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 <ua'-*jtOiaent> 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 'VHE 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 CHANGES. 121
graiiiiiiatical blunder in all the changes
of the thirty-eight pa^es. except 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.
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11