The Book of Mormon

Something just struck me tonight.

The BoM has alot and I mean ALOT of text directly taken from the King James Bible word for word or damn close.
The BoM was written by Mormon in 400BC.
The King James Translation was written in the early 1600`s.

How did Mormon know what would be written 2000 years later in the King James version?
or
How did the the committe King James put together to re-translate the Bible know what was written in the BoM when it wasn`t revealed to mankind until the 1800`s?
Two hundred years later.

Kinda weird.

linwood said:

Something just struck me tonight.

The BoM has alot and I mean ALOT of text directly taken from the King James Bible word for word or damn close.
The BoM was written by Mormon in 400BC.
The King James Translation was written in the early 1600`s.

How did Mormon know what would be written 2000 years later in the King James version?
or
How did the the committe King James put together to re-translate the Bible know what was written in the BoM when it wasn`t revealed to mankind until the 1800`s?
Two hundred years later.

Kinda weird.

Click to expand...

It's a translation. Mormon didn't write in English. Joseph Smith read the King James Version of the Bible. It's not that weird.

linwood said:

Something just struck me tonight.

The BoM has alot and I mean ALOT of text directly taken from the King James Bible word for word or damn close.

Click to expand...

How much would you consider to be a lot? The twenty-one chapters of Isaiah that are quoted in the Book of Mormon actually account for less than 2 1/2% of the Book of Mormon. Many of the Bible's authors quoted each other. Jesus and His Apostles frequently quoted scripture from the Old Testament prophets. The people whose history is told in the Book of Mormon had access to these same scriptures and considered the writings of Isaiah to be particularly significant. As a matter of fact, Isaiah is the most frequently quoted of all the ancient prophets -- in the Bible as well as in the Book of Mormon.

The only other place in the Book of Mormon where you will find some of the same exact language as in the Bible is in 3 Nephi, which recounts the Savior's visit to the people of the ancient American continent. He presented His gospel to them in very much the same way as He had to the people in the Holy Land. If the message was the same, why should the language be particularly different?

Kinda weird.

Click to expand...

Only if you don't understand the reasons behind the similarities. Otherwise, entirely reasonable.

jonny said:

It's a translation. Mormon didn't write in English. Joseph Smith read the King James Version of the Bible. It's not that weird.

Click to expand...

Have patience with me Jonny.

The BoM is a direct translation of the Golden Plates given to Joseph Smith by the angel Moroni in the 1820-30`s.
It is a collection of the works of ancient American prophets brought together around 400BC.

The KJV was translated in 1600-20.

The BoM has direct excerpts of the KJV in it therefore if one believes the BoM was directly translated from Moronis golden plates one must believe the plates themselves had these excerpts from the KJV in them.
How is this possible?

To compound the problem some of those excerpts are taken from the New Testament which no part of was written before 50 AD.

The NT authors the BoM borrows from weren`t even born when the BoM was written.

How can that be?

linwood said:

The BoM has direct excerpts of the KJV in it therefore if one believes the BoM was directly translated from Moronis golden plates one must believe the plates themselves had these excerpts from the KJV in them. How is this possible?

Click to expand...

Joseph Smith translated the plates into King James English primarily because in 1830, King James English was considered the language most appropriate to the word of God. But were to to actually sit down and compare the 433 verses in the Book of Mormon that are quoting Isaiah, you'd find differences in 234 of them. If Joseph was going to the trouble of just copying straight out of the Bible, he could have saved himself some time by not making sure that there were that many differences.

Katzpur said:

How much would you consider to be a lot?

Click to expand...

I have no clue as I`ve not researched exactly how much of the BoM is taken from the KJV but the question is irrelevant to the OP considering even a sentence directly taken and evidenced to come from the KJV creates a serious paradox.

Many of the Bible's authors quoted each other. Jesus and His Apostles frequently quoted scripture from the Old Testament prophets. The people whose history is told in the Book of Mormon had access to these same scriptures and considered the writings of Isaiah to be particularly significant.

Click to expand...

No, the people the BoM speaks of were born thousands of years before the authors of the NT yet the BoM clearly cites NT text.
The great, great, great, great grandparents of the apostles of Jesus weren`t even born when the BoM was authored yet you tell me his apostles are quoted in the BoM.

How is that possible?

If the message was the same, why should the language be particularly different?

Click to expand...

The language is identical in places.
It`s nearly impossible that a translation of a text in Egyptian(reformed or not)to English compared to the translation of Hebrew to Greek to Latin to English and then translated again differently in English with 2000 years between the two will be identical.

Only if you don't understand the reasons behind the similarities. Otherwise, entirely reasonable.

Click to expand...

I think I understand the reasons entirely.
I`m curious as to what you would consider "unreasonable".

linwood said:

Have patience with me Jonny.

The BoM is a direct translation of the Golden Plates given to Joseph Smith by the angel Moroni in the 1820-30`s.
It is a collection of the works of ancient American prophets brought together around 400BC.

The KJV was translated in 1600-20.

The BoM has direct excerpts of the KJV in it therefore if one believes the BoM was directly translated from Moronis golden plates one must believe the plates themselves had these excerpts from the KJV in them.
How is this possible?

To compound the problem some of those excerpts are taken from the New Testament which no part of was written before 50 AD.

The NT authors the BoM borrows from weren`t even born when the BoM was written.

How can that be?

Click to expand...

Isaiah wasn't a New Testament author, which is the source of most of the quotes in the Book of Mormon.

The Book of Mormon starts out with a story of Lehi and his family leaving Jerusalem. After they had been in the wilderness for a while, Lehi has a dream where he is commanded by the Lord to have his sons return to Jerusalem to retrieve "the genealogy of my forefathers." These records are known as the brass plates and contain many of the teachings of the Old Testament prophets. This should account for anything out of the Old Testament that is in the Book of Mormon.

Later, in 3 Nephi, Christ visits the Nephites after his resurrection and teaches them. Here he teaches many of the same teachings that are found in the Bible, which makes sense to me since it is his Gospel.

Now, for the similarities in the language. I believe that it is possible that since Joseph Smith was translating, that when he came across passages that were similar to those in the Bible, that he simply used the Biblical translation.

Keep in mind, while many of the biblical quotes are exact, they are not all exact. There are some interesting differences. You can read an article about the variants here: http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?id=2&table=transcripts

This is one that has always interested me:

Isaiah 2:16 compared with 2 Nephi 12:16:

KJV: "And upon all the ships of Tarshish"

BM: "And upon all the ships of the sea,

and upon all the ships of Tarshish"

Here, BM adds a line not found in KJV. Interestingly, LXX reads "And upon every ship of the sea, and upon all views of pleasant ships," with the last part paralleling KJV/BM "and upon all pleasant pictures." The Greek talassa, "sea," resembles the word Tarshish. But both the Targum and the Vulgate have "sea" with LXX instead of Tarshish. The matter is a very complex one, for which a complete discussion cannot be included here. BM appears to have included the versions of both MT and LXX/T/V. MT could have dropped the nearly identical second line by haplography.

Click to expand...

I should add that LXX stands for Septuagint, KJV stands for King James Version, BM stands for Book of Mormon, and MT stands for Hebrew Massoretic text.

Its called plagerism . . . nice try Joe

TheGreaterGame said:

Its called plagerism . . . nice try Joe

Click to expand...

At first I thought you were referring to another Joe I'm acquainted with. :biglaugh:

linwood said:

I have no clue as I`ve not researched exactly how much of the BoM is taken from the KJV but the question is irrelevant to the OP considering even a sentence directly taken and evidenced to come from the KJV creates a serious paradox.

Click to expand...

It's no more a serious paradox than Micah, prophesying hundreds of years after Isaiah, quoted him verbatim without once giving him credit. If the Book of Mormon people had access to Isaiah's writings, it's not a paradox at all.

No, the people the BoM speaks of were born thousands of years before the authors of the NT yet the BoM clearly cites NT text.

Click to expand...

Why don't you give me an example. It would make it a whole lot easier for me to comment.

The great, great, great, great grandparents of the apostles of Jesus weren`t even born when the BoM was authored yet you tell me his apostles are quoted in the BoM.

Click to expand...

The Book of Mormon actually covers roughly 1000 years (from about 600 B.C. until 400 A.D. Twenty generations had passed between the time Lehi and his family left Jerusalem and the time of Christ. Besides, I think you may have misunderstood me. I don't believe I said that Jesus' Apostles are quoted in the Book of Mormon.

The language is identical in places.

Click to expand...

Yes, in places it is. But we believe that Joseph Smith translated the record through the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. He wasn't a scholar, and he didn't know the language he was translating. If you believe his story, it's just another instance of nothing being impossible with God. If you don't, it comes across as "weird."

Kathryn

linwood said:

I have no clue as I`ve not researched exactly how much of the BoM is taken from the KJV but the question is irrelevant to the OP considering even a sentence directly taken and evidenced to come from the KJV creates a serious paradox.


No, the people the BoM speaks of were born thousands of years before the authors of the NT yet the BoM clearly cites NT text.
The great, great, great, great grandparents of the apostles of Jesus weren`t even born when the BoM was authored yet you tell me his apostles are quoted in the BoM.

How is that possible?


The language is identical in places.
It`s nearly impossible that a translation of a text in Egyptian(reformed or not)to English compared to the translation of Hebrew to Greek to Latin to English and then translated again differently in English with 2000 years between the two will be identical.


I think I understand the reasons entirely.
I`m curious as to what you would consider "unreasonable".

Click to expand...

Linwood, do your home work. Your time lines are off. When you speak about something you've not studied it shows.

Did you ever think about the context of those New testament scriptures found in the Book of MOrmon? Jesus said he was teaching them the same thing he taught in Jerusalem. So, let's see what does same thing actually mean?

BenJosh

TheGreaterGame said:

Its called plagerism . . . nice try Joe

Click to expand...

Obviously, you don't know what plagerism is, GG. It's when you don't give credit to your source. Anywhere in the Book of Mormon where Isaiah is quoted, the source is given. Nice try, GG.

Katzpur said:

Joseph Smith translated the plates into King James English primarily because in 1830, King James English was considered the language most appropriate to the word of God. But were to to actually sit down and compare the 433 verses in the Book of Mormon that are quoting Isaiah, you'd find differences in 234 of them.

Click to expand...

BoM
1 Nephi 10:8
10:8 Yea, even he should go forth and cry in the wilderness: Prepare ye the way of the Lord, and make his paths straight; for there standeth one among you whom ye know not; and he is mightier than I, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose. And much spake my father concerning this thing.

KJV
John 1:27
He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose.

BoM
1 Nephi 20:1
Hearken and hear this, O house of Jacob, who are called by the name of Israel, and are come forth out of the waters of Judah, or out of the waters of baptism, who swear by the name of the Lord, and make mention of the God of Israel, yet they swear not in truth nor in righteousness.


KJV
Isiah 48:1
Hear ye this, O house of Jacob, which are called by the name of Israel, and are come forth out of the waters of Judah, which swear by the name of the LORD, and make mention of the God of Israel, [but] not in truth, nor in righteousness.

This is not coincidence.
Can you begin to understand the process involved in translating through and from three different languages to get the end result of the KJV?
I doubt very much the oldest texts we have of these Biblical qoutes were written in quite this exact way so the reason couldn`t be divinity because the KJV is not how God originally said it.

For the BoM to use almost the exact same wording throughout as was used centuries or even millenia later in the abused KJV is...not possible.

linwood said:

Can you begin to understand the process involved in translating through and from three different languages to get the end result of the KJV?
I doubt very much the oldest texts we have of these Biblical qoutes were written in quite this exact way so the reason couldn`t be divinity because the KJV is not how God originally said it.

For the BoM to use almost the exact same wording throughout as was used centuries or even millenia later in the abused KJV is...not possible.

Click to expand...

It is possible to those of us who believe in it.

Katzpur said:

Obviously, you don't know what plagerism is, GG. It's when you don't give credit to your source. Anywhere in the Book of Mormon where Isaiah is quoted, the source is given. Nice try, GG.

Click to expand...

Exactly, Joeseph Smith didn't sight the KJV bible he took passages from and pawned off as his own translation of the book of Mormon . . . no translation put into two different languages would come out exactly the same way in good ol King James English . . .

Do you want to fill us in on what website you are getting this information from so that we can see what's coming up next? Or is this from your personal analysis and comparison of the Book of Mormon and KJV?

You might want to check out this discussion that they were having at Fairboards.org the other day: http://www.fairboards.org/index.php?showtopic=12598&hl=

There are probably a lot of threads over there discussing the same thing.

linwood said:

BoM
1 Nephi 10:8
10:8 Yea, even he should go forth and cry in the wilderness: Prepare ye the way of the Lord, and make his paths straight; for there standeth one among you whom ye know not; and he is mightier than I, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose. And much spake my father concerning this thing.

KJV
John 1:27
He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose.

Click to expand...

Maybe I'm just not getting your drift. The verses in 1 Nephi 10 were prophesying of John the Baptist. A prophet speaks for God. If God were to tell one prophet what another prophet would say at some time in the future, an exact quote would be entirely possible. For those who don't believe in prophets, it would naturally not make sense.

BoM
1 Nephi 20:1

Click to expand...

Hearken and hear this, O house of Jacob, who are called by the name of Israel, and are come forth out of the waters of Judah, or out of the waters of baptism, who swear by the name of the Lord, and make mention of the God of Israel, yet they swear not in truth nor in righteousness.


KJV
Isiah 48:1
Hear ye this, O house of Jacob, which are called by the name of Israel, and are come forth out of the waters of Judah, which swear by the name of the LORD, and make mention of the God of Israel, [but] not in truth, nor in righteousness.

This is not coincidence.

Click to expand...

No kidding.

Can you begin to understand the process involved in translating through and from three different languages to get the end result of the KJV?

Click to expand...

I'm sure I wouldn't even begin to fathom the process. Can you begin to understand the process by which God reveals Himself to His Prophets?

I doubt very much the oldest texts we have of these Biblical qoutes were written in quite this exact way so the reason couldn`t be divinity because the KJV is not how God originally said it.

Click to expand...

Of course God wasn't speaking in King James English when He spoke to the Biblical prophets. But if Joseph Smith was translating the plates into King James English and was inspired in doing so, he would have been directed as to how to translate them.

For the BoM to use almost the exact same wording throughout as was used centuries or even millenia later in the abused KJV is...not possible.

Click to expand...

12 million of us don't share your opinion. So where do we go from here?

Kathryn

TheGreaterGame said:

Exactly, Joeseph Smith didn't sight the KJV bible he took passages from and pawned off as his own translation of the book of Mormon . . . no translation put into two different languages would come out exactly the same way in good ol King James English . . .

Click to expand...

Obviously you can prove this.

Katzpur said:

Obviously you can prove this.

Click to expand...

History tells that a Baptist Minister named Solomon Spaulding wrote "Manuscript Found" a book of religious fiction that fell into the hands of one Oliver Cowerdly (the name might be a little off, I'm recalling from memory) which fell into the hands of the Glass Looker Joseph Smith, jnr . . . who, when he could not find any buried treasure in upstate New York, began to think of other ways to become famous.