Anyone ever ask themselves why is it that if the church does not push the original BOM?
Shouldn’t the original be free of mistranslations like they accuse the bible of being?

Why is it that every mormon member is not told “Get yourself the original most truthful version” over the pulpit?

Men have changed it over 4000 times due to its original anachronisms, changed the doctrine, changed the nature of God, hillbilly English and heaven help us, lack of grammar, periods and misspelling and such.

It couldn’t be the plain embarrassment of the original could it?

Only the King James version of the Bible will do but heaven forbid having the original edition of the BOM!

How many originals are on the shelves of the average member?

When I checked for the supposed changes that the "anti-mormons" were asserting because I had bought one as a novelty and therefore had access to one by pure providence I found that the anti's were telling the truth.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 05/31/2012 07:56PM by AmIDarkNow?.

ON THE NEWS JUST NOW! Someone stole the original BoM from this like antique bookstore or something in AZ. Hahahaha too funny. The owner was all obviously Mormon she was like "well because of the content of the book and the spirit of it I would hope someone would say 'I've done something wrong and I should return the book'" Hahaha! Ohhkaaayy lady.

non-mo here, who married a mo. Years ago, before I heard of mormons, I was in a used book-store off the campus of Eatern Michigan University, say 1995. The bookstore was owned by a slightly crazy, African-American Vietnam War Veteran. He was partially disabled, and think he kept this cupboard store open so he had a place to go every day.

Two distinguished looking men waklked in and spoke in hushed tones to the owner. One of the men pulled out a huge wad of cash that looked thick as a phone book. The owner handed them some books stashed under the counter..


When I asked the owner who they were he told me "mormons. They pay almost any amount to confiscate and hide original books of their scriptures and history; so they can hide them from the public".

He then told nme what the titles of the books were, but I cant recall what he said.

> "well because of the content of the book and the spirit of it I would hope someone would say 'I've done something wrong and I should return the book'"

Given that the opening chapter deals with supposedly righteous people stealing an ancient book of scripture and NOT giving it back, I would guess the content of the book should lead them to keep it.

Good point. Mormons should be using the 1st edition BoM and the Joseph Smith "translation" of the Bible. To not do so shows fundamental problems in the belief.

Awesome point about the JST. Why doesn't the LDS church use the JST over the KJV as their standard text for the Bible? Why should the most correct church on earth use a corrupted text as their standard text, when they have the corrected text at their disposal? (Also, it should be noted that the modern LDS Bible only incorpirates about 1/3 of Joe's inpired version of the Bible.)

LDS scholar (no pun intended) Royal Skousen has spent over a decade working with the Original Manuscript and the Printers Manuscript of the Book of Mormon and has noted all of the variations that exist between them and the 1830 and all subsequent LDS and CofC editions of the BoM. One of his volumes of work is "Book of Mormon: the Earliest Text" which attempts to construct the earlist text of the Book of Mormon. However, his effort is not recommended as valid because his methodology was sloppy. He draws conclusions on many verses based upon his own conjecture without and manuscript support, as well as completely not even addressing misspelled words, misused words, and very poor grammar found consistently in the OM and PM and 1830. In fact, he simply corrects these latter problems without even the slightest manuscript support while at the same time not even acknowledging that he did such. Very sneaky and is far FAR from the original text.

If he were really trying to construct the earlist text he should have simply followed this approach: the 1830 edition is the standard text. Do any variations exist between the original text of the PM and the 1830? Then the PM is the earliest text. Do any variations exist between the OM and the PM or 1830? Then the OM is the earliest text. Done. Footnotes at the bottom.

And to answer the earlier question about the JST, the reason the LDS church never used that as the standard text is because the LDS church never had possession of the original text until a few decades ago. Therefore, they were always skeptical of the RLDS church's inspired version until they finally were allowed to see the text for themselves a few decades ago. Only Then did they start incorporating footnotes and addenda to their translation of the Bible. I guess all those profits, seers, and revelators missed that spirutually discerned memo.

Does anyone know how many 1st ed. copies are still extant?

I suppose there's not an online version, is there?

(O/T) I noticed during my last visit to DI that they no longer sell old Ensigns or really old (potentially embarrassing) church books. Are those being "confiscated" too?

online:
http://solomonspalding.com/SRP/MEDIA/bm.htm

99 cents on kindle:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Book-Mormon-Preferred-ebook/dp/B002JVXC3A/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1338675259&sr=8-6

There are a few hundred originals around I think. I know a collector with two.

You can purchase the original BOM. I got mine from utlm.org. It's not in verses, the spelling is not standardized, the punctuation is odd, etc. It's not in the same order as the current one.

Because the most correct book of scripture on the face of the earth needed some corrections.

given that the 'original' manuscript (the one that Joe wrote with his own hands) "wasn't" the one that went to the printer(according to ChurchCo, I believe) it's easy to understand how the then existing copying methods w/could have had errors.

Joe's stmnt: more Fluff & Feathers, as usual.

When I said "original" I meant copies of the 1830 version with Joseph as "Author and Proprietor". I bought one at the Palmyra bookstore in 2008 for 35 bucks. I keep it for proof of the fraud. If there ever was supposed to be a "Treasured Testament" for the church (thank you jackwad Nelson) you'd think that this would be it.

Modern mormons must say "We believe the BOM to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly".

If it was translated correctly it wouldn't have needed 170 years of corrections now would it?

AmIDarkNow? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When I said "original" I meant copies of the 1830
> version with Joseph as "Author and Proprietor". I
> bought one at the Palmyra bookstore in 2008 for 35
> bucks. I keep it for proof of the fraud. If
> there ever was supposed to be a "Treasured
> Testament" for the church (thank you jackwad
> Nelson) you'd think that this would be it.
>
> Modern mormons must say "We believe the BOM to be
> the word of God as far as it is translated
> correctly".
>
> If it was translated correctly it wouldn't have
> needed 170 years of corrections now would it?



Bet ya didn't know department:

Also, the stmnt of the (8) WITNESSES was that Joseph Smith was the AUTHOR of the book...