- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
B.H. Roberts was a member of the 70 and church historian. He was, perhaps, the first ‘middle way mormon’ in a position of leadership (if you don’t count Joseph Smith, who also seems to have had ‘middle-way tendencies.’) The Book of Mormon was something he struggled with. The whole ranging topic is fascinating. There have been many of his quotes used against the church. At times it seemed like he concluded that the book was a fabrication. That’s probably a ‘quote out of context’ from the critics.
I’ve only just started reading it, but Truman G. Madsen wrote a book about B.H. Roberts and the BoM. You can read it in full here:
http://byustudies.byu.edu/PDFLibrary/19.4MadsenBHRoberts-340f01d0-ddef-4186-8283-0005ae6e3125.pdf It opens with the statement:
“By its own account, the Book of Mormon is for doubters.”
And includes the statement I just put in the quotes thread:
Quote:“B. H. Roberts was preoccupied with Joseph Smith’s role as translator. One reason was that critics turned Joseph’s phrase “by the gift and power of God” into a claim he never made, that of verbal inerrancy. Roberts wrote a whole treatise on these issues, concluding that Joseph Smith could not escape his own skin. Joseph’s vocabulary and grammar are as clearly imposed on the book as are fingerprints on a coin. When Harold Glen Clark asked President Roberts if the Book of Mormon would read differently had it been translated by someone else, B. H. Roberts replied, “Of course, not in substance and basic message but in modes of expression.” Although Joseph Smith affirmed he used a Urim and Thummim, the instrument did not do everything and the Prophet nothing. Roberts insisted that the translation process was neither so simple nor so easy a thing as has been supposed by both advocates and critics of the Prophet. On the contrary, “brain sweat” was required, and preparation, and labor. Further, as an illustration that exact word-for-word translation of one language into another is impossible, Roberts presented examples from the Greek New Testament showing that the word Master used in the authorized version is a translation of six different Greek words all having different shades of meaning. Judgment stands for eight different Greek words. He concluded, “Let us rid ourselves of the reproach of charging error, even though it be of forms of expression, unto God.” Elder Roberts hoped for the day when the President of the Church would authorize that the Book of Mormon be “made a classic in English . . . without changing the shade of a single idea or statement.” He did not live to see it become a classic in other translations.”
I love B.H. Roberts. He was a wonderful example of an heterodox member who remained orthoprax to the end of his life. Quote:At times it seemed like he concluded that the book was a fabrication. That’s probably a ‘quote out of context’ from the critics.
Yes, the term “fabrication” carries implications he would not have supported, especially as used by opponents of the Church. His view was much more complicated and . . . open . . . to various descriptions than “fabrication” allows.
Mackay – Thanks for finding this, I was just discussing my desire to dig into some of this last night and here you start it. Thanks. I can’t wait to read it. I am a huge Truman Madsen fan, he was the first person who publicly said, religious art is never accurate to reality. At the time he said it he was referencing the pictures of Christ in Gethsemane. The picture is all glowing with a serene savior kneeling by a rock. When you read the biblical accounts, Christ falls to the ground, face down in agony and is sweating, and possibly bleeding. It’s very different. Madsen taught that fact a decade before the faith crisis influx, and I always kept it in the back of my mind when the discussion about art and Joseph came up. mom3 wrote:Mackay – Thanks for finding this, I was just discussing my desire to dig into some of this last night and here you start it. Thanks. I can’t wait to read it. I am a huge Truman Madsen fan, he was the first person who publicly said, religious art is never accurate to reality. At the time he said it he was referencing the pictures of Christ in Gethsemane. The picture is all glowing with a serene savior kneeling by a rock. When you read the biblical accounts, Christ falls to the ground, face down in agony and is sweating, and possibly bleeding. It’s very different. Madsen taught that fact a decade before the faith crisis influx, and I always kept it in the back of my mind when the discussion about art and Joseph came up.
If you have a source on that art quote I’d quite like to read it.
Old-Timer wrote:Yes, the term “fabrication” carries implications he would not have supported, especially as used by opponents of the Church. His view was much more complicated and . . . open . . . to various descriptions than “fabrication” allows.
My dictionary describes fabrication first as “To construct by combining or assembling”
That seems pretty similar to my own perspective on the forming of the BOM.
The second definition is “To make up in order to deceive” and seems to overshadow the first meaning in its negativity.
I too am interested in any insights you might glean from this Mackay.
:thumbup: Yep, Roy, that’s exactly what I meant. In the context of the Book of Mormon, “fabrication” generally defaults to the second, completely negative definition – since it is used and has been used so much by people who view it as intentional fraud perpetrated by a / the deceiver. Mackay – I will try to find it, I heard it live at BYU Women’s conference, and over the years I’ve learned that the typed and recorded versions get edited. I think it’s for time and page length. I will try to find it though.
So far I am not finding it. I heard him give two talks, only one of them has a transcript and the quote isn’t in there. The other one he did with Steve Young and it maybe in that one, but I can’t find a full transcript. I wrote it in my notes, but that doesn’t make it a resource. Sorry. It looks like a great faith promoting rumor. AAA.
No worries mom3. Was just curious if it came up. Thanks for the link, Sheldon. It is an excellent book, and I should have thought to provide the link.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.