BANCROFT LIBRARY THE LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2007 with funding from IVIicrosoft Corporation http://www.archive.org/details/2000changesinboo00callrich KJ : r-'-i <"1 BOOK of MORMON . COTAfNIMG The way ih'"^ bo'^'-k i;- cIpd'jm"! lo i.-iv » . • -s traiislated, the wlwr':^ b-\\. '- ,-i' made in the book .vn.it ^.o ^'-.spirfy! d - J d-o' sliould have been, and tint rea?oa.s giVen i^y *-^''" church for making :he many oranur.Ptf-K.iA •,*''^' ^ ' cK^ns; showisia thai th'- vJai^n di' "'ons.-. '» . Bv I .AMONJ CALL. 190 Gordon Laiio. i. r d. 4, >'i]'.v;i I 'i il Price /•'> crrl^. po^-.^ ly n' ; CHAfES IN THE BOOK OF MORMON. CONTAINING The way the b3ok is claimed to have been translated, The amendments which have been made in the book. What an inspired translation should have been, and the reasons given by the church for making the many grammatical changes. . SHOWING That the claims are inconsistent and untrue. BY LAMONI CALL, coMPiLBR OP "The Gospel In A Nut Shell.' BOUNTIFUL, UTAH, AUG. 1898. •C 19 COPYRIGHT BY -LAMONI CALL,- 1898. Bancroft Library PREFACE. In lifting my pen against the book my friends hold as sacred, I realize, in part, at least, my position. My friends and relatives are mostly in the chnrch, and many of them look with pity npon my position; while I regard my differ- ence of opinion as purely a mental con- viction, and cannot see how any person can injure himself in the sight of God if he does onlj^ what he thinks is right. To advise one not to think in any particular way would be as inconsistent as to ask the powers of gravitation not to attract. A person ma}^, however, for aught I know, do something which will cause God to withdraw his spirit from him so that he will not then believe as lie once did. But I see no difference as to the cause of one's belief, the onl}/ thing for we poor mortals is to do as we think we should do. We cannot even follow the convictions of yesterday, nor can we follow those we may have to-morrow. The thing to do is to do what we believe we should do now. Emerson has in his essay on ^^Self-reliance'' (I should like to incor- porate the entire essay as part of this preface.) ^'If you would be a man, speak what you think to-day in words as hard as cannon balls, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard w^ords again; though it contradict everything you said to-day." A person might be held accountable for doing the thing that caused his mind to change; if it be a crime, he would be held accounta- ble whether his mind changed or not; if honest investigation, that is a praise- worthy-act at any time, and our inves- tigations should be made without fear of being convinced in an}^ particular way. Since, then, I do not believe the Book of Mormon is a gift of heaven to man, there are but three reasons why I should not raise my voice and pen to proclaim against it. One of these is the lack of ability. Another is the lack of energ}\ The other is the lack of courage. The last two have not stood in the way, but I am not so sure but many will say the first should. What makes me the more anxious to write my views is because I have been unable to -satisfy myself that my stand is wrong, and no person with whom I have been able to converse upon the subject has been able to show me the fallacy in my argument. It maj^ exist for all that, and there may be plenty of people able to help me. The publica- tion of this little work will put them in possession of one of iny difficulties, which if they can remove, will give me great hope that the others may be re- moved. If truth is against me I most sincerely hope some person with the spirit of sympathy burning deep in his bosom will step forward and save another soul unto Christ. Be assured, if you come with reason you will be considered, but do not ask me to lay aside my mind and take that of any other person. I have endeavored to write without animosity, and to use nothing of a repul sive nature. No vile names are used. But in all cases reference is made to matters of history in the most respectful language at my command. I believe those who hold the Book of Mormon as sacred can read without having their ire aroused by false statements, oi* abusive accusations. The Author. ]J2©N[| ^h^ SMto© ^m^ 1^2i3i©Ma®il* T MAY not seem a matter of im- portance to some to learn just how the plates were translated. But it seems to me that a great matter rests upon even this small point of history. If it is a fact that Joseph had the plates as he said, and translated them as we are told he did, the probabilities are that tliose who were intimately cor nected with the work would get a cor- rect understanding of the way it was done, and we would be furnished with correct data regarding so great a sub- ject. I have considered, carefully, all the references made to the way the work of translation was performed that I have been able to find, but at present can- 1 8 HOW THE BOOK not tell liOw the work was accom- plislied. It is necessary that we learn as much about the historical evidence as we can before we enler into the subject mat- ter of this little work. Indeed we should have the wIk le truth to do it justice. But since I have not found what satisfies me as being the whole truth, w^e will go to work as best w^e can. Elder George RcN^nolds, in writing on the subject of ^^Time Occupied in Translatingthe Book of Mormon/' sa}' s: 1. "Objection has been made to the divinity of the Book of Mormon on the ground that the aeconnt given in the publications of the Church, of the time occupied in the work of translation is far too short for the accomplishment of such a labor, and conse- quently it must have been copied or transcribed from some work written in the English language, most probably from Spaulding's *Manuscript Found.' Bat at 1 he outset it must be recollected that the trans- lation was accomplished by no common method, by WAS TRANSLATED. 1 9 no ordiudry meau^. lo was doae by divine aid. There were no delays ovtr rb cure passages, no difficnlties over the choice of words, 110 atoppagps from the ig- noracce of the translator; no time was wasted in investigation or argument over the value, intent or meaning of certain characters, and there were no reft^rences to authorities. These difficulties to hu- man work were removed. All was a^ simple as when a clerk writes from dictation. The translation cf the characters appeared on theUrim and Thummifr\ sentence by sentence, and as soon as one was correctly transcribed the next would appear. So the enqiry narrows down to the consideration cf this simple question, how much could Oliver Gowdrey write in a day?'*- Myth cf the Manufcript Found, Pace 71. Again, from the same author, we have a quotation from Martin Hanis, one of the three witnesses, Joseph's first scribe, a man who befriended Jo- seph, and was in his company at first, when the work was yet in embryo; the man who saw as much of the process as God designed man — other than his prophet Joseph — to see at that lime: 2. **He said that the Prophet posi^essed a seer 20 HOW THE BOOK stone, by which he whs enabled to translate as well as from the Urim and ThDmmim,andfor conveDieLce he then used the seer stone. Martin explained the translation as follows: By aid of the seer stone, sentences would appear and were read by the prophft and written by Martin, and when finished he would say, *Written,' and if correctly written, that sentence would disappear and another appear in its place, but if not written correctly it remained until corrected, so that the translation was jast as it was engraven on the plates, precisely in the languapre then used/' —Myth of the Manuscript Found, Page 91. , M. T. Lamb lias quoted Tavid Wliit- mer's description of the process from the Deseret Evening News of Decem- ber 24, 1885: 3. •'After affixing the magical spectacles to his eyes. Smith would take the plates and translate the characters one at a time. The graven characters would appear in succession to the seer, and directly under the character, when viewed through the glasses, would be the translation in English."— The Golden Bible, page 241 . B. H. Roberts, in his ''Brief History of the Chnrch," has the following foot- WAS TKANSLATFD. 21 note, but he does not tell where he gets it. O. F. Whitney has almost the same thing in his "History of Utah:'^ 4. "The following is the manner in which it is Sdid the Book of Mormon was trant-lated: *ThB Prophet, scanning through the Urim and Thummim the golden pages, would see appear, in lieu of the strange characters engraved thereon, their equiv- alent in English words. These he would repeat, and the scribe, separated from him by a veil or curtain, would write them down, * * * Until the writing was correct in every particular, the word^ last given would remain before the eyes of the translator, and not disappear. But on the necessary correction be- ing made, they would immpdiately pass awav and be succeeded by others.* "- Brief History of the Church, page 28, Dr. Wyle, an anti-Mormon author, qnotes Emma's — the Prophet's first wife — death-bed statement to her son Joseph: 5. "In writing for your father I freqently 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."— Mormon Portraits, page 203. 2 2 HOW THE BOOK Daniel P. Kidder published a work in 1842. Tliisj too, is anti-MoriiiOii, and we can take it for what it is worth. We make an extract from a statement made b\^ Joseph's father-in-law, Isaac Hale: 6. *'The manner in which he pretended to read and in-erpret, was the came as when he looked for the money-diggers, with the stone in his hat, and his hat over his face, while the book of plates was at the same time hid in the wood?." — Mormonism and the Mormons, page 32. A Chicago Times correspondent vis- ited David Whitmer, and published an article which was criticised by the Des- eret Evening News at the time. Our extract was not criticised, so it must have been correct, according to the ideas of the editor: 7. "Frequently one character would make two lines of manuscript, while others made but a word or two words."— Myth of M. F., page 83. In order to avoid trouble in calling WAS TRANSLVrED. 23 attention to the above extracts we have numbered them. The only point of interest to me in Nos. 5 and 6 is that the stone was placed in Joseph's hat. Just where the plates were I cannot tell, for if Joseph had the stone and his face buried in his hat, it is hardly probable that the plates could have been there too. If tliey were, the light must have peen exclud- ed, so he could not view them with his natural eyes, and the work could not be read as we would read a work by the light of the sun. Extract No. one says: ^'The trans- lation of the characters appeared ON the Urim and Thummim." No. three says Joseph viewed the characters ^'through'' the glasses. No. four also says that he viewed the plates through the Urim and Thummim. The ques- tion which now presents itself is, did the translation appear on the stone, or 24 HOW THE BOOK Urim and Thuaiiiiiiii, or did Joseph look THROUGH the instrument and see the translation beyond it, or was it sometimes one way and sometimes the other way. As a matter of fact, after reading what all three extracts say, I do not know anything about it. Number three sa3^s: ^^The graven characters would appear in succession to the seer, and directly under the char- acter, when viewed through the glasses, would be the translation in English. In number four Joseph ^^would see ap- pear, IN LIEU of the strange characters engraven thereon, their equivalent in English words." Number one says ^^The translation of the characters ap- peared on the Urim and Thummim.'' It is important that we understand this matter, so please note carefully. Number three says both character and English appeared, number four says only the English appeared; u umber WAS TRANSLATED. 25 one says the translation appeared, bat says nothing abont the characters ap- pearing. So after getting all I can out of this, I am not certain of the way the translation was performed. Number seven may throw a little light on the subject: ^ ^Frequently one character would make two lines of man- uscript, while others would make but a word or tw^o words." If the English appeared in liEU of the characters, how could Joseph tell which character made the English before him? And if the translation only came up upon the Urim and Thummim, how could he tell what part of the record he was working on? How could he tell when to turn over the leaf? Or is it a fact that they sometimes translated with the plates in the woods? Or were they placed in a hat and all the light of day excluded? If Joseph looked through the instru- ment, and saw the graven characters 26 HOW THE BOOK appear in succession, and the English too, it is possible that he might have known the amount of English each character made. But if he was look- ing at the whole page, what became of the characters that did not stand in view of the translator? Did the in- strument cover the page with a mist, and only allow the propper character to appear throngh the mist, or does it look as though the story was fabricated out of whole cloth, and that it was not so carefully thought out that sometimes one story was told and sometimes an- other. In the second Martin says: ^'So that the translation was just ^s it was engraven on the plates, precisely in the language then used.'' This to me is a statement made at random, for as I un- derstand translation, the thought is all that could possibly have been repro- duced; and as Martin kne\/ nothing of language, it was impossible to know^ WAS TRANSLATKD. 27 more than that Joseph or some other power told him that such was the case. We expect to present, further on in this little work, a chapter on tj'anslation. The spelling and punctuation is a matter of interest to me. The question is, did the heavenly instrument spell and punctuate the work for Joseph? From the extracts quoted one would be led to think the work was ^^correct in every particular/^ and as spelling and punctuation are both particulars, they must have been included. To be sure, the misspelling of many words could not lead one astray; but if the work came up, either on the instrument or on tlie plates, or in some divinely formed background, it must have come in script or print to have been understood by Joseph. If it came in either way, of course each word would have been spelled correctl3\ Probably the singu- lar and plural of verbs would have given 28 HOW THE BOOK Joseph the most trouble if they were not spelled for him. With his education at the time he would not have been likely to get all these things right, and if they had been written incorrectly, the printer would have been likely to want to change them, and if they were to have insisted that God was responsible for every word, as he most assuredly would have been if the instrument furnished every word, of course he would have let it remain as God gave it. Neither love, money nor threats would have induced him to have made a change, even if he had used the singular for the plural verb, or vice versa. The punctuation, however, is a mat- ter of very great importance. Occa- sionally we meet with sentences which can be punctuated so they will not con- vey the idea the author wished to con- vey. We often get letters written with- WAS TRANSLATED. 29 out punctuation, and many times they are difficult to understand. But as a matter of history the Book of Mormon manuscript was not punctuated. The typo who set the first edition says: ''We had a great deal of trouble with it. It was not punctuated at all. They did not know anything about punctua- tion, and we had to do that ourselves." It seems to me that God could have added the punctuation just as well as not, especially when he was doing, as Orson Pratt says, ^ What could be more marvelous and wonderful, than for the Lord to cause an unlearned youth to read or translate a book which the wis- dom of the most wise and learned could not read?'' — Orson Pratt's Works, page 298. . Had this language been perfect, it would have been marvelous, and there is plenty of room for a perfect being to have improved even on the best, but if 30 HOW THE BOOK the most marvelous part is its clumsi- ness, and if the translator was not fur- nished with the punctuation, and had to leave so important a matter to a common scrub printer, (as Joseph F. Smith informs the writer that Grandon was, and that they could not get a first- class printer to do the work) to say the least, the work was not so marvelous as it could have been. God's way may not be as man's ways, but so far as the writer is concerned, he would have had more faith in the work if it had been ^'correct in every particular," a model of simplicity in English, and not need more than 3,000 amendments to make it passable among even scrub English scholars. My faith would have been greater if the words ''Carefully revised by the translator'' had not appeared in the title page of each edition except the first as far as the fourth. We close WAS TRANSLATED. 3 I this subject willi an extract set without paragraplis or punctuation: And now Abinadi said onto them I would that ye should understand that God himself shall come down among the children of men and shall redeem his people and because he dwelleth in Ifleeh he shall be called the Son of God and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father being the Father and the Son the Father because he was conceived by the power of God and the Son because of the flesh thus becoming the Father and the SDn and they are one God yea the yery eternal Father of heaven and of earth and thus the flesh becoming subject to the spirit or the Son to the Facher being one God suffer- eth temptation and yieldeth not to the temptation but suffereth himself to be moeked and scourged and cast out and disowned by his people and after all this after working many mighty miracles among the children of men he shall be led yea even as Isaiah said as a sheep before the shearer is dumb so he opened not his mouth yea even so shall he be led crucified and slain the fle^sh becoming subject eyen unto death the will of the Son being swallowed up in the will of the Father and thus God breaketh the bands of death having gained the victory over death giving the Son power to make intercession for the 32 HOW THE BOOK children of men having ascended into heaven having the bowels of mercy being filled with compassion towards the children of men standing betwixt them and justice having broken the bands of death taken npon himself their iniquity and their transgressions having redeemed them and satisfied the demands of justice and now I say unto you who shall declare his generation behold I say unto you that when his soul has been made an offering for sin he shall see his seed and now what say ye and who shall be his seed We must go over these extracts for another point, the most important of all to me. Number four says: ^^Until the writing was CORRECT in every partic- ular the words last given would re- main before the eyes of the translator, and not disappear. But on the neces- sary corrections being made, they would immediately pass away and be succeed- ed by others." Number two says: '^And if CORRECTLY written, that sen- tence would disappear and another ap- pear in its place. But if not written CORRECTLY it remained until correct- WAS TRANSLATED. 33 ED.'' Number one says: '^There were no delay s over obscure passages, no difl&ciilties over the choice of words, no stoppages from the ignorance of the translator; no time was wasted in in- vestigation or ^argument over the value intent or meaning of certain characters, and there were no references to au- thorities. These difficulties to human work were removed. All was as simple as when a clerk writes from dictation. The translation of the characters ap- peared on the Urim and Thummim, sentence by sentence, and as soon as one was correctly transcribed the next would appear.'' This is one point of history where there is no disagreement in testimony so far as I have been able to learn. Joseph was furnished with every syl- lable. He did not have to ransack his scanty vocabulary for the proper word. '^It was all as simple as when a clerk 34 HOW THE BOOK writes from dictation," when tlie dictator reads from a printed page. If he could not pronounce it he C(mld spell it, and it did not matter whether he knew the meaning or not. If language could be n'lade stronger than the above in proof that Joseph had every word furnished him by the in- strument, it is given in the following: REVELATION. (Sec. 10 Present Edition. Sec. 9 First Edition, D. & C.) Revelation given to Joseph Smith, jun., in Harmony, Penn- sylvania, May, 1829, informing him of the alteration of the Manuscript of the fore part of the Book of Mormon. 1. Now, behold, I say unto you, that because you delivered up those [so manyjwritiugs which you had power given unto you totraDSlate,by the means of the Urim and Thummim, into the hands of a wicked man, you have lost them ; 2. And you also lost your gift at the same time, and your mind became darkened. 3. Nevertheless, it is now [has been] restored unto [NOT§— The parts set in light face type and enclosed in brackets have been eliminated since the first edition, in 1833. The parts set in light face type and not enclosed in brackets have been added since the first edition.] WAS TRANSLATED. 35 5 ou a^aiD, therefore see that you ar*^ fathful aDd con- tinue [go] on unto the finishing of the remainder of the work of translation as you have bfgun. 4. Do not run faster, or labor more than }ou have strenth and means provided to enable you to translate; but be diligent unto the end: 5. Pray always, that you may come off con- quereror; yea, that you m^y conquer Satan, and that you may escape the hands of the servants of Satan [and those] that do uphold his work. 6. Behold, they have sought to destroy you; yea* even the man in whom you have trusted, has sought to destroy you. 7. And for this cause I said that he is a wickf d man, for he has sought to take away the things wherewith you have been entrusted; and he has also sought to destroy your gift; 8. And because you have delivered the writings into his hands, behold, wicked men [they] have taken them from you: 9. Therefore, you have delivered them up; yea, that which was sacred unto wickedness. 10. And, behold, Satan has put it into tbeir hearts to alter the words which you have caused to be writen, or which ycu have translated, which have gone out of your hands. 11. And, behold, I say unto you, that because 36 HOW THE BOOK they have altered the words, they read contrary froai that which you translated and caused to be written; 12. And on this wise, the devil has sought to lay a cunning plan, that he may destroy this work; 13 . For he has put it into their hearts to do this » that by lying they may say they have caught you in the words which you have pretended to translate. 14. Verily, I say unto you, that I will not suffer that Satan shall accomplish his evil design in this thing, 15. For, behold, he has put it into their hearts to get thee tO tempt the Lord thy [their] God, in asking to translate it over again; 16. And then, behold, they say and think [for be hold they say] in their hearts, we will see if God has given him power to translate, if so, he will also give him power again ; 17. And if God giveth him power again, or if he translates [translate] again, or in other words, if he bringeth forth the same words, behold, we have the same with us, and we have altered them: 18- Therefore, they will not agree, and we will say that he has lied in his words, and that he has no gift, and that he has no power: 19. Therefore we will destroy him and also the work, and we will do this that we may not be WAS TRANSLATED. 37 ashamed in the end, and that we may get glory of the world. 20. Verily, verily, I say unto you, that Satan has great hold upon thetr hearts; he stirreth them up to [do] iniquity against that which is good, 21. And their hearts are corrupt and full of wick- edness and abominations, and they love darkness rather than light, because their deeds are evil: therefore they will not ask of me. 22. Satan stirreth them up, that he may lead their souls '0 destruction. 23. And thus he has laid a cunning plan, think- ing to destroy the work of God, but I will require this at their hands, and it shall turn to their shame and condemnation in the day of judgment. 24. Yea, he stirreth up their hearts to anger against this work; 25. Yea, he saith unto them, deceive and lie in wait to catch, that ye may destroy: behold, this is no harm, and thus he flattereth them, and telleth them that it is no sin to lie, that they may catch a man in a lie, that they may destroy him. 26. And thus he flattereth them, and leadeth them along until he draggeth their souls down to hell ; and thus he causeth them to catch themselves in their own snare. 38 HO\V THE BOOK 27. And thus he goeth up and down, to and fro in the earth, seeking to destroy the souls of men. 28. Verily, verily, I say onto yon, wo be unto him that lieth to deceive, because he supposeth that another lieth to deceive, for such are not exempt from the justice of God. 29. Now, behold, they have altered these [those] words, because Satan saith unto them, He hath de- ceived you: and thus he flattereth them away to do iniquity, to get thee to tempt the Lord thy [their] God. 30. Behold, I say unto you, that you shall not translate again those words which have gone foith out of your hands: 31. For behold, they shall not accomplish their evil designs in lying [lie any more] against those words. For behold, if you should bring forth the same words, they will [would] say that you have lied; that jou have pretended to translate, but that you have contra- dicted yourself; [your words] 32. And, behold, they will [would] publish this, and Satan will [would] harden the hearts of the peo- ple to stir them up to anger against you, that they will [might] not believe my words. 33. Thus Satan thinketh to [would] overpower your testimony in this generation, that the work may [might] not come forth in this generation: WAS TRANSLATED. 39 34. But behoJd, here is wisdom, and because I show unto you wisdom, and give tou commandments concerning these things, what you shall do, show it not unto the world until you have accomplished the work of translation. Please note the language of the tenth verse^ ''Satan has put it iuto their hearts to alter the words whicli yon liave caused to be written.'' Also the eleventh^ ^^becanse the}/ have altered the words that they read contrary fioni that which you have translated." No- tice the thirteenth. The people who had the manuscript were going to lie by claiming that Joseph had not translated the work over again exactly as it was at first. Of conrse Joseph conld trans- late it again word for word; but what was the use? The people wonld change the work, causing it to read ^^contrary." In my way of looking at it, language conld not be put up setting forth the claim that Joseph was furnished every 40 HOW THE BOOK word, and if he was, we simpl}^ refer you to the next chapter, showing the changes he made himself after the book had been published to the world. Sure- ly there can be no harm in wondering if this is a cunning plan laid by Satan, as set forth in verses twelve and thir- teen. '^^w^^ ^^^^ In ] -resenting this subject we wish to call attention to the fact that the work of comparing the books was a long-, tedions job for a working man. Many hours were spent at the work when tlie eyes refused to stand guard ns they should, desiring more to be locked in slumber. Therefore it is quite probable that all the mistakes are not noted; bnt we feel quite sure there are none here mentioned wliicli do not occur. Where fignres do not follow the c(^r- rection it occurs but once; where they do follow they tell the number of times tbey do occur. We did not use quota- tion marks to enclose the parts ii:certed 42 CHANGES OF THE or taken out, because there were not enough in the office: I BOOK OF NEPHl. Which to Who 76 Which to whom 6 Wnicii to that Saitli to fi?Ad 25 Saith to say Theai to those 3 Thev to them Tiiey to those 13 Was to were 9 Is to are 3 Hath to has 3 Had to has 5 Hath to have 3 Hath to had That eliminated 61 Was to are That which eliminated That he eliminated Saith the prophet eliminated And eliminated Do eliminated My to thy Knowing to know Thou to ye 2 Might to may Our to my Them to those How to what Had eliminated 2 Desirous to desirable In my dream eliminated To eliminated And after I had followed him eliminated In eliminated Yea to and Only eliminated How eliminated And I b^'j^lil eliminated It be e-iminated Yea eliminated 2 Remember to remberest Should to are Dominion to dominions They should to to All eliminated Spea'< that to saith Lieth to lies And it came to pass elimi- nated Telleth to tells For all men added As if to that Wherefore eliminated 2 To eliminated Sat to set The son of added 3 Much eliminated Exceeding to exceedingly Judgment to judgments They added Of to with For to and Rememberetb to remember- est Wherefore eliminated Jesus Christ to the Messiah Called to call Founder to foundation And elimiiiatad Them to all those Commandment to command- ments Behold after this eliminated Before to behold And eliminated After that I eliminated The to their That shall publish to yea. State of awful woundedness to awful state of blindness And if it so be tiiat they harden not their hearts aa-ainst the Lamb of God eliminated If it so be that to and if Of God eliminated Did lose me not to did not lose me BOOK OF MORMON. 43 I should have perished ai^o eliminated II BOOK OF NEPHI. 30 Which to who Th^it to who Sa'th to said Sayeth to said Saith to says Ti.ey to those Was to were weie to was Is to are 3 Are to is Hath to has 14 Hath to, have 4 Hast to have Thou to ye Tliinketh to thinks It came to pass that Th?.t eliminated 30 Eelongethto belongs Cometh to comes And eliminated Is to their Know to knows Wherefore to and Horner to homer Constrain to restrain From to of My to thy Of eliminated Right eliminated My father inserted Spake to spoken The to his Notwithstanding eliminated That ye shall to have him to Do eliminated That they should to to Therefore eliminated Hath me to has Them eliminated Wherefore eliminated Belie veth to believe Come to came Appointed to opened Kindleth to kindle Bare to bear It to he 2 Have to I If it it so he that eliminated Got to gotten AmoztoAmos 3 Not inserted Am inserted 2 Is into inserted Convert to be converted And to that Remaliali to Remalia 5 The eliminated Aside to awny. Zion to Sion And inserted Lands to h;nd Pad eliminated Yieldeth to yield Founder to ifoundation 3 Canseth to cause Unto to to Things to wcrds I cannot hope to can I hoie BOOK OP JACOB. Which to who ^ Sayeth to said 35 Saith to said -4 They to those Hath to has -4 Hath to have That eliminated 5 They to them Done to did Thev to the Ascendeth to nscend Shall eliminated About inserted To it eliminated Wherefore el:minated Never to ever BOOK OF ENOS. That eliminated And the words of my fathtr eliminated Sayeth to said 3 Not to never before Passeth to pass It eliminated Much to many BOOK OF J ^Tt< M. Which to who 44 CHANGKS OF THE ^0 BOOK OF OMNI. Not eliminated WORDS OF MORMON. That eliminated Has to have Wherefore they eliminated BOOK OFMOSIAH. Which to who Which to whom Salth to said Was to were Is to are Hath to has Hath to have Hath to bad That eliminated Done to did Any to no Doth to do Thou to ye Heholdest to beholi Flames to flame Dwelleth to dwell Drinketh to drink Believeth to believe Repenteth to repent Afflictions to affliction Has to have Hath eliminated Spake to spoken Prophesying to prophecy Hast to has Desireth to desire Teachest to teach Knvowest to know Had eliminated Sayest to say That to who That to and There to these Had eliminated Rebelleth to rebel Dieth to die Hath to h IS Desires to desire They eliminated For eliminated The ones who to which Benjaman to Mosiah It came to pass that elim- inated 10 Thee to you When eliminated For to and May to mayest Them to those Sayeth to says Bepenteth to repents Commanding to commanded Much to many Remained to remain No to any Accoidingtothe crime which, he hath committed Cometh to comes Seeth to sees Remainet^ to remains Had nor eliminated Not inserted Their to his BOOK OF ALMA. Which to who Which to whom Which to when That to who Who to which Saith to said Sayeth to said Sayeth to say Was to were These to those Were to was Nor to or Is to are Hath to has Hath to have Hath to had That eliminated Done to did Doth to do Doth eliminated Had eliminated Come to came They to them The eliminated Him to he Being to were A eliminated His to their Seeing to he saw 195 13 106 2 50 10 5T 5 4 4 3 BOOK OF MORMON. 45 Now eliminated Word to words h or eliminated 8 Not el minated Up eliminated Not inserted He eliiuinated 2 Got to gotten And to but And eliminated 4 Art to is Whomsoever to whosoever 2 Arriven to arrived Affections to affection Fell to fallen 2 Binds to bind Slew to slain Suffer to succour To to at To elminated It came to pass that elim- inated 21 Causeth to caused Know to known He hath to has he And Amon to he Which was to those who were My to thy Judgeth to judged And to an Oweth to owed Desires to desire Receiveth to received Kind to kinds Answereth to answered Smote to smitten Durst to dare Their to our Had not ought to ought not Having to have No to any And to now Arrest to wrest Becometh to becomes Also eliminated Delighteth to delight Stronger to strong Was also to also was Thee to you Taking to taken Where to whence Respects to respect No eliminated Even as with power and authority eliminated Causeth to causes li to will Fell to fallen War eliminated Art to are Humbleth to humble Might to may Promise to promises Nevertheless eliminated Its to their To eliminated Him to he Of eliminated Became to become Cherubims to cherubim Therefore eliminated And Moroni eliminated Came to come It came to pass that Moroni and his army elim nated Have fought to fight Saying eliminated Wrote to written Devices to device Which was subsequent to to which men were subject Son to sons BOOK OF HELAMAN. W^hich to who 96 Which to whom 3 That to who Saith to said Saith to say Them to those Was to were 6 Were to was 3 Is to are Is to art Hath to has 23 Hath to have 4 Doth to do 2 They to those Those to these He eliminated Neither to either Contentions to contention Nobler to robber Buildeth to build 46 CHANGES OF THE Fa e to faces For eliminated In eliminated Whatsoever was eliminated Repentetli to repeilt Ways to way And eliminated 5 Hideth to bide Him to eliminated Mauy-day to many days In to into Hideth to hide 'Ireasiire to treasures Arriven to arrived Ye will eliminated Liayeth to lay Came to come Those to them III BOOK OF NEPHI. Which to who 136 Which to whom 15 Sayeth to said 23 S lith to said 2 Them to those 5 Was to were 6 Were to was 3 Is to are 7 Has to hath Hath to have 4 That elimmated 2 They to those 6 Them to those Them to they Sis^n to signal Which was between the land of Zarahemla and the elim- inated Were to had Testifies to testify Drank to drunk Of which to whom Spake to spoken 5 In to on Out eliminated And eliminated Repenteth to repent It came to pass eliminated Eat to eaten 2 Their to his 3 Healings to healing Wrote to written Had eliminated Traveleth to travel Sufficiently to sufficient Gives to give To get gain inserted Fof to get gain eliminated IV BOOK OF NEPHI. ^A^hich to Who II They to those vv as to were 2 ^^ere to was No eliminated 3 Their el miuated BOOK OF MORMON. Which to who 33 Which to whom Saith to said That to who W as to were 3 vv ere to was .'^ Is to are 4 They to those 3 Hath to have 2 That eliminated A eliminated This to these Tiiem to him Kumders to murders The eliminated That to him Wiiich eliminated Of to both Of eliminated Beaz to Boaz I eliminated Remaineih to remain Their eliminated Not eliminated They have to he has They do to he does That which eliminated The eliminated None to no And because that none other people knoweth our lan- guage eliminated BOOK OF ETHER. Which to who Which to whom 47 BOOK OF MORMON. 47' Saiih lo said Was to were "Were to was Is to are Hath to has That eliminated Speake h to speaks Of eliminated Clowd to cloud The elimina'^ed Decree to decrees This to these Not eliminated For eliminated Knew to might know Benjaman to Mosiah vv rote o written Them to him He elminated The eliminated In the which to and Much to many- Slew to slain A eliminated Avenu:eth to avenge The Lord to He In the to by In the to with 12 2 Do eliminated VVhereuntoto but Did to didst Kememberest to remember How eliminated Dwelleth to dwell Garment to garments They eliminated BOOK OF MORONI. Which to Who 6 That to who . 2 Was to were * 2 Hath to has 2 Hath to have That eliminated 8 Doth to do Surely to sure They to those Needeth to need 2 Of eliminated Had not ought to ought not The eliminated Has to have And eliminated Comes to come We present a few sentences with the changes in, that the reader can see how the changes appear in the book: "Which" to **Who" and **They" to Those." I NEPHI 22: 23. For the time speedily shall come, that all churches which are built up to ge* gain, and all those who [they which] are built up to get power over the flesh and those who [they which] are built up to become popular in the eyes of the world, and those who [they which] seek the lusts of the flesh and the things of the world, and to do all manner of iniquity; yea, in fine, all those who [they 48 CHANGES OF THE which] belong to the klngrdou of tie devil, are th^y who[which] need fear and q i .ke; thy are those who [they which] oiiat be brought low in the dust; ihey are those who [they which] must he consumed as stubblp; and this is accordiDg to t' e words of the prophet. ALMA 57: 18-27. Those men whom [which] we s^n^. And tho^»^ m- n who [which] had been selected. My men who [which] had benn wounded. Out of my two thousand and sixty, who [which] had fainted. N 't one poul of them who [which] did perish; yea» and neither was th^re one soul amon.? them who [which] had not received many wounds. Our breth- r'»n who [which] were sUiu. No v thii was the faith of those of whom [which] in NEPHl 6: 21. Now there were mai.y of the people who [which] were excepding angry because of those who [which] testified uf the^e tilings; and those who [which] were angry werechiedy the chief judges, ai'd ihey who [which] had been hi^h priests and law- yerfs, all those who [they which] wfre lav.ynp, were angry with those who [which] trf-tifitd of ihese things. 23. X>w there were many of tiiof^e who [which] tes^id d of the things pertaining to Chriht, who [which] testifltd boldly, who [which] were taken and put to death ecret'y by the judges, that the knowl- BOOK OF MORMON. 49 pdge of their death came pot unto the govercor of the land, until after their death. "Saith" to '*Said." • JACOB 7:9. And I said [sayeth] unto him, Deni- est thou the Christ who should come? And he said [sayeth], If there should be a Christ, I would not deny him; but I know that there is no Christ, neither has been, nor ever [never] will be. 10. And I said [sayeth] unto htm, Bellevest thou the scriptures? And he said [sayeth], Yea. 11. And I said [sayeth] unto him, ALMA 45: 2. And it came to pass in the nine- teenth year of the reign of the judgf s over the peo- ple of Nephi, that Alma came to his son Helaman and said [saith] unto him, Bplievest thou the words which I spake unto thee concerning those records which have been kept? 3. And Helaman said [saith] unto him, Yea, I believe. 4. And Alma said [saith] again, Believest thou in. Jesus Christ, who [which] shall come? 5. And he said [saith], Yea, I believe all the words which thou hast spoken. 6. And Almy said [saith] unto him agsir, Will ye keep my commandments? 50 CHANGES ^OF THK 7. And he said, Yea I will keep thy commaad- ment8 with all ray heart. 8. And Alina said [saith] unto him, Blessed art thou; Double Negatives. 1INEPHI33: 9. Bat behold, for noae of these can I hope [I cannot hope], OMNI 1: 17. Aad Mosiah, nor the people of Mosiah, could ]not] understand them. MOSIAH 3: 17. That there shall be no other name given, nor any [no] other way nor means whereby * 29: 14. Nor any [no] manner of iniquity: ALMA 29: 2. That there raighj not be [no] more sorrow upon all the face of the earth. 23: 7. That they did not fight against God any [no] more, HELAMAN 1: 31. And now behold the Lamanites could not retreat either [neither] way; Miscellaneous. I NEPHI 8: 7.And it came topass that as I followed him, [and after I had followed him] I beheld myself that I was in a dark and dreary waste. 11: 13. I beheld a virgin, and she was exceedingly [exceeding] fair and white. 18. And he said unto me. Behold the virgin whom BOOK OF MORMON. 5 I [which] thou seest, is the mother of the son of Grod; after the manner of the fle-h. 21 . And the angel said unto me, Behold the Lamb of God; Yey, even the son of the Eternal Father. 32. And I looked and beheld the Lamb of God, that he was taken by the people; yea, the son of the everlasting God was jodgedof the world. 13: 32. Neither will the Lord God suffer that the Gentiles shall for ever remain in that awful state of blindness [state of awful woundedness) Which thou beholde^t (that) they are in becauso of the plain and most precious parts of the go?pel of the Lamb which have(hath)b2en kfpt back by that abominable church, whose foundation thou hast seen. II NEPHI 5: 3. Our younger brother thinks (think- eth) to rule over us. * ^ We will not have him to (that he shall) be oar ruler; for it belongs (belongeth ) unto us, who (which) are the elder brethren to rule over this people. 15. And I did teach my people, to (that they should build buildings. 17. And it came to pass that I, Nephi, did cause my people to (that they should) be industrious, and to (that they should) labor with their hands. II NEPHI 8: ISAIAH 51: 9. Awake, awf I f IPnt on strength, Oarm of the Lord; awake as in tlie ancient 52 CHANGES OF THE days. Art thou uot he (it) that hath cat Rahab, wounded the dragooV 10. Art thou not he who (it which) hath dried the sea. 23. But I will put it into the hand of them that afflict thee who have (which I) said to thy soul. nNEPHI12: ISIAH2: 9. Aud the mean man boweth not down, and the great man humbleth him- self not, therefore forgive him not. M03IAH i8: 8. Here are (is) the waters of M )rmon. 10. If this be the desire (desires) of your hearts. 11. This ia the desire (desires) of our hearts. ALMA i: 30. And thus in their prosperous circum- stances, they did not send away any who were (which was) naked, or that were (was) hungry, or that were (was) athirst, or that were (was) sick. i7. And now the law could have no power on any man for his (their) belief. 2: lO. And this he did (done) that he might sub- ject them to him. 12. Therefore the people of the Nephites were (was) aware of the intent of the Amlicites, and therefore they did prepare (for) to meet them. 10: 7. Ail was (a) joarneyiag. 8. And as I was (a) going thither. 30: 56. Bat he was cast out, and went about from BOOK OF MORMON. 53 honse to house (a) begging for his food. 58. And Korihor did go about from house to house (a) begging for his support. Please note — there are 2038 places changed. That tliey are correct- ing the coniinonest kinds of grammat- ical errors. The number of botli nouns and verbs is changed. Adjectives are changed for adverbs. The tense of veri)s is changed. Superfluous words and clauses are eliminated. Words and clauses are added to complete or amend the sentence. Pronouns are changed. The ancient formis changed to the modern in hundreds of places, sometimes as many as thirteen times on a single page. Sometimes the word ''saith" is spelled ^'sayeth^'. A passing uotice of the pages of changes is not snfficient if we wish to [NOTE — The parts set in light face type and enclosed in brackets have been eliminated since the first edition, in 1833. The parts set in light face type and not enclosed in brackets have been added since the first edition.] 54 CHANGES OF THE understand how the book has been re- vised. In fact one cannot realize t!ie extent of the changes unless he can see a book witli the changes marked. While in some of the illustrative sen- tences quoted the mistakes are some- what thicker than the average, it will be noticed that there must be an average of almost four to the page. The changes are less frequent in the parts claimed to have been taken from the plates brought from Jerusalem when King James has it in his transla- tion too. This makes the average ^of original parts greater. The phrase, ^'It came to pass" has been stricken out in a number of places. Some people may think I am pre- sumptuous to write under such a head- ing as the above, because I have not had a college education, and understand no tongue but the English, and that very impefectly. But let it be here suggested that we often have things to investigate that we are not professors of. In fact there are so few people who master more than one branch of science that were it not for this fact we v/ould not be allowed to speak npon the general subjects of the day. But as a matter of fact we are surrounded by things and subjects that we must, in part at least, make up our minds on — we must pass an opinion. 56 TRANSLATION As a rule there is a way for any of us to investigate any subject we need, and obtain a fair understanding of it. We will get at it in our way. vSo in investigating the subject before us, it is not necessary for one to go through the various languages and understand all the ^4ns" and ^^outs" of translation. Usually there is some special object to be attained in presenting a subject, and often that object can be attained by investigating only a small part of the great field that wonld occupy the mind of a careful student or scientist. So with the work at hand. The object be- ing to see if the grammatical errors which may have been made by the Nephites could, would or should have been reproduced in the English transla- tion of our times. The ancient writers confess their ignorance of writing and apoligize to TRANSLATION. 57 tills generation. If the book is what it purports to be, we should excuse and most heartily thank them for having done the best they could for our in- formation. We give their apology. INEPHI 1: 1. I, Npphi, having been born of goodly parents, therefore I was taught somewhat in aU the learning of my father; and having seen many afflictions in the course of my days -nevertheless, having been highly favored of the Lord in all my days; yea, having had a great knowledge of the good- ness and the mysteries of God, therefore I make a record of my proceedings in my days; 2. Yea, I make a record in the language of my father, which consists of the learning of the Jews, and the language of the Egfyptians. 3. And I fenow that the record which I make is true;and I make it with mine own hand; and I make it according to my knowledge. MORMON 9: 31. Condemn me not because of mine imperfection; neither my father, because of his imperfection ; neither them who (which) have written before him, but rather give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest unto you our imperfections, that ye may learn to be more wise than (that which) we have been. 58 TRANSLATION\ 32. And now behold, we have writ- ten this record according to our knowledge in the character?, which are called amocg ns the reformf d Egyptian, being handed down and altered by us ac- cording to our manner of speech. 33. And if our plates had been sufficiently large, we should have written in (the) Hebrew; but the Hebrew hath been altered by us also; and if we could have written in (the) Hebrew, behold, ye would have had no (none) imperfection in our record. 34. But the Lord fenoweth the things which we have written, and alf=o that none other people knoweth our language, (and because that none other people knoweth our language,) therefore he hath prepared means for the interpretation th^^reof, 35. And these things are written, that we may rid our garments of the blood of our brethren who (which) have dwindled in unbelief. MORMON 8:12. And whoso receiveth this record and shall not condemn it because of the imperfec- tions which are in it, the same shall know of greater things than these. Behold, I am Moroni; and were it possible, I would make all things known unto you, 17. And if there be faults, they be the faults of a man. Bat behold, we know no fault. Nevertheless God kaovvoth all things; therefore he that coademu- eth, let him be aware lest he shall be in danger of heHfire. TRANSLATION. 59 Seven sentences have been selected from the first edition of the Book of Mormon, containing a variety of mis- takes which have been corrected. Copies of these sentences were sent to Professors of languages with the simple request to translate. One was asked to translate into German, another into French, and tlie other into Latin. The last two were kindly furnished, but the German did not come. We illustrate our point with the two. Other Professors w^ere now asked to translate the Latin and French back into English. So we here submit the three Englishes, the Latin and the French. From the First Edition. 1. ^^The servant done according to his word.'' 2. ^^The Lord of the vineyard saith again unto his servant." 6o TRANSLATION. 3. '^He had been a preparing the minds of the people.'' 4. ^'He was acknowledged king thronghout all the land, among all the people of the Lamanites, which was composed of the Lanianites." 5. 'I have wrote unto yon." 6. ''I trnst that the sonls of them which has been slain, have entered into the rest of their God." 7. ''They retreated into the wilder- ness again, yea, even back the same way which they had come." From the Latin. 1. ''The servant did it from his own faith." 2. The master of the vineyard speaks again to his servant." 3. ''He had prepared the minds of the people." 4. "He is called a king nnto all the land among the whole people of the Lamanites who stand among the Lamanites." 5. "I wrote to yon." TRANSLATION. 6 [ 6. ^^I hope the souls of those who were killed have entered into the peace of their God.'' 7. The}^ again betook themselves into the desert places; thus, even back in the very way by which they had come." From the French. • 1. "The servant acted according to his word.'' 2. "The master of the vine \ ard said again to his servant." 3. "He had prepared the minds of the people." 4. "He was recognized as king throughout all the country among all the people of the Lamanites." 5. "I have written to you." 6. "I believe that the souls of those who have been killed have entered into the repose of their God." 7. "Tliey withdrew again into the desert; yea, by the same route over which they had come." 62 TRANSLATION. French. 1. Le serviteur agit selon sa parole. 2. Le iiiaitre de la vigne dit encore a son serviteur. 3. II avait prepare les esprits du peuple. 4. II etait reconnu comnie roi tout au travers du pays, parnii tout le peuple des Lanianites. 5. Je vous ai ecrit. 6. Je crois que les anies de ceux qui out ete tues, sont entres dans le repos de leur Dieu. 7 lis se sont retires encore dans le desert, oui, par la nieme route sur laquelle ils etaient venus. Latin, 1. Servus ex fide suo fecit. 2. Dominus vineae servo suo iterum dicit. 3. Animos populorum praepar- averat. 4. lUe rex appellatur in terrani totam inter omnem populum Lamini- tum qui in Laminitibus constitit. TRANSLATION. 63 5. Ad te scripsi. b. Spero aninios illoruui qui necati sunt in paceni Dei suoruni inisse. 7. lu loca deserta iteruiii se recep- eru:it; ita, etiaui retro in via ipsa qua venerant. At this point it is quite probable that some readers would enjoy a criticism of the grammatical construction of the original sentences, and since it was furnished by the professors who'trans- lated, we feel equal to the occasion. One of them very niodestly said, ^'If you will allow me first to correct the English of some of the sentences that you sent I will endeavor to translate them into French." But tlie other goes further and tells where each sentence is wanting. The English Criticised. '^My second comment must be a severe criticism on the grammar of the sen- tences submitted. The errors are of so 64 TRANSLATION. gross a nature as to show great igiio- rance on the part of the original user of the expressions or of one who habitually euiplo3'S them. The error in the first consists in the use of a perfect participle for the past- tense form. At no time in the history of the English language was such a usa^^e permitted. So far as I am ac- quainted with other languages this is not now aud never was permitted in them; and if a translation of the Eng- lish as submitted be insisted upon, all I can say is that it can not be translated. The second is correct. The third while not positively in- correct is at least inelegant in the use of ^a preparing', ^a' being a preposition and ^preparing', a gerund, its object. Before translating, the ^'a'^ must be stricken out. The error in the forth is in the use of the singular verb ^was' with a plural subject Vhich', referring to 'all peo- ple'. The sentence is otherwise clumsy. In no language does a plural word as TRANSLATION. 65 a subject take a singular predicate. The error in the fifth is in the use of a past-tense form 'wrote' for a per- fect participle ^written'. This is no- where permitted. The sixth also contains a plural sub- ject, Svhich' with a singular predicate, 4ias been slain'. The seventh is clumsy in the omis- sion of needed prepositions before ^same way' a'ld before Svhich' respectively." Som^ people whD are acquaiiitei with langu igeaud caa see at a glance where the English of the first edition is faulty, may think we are pursuing these little matters just to fill up space. But the CKperience had up to date is of such a nature as to demand the chasing of every little point of evidence until it vanishes in the distance. Neighbors, and those too, who hold the respect of all on political and financial matters, say our language is continually undergoing a change 66 TRANSLATION. and probably it was translated correctly into the language as it was then, but has simply been changed since to keep pace with a progressive language. But hear what our Professor says of the first sen- tence^'Atno time in the history of the English language was such a usage per- mitted. So far as I am acquainted with other languages this is not now and never was permitted in them." Also in criticising the fourth he says.'^In no lan- guage does a plural word as a subject take a singular predicate." And in the fifth. '^This is nowhere permitted." If our informant knows what he is talking about, any little consolation that our neighbors might borrow from the thought that the book was translated in- to correct English at first will have to vanish as the manna of the Israelites did after sunrise on all week-days. Another point in connection with the TRANSLATION. 67 criticism of the first sentence is worth our consideration. 'If a translation of the English as submitted be insisted upon, all I can say is that it cannot be translated." And our other linguist said, If I would allow him to first correct the English he would translate. If it were ever so great a crime to wonder, my mind is so framed that I can not avoid wondering what the apology of the ancient writers of the B. of M amounts to. It is calculated to account for the bad grammar. But our modern students of language cannot translate such grammatical errors from one language to another. If we will now turn back and compare the Eng- lishes, we will see that while they differ a little from each other the gram- matical errors have been eliminated. Even those needed prepositions in the 68 TRANSLATION. seventh have been supplied. From the French we get ^'by" and ^'over". From the Latin we get ^'in" and '^by'\ Referring to the matter of translat- ing grammatical errors, one of the Professors informs me that there are some kinds of errors, that can be trans- late! from one language into another, but further said that if his students were translating a sentence with agrainmat- ical error in it he would expect them first t) correct the error, unless it was a slang phrase which depended upon the error for its significance. Besides criticising the sentences our Professjr tells us briefly but plainlj^ what a translation is. ''My first statement must be an expla- nation of a translation. It is not an exact setting over, word for word, from one language to another; but the using of such expressions in one language as TRANSLATION. 69 conveys the same idea to one who speaks that language as the words of anotlier language c^)nveys to one who speaks that other language. Thus ^How do you do' conveys the same idea to an American as 'Wie geht's' conveys to a German; but the word for word equiva- lent in Euglish of the German form is» ^How goes it'. Any Latiu equivalent for English expressions mnst be of the same natnre.'' We wish here to call atteutiou to the fact that a translation is not a ^Svord for word'' setting over from one lauguage to another, bnt it is simply conveyingthe tlionghts of one langnage in words con- veying the same thoughts in the other. If we will compare our French, Latin and English we will observe that the words look nothing alike, we may be sure that they would sound nothing alike if spoken. And all of us have seen enough foreigners who mix 70 TRANSLATION. up the grammatical parts of the sentence in such a way that we may know that the parts of speech are differently arranged. In fact the con- struction of the whole language is dif- ferent. This being true what excuse is there for the thousands of grammatical errors in the first edition of tlie book which God himself condescends to trans- late that we might have his law in its purity? Why should He inspire his servants to write the following article of faith? "We believe the Bible to be the word of God, as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God''.? Please note in this article not one word of allowance is made for wrong translation of the B. of M. Is such a work a marvel and a wonder in any other sense than that men would prepare it and that so manj'^ 1:^RANSLATION. 7 1 would believe it came from God. This WE are willing to admit is marvelous; and when superficially examined I felt like exclaiming in the language of King Agrippa, ^^Almost thou persuad- est me to believe". We might now, with profit, return to page 20 and again consider Martin Harris' statement, that tlie plates were translated in precisely the same langu- age that was used by the ancients. It will be remembered that we thought he could not have understood what he was saying. That he did not know the meaning of his own words. The idea we have is, for this to be true, the ^^Refornied Egyptian, '^ which was cut loose from civilization twentj-four hundred years ago, must have developed into a grammatical construction very similar to that of the English language of to-day. They may have had word 72 TRANSLATION. signs whicli differed from ours in ap- pearance, and when these words were sonnded they may not have been recog- nizable to an ear nsed to the English words only. But the arrangement of the parts of speech must have been similar. This is not al 1, indeed it is not the half. They mnst have liad become accnstomed to making the same kinds of grammatical errors that were common in Joseph's time. Fnrthermore, they must have nsed the relative pnmoun "which" for 'Svho'^ just as the trans- lators of the Bible did two hundred for- ty years before, which was good English at that time, but was not allowablein the days of Joseph Smith. They must have been in the habit of using a sup- erfluous "a" as illustrated in our last four illustrative sentences, pages 52-3. Double negatives, which are directly contrarj^ in letter to the spirit of the TRANSLATION. 73 sentence, a common error among us. must have been common then also. In fact tlie errors resemble back-v/oods English so closely that one would be justified in rejecting the whole work on that one point alone, until conclusive evidence to the contrary is produced. We do not wish to say positively that it is impossible for a language to have been, at that time, similar to the English of to-da}^ Yes it might Iiave included the local peculiarities of Jos- eph's neighborhood. God is p'ctured to us as possessing all power. So of course he could by special design cause the ancient inhabitants of America to acquire a language of any kind He saw fit. But we do wish to express an opinion that nothing short of special interposition of the hand of Providence would have produced a language, which, when translated ^'precisely in the Ian- m 74 TRANSLATION. guage then used/' ^Vorrect in every par- ticular/' would resemble the English of Joseph's day; and even include such little grammatical errors as an illiterate person of Joseph's day would be sure to use if he wrote his own thoughts in his own way. If the work be true we have a circumstance, the like of which has never before been discovered in all the research of modem scientists. We give below what we think the first edition should have been, coming from the source it is clainjed to have come from. In this consideration we allows that the ancient wiiteis of the book may have been ever so illiterate; and their w^ork may have been ever so full of errors. The urini and thummim should have brought up tlie thoughts of the ancients. And even if these thoughts were originally clothed in language full of ambiguity it should TRANSLATION. 75 have appeared on the urim and thiiiii- mini in perfect English. We must ever bear in mind that a translation is not a setting over of words. It deals with thoughts. And be it remembered that God was prodncing a marvelous w^ork and a wonder. The wisdom of the wise was to be hid because He was going to so far surpass it. The Book of Mormon, then should have been a model of perfection. It shonld liave stood out alone, a solitary pinnacle wliicli linguists would have peeped at throngli a telescope from afar. It should have been a book wdiich educators would have taken into the school room from one end of civilization totheother. No this is not asking too much. Shak- speare has stood out an unapproachable pinnacle in his line for centuries. And while he seems might}^ to the scholars of today, he should have been a mere 76 TRANSLATION. speck when compared with tlie work of Almighty God. The language of the Book of Mormon should have been ab- solutely perfect. In ever}^ case the veiy best word for the place should have been used. Linguists tell us that there are no synonyms, but that there is a fine shade of difference of meaning in all English words. This book, then Avould have been a miue of treasures. All the fine shades of meaning would have been displayed by God Himself, and all edticated people would have praised the book forever more. Because any other meaning except the proper one would be impossible. Not a word could have been eliminated, added nor exchanged for another without inflicting an injury on the book. There would have been no call for such a remark as Elder Roberts made in the Bountiful TRANSLATION. 77 meeting house in the presence of President Joseph F. Smith, at the quarterly conference, in March, 1897; tliat he wished the book had been clianged (amended) more More than two-thousand amendments had already been made, which improved the book very much, and still God's translation is in such a shape that Elder Roberts wishes they had amended it more. It may be urged by some that had this been the case it would be claimed that an educated person did it, and the book would be disbelieved on that ac- count. But to this we would reply, that tlie claim is made that the ^^ALL WISE did do it. No danger of men saying that man did it. For it would have so far surpassed any thing man had done or could do that they would be obliged to look higher than man for the source. Now men say it was so full of 78 TRANSLATION. the commonest kind of errors that an ignorant person mnst have done it. '^There is plenty of room at the top/^ so if God translated the Book of Mor- mon it should have been on top so far clearness is concerned. After having read the testimony and seeing how very particular God was in furnishing an automatic instrument wliich furnished the very words to be used, and then noting how they have been changed; it seems to me that one would be justified in condemning the whole work as the scheme of an evil designing man, without asking for reas- ons. Under any circumstances I do not see how we can avoid asking: Why so many changes in the book after it was published to the world? Again, after one has read the Book of Mormon even casually, and noted how very par- ticular God was to keep the plates in the hands of just men; men who could 8o REASONS GIVEN FOR and would keep the record correct, it seems to me that lie would be justified in the exclamation: Why was God so slothful at the last with his history and law? Why did He get over His bache- lor notions of precision so soon? Why did He allow His book to be overhaled, amended, patched, cut, doctored, in more than two-thousand places, and still hold His peace? Why did He not come out in his wrath as He did with Uzziah for putting forth his hand to steady the ark? Or the 50,070 men of Bethsheni- isli for simply looking into the ark? Oh! why this great change in Him who is ''the same yesterday, to-day and for- ever?'^ But one thing we should all learn if we have not learned it already; and that is always to let the accused speak for himself. For if it does no good it can do no harm. So in this case, we MAKING THE CHANGES. will let the advocates of the book speak for themselves. It may be that we have overlooked something that would clear lip all this seeming contradiction of statements and circumstances. It may be that we have put altogether too much stress on the way the book was translated. We cannot tell what may come until w^e let the accused speak. When we stop to gather up our scat- ered thoughts, and assemble the wan- derings of our minds, we may remem- ber that we don't remember of having seen a single reference to the matter in any of the church publications. We may think there are but few of our writers who know that the book has been so shamefully handled; or we may think they do not want the public to know all about such a matter, be- cause it is not one of the '^Faith Pro- moting Series." If any are conversant 82 REASONS GIVEN FOR with the matter they have kept up an awful stillness; prolouged with care, the period of ignorance of the matter. But a few words have been dropped, and we will consider them though they be but few. The preface to the second edition of the Book of Mormon is the only printed explanation why the changes were made, I have been able to find. But while investigating it, it did not satisfy me, so I wrote to Prest. Jos. F. Smith for further information. Only a small portion of the correspondence bears on the subject at hand — Reasons given for making the changes — but fearing some niay think we have not quoted fairly we give all the letters. From them the reader can see the questions asked and the answers given. Then we present the preface to the second edition in full, which is all the material I have been able to find. MAKING THE CHANGES. 83 A Series of Letters. Bountiful, Utah, Jan. 17, 1897. Joseph F. Smith, Salt Lake City, Utah. Dear Brother:— For some time pist I have been growing skeptical to revealed religion. For a long time the Bible has had but one prop, that of new revelation, and now, even that, to my mind, is being weakened day by d^y. The reprint of the "Doctrine and Covenants*' I left with you some eighteen months ago has weak- ened my faith slightly. But this winter I learned that the "Book of Mormon'* has been amended since the first edition. Whil^ the changes are only gram- matical for the most;part, when we consider how the book was translated, to my mind even grammatical changes are unpardonable. The ward authorities know how I feel, and they think I should get down on one side of the fence or the other, which I cannot say is wrong. If I were out I should not ask to come in while I feel as I do, but since I am in I do not wfsh to withdraw my name until I have examined every point of evidence in my reach If I should learn that the Tribune had not copied 84 REASONS GIVEN FOR the ^'Doctrine and CovenaDts" Correctly it would strengthen my faith a little Then if you could give a satiBfactory explanation for the many grammatical changes of the '*B3ok of Morm)n" it would do much toward satisfying my mind. This done, the other little clashing points could probably be borne up by the many favorable evidences already in my posses- sion ; and I would be ready to make a full hand again in church matters. Wednesdays or Fridays after 12, noon, would ba my best time to leave school and meet with a com- mittee you might appoint, but I will come any time you suggest, or a written reply would do as well. Unless some change takes place it will be nec- essary for me to give the ward authorities an an^ swer soon, probably iu three weeks from to-day. Hoping to hear from you soon with such a show- er of evidence that my mind will be set permanently at rest. I remain desirous of being considered a Brother in the Gospel of Christ. Lamoni Call Salt Lake City, Utah, Jan. 23, 1897. Lamoni Cf 11. Bountiful, Davis, Co. My Dear Brother Call: -Your esteemed favor of the 17th inst, came to hand on the 20th and I have MAKING THE CHANGES. 85 been so driven with duties and extraordinary prefi- sure upon my time on account of severe sickness in my family that I have found it impossible to suitably reply to your letter. I have but a monent at my dis- posal now, hence this hastely written acknowledg- ment and my desire to express the wish that you will suspend feeling and action until I can get a few momeuts to write you or speak with you. C- m ^ and see me and let me speak with you regarding your views. I have a great regard for your name and ancestry and I would love to see you prosperous and happy and full of faith, knowledge and power for gooJ. I would see you at any time I could get a moment, or I will write 50U later on, until then believe me your brother and friend. Jos. F. Smith. Bountiful, Utah, June. 27, 1897. Joseph F. Smith, Salt Lake City, Utah. Dear Brother: Again I am persuaded that I should write you. Since receiving yous of Jan. 23. 1897. 1 have called at your office several times but always found you buisy. The ward authorities waited on me until my school quit since which time I have spent much of any time reading the Book of Mormon, and com- 86 REASONS GIVEN FOR paring the present with the first edition. All I wish to say is that the more 1 read the Book the unresonable it seems to me to be. I wish it were as I onece thought it to be. It is not pleasant to cat myself off from the society of my friends, but I see no other show. The president of the Seventies quorum said the Bishop had asked him to push things to an issue, and if I would not resign to handle me. Now I do not wish to be handled; I have no flea to make. In my present situation I cannot think that God has done the work our people credit him with doing. In your letter to me you asked me not to act un- til you saw me or wrote me, so I have delayed until now. But if I do not learn something favorable be- tween now and next Sunday I expect to resign my position, I enclose stap, please send my reprint of ^ the •'Covenants and Commandments". I will come to visit you if you advise it. With kind reguards. Lamoni Call. NOTE— The above letter is set just as it was written. Reference is made to the mistakes in it by Jos. F. in the following ; MAKING THE CHANGES. 87 Salt Lake City, Utah, Jan. 28, 1897. Lamoni Call, Esq., Bjuntiful. Dear Brother: Your favor of the 27th inst. is duly received. I do not need to read between the lines to discover the temper of your feeling nor the condition of your mind. I am fully persuaded that under existing condi- tions, with reference to your frame of mind and darkened spirit, it would be a waste of time and words for me to attempt by means of conversation or by letter to dissuade you from your intended purpose as expressed in your letter to me, or to change the trend of your thoughts by any argument, statement of facts or tf stimcny within my power at this lime. I feel quite sure that only time, experience, and the exercise of a few grains of common sense will suffice to bring about the change of heart }ou so much need. I regret, probably as much as you do, the exis- tance in the Book of Mormon as well as other church works of typographical and grammatical errors, bull these are due to the imperfections of men whose handiwork in comparison to the handiwork of God Is always faulty and imperfect. But this is only the evidence of man's weakness and does not destroy 88 REASONS GIVEN FOR the perfection of God's works, nor should they impair oar CDnQdenee in them. I am thankful bayond meas- ure to kaow that the Gospel truths revealed through the medium of the Book of Mormon and other books accepted as authentic by the church, are divine truths and can be relied upon by every man as spiritual and intellectual guidt s, which if well followed will most assuredly lead him back into His presence and glory and eternal life. No amount of verbal changing or paragraphing or versing can ever shake my faith in the divine mission of Christ nor of Joseph Smith or the divine origin of the Book of Mormon, and the revelations contained in the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, or which may still re- main as unpublished records in the manuscdpt his- tory of the church. Especially is this so when such changes tend only to make the thought more plain, the truth more clear, and does not change or destroy its true sense. Howbeit,*'the things of God knoweth no man but (by) the Spirit of God." Herein lies your mistake and consequent trouble. The scriptures are plain upon this subject. Therein it is said,*'Biit the natural man receivelh not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are (or seem to be) foolishness unto him; neither can he know them, because they are MAKING THE CHANGES. 89 spiritii illy discerned". (Sej l8t Cor, 2 cb., 9th to 16. h ver.) If you will humble yourself before the Lord and get a little of His Spirit in your heart, then bend your thought and effort to finding out and demon- strating the truth of the Book of Mormon and ihe rev- elations fr)mGod to Joseph Snith, instead of trying to discover whatever of error can be found in them which error, if it does exist, is only incident to the weaknesses of men, Twill warrant that you will begin to see things in their true light. If you would tske this course from now on, you might, I frimly believe, save yourself from a aserious blunder, which if you make it I can only hope that you may live long enoujsh to discover it and repent. With sorrow for your unfortunate mental and social condtion, and yet with sympathy and love for you as a dessendant of true, noble, and clear- sighted man, I am, with sincere regards, Your Brother, Jos. F. Smith. P. S. By the way I find five glaring mistakes in your letter and you are "a publisher." Your letter would not make more than one fourth of a page of the B. of M. How thankful I am Joseph did not have you to proof read the B. of M.! 0. Cowdery was not a "publishei"! J. F. S. 90 REASONS GIVEN FOR Preface to Second Edition of the Book of Mormon, Printd at Kirtland, Ohio, 1837. '*rhe publishers of the folio wing vohimt^g having obfcainel leave to issue five thoasaud copies of the same, from those holding the copyrights, would respectfully notice a few items for the benefit of the reader." **The 1830 edition of the book of Mormon hnviug some timesince been distrihuted,tlre pressing calls for the same, as well as the baok of D >ctrine and Cove- nants, and the vast importance attached to their con- tents, have induced the undersigned to seek the priv- ilege of supplying those calls by presenting in one vol- ume*, both books, in a condensed form, rendering great- er convenience to elders, and others, who convey the same to different parts. ^'Individuals acquainted with book printing are a ivare of the numerous typographical errors which al- ways occur in manuscript editions. It ie only nec- essary to say, that the whole has been carefully re- examined and compared with the original manu- scripts, by elder Joseph Smith, Jr., the translator of the book of Mormon, assisted by che present printer, brother 0. Cowdery, who formerly wrote the greatest portim of the same, as dictated by brother Smith. MAKING THE CHANGES. 9 1 ''Expecting, as we have reason to, that this book will b9 conveyed to places which circumstances will render it impossible for us to visit, and be perused by thousands whose faces wa may never see on this side of eternity, we cannot consistently let the opportuni- ty pass, without expressing our sincere conviction of its truth, and the great and glorious purposes it must effect, in the restoration of the house of Israel, and the ushering in of that blessed day when the know- ledge of Gjd will cover the earth, and one universal peace pervade all psople. Parley p. Pratt, John Goodson. **Note from back— Contrary to our expectations, when the foregoing ^ork was commenced, we have been induced to abandon the idea of attaching to it the Book of Doctrine and Covenants. We came to this conclusion from the fact, that the two connected, would make a volume, entirely too unwieldy for the purpose intended, that of a pocket companion. The Publishers." Our witnesses are few aud their stat- iiients are not voluminous. So we should by a careful reading and a little thought sift it to the bottom and get the 92 REASONS GIVEN FOR truth. At that word 'truth" I realize that man\' of those wlio hold Josepli as a prophet will feel just a little indignant. The very tliought of questioning liis word! But let it be reuiembered that we are investigating, that Joseph has made a record, that that record will be inves- tigated for a long time to come. Let those who love Joseph rest easy for the ''truth will out.'' Mau}^ men who were considered heretics in their day are now being boosted as high as we poor mortals can boost them. All we can get is their name and record, but that is a thing that cannot be sentenced to death by a bigoted judge or a fanatical priest; or enthroned in glory by a loving mother or an earnest convert If Joseph Smith's work was a success- ful fraud, the people who hold them- selves open to conviction will learn the facts, but those who say, "'tis because MAKING THE CHANGES. 93 His/' and, being so afraid of having their faith weaken that they positively refuse to read anything that is liable to over- turn it, will remain in ignorance, and glory in that ignorance, and think it is the ^'power of God unto salvation.'^ ^^Ignorance is bless.'' If his work is just what he claims it to be, the truth is somewhere buried — from my mind at least — in the mul- tiplied statements which seenji to me to be clashing. (To say they do not clash without investigating is either lazy or cowardly. To say they do clash with- out investigating is just as bad.) And a careful study v/ill bring it to the top all right. The evidence will be classified and weighed, and he will finally get full value for all the good he has done. Men will study both sides of the question and lie will be given his portion among the world's greatest heroes. 94 REASONS GIVEN FOR So let lis go to and carefully examine eveiy point within our reach. Let us not be afraid of thescriptnre which says if we do not believe we will be damned^ because that doctrine would make cow- ards of the best of us. Let me asure you that that scripture is not a heavenU^ truth; a Godl}^ justice,andif it were God never would have trusted it out ot heaven for fear he would be overrun with cowards. The first edition of the book had been in circulation seven years when the sec- ond was printed. It had undoubtedly been criticised by the educated during that time. And publishers found it necessary to make a great mau}^ gram- matical changes in it. The question undoubtedly arose about what they would tell the people as a reason for making the alterations in God's word, may seem to some that I am prejudging MAKING THE CHANGES. 95 tliat the work is a fraud, by saying that thc}^ undoubtedly debated tlie matter to decide what to tell the people. The reader may think a person does not need to debate when he is going to tell simp- ly what he knows to be tlie truth. But let it be remembered, the Book of Mormon was no common volume. It was the word of God; the Law of God. Surel}^ it is not claiming too much when we assert tliat the publishers should have been very particular with it. And if they sent the law of God out with thousands of blunders in it the people would have the right to censure them for laziness at least. So they laid it at the door of the poor printer. They say the errors are typographical. It seems to me that they could have added another source quite as reason- able as the above. For in the early part of the work Joseph let Martin 96 REASONS GIVKX FOR Harris take ii6 pages of AIS. home to show it to the folks, and it was lost. To avoid a repetition of so serious a matter Oliver copied the work and took it to the printer a little at a time. So the printer did not get the original cop\\ It is quite leasonable to expect that Oliver would make mistakes in copy- ing so large a work, for we have no account of his liaving either the seer stone or the urini and thummim to gard against errors as it did in the first cop3^ But the preface to the second edition makes no claim to the right to change on account of clerical errors. However, P. P. Pratt and John Goodson may not have known just what ^'typographical errors'' included. It is possible that tliey thought it meant any error that Oliver or the compositor made. But MAKING THE CHANGES. 97 o;ie would hardly think so, for they vSiy, '^Individuals ajquaiiited with book printing are aw ire of the numerous typographical errors which always oc- cur in manuscript editions." The only reason why more typographical errors should occur in manuscript editions is on account of the liability of the printer to mistake the writer\s characters. Prest. Joseph F. says, '^I regret, probably as much as you do, the exist- ence in the Book of Mormon as well as other church works of typographical and grammatical errors. But these are dne to the imperfections of men whose handiwork in comparison to the handi- work of God is always faulty and im- perfect. But this is only the evidence of man's weakness and does not destroy the perfection of God's works." Does this answer my question? I had read something nincli clearer than 98 REASONS GIVEN FOR tliat ill the preface to the seco id edition of the Book of Mormon. They say there that they are typograpliical errors, and they po'iit out tlie particular book which has them. But Joseph F. sim- ply makes a sweeping statement of all the church books. But I should like to inform him, for he seems not to know, that the Bjok of Mormon differs from all other bjoks in the church if the cla"ins for it be true. He says these errors are due to man's imperfections. Probably it would not be amiss to say that I had before read in Mormon's preface in the first edition, ''and now if there are faults, it be the mistakes of men " But in the second edition he says, ^'tliey are'', instead of, ^'it be." In Mormon 8: 17. it sa3^s, ''and if there be faults, they be the faults of a man." Which "man"? Yes indeed, well may we inquire ^'which man". MAKING THE CHANGKS. 99 Joseph F. now makes a sweeping class- ification of the church b:)oks in which lie has the great aniouiitofONE group. And he regrets that they are not free from errors I should like to ask if the errors of all are traceable to the same source — nan's ignorauce. If so where is the hiudiwork of G)d. The handi- work of man is plainl}^ appareut ou every page. But where, in the name of that Great God that created heaven and earth is 'the perfection of God's works?'' That is what I have been huuting for these years. That is what I have failed to get the first glimpse of. No I have never been able to even find one of its tracks. And if I possessed the olfactory nerves of the most sensiti\ e hound I d ) not belive I could even then obtain the scent of the ^'perfection of God's works" in all the ramifications of Monnonism. lOO REASONS GIVEN FOR Wiiere God started out to prod ice a marvelous work and a wonder by eclips ing the wisdom of the wise we have the mistakes of '*A inau^'aiid tliey bare all the earmarks of a very illiterate man too. With the second editiou we have a progressive student, P. P. Praft on the staff, and the revised editiou is quite a credit to a man of his chances. Now we have the college graduate and the books sliow all the shades of difference of the men's abilities. But nowhere can '^the perfection of God's works" be found. Joseph F. can read between the lines of my letter and he sees that he \/ill have to produce facts and since he does not think he can produce evidence which will convince me, he does not wish to waste his words on a person so likely to question ever^^thing, and believe nothing nutil itis proved. But I should MVKrTG THK CHAXGKS. TOI like to call his atte:itio:i to the fad that if the thiii;^s of God a-e or even seem to me to be, foolishness, ho.v am I to judge tlieii? I must judge all things as they seem to ME to be. It is impossi- ble for MK to judge tlieni as they seem to HIM to be. I cau quote his thoughts if he m:ikes them public, but that is all. If I get his thoughts so I can use them as my own it must be by his prov- ing to me by facts and figures that he is right. By putting me in possession of tlie facts which cause him to believe or know, and then they would be my facts. I would nnderstand them as well as he understauds them. If a fact exists which cannot be proved, of what use is it? If it can only be proved to those who do not look for anything to oppose it with, of what good is it? Joseph F. suggests that I should cease to look for the opposite. What professor of I02 REASONS GIVEN FOR inaLheinatics would ask his students iK>t to look for ail}' thing opp )sed to the rules he gives them? iVnd until a reli- gion can be proved with mathematical exactness we should never close our eyes to the opposite, we should never cease to ask our- selves: ^^Is it not possible that I might be wrong?" Thousands of peo- ple, in past ages, have proved by la3'ing down their lives for their religion, that their faith in their religion was strong- er than their love of the pleasures of this life; however feeble their evidences in support of what they believed. But we are taught by the Latter-day Saints that no people from about one hundred years after Christ's death enjoj^ed the saving principles of the gospel. Shall I do as they did — refuse to consider the claims of others? No! I will not. I will be free. I will investigate every- MAKING THE CHANGES. 103 thing. And if God gets 'Snad'' about it, I cannot help that. He had no busi- ness to give nie a mind if He did not want me to use it. Just a word on Joseph F's postscript. He finds five glaring mistakes in my letter. He might have found more. He is tliankful that Joseph did not have me to proof read the Book of Mor- mon. He also informs me tjiat Oliver Cowdry was not a publislier, and con- sequently he could not be expected to do a good job of proof reading. Here he confirms the preface to the second edition, in that the mistakes are typographical, in the strongest of terms. His inference is that the manuscript, as it came from the urini and thummim was absolutely perfect. Indeed, no other claim could be made. This being true, the only tiling w^e need to consider is, did the printer I04 REASONS GIVEN FoR make tlie errors in the fiist edition that have been conected since. In other words, is our present B )o:>: of Aloi.nion like the original nianu -.cript as itc.inie from the nrini and thunimim? If it is, the Wv)rk may be true. B;it if it is not, the work is a fraud, as the claims of the originators of the book is not trne. Now I shall offer my reasons for be- lieving that the errors are not typo- graphical at all. ' That the present Bo )k of Mormon is not like the first manuscript. That the errors in the first edition are traceable to the igno- rance of some modern author, just as the orthographical errors of my letter are traceable to mine. In this investigation we will be liberal. We will allow any clerical error which Oliver may have made in copying as typographical. We will MAKING THE CKANGES^: 105^1 allow tlieni to bring the book to tlie^ first iiiaiiuscript. But here we must '^ insist upon a stand. No, you cannot f add to, or take from that! No, not even if it does '^make the thought more plain, o the truth more clear.'' Who is to be 1 the judge of when the thought is more ' plain, or the truth is more clear? Will ' Joseph F. set up the puny judgment of ^ any man agalinst that of Alniighty't God's? Remember, it is the duty of ^ a translator to reproduce the thought ' of the language fi'om which he is trans- ' lating, in words of the language into ' which he is trauslating, which express f the same thought. Then who would i attempt to make a selection which he > would be willing to pit against those'/ chosen by God Himself. No sir! r Most emphatically, no sir! You can- " not change a single letter, even if you-> do think it ''tends only to make thd^- k I06 REASONS GIVEN FOR thought more plain, the truth more clear." The first manuscript or noth- ing for me! lu this investigati(m we will have to do without the first MS., because it is thought uot to be in existence. David Whitmer had what he supposed was the first, but as it had the printer\s marks on it, it is quite evident, in the minds of some, that it is the transcrip- tion. What is supposed to be the orig- inal copy, with other papers, was placed in a mortice in a large stone in the ^^Nauvoo House'', and as the house was never finished, the water percolated through and dampeiied the papers so that the)^ were not well preserved; and when the house w^as torn down the papers Avere taken by people who did not value them llighl3^ Joseph F. afterwards obtained about a quire of the MS. in Oliver's hand writing, which he MAKING the: changes. I07 kindly sliowed to me. This part, though only a fragment of the book, may be useful as a test of my work. If my deductions are wrong, that MS. can be couipared with our present edi- tion, and if it is like it, it will do much toward settling my mind as to the truthfulness of Joseph Smith, for at preseut it looks like he has deceived ns in the manner of translation and in ac- couutiug for the changes made in the second edition. I never investigated a matter which seemed to me more like a premeditated deception; and if I am mistaken I will heardly trust my mind to investigate an3^thing again.' I will do like thousands of others, let some one else do my thinking for me. x\s evidence that the first edition w^as set according to cop}^, and that the present editions are wrong, we quote the following: rI08 I^EASONS GIVEN FOR^ r *Iu Marcb, 1881, two genilemen, named Keila?^, refiidinipr in MichigaD, for their own satisfaction, visit- ' ed the neighborhood where Joseph spent his youth, and questioned the older residents who were ac- guainted with the Smith family as to their kabwledge -of the character of Joseph, his parents and his { brothers and sisters. Their interviews with numer- ^ ous parties who claim to, have known Joseph were afterwards published. * * * * We here append a few extracts from these interviews. ****>' **What did yoa kuow^bout the Smiths, Mr, Giibertr "* ' *'I knew nothing myself; have Feen Jo*seph 'Smith a few times, but not acquainted with him. tSaw Hyrum quite often. I am the party that set the type from the original manuscript for the Book I of Mormon. They translated it in a cave. I would know that manuscript to-day if I should see it. The most of it was in Oliver Cpwdery's handwriting. Some in Joseph's wife's; a small part though. Hyrum Smith always brought the manuscript to the -^flace; he would have it under his coat, and all buttoned up as carefully as though it was so much ,gol(^. He said at the time that it was translated from plates by the po;ver of God, and they were verj^ particular about it. We had a great deal of trouble MAKING THE CHANGES. IO9 trfWith it. It was Bot pnDctnated at all, Tbey did not know anything about punctuation, ?antl we had to do that oureelves." I **Well; did you change any part of it when you were setting the type?" / r *'No, sir; we never changed it at all." i* i j^l V **Wh.y did you not change it and correct it? „ , "Because they would not allow us to; they w^re very particular about that. , We never changed |t,in the least. Oh, well; there might have been one or two words that I changed the spelling of; I believe } did change the spelling of one, and perhaps two, but no more." . ' "Did you set all the type, or did some one help you?" "I did the whole of it myself, and helped to read the proof, too; there was no one who worked at that but myself. Did you ever see one of the first copies? I have one here that was never bound. Mr. Grandin, the printer, gave it to me. If you ever ^aW a Book of Mormon you will see that they changed it afterwards." yir "They did! Well, let us see your copy; that i^ a good point. How is it changed now?" "I will show you (bringing out his copy). Here on the title page it says (reading), 'Joseph Smith, I JO REASONS GIVEN FOR Jr., author and proprietor/ Afterwards, in getting out other edi!;lon9 they left that out, and only claim- ed that Joseph Smith translated it." "Well, did they claim anything else than that he was the translator when ihey brought the man- uscript to you?" "Oh, no; they claimed that he was translating by means of some instruments he got at the same time he did the plates, and that the Lord helped him.'* Myth of the M. F. page 58-9. For the benefit of those who do not know, we explain that one Solomon Spaulding wrote a romance in the early part of this century, which he called, ''The Mannscript Fonnd/' and many people believe it became the nnclens of the^'Book of Mormon/' ^'Tlie Myth of the Mannscript Fonnd" was written by Elder Reynolds for the pnrpose of prov- ing that there was no connection be- tween them. This qnotation is made to prove that the Smith family was an honorable one. Onr object in quoting MAKING THE CHANGES. Ill it is to sliow that the printer followed copy as nearly as possible; making onl}^ such errors as passed unnoticed. That the publishers were very particu- lar about it and would not allow it changed in the least. That Mr. Gilbert was struck wath the fact that they would not allow him to correct the grammatical errors, and yet they after- wards corrected them themselves. Elder Re3'nolds does not tell us where he gets the extract from, or I should endeavor to get the publication, for I believe there is more of it that would be of value here. It is hardly probable that two gentlemen who would say: ''They did! Well, let us see your copy; that is a good point. How is it changed?", would be satisfied by being informed that the title page, that part of which w^as not translated from the plates at all w^as changed from '^Joseph 112 I REASONS GIVEN FOR Smith, Jr., author and proprietor," to , ^^trauslated by Joseph Smith, Jun." I believe they followed with soirie such question as this: '*What other changes liave been made? Did they change the parts which they claimed had been translated by the Lord?" And of course the man who would say, ^^If you ever saw a ^Book of Mormon' you will see that they changed it afterwards." would be prepared to inform them by illustrating from all parts of the book. A point of history connected with this quotation is that Mr. Gilbert says, the MS. was part in Oliver Cowdery's hand writing, and part in Joseph's wife's. If this is true, tliey must have taken the first copy to the printer and kept the second themselves. Joseph's mother, in her history, says Joseph went to Pennsylvania to see his wife, while Oliver copied the MS. ''Whit- MAKING THE CHANGES. II3 iiey's History of Utali'^ says the same. We wish now to call the reader's attention to the main reason for believ- ing the errors in the first edition are not typographical. This one point alone we consider sufficient to convince any one able to read and think. The corrections are just such as would be sure to have been made if the book had been wytten by a person who knew nothing of grammar, and after- wards learned a few of the simplest rules and then revise. For illustration look carefully through the changes on pages 42 to 47. Now turn to the il- lustrative extracts on pages 47 to 52. In these you can see the errors in the sentences. In the first we have *^they which", changed to **those w^ho'\ six times in one short verse, and ^Svhicli", to ^Svho", once besides. Again, we have ^Svhich", to ^Svho'', six times and 1 74 REASONS GIVP:N FOR ^Svliiclr', to \vlioin'\ twice in ai oilier sliort verse. In the next we have ''wliich'\ to ''wlio'\ six times, and in the next verse three times. ^^Which'' /^ is changed to who over seven hniidred times in the book, and it is scattered all throngh, as will l)e seen by comparing the pages of changes. I think we are justified in s.iying that the clerk did not change liis owm* manuscript so much from beginning to end; nor would the typo have set "which", in all these places if the cop\' had been written ^Svho'\ And if he had done such a thing — but what is the use of speculat- ing? No printer w^ould make the same blunder so man}" times, from first to ■ last of a large job like the Book of Mormon — but then if he had done such a thing, ever so poor a proof-reader would have discovered it before they had held cop}^ on many forms. But if MAKING 'VH E CHANGP:S. II5 we will turn to the Bible we will see tliat the same mistake is there made; that is, the pronoun ''\vhich'\ is used in the Bible to refer to persons, which was good English when tlie Bible was trans- lated, but it is not good English now, nor was it good in 1829. ' It may be argued that since a change lias taken place during the two hundred years, that Joseph may not have kept pace with the times, and a change of that kind could have been made a hun- dred years and the common people in the wilds of a new country, with the Bible continually before them would not liave found it out. But we wish to keep it constantly before you, that Joseph had nothing to do with it, ac- cording to his own claims, and there is no excuse for God. He was not a back- woodsman. If that change was ever so new, God should have known it, and Il6 REASONS GIVEN FOR should liav^e selected the proper pro- noun. I have a New Euglaud geog- raphy printed iu 1822, in which the pronouu "which'' is used just as it is to- da\\ So until uiore light is throwu on the subject I shall believe that Joseph did not have auy divine assistance iu the trauslatiou of those wrong '^whiches". Now notice the double negatives ou p:\ge'50. These sentences as they were iu the first editiou ment just the reverse of what they do iu the preseut editious. The question is, did God operate the instrumeut so it produced the lauguage of the first or the last. When I noticed iu I. Nephi 8:18, that Mary was said to be the mother of God Hiuiself, I thonght it uiust be a clerical error, bnt wheu I saw the sauie stateuient in the twenty-first verse, and again in the thirty-second, I saw 110 MAKING THE CHANGES. II7 reason for laying sucli a bhinder at the door of the poor printer. (Tnrn to page 51 and see how it has been amended by the addition of three words, ^^ihe son of) Then when I read the following, I felt snre the printer had followed copy: "1. And now Abinadi said unto them, I would that ye should understand that God himself shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people; 2. And because he dwelleth in flesh, he shall be called the Son of God: and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and the Son; 3. The Father, because he was conceived by the power of God; and the Son, because of the flesh; thus becoming the Father and Son: 4. And they are one God, yea, the very eternal Father of heaven and of earth;" The above evidence is snfi&cient to convince me that the printer followed copy fairly well. There are a few real Il8 RE'\SONvS GIVEN FOR typograpliical errors in tlie first edition, but not man}-; I slioiild judge that there are no more than we find in our well printed newspapers today. Yet Joseph F. told me personally that Grandin was a poor printer, and inferred that he was responsible for the bulk of the errors in the first edition. There is another point ofevidence that the errors are not tj^pographical. This is a stronger point — if, indeed, it well could be — than the preceeding. As the story goes, one, Lehi, with his family and some others, came from Jerusalem to America, 600 B. C.^They brought with them a lot of brass plates containing the Old Testament scrip- tures up to that time. From these plates we have a few quotations, trans- lated by the gift and power of God. So this part is not only better than the cor- responding parts of the Bible, but it is MAKING THE. CHANGES. II9 absolutely perfect, if tlie eiglitli article of faitli is anything to go by. So if we wisli to see how nearly correct the Bible has been translated, a comparison of these parts would inform us. There are thirt3-eight pages in the Book of Mormon which is also in the Bible. Six and one-half of these is the sermon on the mount, which Christ delivered in America almost exactly as he did in Jerusalem. The third and forth chap- ters of Malachi He quoted to them; making eight and one-half pages from the Son of God direct. The other twenty-nine and one half was taken from the brass plates by the various writers. We wish now to call attention to the changes in these thirty-eight pages. Remember, Joseph translated them just as he did all the other parts of the book. Oliver copied it just as he did I20 REASONS GIVEN FOR the balance of the book. The printer set it from the same hand writing. So it is plain that an}/ errors which may have been made wonld not be any more likely to have any relation to the Bible than any other part of the book. We find seventy-one changes in the thirty-eight pages, which is a falling off of over one third of the average of the book. Why shonld there be less typo- graphical errors made in the work simply becanse the Bible contains the same matter. It looks still worse when we learn that the same errors that are common in the Bible are abont the same, v/hich rednces the changes, other than '^which^' to ^'who", to less than one-half the nnmber fonnd in the balance of the book. Bnt the worst is still to come; eight are changes of spelling of proper names, so the nnm- ber is cut down until there is not a MAKING THE C HANGES. 121 graiiiiiiatical blunder in all the changes of the thirty-eight pa^es. exc ept as pointed out below. BaBCfOtt Librtl. The book of Mormon claims that many ^'plain and precious'' parts have been taken out of the Bible. So of course we would expect to find some ''plain and precious" parts added. Eight of the changes were made in the added parts, which leaves onl\^ sixty- three changes in the scripture proper. Sixty-three typographical errors! Sixty- three deviations from copy in the first edition. Would you now be surprised to learn that in forty-six of them the deviator selected the very word we have in King James' translation of the Bible? Yet this is a fact. Why should tlie printer, in deviating from copj^, settle on the language of the Bible so much? Ah! No printer would do it. Joseph must have mistook a Bible for the 122 REASONS GIVEN FOR plates on those several occasions. This is the only reasonable solution. But then he had to make some changes to account for the necessity of the transla- tion. As might be expected, an illiter- ate person wonld be as likely to change one part as another; just as likely to take correct grammar and make it wrong as any other way. So we find thirteen of these changes from Bible language had to be brought back to avoid blunders. Eight out of the thirteen weie grammatical errors, and two gave wrong meanings, while two were simpl}^ the change of the ancient to the nu)dern style. But the other tells a big storj^ to a printer. It is the change of 'iiorner" to ''homer''. If the truth could be learned, I would bet all the old jack knives I had when I was a bo}^, that I can now find, against anything you have a mind to put up, MAKING THE CHANGES. 1 23 that the Bible Joseph had behind cur- tain had a nicked ^'m'\ so it looked something like '^n\^\ The word may have looked not very unlike ^'honier". This leaves four out of sixty-three which was not like the Bible, first or last. Oh, how it resembles the work of a plagiarist! One of these is timely, it is the addition of the word ^Siot'\ in Isaiah 2:9, first line, betv/een, ^'bowetli^' and ^'dowu''; the urini and thummim having added another ^4iot'' between ^'himself' and '^therefore". The verse agrees with my judgment better with the two additions; but remember God's translation onlj^ supplied one of them, the other being the work of the com- mittee on revision. I take it for granted that no one who has followed me will now say the blunders of the first edition are charge- able to the printer; but I fancy I hear 124 REASONS GIVEN FOR the reader ask, ^'Wliat of all these changes? They are trifling.'' I grant you they are small, but if Joseph had sat behind that curtain and seen that language come through the urini and thummiui, he never would have changed it. Never! Here I fancy 3^ou may wonder whether Joseph made the bulk of the changes, or whether they were made by some subsequent revisor. To w^hich we reply that a comparison of the first with the second edition shows nine- ty-five of the first hundred changed. So the first committee made about ninety- five per cent of the changes. Now note the only deductions which can be made. Joseph, Oliver, Parley, John, and every other person who knowingly acquiesced in the revision, are all parties to a fraud. The}' are revising a book which has gone out Avitli such claims of perfection that the MAKING THE CHANGES. 1 25 only show is to say the copy was right as it came from the urim andthuminim, but the printer blundered And since, as we have abnndantly proven , the printer did not make them, they *^told the thing that was not'\ as Swift puts it. It is a plain case of wilful decep- tion, to say the least. ^' What, you do not mean to sa}^ Joseph would lie abont a thing of that kind do you?" Since he mnst have known the contents of the preface, I answer, yes. If he had cut Parley P. Pratt and John Goodson off the church for lying, as soon as the second edition was out we might have excnsed him. But had he done such a thing he would have been obliged to ha\ e given another reason for making near two thousand changes; and what reason could he have geven? It might be asked if the first edition is not like the old language, with all its 126 REASONS GIVEN FOR imperfections; and were not the changes allowable on that acconnt? The only answer is no, because if this had been the case the revisors should have told ns so in the preface, instead of telling us something else; unless, indeed, it can be shown beyond doubt that it has always been the policy of the church to ^'tell the thing that is not" and allow its subjects and the people in general to guess at the real truth. There is one other reason why there are mistakes in the first edition, but it is rather against removing them for sub- sequent editions. It is aS follows: '^Con- demn me not because of mine imperfec- tions: neither my father because his imperfections; neither them that have written before him, but rather give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest unto j^ou our imperfections, that ye may learn to be more wise than we have been.'' Mormon, 9:31. MAKING THE CHANGES. 127 Now we have it in its purity, after all this labor we finally learn that the errors were put there intentionally for a pedagogical effect. But what occasion have we to thank God, now that the errors are removed? For seven short yearns they had cause to be thankful, but how now? Oh, we have better schools. But since that time the church has passed through a period of almost no schools, and still they were deprived of that great amount of stimuli — the im- perfections of the ancient mythical prophets of America. But such peda- gogy does not agree with that of our modern teachers. They now say the teacher should never repeat an error in the hearing of the pupil, but on the contrary, the teacher should correct the pupil and get him to repeat his work corrected. But why should we set the judgment of the worldly wise up against God's prophets? 128 REASONS GIVEN FOR Now patient reader, if you have ob- served carefully the claims of the niau- uer of translatiou, and noted the changes, and the reasous given for making them, I should like to ask, can you show me where I am wrong in concluding that tlie revising committee and all others who sanction sucli work are parties to a plain, premeditated prevarication? We do not claim that this proves the Book of Mormon untrue, but we do think it goes a long wa}^ toward it. B}^ showing that some tlie of claims aie false, there is no dependence to be put in others. But we will hope to investi- gate further. If we find unimpeachable evidence in favor of the book we will be glad to believe it. But as I see it now, sufficient evidence could not be had to prove that Joseph and others did not practice deception wilfully.