King Benjamin's death is recorded in Mosiah 6:5, so why does the 1830
edition of the Book of Mormon have him living at a later time (see Mosiah
21:28 and Ether 4:1), while subsequent editions changed the name to Mosiah
in the later references?
|
King Benjamin lived for three years
after his son Mosiah2 was made king. It was at the end of these three
years that the expedition was sent to the Land of Nephi, where the
plates of Ether were found. After relinquishing his kingship, Benjamin
may have continued to act as a seer for the three-year interval. The
chronology in this part of the book is not all that clear. We do not
know how long Ammon and his brethren were in the Land of Nephi. It could
have been only a matter of weeks or months. It is not inconceivable
then, that Benjamin passed away shortly after their return, which still
would have been "after three years" (Mosiah 6:5). It is certainly
possible that the keeper of the record of Zeniff or Mormon and Moroni
(Ether 4:1) may have erred in compiling the records. After all they were
mortals, capable of making mistakes (which both Mormon and Moroni
admitted). The issue of whether the individual was Mosiah or Benjamin is
not that important as far as salvation is concerned (the Bible displays
similar apparent anomalies). It is also possible that this was an
example of a scribal error, later corrected by Joseph Smith the
translator.1
It is interesting that the Bible has a situation similar to that found
in the Book of Mormon. We read in 1 Kings 15:29-15:5
(dear heavens - don't you people have
proof-readers? The passage is 1 Kings 15:1 - 9) that Abijam (also
called Abijah, as in the parallel passage in 2 Chronicles 12:16) became
king of Judah after the death of his father Rehoboam and that, despite
his sins, the Lord preserved his kingship for the sake of his ancestor
David. Then, in the verses that follow (1 Kings 15:6-7), we read, "And
there was war between Rehoboam and Jeroboam all the days of his life.
Now the rest of the acts of Abijam, and all that he did, are they not
written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah? And there
was war between Abijam and Jeroboam." The name Rehoboam is
anachronistic, since he was dead and the passage was intended to
describe events in the days of his son Abijam. The error is actually
corrected in a few Hebrew manuscripts and in the Peshitta (Christian
Syriac) version to read, "And there was war between Abijah the son of
Rehoboam." The parallel passage in 2 Chronicles 13:2 reads, "And there
was war between Abijah and Jeroboam."2
-------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
1. OK, so the defense is that
perhaps Zeniff, Mormon or Moroni erred in compiling the records. That
really is not the problem. The problem is that Joseph Smith did
not translate the records on his own - after all, he didn't study "reformed
Egyptian hieroglyphics" then use his skills to translate the record. Joseph was
allegedly given a word-for-word
translation approved by God... |
|
|
|
“I will now give
you a description of the manner in which the Book of Mormon was translated.
Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the
hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the
darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling
parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing. One character at a
time would appear, and under it was the interpretation in English. Brother
Joseph would read off the English to Oliver Cowdery, who was his principal
scribe, and when it was written down and repeated to Brother Joseph to see
if it was correct, then it would disappear, and another character with the
interpretation would appear. Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the
gift and power of God, and not by any power of man.”
David Whitmer (A
witness to the gold plates)
An Address to All
Believers in Christ
p.12
Elder Edward
Stevenson: "Martin Harris related an instance that occurred during the time
that he wrote that portion of the translation of the Book of Mormon, which
he was favored to write direct from the mouth of the Prophet Joseph Smith.
He said that the Prophet possessed a seer stone, by which he was enabled to
translate as well as from the Urim and Thummim, and for convenience 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 prophet 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 just as it was engraven on the plates, precisely in the
language then used.”
Myth of Manuscript
Found
p. 91, 1883
edition
Martin Harris, a
witness to the gold plates
But at the outset
it must be recollected that the translation was accomplished by no common
method, by no ordinary means. It was done by divine aid. There were no
delays over obscure passages, no difficulties over the choice of words, no
stoppages from the ignorance of the translator; no time was wasted in
investigation or argument over the value, intent or meaning of certain
characters, and there were no references to authorities. These difficulties
to human work were removed. All was as simple as when a clerk writes from
dictation. The translation of the characters appeared on the Urim and
Thummim, sentence by sentence, and as soon as one was correctly transcribed
the next would appear.
George Reynolds
(First Council of
the Seventy 1890-1909)
Myth of Manuscript
Found
p. 71, 1883
edition
“…we heard a voice
from out of the bright light above us, saying, ‘These plates have been
revealed by the power of God, and they have been translated by the power of
God. The translation of them which you have seen is correct, and I command
you to bear record of what you now see and hear.’”
History of the
Church
Vol. 1, pp. 54
-55 |
|
|
|
|
So, there should have been no errors in the
record whatsoever! God had the opportunity to correct any "scribal
errors" before the first publishing of the Book of Mormon, but
apparently did not. Should we then
assume that God later corrected the error, or was it Joseph's own
personal editorial skills that corrected God's sloppiness? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. I presume this is the
best example that MIRS could put forth...but the Biblical account is in
no way similar! First, there is no scribal error (as the alleged
defense of the Book of Mormon). If MIRS had backed up to I Kings 14:30
they would see that the war with Jeroboam started under Rehoboam's reign and
continued into Abijah's reign. As a matter of practice (rooted in
maintaining clarity of writing historical accounts at that time) the author
attributes the war to Rehoboam and states that it continued throughout
Abijah's lifetime. See, they didn't have catchy names for wars at the
time (The Seven Days War, World War I, the Gulf War, things like that), so
it was common to record which leaders went to war (which is done in this
circumstance). If the author attributed the war to Abijah, one might
think it was a different war instead of a continuation of the war
begun under Rehoboam. The point the author makes in I Kings
15:6 is that this is a continuation of the war begun under Rehoboam.
In effect, it is perfectly accurate to use
either name in verse 6. Rehoboam is accurate in a historical reporting
context, and Abijah is literally accurate.
The second reason the Book of Mormon
account does not compare to the Biblical account is that the reference in
the Book of Mormon deals with a specific person having something specific: |
|
|
|
“…king Benjamin
had a gift from God, whereby he could interpret such engravings…”
Page 200
of the 1830 Book of Mormon changed to..
“…king Mosiah
had a gift from God, whereby he could interpret such engravings…” ( Mosiah
21:28)
and...
“…for this cause did
king Benjamin keep them…”
Page 546 of the 1830 Book of Mormon changed
to...
“…for this cause did
king Mosiah keep them…” (Ether 4:1) |
|
|
|
|
Notice MIRS admits that the
Biblical passage is anachronistic - yet they make no claim that the Book of
Mormon passage is anachronistic because it's not!
The account is chronological
and King Benjamin died on page 168 of the Book of Mormon. The fact is
that Joseph Smith made a mistake here. This mistake could not have
happened if Joseph was truly using divine methods to translate a divine
writing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. Wow! What a convenient
"revelation"! Joseph's god "reveals" he's not up for any challenge!
If people work against him, he just gives up! |
|
|
|
|
|
If you would like an in depth analysis of five other Joseph Smith prophecies
that failed to come to pass, click here for our Solving
the Mormon Puzzle program.
|