is to highlight the differences between the newly discovered manuscripts and those to which scholars already had access. Thus, in areas where the DSS manuscripts agree with the Biblical texts that were already known, the KJV translation is used to indicate this.

This is not to argue that there may not be a better way to render the text than the KJV—but, it would be counterproductive for the DSS committee spent a lot of time improving on the KJV translation. A reader without access to the original manuscripts could then never be sure if a difference between the DSS translation and the KJV translation represented a true difference in the DSS, or simply the choice of the DSS translators to improve the KJV.

The situation with the Book of Mormon is likely analagous. For example, most of the text to which the Nephites had access would not have differed significantly from the Hebrew texts used in Bible translations. The differences in wording between the KJV and the Book of Mormon highlight the areas in which there were ''theologically significant'' differences between the Nephite versions and the Masoretic text, from which the Bible was translated. Other areas can be assumed to be essentially the same. If one wants an improved or clearer translation of a passage that is identical in the Book of Mormon and the KJV, one has only to go to the original manuscripts available to all scholars. Basing the text on the KJV focuses the reader on the important clarifications, as opposed to doing a new translation from scratch, and distracting the reader with many differences that might be due simply to translator preference.

===Why is the JST different from the Book of Mormon?===

The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible is not, as some members have presumed, simply a restoration of lost Biblical text or an improvement on the translation of known text. Rather, the JST also involves harmonization of doctrinal concepts, commentary and elaboration on the Biblical text, and explanations to clarify points of importance to the modern reader. (See main article on the [[Joseph_Smith_Translation_as_a_restoration_of_the_original_Bible_text|nature of the JST]] for a more detailed discussion.)

Thus, the Book of Mormon is likely a relatively "tight" translation of the Nephite records, with the focus on the important differences between the Nephite textual tradition and the Masoretic text.

By contrast, the JST comes from a more prophetically mature and sophisticated Joseph Smith, and provides doctrinal expansion based upon additional revelation, experience, and understanding.

It is important to remember that Joseph did not consider one 'translation' of anything to be perfect or 'the final word.' Joseph had indicated that Moroni quoted Malachi to him using different wording than the KJV (See [http://scriptures.lds.org/js_h/1/36#39 Joseph Smith History 1:36–39]). However, when Joseph quoted the same passage years later in a discussion about vicarious baptism for the dead, he said:

:I might have rendered a plainer translation to this, but it is sufficiently plain to suit my purpose as it stands. It is sufficient to know, in this case, that the earth will be smitten with a curse unless there is a welding clink of some kind or other between the fathers and the children, upon some subject or other-and behold what is that subject? It is the baptism. for the dead.([http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/128/18#18 D&C 128:18].)

Thus, to Joseph, the adequacy of a translation depended upon the uses to which a given text will be employed. For one discussion, the KJV was adequate; for others, not. A key element of LDS theology is that living prophets are the primary instrument through which God continues to give knowledge and understanding to his children. Scriptures are neither inerrant, nor somehow "perfect," but are instead produced by [[Fallibility_of_prophets|fallible mortals]]. Despite this, because of current prophets and the revelation granted each individual, the writings of past prophets are sufficient to teach the principles essential for salvation. Additional revelation is sought and received as required.

===An Example===

There is a great example of this kind of difference in the Lord's prayer. Compare the following:

:And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil (Book of Mormon).
:And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil (KJV Bible).
:And ''suffer us not to be led into'' temptation, but deliver us from evil (JST Bible).

The JST changes the statement to passive voice whereas the KJV Bible and the Book of Mormon are in active voice. According to E. W. Bullinger, this particular scripture contains a Hebraism, namely, "active verbs were used by the Hebrews to express not the doing of the thing, but the permission of the thing which the agent is said do." Consequently, Bullinger interprets the passage this way: "Lead us not (i.e., suffer us not to be led) into temptation." {{ref|Bullinger}}

Adam Clarke agrees with Bullinger. He wrote this scripture means "'Bring not in,' or 'lead us not into.' (This is a mere Hebraism. God is said to do a thing which He only permits or suffers to be done)." {{ref|clarke}}

In Barnes' Notes on the New Testament we read the same interpretation. "This phrase then must be used in the sense of permitting. Do not suffer us or permit us, to be tempted to sin. In this it is implied that God 'has such control over us and the tempter, as to save us from it if we call on him." {{ref|Barnes}}

When properly considered, this passage is an example of where the JST reading and the KJV/Book of Mormon are both correct. The KJV and Book of Mormon are literal interpretations while the JST is an interpretive translation that is also correct.

==Conclusion==

The purposes of the Book of Mormon and JST translations were not identical. The LDS do not believe in one fixed, inviolate, "perfect" rendering of a scripture or doctrinal concept. The Book of Mormon likely reflects differences between the Nephite textual tradition and the commonly known Biblical manuscripts. The JST is a harmonization, expansion, commentary, and clarification of doctrinally important points. Neither is intended as "the final word" on a given concept or passage—continuing revelation, adapted to the circumstances in which members of the Church find themselves, precludes such an intent.

Critics impose their own inerrantist assumptions on LDS scriptures, but such assumptions simply do not apply to LDS doctrine or scripture.

==Endnotes==
#{{note|emma1}} Joseph Smith III, “Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” ''Saints’ Advocate'' 2 (Oct. 1879): 51
#{{note|harris1}} David Whitmer, ''An Address to All Believers in Christ'' (Richmond, Mo.: n.p., 1887), 12; cited frequently, including by {{Ensign|author=Neal A. Maxwell|article=By the Gift and Power of God|date=January 1997|start=34|end=41}}{{link|url=http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1997.htm/ensign%20january%201997.htm/by%20the%20gift%20and%20power%20of%20god.htm}}
#{{note|roper1}}{{FR-8-2-13}}
#{{note|emma2}} Emma Smith to Edmund C. Briggs, "A Visit to Nauvoo in 1856," ''Journal of History'' 9 (January 1916): 454.
#{{note|emma3}} Joseph Smith III, “Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” ''Saints’ Advocate'' 2 (Oct. 1879): 51
#{{note|DSS1}} {{NeedCite}}
#{{note|Bullinger}}See E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech used In the Bible: Explained and Illustrated. [London: Messrs. Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1898], 819-824.
#{{note|clarke}} Adam Clark, Commentary an the Bible. Abridged by Ralph Earle. [Grand Rapids: Baker Book, 1979], 778.
#{{note|Barnes}} Barnes' Notes on the New Testament. Ed. by Ingram Cobbin [Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1980], 30.

==Further reading==

===FAIR wiki articles===
{{JSTWiki}}

===FAIR web site===
{{JSTFAIR}}

===External links===
{{JSTLinks}}

===Printed material===
{{JSTPrint}}

Discusión:Página principal

2007-11-10T02:15:35Z

AndresSilva: /* José Smith copio el texto de la Biblia del Rey Santiago? */

{draft}}
==Criticas==
Ciertos pasajes de la Biblia (por ejemplo, partes de Isaías) fueron incluidos en el Libro de Mormón. Sin embargo, estos mismos pasajes fueron revisados para realizar la Traducción de José Smith de la Biblia. En algunos casos, estos pasajes no fueron escritos de forma idéntica. Los críticos afirman que si TJS (Traducción de la Biblia de José Smith) es una traducción precisa, entonces correspondería al texto más "puro" que tenían los nefitas.


==Respuesta==
===Por que es que el Libro de Mormón se parece tanto a la Biblia del Rey Santiago?===
Desde hace mucho tiempo que los críticos han adoptado la posición cínica de que José Smith simplemente copió la Biblia del Rey Santiago en ciertos pasajes, como por ejemplo los de Isaías. Incluso miembros de la Iglesia has presumido que esta similitud entre estos textos demuestra que José Smith simplemente abrió la Biblia y copio capítulos que él reconoció provenían de la Biblia a medida que traducía material de las planchas de oro.

====José Smith copio el texto de la Biblia del Rey Santiago?====
Existen varios problemas con esta idea.

1) Los testigos del proceso de la traducción indican unánimemente que José Smith tenia libros, manuscritos, o notas a las que referirse cuando traducía. En una entrevista Emma recuerda:

:Sé que el Mormonismo es la verdad; y creo que la iglesia fue establecido por media de guía divina. Tengo completa fe en ella. Mientras escribía para (José) día tras día, generalmente sentada cerca de él, él sentado con su cara metida en su sombrero, con la piedra adentro, y dictando hora tras hora sin nada que nos separa.

:Pregunta. ¿No tenía algún libro o manuscrito del cual leer, o él le dictaba?
:Respuesta. No tenía ni libro ni manuscrito del cual leer.

:Pregunta. ¿Pudo haber tenido algo de donde leer y usted no lo sabia?
:Respuesta. Si acaso el tenía tal cosa entonces él no pudo haberlo ocultado de mí.{{ref|emma1}}

Martín Harris también menciono que José traducía con su cara metida en su sombrero para poder ver las piedras visoras/urim y tummim. Esta situación hace imposible el hecho de que él se refiriera a la Biblia o notas:

:José Smith ponía las piedras en su sombrero, y su cara en el sombrero, poniendo este muy cerca de su cara para cubrir la luz; y en la oscuridad la luz espiritual brillaba...{{ref|harris1}}

2) Es incierto si acaso Jose Smith tenia una Biblia "propia" durante el proceso de traduccion del Libro de Mormon. Mas tarde, el junto a Oliver Cowdery compraron una Biblia, lo que sugiere (sin olvidar la dificil situacion economica de jose Smith) que el no tenia una Biblia propia desde antes.{{ref|roper1}}

3) Tampoco es claro si Jose Smith tenia un vasto conocimiento de la Biblia al momento de la traduccion del Libro de Mormon. Parece bstante improbable que el hubiera reconocido pasajes de Isaias por ejemplo, si se hubiera econtrado con ellos en las planchas. Emma Smith comenta:

:Cuando mi esposo traducia el Libro de Mormon, yo escribi parte de el, a medida que el dictaba cada oracion, palabra por palabra, y cuando se encontraba con nombres propios los cuales no podia pronunciar, o palabras muy largas, el las deletreaba, y mientras yo las escribia, si yo cometia algun error ortografico, el me detenia para corregir la ortografia, a pesar de que era imposible para el ver como yo estaba escribiendo las palabras. .?. . Cuando el se detenia por cualquier razon que fuera, el empezaba nuevamente, y comenzaba desde donde se habia quedado sin tambalear, y una vez mientras estaba traduciendo repentinamente se detuvo, palido como una hoja blanca, y me dijo, "Emma, Jerusalen tenia muros alrededor?" le dije que "Si," el dijo, "Oh! pense que me habian enganado." El tenia un conocimiento tan limitado de la historia en aquel entonces que ni siquiera sabia que Jerusalen estaba rodeada de muros.{{ref|emma2}}

Emma tambien comento que

:Jose Smith no podia ecribir o dictar una carta coherente y bien escrita; que mas queda para pensar en cuanto al Libro de Mormon. Y, a pesar de que yo forme parte de lo que sucedio, . . . me parece maravilloso, "una obra y un prodigio," como a cualquier otra persona.{{ref|emma3}}

Y si Jose nada mas invento la historia del Libro de Mormon, el escogio algunos de los pasajes mas ocuros y dificiles de la Biblia.

4) Si Jose Smith estaba falsificando el Libro de Mormon, por que incluyo pasajes de la Biblia? Evidentemente Jose era capaz de producir un libro vasto y complejo que no tueviera referencias a la Biblia. Si Jose Smith estaba tratando de montar una estafa por que entonces incluyo citas casi copiadas del libro (la Biblia del Rey Santiago) con el cual su audiencia estaba familiarizada?

====Why then the KJV and Book of Mormon similarities?====

Even academic translators sometimes copy a previous translation if it serves the purpose of their translation. For example, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) provided previously unknown texts for many Biblical writings. However, in some translations of the DSS, approximately 90% is simply copied from the KJV.

Surely we are not expected to believe that the DSS translators dropped back into King James idiom and just happened to come up with a nearly identical text! They, in fact, unabashedly copied the KJV, except where the DSS texts were substantially different from ''already known Hebrew manuscripts''.{{ref|DSS1}} - ''need ref!!''

Why was this done? Because, the purpose of the DSS translation is to highlight the differences between the newly discovered manuscripts and those to which scholars already had access. Thus, in areas where the DSS manuscripts agree with the Biblical texts that were already known, the KJV translation is used to indicate this.

This is not to argue that there may not be a better way to render the text than the KJV—but, it would be counterproductive for the DSS committee spent a lot of time improving on the KJV translation. A reader without access to the original manuscripts could then never be sure if a difference between the DSS translation and the KJV translation represented a true difference in the DSS, or simply the choice of the DSS translators to improve the KJV.

The situation with the Book of Mormon is likely analagous. For example, most of the text to which the Nephites had access would not have differed significantly from the Hebrew texts used in Bible translations. The differences in wording between the KJV and the Book of Mormon highlight the areas in which there were ''theologically significant'' differences between the Nephite versions and the Masoretic text, from which the Bible was translated. Other areas can be assumed to be essentially the same. If one wants an improved or clearer translation of a passage that is identical in the Book of Mormon and the KJV, one has only to go to the original manuscripts available to all scholars. Basing the text on the KJV focuses the reader on the important clarifications, as opposed to doing a new translation from scratch, and distracting the reader with many differences that might be due simply to translator preference.

===Why is the JST different from the Book of Mormon?===

The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible is not, as some members have presumed, simply a restoration of lost Biblical text or an improvement on the translation of known text. Rather, the JST also involves harmonization of doctrinal concepts, commentary and elaboration on the Biblical text, and explanations to clarify points of importance to the modern reader. (See main article on the [[Joseph_Smith_Translation_as_a_restoration_of_the_original_Bible_text|nature of the JST]] for a more detailed discussion.)

Thus, the Book of Mormon is likely a relatively "tight" translation of the Nephite records, with the focus on the important differences between the Nephite textual tradition and the Masoretic text.

By contrast, the JST comes from a more prophetically mature and sophisticated Joseph Smith, and provides doctrinal expansion based upon additional revelation, experience, and understanding.

It is important to remember that Joseph did not consider one 'translation' of anything to be perfect or 'the final word.' Joseph had indicated that Moroni quoted Malachi to him using different wording than the KJV (See [http://scriptures.lds.org/js_h/1/36#39 Joseph Smith History 1:36–39]). However, when Joseph quoted the same passage years later in a discussion about vicarious baptism for the dead, he said:

:I might have rendered a plainer translation to this, but it is sufficiently plain to suit my purpose as it stands. It is sufficient to know, in this case, that the earth will be smitten with a curse unless there is a welding clink of some kind or other between the fathers and the children, upon some subject or other-and behold what is that subject? It is the baptism. for the dead.([http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/128/18#18 D&C 128:18].)

Thus, to Joseph, the adequacy of a translation depended upon the uses to which a given text will be employed. For one discussion, the KJV was adequate; for others, not. A key element of LDS theology is that living prophets are the primary instrument through which God continues to give knowledge and understanding to his children. Scriptures are neither inerrant, nor somehow "perfect," but are instead produced by [[Fallibility_of_prophets|fallible mortals]]. Despite this, because of current prophets and the revelation granted each individual, the writings of past prophets are sufficient to teach the principles essential for salvation. Additional revelation is sought and received as required.

===An Example===

There is a great example of this kind of difference in the Lord's prayer. Compare the following:

:And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil (Book of Mormon).
:And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil (KJV Bible).
:And ''suffer us not to be led into'' temptation, but deliver us from evil (JST Bible).

The JST changes the statement to passive voice whereas the KJV Bible and the Book of Mormon are in active voice. According to E. W. Bullinger, this particular scripture contains a Hebraism, namely, "active verbs were used by the Hebrews to express not the doing of the thing, but the permission of the thing which the agent is said do." Consequently, Bullinger interprets the passage this way: "Lead us not (i.e., suffer us not to be led) into temptation." {{ref|Bullinger}}

Adam Clarke agrees with Bullinger. He wrote this scripture means "'Bring not in,' or 'lead us not into.' (This is a mere Hebraism. God is said to do a thing which He only permits or suffers to be done)." {{ref|clarke}}

In Barnes' Notes on the New Testament we read the same interpretation. "This phrase then must be used in the sense of permitting. Do not suffer us or permit us, to be tempted to sin. In this it is implied that God 'has such control over us and the tempter, as to save us from it if we call on him." {{ref|Barnes}}

When properly considered, this passage is an example of where the JST reading and the KJV/Book of Mormon are both correct. The KJV and Book of Mormon are literal interpretations while the JST is an interpretive translation that is also correct.

==Conclusion==

The purposes of the Book of Mormon and JST translations were not identical. The LDS do not believe in one fixed, inviolate, "perfect" rendering of a scripture or doctrinal concept. The Book of Mormon likely reflects differences between the Nephite textual tradition and the commonly known Biblical manuscripts. The JST is a harmonization, expansion, commentary, and clarification of doctrinally important points. Neither is intended as "the final word" on a given concept or passage—continuing revelation, adapted to the circumstances in which members of the Church find themselves, precludes such an intent.

Critics impose their own inerrantist assumptions on LDS scriptures, but such assumptions simply do not apply to LDS doctrine or scripture.

==Endnotes==
#{{note|emma1}} Joseph Smith III, “Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” ''Saints’ Advocate'' 2 (Oct. 1879): 51
#{{note|harris1}} David Whitmer, ''An Address to All Believers in Christ'' (Richmond, Mo.: n.p., 1887), 12; cited frequently, including by {{Ensign|author=Neal A. Maxwell|article=By the Gift and Power of God|date=January 1997|start=34|end=41}}{{link|url=http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1997.htm/ensign%20january%201997.htm/by%20the%20gift%20and%20power%20of%20god.htm}}
#{{note|roper1}}{{FR-8-2-13}}
#{{note|emma2}} Emma Smith to Edmund C. Briggs, "A Visit to Nauvoo in 1856," ''Journal of History'' 9 (January 1916): 454.
#{{note|emma3}} Joseph Smith III, “Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” ''Saints’ Advocate'' 2 (Oct. 1879): 51
#{{note|DSS1}} {{NeedCite}}
#{{note|Bullinger}}See E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech used In the Bible: Explained and Illustrated. [London: Messrs. Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1898], 819-824.
#{{note|clarke}} Adam Clark, Commentary an the Bible. Abridged by Ralph Earle. [Grand Rapids: Baker Book, 1979], 778.
#{{note|Barnes}} Barnes' Notes on the New Testament. Ed. by Ingram Cobbin [Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1980], 30.

==Further reading==

===FAIR wiki articles===
{{JSTWiki}}

===FAIR web site===
{{JSTFAIR}}

===External links===
{{JSTLinks}}

===Printed material===
{{JSTPrint}}

Discusión:Página principal

2007-11-09T19:37:53Z

AndresSilva: /* Jose Smith copio el texto de la Biblia del Rey Santiago? */

{{draft}}
==Criticas==
Ciertos pasajes de la Biblia (por ejemplo, partes de Isaias) fueron incluidas en el Libro de Mormon. SIn embargo, estos mismos pasajes fueron revisados para realizar la Traduaccion de Jose Smith de la Biblia. En algunos casos, estos pasajes no fueron escritos de forma identica. Los criticos afirman que si TJS (Traduccion de la Biblia de Jose Smith) es una traduccion precisa, entonces corresponderia al texto mas "puro" que tenian los Nefitas.


==Respuesta==
===Por que es que el Libro de Mormon se parece tanto a la Biblia del Rey Santiago?===
Desde hace mucho tiempo que los criticos hand adoptado la sinica posicion de que Jose Smith simplemente copio la Biblia del Rey Santiago en ciertos pasajes, como por ejemplo los de Isaias. Incluso miembros de la Iglesia has presumido que esta similitud entre estos textos demuestra que Jose Smith simplemente abrio la Biblia y copio capitulos que el reconicio provenian de la Biblia a medida que traducia material de las planchas de oro.

====Jose Smith copio el texto de la Biblia del Rey Santiago?====
Existen varios problemas con esta idea.

1) Los testigos del proceso de la traduccion indican unanimamente que Jose Smith tenia libros, manuscritos, o notas a las que referirse cuando traducia. En una entrevista Emma recuerda:

:Se que el Mormonismo es la verdad; y creo que la igleasia fue establecido por media de guia divina. Tengo completa fe en ella. Mientras escribia para (Jose) dia tras dia, generalmente sentada cerca de el, el sentado con su rostro metido en su sombrero, con la piedra adentro, y dictando hora tras hora sin nada que nos separa.

:''Pregunta. NO tenia algun libro o manuscrito del cual leer, or el le dictaba?''
:Respuesta. No tenia ni libro ni manuscrito del cual leer.

:''Pregunta. Pudo haber tenido algo de donde leer y usted no lo sabia?''
:Respuesta. Si acaso el tenia tal cosa entonces el lo oculto de mi.{{ref|emma1}}

Martin Harris tambien menciono que Jose traducia con su rostro metido en su sombrero para poder ver las piedras visoras/urim y tummim. Esta situacion hace imposible el hecho de que el se refiriera a la Biblia o notas:

:Jose Smith ponia las piedras en su sombrero, y su rostro en el sombrero, poniendo este muy cerca de su cara para cubrir la luz; y en la oscuridad la luz espiritual brillaba...{{ref|harris1}}

2) It is not clear that Joseph even ''owned'' a Bible during the Book of Mormon translation. He and Oliver Cowdery later purchased a Bible, which suggests (given Joseph's strained financial situation) that he did not already own one.{{ref|roper1}}

3) It is not clear that Joseph's Biblical knowledge was at all broad during the Book of Mormon translation. It seems unlikely that he would have recognized, say, Isaiah, had he encountered it on the plates. Recalled Emma Smith:

:When my husband was translating the Book of Mormon, I wrote a part of it, as he dictated each sentence, word for word, and when he came to proper names he could not pronounce, or long words, he spelled them out, and while I was writing them, if I made a mistake in spelling, he would stop me and correct my spelling, although it was impossible for him to see how I was writing them down at the time. .?. . When he stopped for any purpose at any time he would, when he commenced again, begin where he left off without any hesitation, and one time while he was translating he stopped suddenly, pale as a sheet, and said, "Emma, did Jerusalem have walls around it?" When I answered, "Yes," he replied, "Oh! I was afraid I had been deceived." He had such a limited knowledge of history at the time that he did not even know that Jerusalem was surrounded by walls.{{ref|emma2}}

Emma also noted that

:Joseph Smith could neither write nor dictate a coherent and wellworded letter; let alone dictating a book like the Book of Mormon. And, though I was an active participant in the scenes that transpired, . . . it is marvelous to me, “a marvel and a wonder,” as much so as to any one else.{{ref|emma3}}

And, if Joseph was merely inventing the Book of Mormon story, he picked some of the more obscure and difficult Bible passages to include.

4) If Joseph was forging the Book of Mormon, why include Biblical passages at all? Clearly, Joseph was able to rapidly produce a vast and complex text that made no reference to Biblical citations at all. If Joseph was trying to perpetrate a fraud, why did he include near-verbatim quotations from the one book (the Holy Bible KJV) with which his target audience was sure to be familiar?

====Why then the KJV and Book of Mormon similarities?====

Even academic translators sometimes copy a previous translation if it serves the purpose of their translation. For example, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) provided previously unknown texts for many Biblical writings. However, in some translations of the DSS, approximately 90% is simply copied from the KJV.

Surely we are not expected to believe that the DSS translators dropped back into King James idiom and just happened to come up with a nearly identical text! They, in fact, unabashedly copied the KJV, except where the DSS texts were substantially different from ''already known Hebrew manuscripts''.{{ref|DSS1}} - ''need ref!!''

Why was this done? Because, the purpose of the DSS translation is to highlight the differences between the newly discovered manuscripts and those to which scholars already had access. Thus, in areas where the DSS manuscripts agree with the Biblical texts that were already known, the KJV translation is used to indicate this.

This is not to argue that there may not be a better way to render the text than the KJV—but, it would be counterproductive for the DSS committee spent a lot of time improving on the KJV translation. A reader without access to the original manuscripts could then never be sure if a difference between the DSS translation and the KJV translation represented a true difference in the DSS, or simply the choice of the DSS translators to improve the KJV.

The situation with the Book of Mormon is likely analagous. For example, most of the text to which the Nephites had access would not have differed significantly from the Hebrew texts used in Bible translations. The differences in wording between the KJV and the Book of Mormon highlight the areas in which there were ''theologically significant'' differences between the Nephite versions and the Masoretic text, from which the Bible was translated. Other areas can be assumed to be essentially the same. If one wants an improved or clearer translation of a passage that is identical in the Book of Mormon and the KJV, one has only to go to the original manuscripts available to all scholars. Basing the text on the KJV focuses the reader on the important clarifications, as opposed to doing a new translation from scratch, and distracting the reader with many differences that might be due simply to translator preference.

===Why is the JST different from the Book of Mormon?===

The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible is not, as some members have presumed, simply a restoration of lost Biblical text or an improvement on the translation of known text. Rather, the JST also involves harmonization of doctrinal concepts, commentary and elaboration on the Biblical text, and explanations to clarify points of importance to the modern reader. (See main article on the [[Joseph_Smith_Translation_as_a_restoration_of_the_original_Bible_text|nature of the JST]] for a more detailed discussion.)

Thus, the Book of Mormon is likely a relatively "tight" translation of the Nephite records, with the focus on the important differences between the Nephite textual tradition and the Masoretic text.

By contrast, the JST comes from a more prophetically mature and sophisticated Joseph Smith, and provides doctrinal expansion based upon additional revelation, experience, and understanding.

It is important to remember that Joseph did not consider one 'translation' of anything to be perfect or 'the final word.' Joseph had indicated that Moroni quoted Malachi to him using different wording than the KJV (See [http://scriptures.lds.org/js_h/1/36#39 Joseph Smith History 1:36–39]). However, when Joseph quoted the same passage years later in a discussion about vicarious baptism for the dead, he said:

:I might have rendered a plainer translation to this, but it is sufficiently plain to suit my purpose as it stands. It is sufficient to know, in this case, that the earth will be smitten with a curse unless there is a welding clink of some kind or other between the fathers and the children, upon some subject or other-and behold what is that subject? It is the baptism. for the dead.([http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/128/18#18 D&C 128:18].)

Thus, to Joseph, the adequacy of a translation depended upon the uses to which a given text will be employed. For one discussion, the KJV was adequate; for others, not. A key element of LDS theology is that living prophets are the primary instrument through which God continues to give knowledge and understanding to his children. Scriptures are neither inerrant, nor somehow "perfect," but are instead produced by [[Fallibility_of_prophets|fallible mortals]]. Despite this, because of current prophets and the revelation granted each individual, the writings of past prophets are sufficient to teach the principles essential for salvation. Additional revelation is sought and received as required.

===An Example===

There is a great example of this kind of difference in the Lord's prayer. Compare the following:

:And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil (Book of Mormon).
:And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil (KJV Bible).
:And ''suffer us not to be led into'' temptation, but deliver us from evil (JST Bible).

The JST changes the statement to passive voice whereas the KJV Bible and the Book of Mormon are in active voice. According to E. W. Bullinger, this particular scripture contains a Hebraism, namely, "active verbs were used by the Hebrews to express not the doing of the thing, but the permission of the thing which the agent is said do." Consequently, Bullinger interprets the passage this way: "Lead us not (i.e., suffer us not to be led) into temptation." {{ref|Bullinger}}

Adam Clarke agrees with Bullinger. He wrote this scripture means "'Bring not in,' or 'lead us not into.' (This is a mere Hebraism. God is said to do a thing which He only permits or suffers to be done)." {{ref|clarke}}

In Barnes' Notes on the New Testament we read the same interpretation. "This phrase then must be used in the sense of permitting. Do not suffer us or permit us, to be tempted to sin. In this it is implied that God 'has such control over us and the tempter, as to save us from it if we call on him." {{ref|Barnes}}

When properly considered, this passage is an example of where the JST reading and the KJV/Book of Mormon are both correct. The KJV and Book of Mormon are literal interpretations while the JST is an interpretive translation that is also correct.

==Conclusion==

The purposes of the Book of Mormon and JST translations were not identical. The LDS do not believe in one fixed, inviolate, "perfect" rendering of a scripture or doctrinal concept. The Book of Mormon likely reflects differences between the Nephite textual tradition and the commonly known Biblical manuscripts. The JST is a harmonization, expansion, commentary, and clarification of doctrinally important points. Neither is intended as "the final word" on a given concept or passage—continuing revelation, adapted to the circumstances in which members of the Church find themselves, precludes such an intent.

Critics impose their own inerrantist assumptions on LDS scriptures, but such assumptions simply do not apply to LDS doctrine or scripture.

==Endnotes==
#{{note|emma1}} Joseph Smith III, “Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” ''Saints’ Advocate'' 2 (Oct. 1879): 51
#{{note|harris1}} David Whitmer, ''An Address to All Believers in Christ'' (Richmond, Mo.: n.p., 1887), 12; cited frequently, including by {{Ensign|author=Neal A. Maxwell|article=By the Gift and Power of God|date=January 1997|start=34|end=41}}{{link|url=http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1997.htm/ensign%20january%201997.htm/by%20the%20gift%20and%20power%20of%20god.htm}}
#{{note|roper1}}{{FR-8-2-13}}
#{{note|emma2}} Emma Smith to Edmund C. Briggs, "A Visit to Nauvoo in 1856," ''Journal of History'' 9 (January 1916): 454.
#{{note|emma3}} Joseph Smith III, “Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” ''Saints’ Advocate'' 2 (Oct. 1879): 51
#{{note|DSS1}} {{NeedCite}}
#{{note|Bullinger}}See E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech used In the Bible: Explained and Illustrated. [London: Messrs. Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1898], 819-824.
#{{note|clarke}} Adam Clark, Commentary an the Bible. Abridged by Ralph Earle. [Grand Rapids: Baker Book, 1979], 778.
#{{note|Barnes}} Barnes' Notes on the New Testament. Ed. by Ingram Cobbin [Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1980], 30.

==Further reading==

===FAIR wiki articles===
{{JSTWiki}}

===FAIR web site===
{{JSTFAIR}}

===External links===
{{JSTLinks}}

===Printed material===
{{JSTPrint}}

Discusión:Página principal

2007-11-09T09:44:00Z

AndresSilva:

{{draft}}
==Criticas==
Ciertos pasajes de la Biblia (por ejemplo, partes de Isaias) fueron incluidas en el Libro de Mormon. SIn embargo, estos mismos pasajes fueron revisados para realizar la Traduaccion de Jose Smith de la Biblia. En algunos casos, estos pasajes no fueron escritos de forma identica. Los criticos afirman que si TJS (Traduccion de la Biblia de Jose Smith) es una traduccion precisa, entonces corresponderia al texto mas "puro" que tenian los Nefitas.


==Respuesta==
===Por que es que el Libro de Mormon se parece tanto a la Biblia del Rey Santiago?===
Desde hace mucho tiempo que los criticos hand adoptado la sinica posicion de que Jose Smith simplemente copio la Biblia del Rey Santiago en ciertos pasajes, como por ejemplo los de Isaias. Incluso miembros de la Iglesia has presumido que esta similitud entre estos textos demuestra que Jose Smith simplemente abrio la Biblia y copio capitulos que el reconicio provenian de la Biblia a medida que traducia material de las planchas de oro.

====Jose Smith copio el texto de la Biblia del Rey Santiago?====
Existen varios problemas con esta idea.

1) Los testigos del proceso de la traduccion indican unanimamente que Jose Smith tenia libros, manuscritos, o notas a las que referirse cuando traducia. En una entrevista Emma recuerda:

:Se que el Mormonismo es la verdad; y creo que la igleasia fue establecido por media de guia divina. Tengo completa fe en ella. Mientras escribia para (Jose) dia tras dia, generalmente sentada cerca de el, el sentado con su rostro metido en su sombrero, con la piedra adentro, y dictando hora tras hora sin nada que nos separa.

:''Q. Had he not a book or manuscript from which he read, or dictated to you?''
:A. He had neither manuscript or book to read from.

:''Q. Could he not have had, and you not know it?''
:A. If he had anything of the kind he could not have concealed it from me.{{ref|emma1}}

Martin Harris also noted that Joseph would translate with his face buried in his hat in order to use the seer stone/urim and thummim. This would make referring to a Bible or notes virtually impossible:

:Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine...{{ref|harris1}}

2) It is not clear that Joseph even ''owned'' a Bible during the Book of Mormon translation. He and Oliver Cowdery later purchased a Bible, which suggests (given Joseph's strained financial situation) that he did not already own one.{{ref|roper1}}

3) It is not clear that Joseph's Biblical knowledge was at all broad during the Book of Mormon translation. It seems unlikely that he would have recognized, say, Isaiah, had he encountered it on the plates. Recalled Emma Smith:

:When my husband was translating the Book of Mormon, I wrote a part of it, as he dictated each sentence, word for word, and when he came to proper names he could not pronounce, or long words, he spelled them out, and while I was writing them, if I made a mistake in spelling, he would stop me and correct my spelling, although it was impossible for him to see how I was writing them down at the time. .?. . When he stopped for any purpose at any time he would, when he commenced again, begin where he left off without any hesitation, and one time while he was translating he stopped suddenly, pale as a sheet, and said, "Emma, did Jerusalem have walls around it?" When I answered, "Yes," he replied, "Oh! I was afraid I had been deceived." He had such a limited knowledge of history at the time that he did not even know that Jerusalem was surrounded by walls.{{ref|emma2}}

Emma also noted that

:Joseph Smith could neither write nor dictate a coherent and wellworded letter; let alone dictating a book like the Book of Mormon. And, though I was an active participant in the scenes that transpired, . . . it is marvelous to me, “a marvel and a wonder,” as much so as to any one else.{{ref|emma3}}

And, if Joseph was merely inventing the Book of Mormon story, he picked some of the more obscure and difficult Bible passages to include.

4) If Joseph was forging the Book of Mormon, why include Biblical passages at all? Clearly, Joseph was able to rapidly produce a vast and complex text that made no reference to Biblical citations at all. If Joseph was trying to perpetrate a fraud, why did he include near-verbatim quotations from the one book (the Holy Bible KJV) with which his target audience was sure to be familiar?

====Why then the KJV and Book of Mormon similarities?====

Even academic translators sometimes copy a previous translation if it serves the purpose of their translation. For example, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) provided previously unknown texts for many Biblical writings. However, in some translations of the DSS, approximately 90% is simply copied from the KJV.

Surely we are not expected to believe that the DSS translators dropped back into King James idiom and just happened to come up with a nearly identical text! They, in fact, unabashedly copied the KJV, except where the DSS texts were substantially different from ''already known Hebrew manuscripts''.{{ref|DSS1}} - ''need ref!!''

Why was this done? Because, the purpose of the DSS translation is to highlight the differences between the newly discovered manuscripts and those to which scholars already had access. Thus, in areas where the DSS manuscripts agree with the Biblical texts that were already known, the KJV translation is used to indicate this.

This is not to argue that there may not be a better way to render the text than the KJV—but, it would be counterproductive for the DSS committee spent a lot of time improving on the KJV translation. A reader without access to the original manuscripts could then never be sure if a difference between the DSS translation and the KJV translation represented a true difference in the DSS, or simply the choice of the DSS translators to improve the KJV.

The situation with the Book of Mormon is likely analagous. For example, most of the text to which the Nephites had access would not have differed significantly from the Hebrew texts used in Bible translations. The differences in wording between the KJV and the Book of Mormon highlight the areas in which there were ''theologically significant'' differences between the Nephite versions and the Masoretic text, from which the Bible was translated. Other areas can be assumed to be essentially the same. If one wants an improved or clearer translation of a passage that is identical in the Book of Mormon and the KJV, one has only to go to the original manuscripts available to all scholars. Basing the text on the KJV focuses the reader on the important clarifications, as opposed to doing a new translation from scratch, and distracting the reader with many differences that might be due simply to translator preference.

===Why is the JST different from the Book of Mormon?===

The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible is not, as some members have presumed, simply a restoration of lost Biblical text or an improvement on the translation of known text. Rather, the JST also involves harmonization of doctrinal concepts, commentary and elaboration on the Biblical text, and explanations to clarify points of importance to the modern reader. (See main article on the [[Joseph_Smith_Translation_as_a_restoration_of_the_original_Bible_text|nature of the JST]] for a more detailed discussion.)

Thus, the Book of Mormon is likely a relatively "tight" translation of the Nephite records, with the focus on the important differences between the Nephite textual tradition and the Masoretic text.

By contrast, the JST comes from a more prophetically mature and sophisticated Joseph Smith, and provides doctrinal expansion based upon additional revelation, experience, and understanding.

It is important to remember that Joseph did not consider one 'translation' of anything to be perfect or 'the final word.' Joseph had indicated that Moroni quoted Malachi to him using different wording than the KJV (See [http://scriptures.lds.org/js_h/1/36#39 Joseph Smith History 1:36–39]). However, when Joseph quoted the same passage years later in a discussion about vicarious baptism for the dead, he said:

:I might have rendered a plainer translation to this, but it is sufficiently plain to suit my purpose as it stands. It is sufficient to know, in this case, that the earth will be smitten with a curse unless there is a welding clink of some kind or other between the fathers and the children, upon some subject or other-and behold what is that subject? It is the baptism. for the dead.([http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/128/18#18 D&C 128:18].)

Thus, to Joseph, the adequacy of a translation depended upon the uses to which a given text will be employed. For one discussion, the KJV was adequate; for others, not. A key element of LDS theology is that living prophets are the primary instrument through which God continues to give knowledge and understanding to his children. Scriptures are neither inerrant, nor somehow "perfect," but are instead produced by [[Fallibility_of_prophets|fallible mortals]]. Despite this, because of current prophets and the revelation granted each individual, the writings of past prophets are sufficient to teach the principles essential for salvation. Additional revelation is sought and received as required.

===An Example===

There is a great example of this kind of difference in the Lord's prayer. Compare the following:

:And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil (Book of Mormon).
:And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil (KJV Bible).
:And ''suffer us not to be led into'' temptation, but deliver us from evil (JST Bible).

The JST changes the statement to passive voice whereas the KJV Bible and the Book of Mormon are in active voice. According to E. W. Bullinger, this particular scripture contains a Hebraism, namely, "active verbs were used by the Hebrews to express not the doing of the thing, but the permission of the thing which the agent is said do." Consequently, Bullinger interprets the passage this way: "Lead us not (i.e., suffer us not to be led) into temptation." {{ref|Bullinger}}

Adam Clarke agrees with Bullinger. He wrote this scripture means "'Bring not in,' or 'lead us not into.' (This is a mere Hebraism. God is said to do a thing which He only permits or suffers to be done)." {{ref|clarke}}

In Barnes' Notes on the New Testament we read the same interpretation. "This phrase then must be used in the sense of permitting. Do not suffer us or permit us, to be tempted to sin. In this it is implied that God 'has such control over us and the tempter, as to save us from it if we call on him." {{ref|Barnes}}

When properly considered, this passage is an example of where the JST reading and the KJV/Book of Mormon are both correct. The KJV and Book of Mormon are literal interpretations while the JST is an interpretive translation that is also correct.

==Conclusion==

The purposes of the Book of Mormon and JST translations were not identical. The LDS do not believe in one fixed, inviolate, "perfect" rendering of a scripture or doctrinal concept. The Book of Mormon likely reflects differences between the Nephite textual tradition and the commonly known Biblical manuscripts. The JST is a harmonization, expansion, commentary, and clarification of doctrinally important points. Neither is intended as "the final word" on a given concept or passage—continuing revelation, adapted to the circumstances in which members of the Church find themselves, precludes such an intent.

Critics impose their own inerrantist assumptions on LDS scriptures, but such assumptions simply do not apply to LDS doctrine or scripture.

==Endnotes==
#{{note|emma1}} Joseph Smith III, “Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” ''Saints’ Advocate'' 2 (Oct. 1879): 51
#{{note|harris1}} David Whitmer, ''An Address to All Believers in Christ'' (Richmond, Mo.: n.p., 1887), 12; cited frequently, including by {{Ensign|author=Neal A. Maxwell|article=By the Gift and Power of God|date=January 1997|start=34|end=41}}{{link|url=http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1997.htm/ensign%20january%201997.htm/by%20the%20gift%20and%20power%20of%20god.htm}}
#{{note|roper1}}{{FR-8-2-13}}
#{{note|emma2}} Emma Smith to Edmund C. Briggs, "A Visit to Nauvoo in 1856," ''Journal of History'' 9 (January 1916): 454.
#{{note|emma3}} Joseph Smith III, “Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” ''Saints’ Advocate'' 2 (Oct. 1879): 51
#{{note|DSS1}} {{NeedCite}}
#{{note|Bullinger}}See E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech used In the Bible: Explained and Illustrated. [London: Messrs. Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1898], 819-824.
#{{note|clarke}} Adam Clark, Commentary an the Bible. Abridged by Ralph Earle. [Grand Rapids: Baker Book, 1979], 778.
#{{note|Barnes}} Barnes' Notes on the New Testament. Ed. by Ingram Cobbin [Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1980], 30.

==Further reading==

===FAIR wiki articles===
{{JSTWiki}}

===FAIR web site===
{{JSTFAIR}}

===External links===
{{JSTLinks}}

===Printed material===
{{JSTPrint}}

Discusión:Página principal

2007-11-09T09:28:32Z

AndresSilva:

{{draft}}
==Criticism==
Some passages from the Bible (parts of Isaiah, for example) were included in the Book of Mormon text. However, the same passages were later revised for the Joseph Smith Translation of the Holy Bible. In some cases these passages are not rendered identically. Critics claim that if the JST was an accurate translation, it would match the supposedly more 'pure' Isaiah text possessed by the Nephites.


==Response==
===Why does the Book of Mormon match the KJV so closely?===
Critics have long adopted the cynical position that Joseph Smith simply copied the King James Version (KJV) Bible text for the relevant portions of, for example, Isaiah. Even some Church members have presumed that the close match between the texts indicates that Joseph simply opened a Bible and copied those chapters when he came to material on the gold plates that he recognized as being from the Bible.

====Did Joseph simply copy the KJV text?====
There are several problems with this view.

1) Witnesses to the translation process are unanimous that Joseph did not have any books, manuscripts, or notes to which he referred while translating. Recalled Emma, in a later interview:

:I know Mormonism to be the truth; and believe the church to have been established by divine direction. I have complete faith in it. In writing for [Joseph] I frequently wrote day after day, often sitting at the table close by him, he sitting with his face buried in his hat , with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us.

:''Q. Had he not a book or manuscript from which he read, or dictated to you?''
:A. He had neither manuscript or book to read from.

:''Q. Could he not have had, and you not know it?''
:A. If he had anything of the kind he could not have concealed it from me.{{ref|emma1}}

Martin Harris also noted that Joseph would translate with his face buried in his hat in order to use the seer stone/urim and thummim. This would make referring to a Bible or notes virtually impossible:

:Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine...{{ref|harris1}}

2) It is not clear that Joseph even ''owned'' a Bible during the Book of Mormon translation. He and Oliver Cowdery later purchased a Bible, which suggests (given Joseph's strained financial situation) that he did not already own one.{{ref|roper1}}

3) It is not clear that Joseph's Biblical knowledge was at all broad during the Book of Mormon translation. It seems unlikely that he would have recognized, say, Isaiah, had he encountered it on the plates. Recalled Emma Smith:

:When my husband was translating the Book of Mormon, I wrote a part of it, as he dictated each sentence, word for word, and when he came to proper names he could not pronounce, or long words, he spelled them out, and while I was writing them, if I made a mistake in spelling, he would stop me and correct my spelling, although it was impossible for him to see how I was writing them down at the time. .?. . When he stopped for any purpose at any time he would, when he commenced again, begin where he left off without any hesitation, and one time while he was translating he stopped suddenly, pale as a sheet, and said, "Emma, did Jerusalem have walls around it?" When I answered, "Yes," he replied, "Oh! I was afraid I had been deceived." He had such a limited knowledge of history at the time that he did not even know that Jerusalem was surrounded by walls.{{ref|emma2}}

Emma also noted that

:Joseph Smith could neither write nor dictate a coherent and wellworded letter; let alone dictating a book like the Book of Mormon. And, though I was an active participant in the scenes that transpired, . . . it is marvelous to me, “a marvel and a wonder,” as much so as to any one else.{{ref|emma3}}

And, if Joseph was merely inventing the Book of Mormon story, he picked some of the more obscure and difficult Bible passages to include.

4) If Joseph was forging the Book of Mormon, why include Biblical passages at all? Clearly, Joseph was able to rapidly produce a vast and complex text that made no reference to Biblical citations at all. If Joseph was trying to perpetrate a fraud, why did he include near-verbatim quotations from the one book (the Holy Bible KJV) with which his target audience was sure to be familiar?

====Why then the KJV and Book of Mormon similarities?====

Even academic translators sometimes copy a previous translation if it serves the purpose of their translation. For example, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) provided previously unknown texts for many Biblical writings. However, in some translations of the DSS, approximately 90% is simply copied from the KJV.

Surely we are not expected to believe that the DSS translators dropped back into King James idiom and just happened to come up with a nearly identical text! They, in fact, unabashedly copied the KJV, except where the DSS texts were substantially different from ''already known Hebrew manuscripts''.{{ref|DSS1}} - ''need ref!!''

Why was this done? Because, the purpose of the DSS translation is to highlight the differences between the newly discovered manuscripts and those to which scholars already had access. Thus, in areas where the DSS manuscripts agree with the Biblical texts that were already known, the KJV translation is used to indicate this.

This is not to argue that there may not be a better way to render the text than the KJV—but, it would be counterproductive for the DSS committee spent a lot of time improving on the KJV translation. A reader without access to the original manuscripts could then never be sure if a difference between the DSS translation and the KJV translation represented a true difference in the DSS, or simply the choice of the DSS translators to improve the KJV.

The situation with the Book of Mormon is likely analagous. For example, most of the text to which the Nephites had access would not have differed significantly from the Hebrew texts used in Bible translations. The differences in wording between the KJV and the Book of Mormon highlight the areas in which there were ''theologically significant'' differences between the Nephite versions and the Masoretic text, from which the Bible was translated. Other areas can be assumed to be essentially the same. If one wants an improved or clearer translation of a passage that is identical in the Book of Mormon and the KJV, one has only to go to the original manuscripts available to all scholars. Basing the text on the KJV focuses the reader on the important clarifications, as opposed to doing a new translation from scratch, and distracting the reader with many differences that might be due simply to translator preference.

===Why is the JST different from the Book of Mormon?===

The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible is not, as some members have presumed, simply a restoration of lost Biblical text or an improvement on the translation of known text. Rather, the JST also involves harmonization of doctrinal concepts, commentary and elaboration on the Biblical text, and explanations to clarify points of importance to the modern reader. (See main article on the [[Joseph_Smith_Translation_as_a_restoration_of_the_original_Bible_text|nature of the JST]] for a more detailed discussion.)

Thus, the Book of Mormon is likely a relatively "tight" translation of the Nephite records, with the focus on the important differences between the Nephite textual tradition and the Masoretic text.

By contrast, the JST comes from a more prophetically mature and sophisticated Joseph Smith, and provides doctrinal expansion based upon additional revelation, experience, and understanding.

It is important to remember that Joseph did not consider one 'translation' of anything to be perfect or 'the final word.' Joseph had indicated that Moroni quoted Malachi to him using different wording than the KJV (See [http://scriptures.lds.org/js_h/1/36#39 Joseph Smith History 1:36–39]). However, when Joseph quoted the same passage years later in a discussion about vicarious baptism for the dead, he said:

:I might have rendered a plainer translation to this, but it is sufficiently plain to suit my purpose as it stands. It is sufficient to know, in this case, that the earth will be smitten with a curse unless there is a welding clink of some kind or other between the fathers and the children, upon some subject or other-and behold what is that subject? It is the baptism. for the dead.([http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/128/18#18 D&C 128:18].)

Thus, to Joseph, the adequacy of a translation depended upon the uses to which a given text will be employed. For one discussion, the KJV was adequate; for others, not. A key element of LDS theology is that living prophets are the primary instrument through which God continues to give knowledge and understanding to his children. Scriptures are neither inerrant, nor somehow "perfect," but are instead produced by [[Fallibility_of_prophets|fallible mortals]]. Despite this, because of current prophets and the revelation granted each individual, the writings of past prophets are sufficient to teach the principles essential for salvation. Additional revelation is sought and received as required.

===An Example===

There is a great example of this kind of difference in the Lord's prayer. Compare the following:

:And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil (Book of Mormon).
:And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil (KJV Bible).
:And ''suffer us not to be led into'' temptation, but deliver us from evil (JST Bible).

The JST changes the statement to passive voice whereas the KJV Bible and the Book of Mormon are in active voice. According to E. W. Bullinger, this particular scripture contains a Hebraism, namely, "active verbs were used by the Hebrews to express not the doing of the thing, but the permission of the thing which the agent is said do." Consequently, Bullinger interprets the passage this way: "Lead us not (i.e., suffer us not to be led) into temptation." {{ref|Bullinger}}

Adam Clarke agrees with Bullinger. He wrote this scripture means "'Bring not in,' or 'lead us not into.' (This is a mere Hebraism. God is said to do a thing which He only permits or suffers to be done)." {{ref|clarke}}

In Barnes' Notes on the New Testament we read the same interpretation. "This phrase then must be used in the sense of permitting. Do not suffer us or permit us, to be tempted to sin. In this it is implied that God 'has such control over us and the tempter, as to save us from it if we call on him." {{ref|Barnes}}

When properly considered, this passage is an example of where the JST reading and the KJV/Book of Mormon are both correct. The KJV and Book of Mormon are literal interpretations while the JST is an interpretive translation that is also correct.

==Conclusion==

The purposes of the Book of Mormon and JST translations were not identical. The LDS do not believe in one fixed, inviolate, "perfect" rendering of a scripture or doctrinal concept. The Book of Mormon likely reflects differences between the Nephite textual tradition and the commonly known Biblical manuscripts. The JST is a harmonization, expansion, commentary, and clarification of doctrinally important points. Neither is intended as "the final word" on a given concept or passage—continuing revelation, adapted to the circumstances in which members of the Church find themselves, precludes such an intent.

Critics impose their own inerrantist assumptions on LDS scriptures, but such assumptions simply do not apply to LDS doctrine or scripture.

==Endnotes==
#{{note|emma1}} Joseph Smith III, “Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” ''Saints’ Advocate'' 2 (Oct. 1879): 51
#{{note|harris1}} David Whitmer, ''An Address to All Believers in Christ'' (Richmond, Mo.: n.p., 1887), 12; cited frequently, including by {{Ensign|author=Neal A. Maxwell|article=By the Gift and Power of God|date=January 1997|start=34|end=41}}{{link|url=http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1997.htm/ensign%20january%201997.htm/by%20the%20gift%20and%20power%20of%20god.htm}}
#{{note|roper1}}{{FR-8-2-13}}
#{{note|emma2}} Emma Smith to Edmund C. Briggs, "A Visit to Nauvoo in 1856," ''Journal of History'' 9 (January 1916): 454.
#{{note|emma3}} Joseph Smith III, “Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” ''Saints’ Advocate'' 2 (Oct. 1879): 51
#{{note|DSS1}} {{NeedCite}}
#{{note|Bullinger}}See E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech used In the Bible: Explained and Illustrated. [London: Messrs. Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1898], 819-824.
#{{note|clarke}} Adam Clark, Commentary an the Bible. Abridged by Ralph Earle. [Grand Rapids: Baker Book, 1979], 778.
#{{note|Barnes}} Barnes' Notes on the New Testament. Ed. by Ingram Cobbin [Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1980], 30.

==Further reading==

===FAIR wiki articles===
{{JSTWiki}}

===FAIR web site===
{{JSTFAIR}}

===External links===
{{JSTLinks}}

===Printed material===
{{JSTPrint}}

Los Fundamentos del Libro de Mormón

2007-11-02T22:03:20Z

AndresSilva: /* Book of Mormon Authors */

{{BoMPortal}}
{{GermanWiki|http://www.de.fairmormon.org/index.php/Buch_Mormon_Grundlagen}}
==Resumen del Libro de Mormon==
Articulo traducido con permiso de FAIRLDS por: '''Alberto Barrios'''

El Libro de Mormon es uno de los cuatro libros considerados como escritura sagrada para la Iglesia de Jesucristo de los Santos de los Ultimos Dias, los otros tres son la Santa Biblia, Doctrina y Convenios, y La Perla de gran Precio. Estos libros son considerados como "obras principales" por los Santos de los Ultimos Dias, quienes los consideran como la Palabra de Dios y con igual autoridad.

El Libro de Mormon es un texto de escritura antigua que fue escrito en el hemisferio occidental en los finales del siglo IV y a comienzos del siglo V D.C.. Es una recopilaciòn de un grupo especifico de personas cuyos ancestros vinieron de Jerusalen a comienzos del siglo VI AC. Aunque algunas veces se refieren al Libro de Mormon como una historia de esa sociedad, es realmente un libro religioso, con eventos historicos que suelen enseñarnos y explicarnos principios religiosos. El Libro de Mormon fue grabado sobre planchas de oro y enterradas en una caja de piedra alrededor del año 421 DC. En 1827, Jose Smith, un joven que vivia en el estado de New York en los Estados Unidos, descubrio estas planchas y las tradujo al Ingles.

El Libro de Mormon es poco menos del tamaño del Antiguo Testamento y es mas grande que el Nuevo Testamento. Las ediciones en Ingles publicadas hoy en dia generalmente resultan en un libro que cubre aproximadamente 500 paginas. El Libro de Mormon ha sido traducido del Ingles a mas de 105 idiomas. Aproximadamente 130 millones de copias del Libro de Mormon han sido impresas desde 1830.

==Sipnopsis del Libro de Mormon==

Lehi, un acomodado y fiel israelita de la tribu de Manases, vivio en jerusalem en el siglo VII AC. Habiendo oido la predicación de Jeremias y otros profetas, ora a Dios y recibe una visión. Dios le dice a Lehi que Jerusalen sera destruida y que Lehi debe sacar a sus familia y huir al desierto y que ellos serian dirigidos a una tierra prometida.

Lehi, su esposa Sariah, y sus hijos abandonan Jerusalen a viajan al Sureste. Los cuatro hijos mayores de Lehi, Laman, Lemuel, Sam, Nefi, son enviados de regreso a Jerusalen para obtener las escrituras Hebreas y otros escritos, y tambien para traer a Ismael y a su familia para que se unan al grupo de Lehi. El grupo de Lehi viaja hacia el sur hacia lo que ahora se llama Arabia Saudita y luego al este a la orilla del Mar Arabigo. Alli ellos construyen botes y viajan al hemisferio occidental.

Despues de llegar a las Americas, Lehi murio y el grupo se dividio en dos fracciones: Los Lamanitas (aquellos quienes seguian a Laman) y los Nefitas (aquellos que seguian al justo e hijo mas joven Nefi).

Los Lamanitas rapidamente cayeron en la idolatria y rechazaron su herencia y cultura religiosa. Sin embargo, Los Nefitas siguieron las tradiciones religiosas de Abraham y Moises, a pesar de que ellos a menudo caian en idolatria, materialismo y otros pecados. Una serie de profetas fueron enviados a los Nefitas para mantenerlos fieles en el Dios de Abraham, Isaac y Jacob y a las enseñanzas de Moises. Estos profetas tambien enseñaron que el Mesias seria enviado a los Israelitas en Jerusalen, y que despues de su crucifixión en Jerusalen el se apareceria a los Nefitas y les traeria paz.

Estos 2 grupos permanecieron en un estado de constante guerra, con los Lamanitas siendo significativamente mas numerosos que los Nefitas. Los Nefitas migraron al norte varias veces, y durante el tercer siglo A.C. ellos entraron en contacto con una civilizacion descendiente del grupo de los Judios que habian abandonado Jerusalen al tiempo de su destruccion (Los Mulequitas).Los Mulequitas y los Nefitas se combinaron y desde entonces todos se hicieron llamar Nefitas.

El climax del Libro de Mormon es un cataclismo de destruccion de muchos de las civilizaciones de los Nefitas y los en el tiempo de la crucifixion de Jesus en Jerusalen. Al poco tiempo despues de la destruccion el Cristo resucitado se aparece a los sobrevivientes justos. Cristo establece la iglesia entre ellos y les entrega muchas de las ensenanzas que estan contenidas en el evangelio del Nuevo Testamento.

There follows a period of about 200 years of peace and harmony, after which the people begin again to break apart into factions. By the mid 4th century A.D., the people are again divided into Lamanites and Nephites, but both having rejected Christ and His teachings. There is a major battle around the year A.D. 385 which destroys nearly all of the Nephites. The book ends with the writings of Mormon and his son Moroni, the two last Nephite prophets. They create the Book of Mormon by abridging the records of their civilization and writing the text on gold plates. The final entry in the Book of Mormon is written around A.D. 421 by Moroni and indicates that God instructed him to bury the plates and that they will be found and translated in the future.

There is one additional civilization that is discussed in the Book of Mormon. The Jaredites were a group that left the Old World around the time of the Tower of Babel and were led by God to the Americas. This culture lasted from approximately 2200 B.C. until the 4th or 5th century B.C. The Mulekites had met a survivor of the Jaredites, and the Nephites found a written history of that people as recorded by a Jaredite prophet named Ether. Moroni’s abridgement of, and commentary on, this record appears within the Book of Mormon as the Book of Ether.

==Los Autores del Libro de Mormon==

El Libro de Mormon fue primeramente escrito y compilado por Mormon, un Nefita que vivio en America durante el siglo IV D.C. Mormon formo el Libro de Mormon de la compilacion de los registros de su pueblo, los que habian sido guardados desde el ano 600 A.C. aproximadamente hasta su epoca. Los libros de Mosiah, Alma , Helaman, Tercer Nefi, Cuarto Nefi, y los siete primeros capitulos de Mormon fueron escritos por Mormon los cuales constituyen una compilacion de los registros guardados por los "reyes" de su pueblo. Estos libros cubren un periodo aproximado desde el ano 130 A.C. hasta casi el ano 385 D.C. La primera parte de la compilacion de Mormon, que cubre el periodo que va desde el ano 600 A.C. hasta el 130 D.C., fue perdido por Jose Smith y Martin Harris durante el proceso de la traduccion en 1827, lo cual explica el por que encontramos en el libro de Mormon de nuestro tiempo un registro que solo cubre registros que comienzan desde el ano 130 D.C.

The books of First Nephi, Second Nephi, Jacob, Enos, Jarom, and Omni are the writings of various Nephite religious leaders from about 600 B.C. to about 200 B.C. Each of these books is named after the author, except that Jarom and Omni include brief writings by people in addition to Jarom and Omni. All of these books were written on what was called the “small plates of Nephi.” Mormon had attached these plates (apparently without editing) to the end of his own writings, which made it possible for the modern translation of the Book of Mormon to contain some of the earlier history and prophecies. After the first part of the record had been lost, Joseph Smith was instructed to translate the “small plates” from the end of the record and to place that translation where the earlier part of Mormon’s record had been.

The Words of Mormon is a short book by Mormon that was written to connect the narrative of the small plates, which end with the book of Omni, to the rest of the book, beginning with Mosiah. The Words of Mormon were written by Mormon in around A.D. 385 but deal with the events between Omni and Mosiah during the 2nd century B.C.

After Mormon died, his son Moroni completed the Book of Mormon as we have it today by adding four pieces. First, Moroni finished his father’s record (the Book of Mormon section within the overall Book of Mormon) by adding what are now chapters 8 and 9. Second, Moroni added the Book of Ether, his condensed summary of, and his commentary on, an ancient record from an earlier civilization, called the Jaredites, that existed from approximately 2200 B.C. to around the 4th or 5th century B.C. Third, Moroni added his own book to the end of the compilation of his father. And finally, Moroni added to the end of the record what is now the title page of the Book of Mormon.

The last recorded date in Moroni’s writings corresponds roughly to A.D. 421.

It should be noted that in the period between the 2nd century B.C. and the 1st century A.D. there were six generations of men who contributed to the books of Mosiah, Alma, Helaman, 3rd Nephi, and 4th Nephi. They were Alma, Alma the Younger (son of Alma), Helaman (son of Alma the Younger), Helaman (son of Helaman), Nephi (son of the second Helaman), and Nephi (son of Nephi). The first Alma’s story is included in the second half of the Book of Mosiah. The Book of Alma is named for Alma the Younger and contains both his record and the record of his son Helaman. The Book of Helaman is a record of Helaman, son of Helaman. The books of 3rd and 4th Nephi refer to the ministries of the two Nephis respectively, though the Book of 4th Nephi covers a period long beyond the mortal ministry of Nephi son of Nephi.

==Book of Mormon Textual Divisions==

The Book of Mormon is divided into books, chapters, and verses, similar to how the Bible is now published, but only the division into books is from the original text. The title page and the individual book introductions are part of the original Book of Mormon text. The Book of Mormon introduction, chapter headings, footnotes, modern year correspondences, supplementary materials, and the division into chapters and verses were added in the second half of the 19th century and in the 20th century, and those portions are not considered part of the revealed text of the Book of Mormon.

Listed below are the 15 books within the Book of Mormon. The years and number of pages are approximates.

*El primer Libro de Nefi
**Autor: Nefi
**Años que cubre: 600 A.C. – 580 A.C.
**Año en que fue escrito: mediados del siglo 6th A.C.
**Numero de paginas: 52
*El Segundo Libro de Nefi
**Autor: Nefi
**Años que cubre: 580 A.C. – 544 A.C.
**Año en que fue escrito: 544 A.C.
**Numero de paginas: 64
*The Book of Jacob
**Author: Jacob (brother of Nephi)
**Years covered: 544 B.C. – 530 B.C.
**Year written: 530 B.C.
**Number of pages: 19
*The Book of Enos
**Author: Enos (son of Jacob)
**Years covered: 530 B.C.
**Year written: early 5th century B.C.
**Number of pages: 2
*The Book of Jarom
**Author: Jarom (son of Enos) and others
**Years covered: 420 B.C.
**Year written:
**Number of pages: 2
*The Book of Omni
**Author: Omni (descendant of Jarom) and others
**Years covered: 323 B.C.
**Year written: late 4th century and 3rd century B.C.
**Number of pages: 3
*Words of Mormon
**Author: Mormon
**Years covered: mid 4th century A.D. and 2nd century B.C.
**Year written: 4th century A.D.
**Number of pages: 2
*The Book of Mosiah
**Author: Mormon (using records of Mosiah)
**Years covered: 130 B.C. – 91 B.C.
**Year written: 4th century A.D.
**Number of pages: 62
*The Book of Alma
**Author: Mormon (using records of Alma and Helaman)
**Years covered: 91 B.C. – 52 B.C.
**Year written: 4th century A.D.
**Number of pages: 161
*The Book of Helaman
**Author: Mormon (using records of Helaman and Nephi)
**Years covered: 52 B.C. – 1 B.C.
**Year written: 4th century A.D.
**Number of pages: 38
*The Book of Third Nephi
**Author: Mormon (using records of Nephi)
**Years covered: A.D. 1 – A.D. 36
**Year written: 4th century A.D.
**Number of pages: 59
*The Book of Fourth Nephi
**Author: Mormon (using records of Nephi and others)
**Years covered: A.D. 36 – A.D. 322
**Year written: 4th century A.D.
**Number of pages: 4
*The Book of Mormon
**Author: Mormon and Moroni (son of Mormon)
**Years covered: A.D. 322 – A.D. 385
**Year written: A.D. 385
**Number of pages: 18
*The Book of Ether
**Author: Moroni (using records of Ether)
**Years covered: 2200 B.C. – 400 B.C.
**Year written: late 4th or early 5th century A.D.
**Number of pages: 31
*The Book of Moroni
**Author: Moroni (son of Mormon)
**Years covered: late 4th and early 5th century A.D.
**Year written: A.D. 421
**Number of pages: 14

==Book of Mormon Location==

The Book of Mormon begins in Jerusalem, and the [[Book_of_Mormon_geography:Old_World|route of the group]] to the shore of the Arabian Sea has been identified and is generally accepted by Book of Mormon scholars. However, the site of their landing in the western hemisphere is not known. Based on a variety of internal evidences, most Book of Mormon scholars today believe that the Book of Mormon narrative takes place near Guatemala and the Yucatan peninsula.

The Jaredite culture existed somewhere to the north of the Lehite cultures, but close enough so that the Nephites found some of the ruins of the Jaredite civilization within a few days or weeks of traveling by foot from the Nephite lands. ({{s||Mosiah|8|&-11}}; compare with {{s||Mosiah|23|1-3}} and {{s||Mosiah|24|25}}.)

Historically, most Book of Mormon readers, including most LDS leaders, assumed that the Book of Mormon civilizations extended far into both North and South America. The primary textual support for this view has been the Book of Mormon statements regarding a “land northward” and a “land southward” separated by a “narrow neck of land.” LDS Church leaders have also frequently used Book of Mormon statements about a promised land to include the United States specifically. This view of the Book of Mormon is called the “Hemispheric Geography Theory” ([[Book_of_Mormon_geography:New_World:HGT|HGT]]).

An alternate opinion of where the Book of Mormon lands are located is that the entire narrative takes place within a relatively small area, probably little more than a few hundred miles between the furthest points. This view, called the “Limited Geography Theory” ([[Book_of_Mormon_geography:New_World:LGT|LGT]]) was first proposed during the lifetime of Joseph Smith, but remained a minority opinion until the second half of the 20th century. Today, nearly all Book of Mormon scholars believe the textual evidence for the LGT is overwhelming.

It should be noted that both the HGT and the LGT can either accept or reject the assumption that non-Lehite peoples and cultures existed before, during, and after the Book of Mormon cultures. Both theories can also either accept or reject the idea that all, or nearly all, of precolumbian Native Americans could have been descended, at least in part, from Lehi. And finally, neither the HGT nor the LGT imply that it should be possible to determine Lehi ancestry from modern Native American [[Book_of_Mormon_and_DNA_evidence|DNA]].

Although many Book of Mormon scholars see references to non-Lehite cultures and peoples within the text of the Book of Mormon, the Book of Mormon does not overtly reference non-Lehite civilizations or peoples. This fact, combined with the paucity of written material from New World antiquity and the discontinuities of New World civilizations, languages, and occupations, makes it difficult to identify existing ancient ruins and artifacts as being of Lehite origin or to confidently place Lehite culture within a specific ancient American context. A commonly held view of many Book of Mormon scholars is that the Jaredites were associated with the Olmec culture and the Nephites and Lamanites were associated with the Mayan culture.

==Book of Mormon Translation==

Joseph Smith, who was born in 1805 in the state of Vermont in the United States, was visited by an angel several times one night in 1823. The angel identified himself as the ancient Nephi prophet Moroni, and he told Joseph about the existence of an ancient record of his people. Moroni told Joseph that the record was written on gold plates and that in time Joseph would be allowed to retrieve the plates and translate them. The following day Joseph went to a nearby hill as directed by the angel, and there under a large rock he saw a stone box and the ancient plates within it.

Joseph was not permitted to remove the plates until 1827. Almost immediately after Joseph Smith retrieved the plates, enemies became aware of them and tried to steal them. Joseph and his wife Emma were forced to move as persecution increased.

Joseph Smith, who had very little education, said that he had been able to translate the Book of Mormon through the power of God. His translation process involved his receiving direct revelation from God, often through the medium of the Urim and Thummim or through a seerstone. Joseph Smith dictated the Book of Mormon while a scribe wrote down what was said. The entire translation process took approximately 60 days and involved at least three scribes: Emma Smith, Martin Harris, and Oliver Cowdery.

At one point during the translation process, Martin Harris pressured Joseph into letting Martin take the transcript to show to his wife, who had been upset with Martin over his involvement with the Book of Mormon translation. These pages, which covered over 300 years of Nephite history and religious discourse, were lost and never recovered. This event had been foreseen by God, and when the plates had been originally assembled, Mormon had been inspired to include a separate set of plates that covered some of the time period as covered by the lost manuscript.

The gold plates were taken by the angel after the translation, but a number of witnesses were allowed to see and feel them. Martin Harris, David Whitmer, and Oliver Cowdery (the “Three Witnesses”) were visited by an angel, who showed them the plates, and these witnesses heard the voice of God declaring the translation to be correct (note that many critics of the Church unjustifiably assume this means the original manuscript was perfect and thus no changes of any kind should have been needed or made in the published Book of Mormon). Another eight men were allowed to see, handle, and lift the plates, though there was no spiritual or supernatural event associated with it. The written testimonies of the three and eight witnesses appears at the front of the printed editions of the Book of Mormon.

In addition to the testimony of the twelve official witnesses (Joseph Smith, the Three Witnesses, and the Eight Witnesses), a number of other people also were witnesses to the existence of the plates. Most of these experiences occurred under natural circumstances, such as Emma moving them and hearing the metallic sound of their rustling under their covering while she was doing housecleaning. Others had miraculous experiences, such as Mary Whitmer being shown the plates by Moroni after she had sacrificed so much to support Joseph while he translated the plates in her home.

The original manuscript of the Book of Mormon consisted of a stream of words without punctuation and with inconsistent spelling. The manuscript was recopied for use by the printer, and this manuscript is called the printer’s manuscript. About one third of the original manuscript and all of the printer’s manuscript are still extant. The printer had to add all of the punctuation, and he did so based on his own reading of the text.

The Book of Mormon was first published in 1829. Over the years, Joseph Smith occasionally corrected errors that had appeared in the first printing, and he also made a few changes to the Book of Mormon text that he felt better expressed what had been on the plates. Nearly every edition of the Book of Mormon since then has involved some minor changes as scholars analyze the various manuscripts to try to determine the original translation of the Book of Mormon plates.

==Book of Mormon Teachings==
* [[Plain_and_Precious_Book_of_Mormon_doctrines | Plain and precious Book of Mormon doctrines]]

==Book of Mormon Resources==

===Complete Text===
* [http://www.mormon.org/freeoffers/1,17785,2071-1-1,00.html?src=tv Click here] for free copy of the Book of Mormon, with no obligation
* [http://www.lds.org/mp3/display/0,18692,5297-41,00.html?src=tv# Click here] to listen to or download Book of Mormon in audio format
* [http://scriptures.lds.org/bm/contents Click here] for an on-line searchable Book of Mormon

===Study Aids===
* [[Online_textual_sources_and_materials#Scripture_study | FAIRWiki scripture study links]]

===Bibliography===
The ''FARMS Review'' often produces a yearly bibliography on the Book of Mormon:

*{{FR-1-1-19}}
*{{FR-2-1-31}}
*{{FR-3-1-23}}
*{{FR-4-1-32}}
*{{FR-5-1-21}}
*{{FR-6-2-17}}
*{{FR-7-2-12}}
*{{FR-8-2-17}}
*{{FR-9-2-7}}
*{{FR-9-2-18}}
*{{FR-10-2-16}}
*{{FR-11-2-9}}
*{{FR-12-2-21}}
*{{FR-13-2-18}}
*{{FR-15-2-21}}

==Further reading==

===FAIR wiki articles===
{{BoMWiki}}
 {{OtherLang}}
*{{GermanWiki|http://www.de.fairmormon.org/index.php/Buch_Mormon_Grundlagen}}

===FAIR web site===
{{BoMFAIR}}

===External links===
{{BoMLinks}}

===Printed material===
{{BoMPrint}}

Los Fundamentos del Libro de Mormón

2007-11-02T09:17:11Z

AndresSilva:

{{BoMPortal}}
{{GermanWiki|http://www.de.fairmormon.org/index.php/Buch_Mormon_Grundlagen}}
==Resumen del Libro de Mormon==
Articulo traducido con permiso de FAIRLDS por: '''Alberto Barrios'''

El Libro de Mormon es uno de los cuatro libros considerados como escritura sagrada para la Iglesia de Jesucristo de los Santos de los Ultimos Dias, los otros tres son la Santa Biblia, Doctrina y Convenios, y La Perla de gran Precio. Estos libros son considerados como "obras principales" por los Santos de los Ultimos Dias, quienes los consideran como la Palabra de Dios y con igual autoridad.

El Libro de Mormon es un texto de escritura antigua que fue escrito en el hemisferio occidental en los finales del siglo IV y a comienzos del siglo V D.C.. Es una recopilaciòn de un grupo especifico de personas cuyos ancestros vinieron de Jerusalen a comienzos del siglo VI AC. Aunque algunas veces se refieren al Libro de Mormon como una historia de esa sociedad, es realmente un libro religioso, con eventos historicos que suelen enseñarnos y explicarnos principios religiosos. El Libro de Mormon fue grabado sobre planchas de oro y enterradas en una caja de piedra alrededor del año 421 DC. En 1827, Jose Smith, un joven que vivia en el estado de New York en los Estados Unidos, descubrio estas planchas y las tradujo al Ingles.

El Libro de Mormon es poco menos del tamaño del Antiguo Testamento y es mas grande que el Nuevo Testamento. Las ediciones en Ingles publicadas hoy en dia generalmente resultan en un libro que cubre aproximadamente 500 paginas. El Libro de Mormon ha sido traducido del Ingles a mas de 105 idiomas. Aproximadamente 130 millones de copias del Libro de Mormon han sido impresas desde 1830.

==Sipnopsis del Libro de Mormon==

Lehi, un acomodado y fiel israelita de la tribu de Manases, vivio en jerusalem en el siglo VII AC. Habiendo oido la predicación de Jeremias y otros profetas, ora a Dios y recibe una visión. Dios le dice a Lehi que Jerusalen sera destruida y que Lehi debe sacar a sus familia y huir al desierto y que ellos serian dirigidos a una tierra prometida.

Lehi, su esposa Sariah, y sus hijos abandonan Jerusalen a viajan al Sureste. Los cuatro hijos mayores de Lehi, Laman, Lemuel, Sam, Nefi, son enviados de regreso a Jerusalen para obtener las escrituras Hebreas y otros escritos, y tambien para traer a Ismael y a su familia para que se unan al grupo de Lehi. El grupo de Lehi viaja hacia el sur hacia lo que ahora se llama Arabia Saudita y luego al este a la orilla del Mar Arabigo. Alli ellos construyen botes y viajan al hemisferio occidental.

Despues de llegar a las Americas, Lehi murio y el grupo se dividio en dos fracciones: Los Lamanitas (aquellos quienes seguian a Laman) y los Nefitas (aquellos que seguian al justo e hijo mas joven Nefi).

Los Lamanitas rapidamente cayeron en la idolatria y rechazaron su herencia y cultura religiosa. Sin embargo, Los Nefitas siguieron las tradiciones religiosas de Abraham y Moises, a pesar de que ellos a menudo caian en idolatria, materialismo y otros pecados. Una serie de profetas fueron enviados a los Nefitas para mantenerlos fieles en el Dios de Abraham, Isaac y Jacob y a las enseñanzas de Moises. Estos profetas tambien enseñaron que el Mesias seria enviado a los Israelitas en Jerusalen, y que despues de su crucifixión en Jerusalen el se apareceria a los Nefitas y les traeria paz.

Estos 2 grupos permanecieron en un estado de constante guerra, con los Lamanitas siendo significativamente mas numerosos que los Nefitas. Los Nefitas migraron al norte varias veces, y durante el tercer siglo A.C. ellos entraron en contacto con una civilizacion descendiente del grupo de los Judios que habian abandonado Jerusalen al tiempo de su destruccion (Los Mulequitas).Los Mulequitas y los Nefitas se combinaron y desde entonces todos se hicieron llamar Nefitas.

El climax del Libro de Mormon es un cataclismo de destruccion de muchos de las civilizaciones de los Nefitas y los en el tiempo de la crucifixion de Jesus en Jerusalen. Al poco tiempo despues de la destruccion el Cristo resucitado se aparece a los sobrevivientes justos. Cristo establece la iglesia entre ellos y les entrega muchas de las ensenanzas que estan contenidas en el evangelio del Nuevo Testamento.

There follows a period of about 200 years of peace and harmony, after which the people begin again to break apart into factions. By the mid 4th century A.D., the people are again divided into Lamanites and Nephites, but both having rejected Christ and His teachings. There is a major battle around the year A.D. 385 which destroys nearly all of the Nephites. The book ends with the writings of Mormon and his son Moroni, the two last Nephite prophets. They create the Book of Mormon by abridging the records of their civilization and writing the text on gold plates. The final entry in the Book of Mormon is written around A.D. 421 by Moroni and indicates that God instructed him to bury the plates and that they will be found and translated in the future.

There is one additional civilization that is discussed in the Book of Mormon. The Jaredites were a group that left the Old World around the time of the Tower of Babel and were led by God to the Americas. This culture lasted from approximately 2200 B.C. until the 4th or 5th century B.C. The Mulekites had met a survivor of the Jaredites, and the Nephites found a written history of that people as recorded by a Jaredite prophet named Ether. Moroni’s abridgement of, and commentary on, this record appears within the Book of Mormon as the Book of Ether.

==Book of Mormon Authors==

The Book of Mormon was primarily written and assembled by Mormon, a Nephite who lived in the Americas during the 4th century A.D. Mormon created the Book of Mormon by abridging the records of his people as they had been kept from approximately 600 B.C. until his day. The books of Mosiah, Alma, Helaman, Third Nephi, Fourth Nephi, and the first seven chapters of Mormon were all written by Mormon and are his selection and abridgement of the historical records kept by the “kings” of his people. These books cover a period from about 130 B.C. to about A.D. 385. The first part of Mormon’s abridgement, which covered the period from 600 B.C. to 130 B.C., was lost by Joseph Smith and Martin Harris during the translation process in 1827, which is why Mormon’s existing abridgement in our Book of Mormon only covers the records beginning in about 130 B.C.

The books of First Nephi, Second Nephi, Jacob, Enos, Jarom, and Omni are the writings of various Nephite religious leaders from about 600 B.C. to about 200 B.C. Each of these books is named after the author, except that Jarom and Omni include brief writings by people in addition to Jarom and Omni. All of these books were written on what was called the “small plates of Nephi.” Mormon had attached these plates (apparently without editing) to the end of his own writings, which made it possible for the modern translation of the Book of Mormon to contain some of the earlier history and prophecies. After the first part of the record had been lost, Joseph Smith was instructed to translate the “small plates” from the end of the record and to place that translation where the earlier part of Mormon’s record had been.

The Words of Mormon is a short book by Mormon that was written to connect the narrative of the small plates, which end with the book of Omni, to the rest of the book, beginning with Mosiah. The Words of Mormon were written by Mormon in around A.D. 385 but deal with the events between Omni and Mosiah during the 2nd century B.C.

After Mormon died, his son Moroni completed the Book of Mormon as we have it today by adding four pieces. First, Moroni finished his father’s record (the Book of Mormon section within the overall Book of Mormon) by adding what are now chapters 8 and 9. Second, Moroni added the Book of Ether, his condensed summary of, and his commentary on, an ancient record from an earlier civilization, called the Jaredites, that existed from approximately 2200 B.C. to around the 4th or 5th century B.C. Third, Moroni added his own book to the end of the compilation of his father. And finally, Moroni added to the end of the record what is now the title page of the Book of Mormon.

The last recorded date in Moroni’s writings corresponds roughly to A.D. 421.

It should be noted that in the period between the 2nd century B.C. and the 1st century A.D. there were six generations of men who contributed to the books of Mosiah, Alma, Helaman, 3rd Nephi, and 4th Nephi. They were Alma, Alma the Younger (son of Alma), Helaman (son of Alma the Younger), Helaman (son of Helaman), Nephi (son of the second Helaman), and Nephi (son of Nephi). The first Alma’s story is included in the second half of the Book of Mosiah. The Book of Alma is named for Alma the Younger and contains both his record and the record of his son Helaman. The Book of Helaman is a record of Helaman, son of Helaman. The books of 3rd and 4th Nephi refer to the ministries of the two Nephis respectively, though the Book of 4th Nephi covers a period long beyond the mortal ministry of Nephi son of Nephi.

==Book of Mormon Textual Divisions==

The Book of Mormon is divided into books, chapters, and verses, similar to how the Bible is now published, but only the division into books is from the original text. The title page and the individual book introductions are part of the original Book of Mormon text. The Book of Mormon introduction, chapter headings, footnotes, modern year correspondences, supplementary materials, and the division into chapters and verses were added in the second half of the 19th century and in the 20th century, and those portions are not considered part of the revealed text of the Book of Mormon.

Listed below are the 15 books within the Book of Mormon. The years and number of pages are approximates.

*El primer Libro de Nefi
**Autor: Nefi
**Años que cubre: 600 A.C. – 580 A.C.
**Año en que fue escrito: mediados del siglo 6th A.C.
**Numero de paginas: 52
*El Segundo Libro de Nefi
**Autor: Nefi
**Años que cubre: 580 A.C. – 544 A.C.
**Año en que fue escrito: 544 A.C.
**Numero de paginas: 64
*The Book of Jacob
**Author: Jacob (brother of Nephi)
**Years covered: 544 B.C. – 530 B.C.
**Year written: 530 B.C.
**Number of pages: 19
*The Book of Enos
**Author: Enos (son of Jacob)
**Years covered: 530 B.C.
**Year written: early 5th century B.C.
**Number of pages: 2
*The Book of Jarom
**Author: Jarom (son of Enos) and others
**Years covered: 420 B.C.
**Year written:
**Number of pages: 2
*The Book of Omni
**Author: Omni (descendant of Jarom) and others
**Years covered: 323 B.C.
**Year written: late 4th century and 3rd century B.C.
**Number of pages: 3
*Words of Mormon
**Author: Mormon
**Years covered: mid 4th century A.D. and 2nd century B.C.
**Year written: 4th century A.D.
**Number of pages: 2
*The Book of Mosiah
**Author: Mormon (using records of Mosiah)
**Years covered: 130 B.C. – 91 B.C.
**Year written: 4th century A.D.
**Number of pages: 62
*The Book of Alma
**Author: Mormon (using records of Alma and Helaman)
**Years covered: 91 B.C. – 52 B.C.
**Year written: 4th century A.D.
**Number of pages: 161
*The Book of Helaman
**Author: Mormon (using records of Helaman and Nephi)
**Years covered: 52 B.C. – 1 B.C.
**Year written: 4th century A.D.
**Number of pages: 38
*The Book of Third Nephi
**Author: Mormon (using records of Nephi)
**Years covered: A.D. 1 – A.D. 36
**Year written: 4th century A.D.
**Number of pages: 59
*The Book of Fourth Nephi
**Author: Mormon (using records of Nephi and others)
**Years covered: A.D. 36 – A.D. 322
**Year written: 4th century A.D.
**Number of pages: 4
*The Book of Mormon
**Author: Mormon and Moroni (son of Mormon)
**Years covered: A.D. 322 – A.D. 385
**Year written: A.D. 385
**Number of pages: 18
*The Book of Ether
**Author: Moroni (using records of Ether)
**Years covered: 2200 B.C. – 400 B.C.
**Year written: late 4th or early 5th century A.D.
**Number of pages: 31
*The Book of Moroni
**Author: Moroni (son of Mormon)
**Years covered: late 4th and early 5th century A.D.
**Year written: A.D. 421
**Number of pages: 14

==Book of Mormon Location==

The Book of Mormon begins in Jerusalem, and the [[Book_of_Mormon_geography:Old_World|route of the group]] to the shore of the Arabian Sea has been identified and is generally accepted by Book of Mormon scholars. However, the site of their landing in the western hemisphere is not known. Based on a variety of internal evidences, most Book of Mormon scholars today believe that the Book of Mormon narrative takes place near Guatemala and the Yucatan peninsula.

The Jaredite culture existed somewhere to the north of the Lehite cultures, but close enough so that the Nephites found some of the ruins of the Jaredite civilization within a few days or weeks of traveling by foot from the Nephite lands. ({{s||Mosiah|8|&-11}}; compare with {{s||Mosiah|23|1-3}} and {{s||Mosiah|24|25}}.)

Historically, most Book of Mormon readers, including most LDS leaders, assumed that the Book of Mormon civilizations extended far into both North and South America. The primary textual support for this view has been the Book of Mormon statements regarding a “land northward” and a “land southward” separated by a “narrow neck of land.” LDS Church leaders have also frequently used Book of Mormon statements about a promised land to include the United States specifically. This view of the Book of Mormon is called the “Hemispheric Geography Theory” ([[Book_of_Mormon_geography:New_World:HGT|HGT]]).

An alternate opinion of where the Book of Mormon lands are located is that the entire narrative takes place within a relatively small area, probably little more than a few hundred miles between the furthest points. This view, called the “Limited Geography Theory” ([[Book_of_Mormon_geography:New_World:LGT|LGT]]) was first proposed during the lifetime of Joseph Smith, but remained a minority opinion until the second half of the 20th century. Today, nearly all Book of Mormon scholars believe the textual evidence for the LGT is overwhelming.

It should be noted that both the HGT and the LGT can either accept or reject the assumption that non-Lehite peoples and cultures existed before, during, and after the Book of Mormon cultures. Both theories can also either accept or reject the idea that all, or nearly all, of precolumbian Native Americans could have been descended, at least in part, from Lehi. And finally, neither the HGT nor the LGT imply that it should be possible to determine Lehi ancestry from modern Native American [[Book_of_Mormon_and_DNA_evidence|DNA]].

Although many Book of Mormon scholars see references to non-Lehite cultures and peoples within the text of the Book of Mormon, the Book of Mormon does not overtly reference non-Lehite civilizations or peoples. This fact, combined with the paucity of written material from New World antiquity and the discontinuities of New World civilizations, languages, and occupations, makes it difficult to identify existing ancient ruins and artifacts as being of Lehite origin or to confidently place Lehite culture within a specific ancient American context. A commonly held view of many Book of Mormon scholars is that the Jaredites were associated with the Olmec culture and the Nephites and Lamanites were associated with the Mayan culture.

==Book of Mormon Translation==

Joseph Smith, who was born in 1805 in the state of Vermont in the United States, was visited by an angel several times one night in 1823. The angel identified himself as the ancient Nephi prophet Moroni, and he told Joseph about the existence of an ancient record of his people. Moroni told Joseph that the record was written on gold plates and that in time Joseph would be allowed to retrieve the plates and translate them. The following day Joseph went to a nearby hill as directed by the angel, and there under a large rock he saw a stone box and the ancient plates within it.

Joseph was not permitted to remove the plates until 1827. Almost immediately after Joseph Smith retrieved the plates, enemies became aware of them and tried to steal them. Joseph and his wife Emma were forced to move as persecution increased.

Joseph Smith, who had very little education, said that he had been able to translate the Book of Mormon through the power of God. His translation process involved his receiving direct revelation from God, often through the medium of the Urim and Thummim or through a seerstone. Joseph Smith dictated the Book of Mormon while a scribe wrote down what was said. The entire translation process took approximately 60 days and involved at least three scribes: Emma Smith, Martin Harris, and Oliver Cowdery.

At one point during the translation process, Martin Harris pressured Joseph into letting Martin take the transcript to show to his wife, who had been upset with Martin over his involvement with the Book of Mormon translation. These pages, which covered over 300 years of Nephite history and religious discourse, were lost and never recovered. This event had been foreseen by God, and when the plates had been originally assembled, Mormon had been inspired to include a separate set of plates that covered some of the time period as covered by the lost manuscript.

The gold plates were taken by the angel after the translation, but a number of witnesses were allowed to see and feel them. Martin Harris, David Whitmer, and Oliver Cowdery (the “Three Witnesses”) were visited by an angel, who showed them the plates, and these witnesses heard the voice of God declaring the translation to be correct (note that many critics of the Church unjustifiably assume this means the original manuscript was perfect and thus no changes of any kind should have been needed or made in the published Book of Mormon). Another eight men were allowed to see, handle, and lift the plates, though there was no spiritual or supernatural event associated with it. The written testimonies of the three and eight witnesses appears at the front of the printed editions of the Book of Mormon.

In addition to the testimony of the twelve official witnesses (Joseph Smith, the Three Witnesses, and the Eight Witnesses), a number of other people also were witnesses to the existence of the plates. Most of these experiences occurred under natural circumstances, such as Emma moving them and hearing the metallic sound of their rustling under their covering while she was doing housecleaning. Others had miraculous experiences, such as Mary Whitmer being shown the plates by Moroni after she had sacrificed so much to support Joseph while he translated the plates in her home.

The original manuscript of the Book of Mormon consisted of a stream of words without punctuation and with inconsistent spelling. The manuscript was recopied for use by the printer, and this manuscript is called the printer’s manuscript. About one third of the original manuscript and all of the printer’s manuscript are still extant. The printer had to add all of the punctuation, and he did so based on his own reading of the text.

The Book of Mormon was first published in 1829. Over the years, Joseph Smith occasionally corrected errors that had appeared in the first printing, and he also made a few changes to the Book of Mormon text that he felt better expressed what had been on the plates. Nearly every edition of the Book of Mormon since then has involved some minor changes as scholars analyze the various manuscripts to try to determine the original translation of the Book of Mormon plates.

==Book of Mormon Teachings==
* [[Plain_and_Precious_Book_of_Mormon_doctrines | Plain and precious Book of Mormon doctrines]]

==Book of Mormon Resources==

===Complete Text===
* [http://www.mormon.org/freeoffers/1,17785,2071-1-1,00.html?src=tv Click here] for free copy of the Book of Mormon, with no obligation
* [http://www.lds.org/mp3/display/0,18692,5297-41,00.html?src=tv# Click here] to listen to or download Book of Mormon in audio format
* [http://scriptures.lds.org/bm/contents Click here] for an on-line searchable Book of Mormon

===Study Aids===
* [[Online_textual_sources_and_materials#Scripture_study | FAIRWiki scripture study links]]

===Bibliography===
The ''FARMS Review'' often produces a yearly bibliography on the Book of Mormon:

*{{FR-1-1-19}}
*{{FR-2-1-31}}
*{{FR-3-1-23}}
*{{FR-4-1-32}}
*{{FR-5-1-21}}
*{{FR-6-2-17}}
*{{FR-7-2-12}}
*{{FR-8-2-17}}
*{{FR-9-2-7}}
*{{FR-9-2-18}}
*{{FR-10-2-16}}
*{{FR-11-2-9}}
*{{FR-12-2-21}}
*{{FR-13-2-18}}
*{{FR-15-2-21}}

==Further reading==

===FAIR wiki articles===
{{BoMWiki}}
 {{OtherLang}}
*{{GermanWiki|http://www.de.fairmormon.org/index.php/Buch_Mormon_Grundlagen}}

===FAIR web site===
{{BoMFAIR}}

===External links===
{{BoMLinks}}

===Printed material===
{{BoMPrint}}

Pregunta: ¿El hecho de que la Biblia declare que nada debe ser "agregado a" o "quitado" del libro significa que el Libro de Mormón es falso?

2007-11-02T09:07:27Z

AndresSilva:

'''Acusación'''
Articulo traducido con permiso de FAIRDS por: '''Alberto Barrios.'''
----

La acusación afirma que el Libro de Mormon no puede ser verdadero porque nada deberia ser "agregado" o "quitado" de la Santa Biblia.

'''Fuente(s) de la acusación'''

"[Jose] Smith aparentemente no estaba enterado de la expresa advertencia acerca de agregar o quitar de la palabra de Dios, o voluntariamente desobedecio a ella (ver Apoc. 22:18,19)." - "Dr." Walter Martin, Mormonismo (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House Publishers, 1984), 29.

'''Respuesta'''

----

El verso a menudo citado (por Martin, arriba) es Apocalipsis 22:18-19.
22:18 Yo testifico a todo aquel que oye las palabras de la profecía de este libro: Si alguno añadiere a estas cosas, Dios traerá sobre él las plagas que están escritas en este libro.
22:19 Y si alguno quitare de las palabras del libro de esta profecía, Dios quitará su parte del libro de la vida, y de la Santa ciudad y de las cosas que están escritas en este libro

Sin embargo, la critica ignora que:

El libro de Apocalipsis fue escrito a causa de los otros textos biblicos, sin olvidar que fue unido a una coleccion de textos. No obtante, este versiculo puede ser aplicado solamente al libro de Apocalipsis, y no a la Biblia completa(algunos de los cuales fueron re-escritos y ninguno aun habia sido recopilado como "La Biblia").

Mientras la fecha tradicional del libro de Apocalipsis es de 95 o 96 años despues de Cristo (primeramente basado en unas afirmaciones de Irenaeus), La mayoria de eruditos fechan el libro entre 68 o 69 años despues de Cristo. El evangelio de Juan es generalmente fechado entre 95 - 100 años despues de Cristo. (para mas informaciòn sobre las fechas del Apocalipsis, vea el articulo biblico por Thomas B).

El libro de Apocalipsis es el ultimo libro de la Biblia porque lo agregaron a ella muchos años depues. Sin embargo Juan no tenia la intencion de escribir las ultimas lineas como advertencia y aplicarlas a toda la Biblia ya que el no se encontraba escribiendo el capitulo final de la Biblia completa.

Otras escrituras (tales como Deuteronomio 4:2, Deuteronomio 12:32, y Proverbios 30:6)de manera similar tambien prohiben agregarle a las escrituras, aqui los argumentos de los criticos no parecen tan consistentes, porque tendrian que descartar todo lo escrito en el Nuevo Testamento y mucho del Antiguo Testamento, siendo que estos versiculos anteceden a "otras escrituras" agregadas por el mismo Dios atravez de antiguos profetas.

La Biblia le prohibe al hombre agregarle a la palabra de Dios; Pero no dice que Dios no pueda hacerlo, a travez de un profeta, agregarle a la palabra de Dios. Si esto no fuera posible, entonces la Biblia nunca hubiera existido.