The book of mormon and the King James version of the Holy Bible

[AndrewCothran]

I have noticed while reading the book of morman there are many new testament scriptures almost word for word contained there in .. How is this possible and why is this so?

I have not gotten a real clear answer on this and i if i have i honestly have forgotten what it was ..

I mean the following with all due respect

Because it is. is not an answer nor just take it on faith actually in my experience what the person is really saying is I dont know i dont care so don't ask me ..but as one investigating the church even on my own ,it is an important question to me ..

[Palerider]

try this web site out........Answers About Mormons and Mormon Belief (LDS FAQ - Latter-day Saints)

[Palerider]

thats an interesting web site that someone put together....go and visit and search around on it.....

[AndrewCothran]

try this web site out........Answers About Mormons and Mormon Belief (LDS FAQ - Latter-day Saints)

i will

[mnn727]

I have noticed while reading the book of morman there are many new testament scriptures almost word for word contained there in .. How is this possible and why is this so?

..

Thats a good question Andrew, one that at first seems strange, but when you stop and think about it, does Gods word change? Does how he wants us to live differ according to where we are in the world? Wouldn't He teach the same things to everyone?

I'd be more worried if the Book of Mormon and the Bible didn't have the same teachings in them.

[AndrewCothran]

Thats a good question Andrew, one that at first seems strange, but when you stop and think about it, does Gods word change? Does how he wants us to live differ according to where we are in the world? Wouldn't He teach the same things to everyone?

I'd be more worried if the Book of Mormon and the Bible didn't have the same teachings in them.

I must admit that wile that does not answer the question it is an interesting point and the answer to youre question is yes ..Wherever he provides scripture it would communicate the same though in a different language .

[mnn727]

I must admit that wile that does not answer the question .

Funny I thought it did, perhaps you asking why the wording is the same?? if so, both books are translations from a different language, when you are translating from one languange to another you choose the best words in the new language that best represent the original languages meaning. Thus is God taught the same lessons, the best words to convey that meaning in English would be the same no matter what the original language was.

Is that what you were asking or am I missing something?

[AndrewCothran]

Funny I thought it did, '' I don't see anything funny about it ."

perhaps you asking why the wording is the same?? " No ,that isn't what I was asking perhaps I should have made it more clear ..Without citing specific scriptures (though i can if you wish ) in the new testament it has been my observation and the observation of countless others that there are scriptures it seems copied from the New testament and placed in the book of morman..Scriptures for example qouted by Saint Paul. I understand the explanation given up to the time of Jeremiah but it would have been impossible for this to occur seeing that Paul did not yet exist .. I am not accusing Joseph Smith of plagarisim what i am asking is is how does the LDS account for this ... Its like saying specific selections fromGone with the wind were qouted before Gone with the Wind existed by Socrates himself ..And im not talking about a word or two here and there i am talking about whole passages with at least 85% accuracy ..

when you are translating from one language to another you choose the best words in the new language that best represent the original languages meaning> " Quite right except with scripture it must be copied as is the translator does not have the luxury of making little changes here and there except for punctuation ..And only for clarification when that is corrected . Otherwise you enter into a problem with the understanding of the texts meaning being compromised ...

[Batmanifestdestiny]

Well, a lot of references in the BoM to the bible are referencexs to the old testament, which were on the brass plates that Nephi got back in 1st nephi.

[AndrewCothran]

Well, a lot of references in the BoM to the bible are referencexs to the old testament, which were on the brass plates that Nephi got back in 1st nephi.

I understand that explanation but that does not account for the New Testament scriptures ..

thanks for you're answer though ....and for not being sarcastic ...

[tubaloth]

FAIR Topical Guide: Textual Issues

[Moksha]

Isaiah and the BoM authors were obviously on the same wavelength, and that included the King James translation committee. Consider it a cosmic convergence.

This could serve as an alternative explanation to whatever FAIR has come up with.

[MaidservantX]

I am not aware of any Paul in the Book of Mormon. So I think you would have to take the time to show exactly what you mean for the Paul scripture for me to be able to answer you.

However, the Savior visited the "American" continent after his resurrection and taught the people his gospel. When he taught, he basically gave the Sermon on the Mount again with perhaps a few differences or additions, I can't really recall at the moment, but which simply do not and would not bother me, coz the Savior is not a scriptural robot. But he did give the same speech. So it was recorded by those people, and we have it in the Book of Mormon.

Good question, thanks for being here, Andrew. :)

[mnn727]

Quite right except with scripture it must be copied as is the translator does not have the luxury of making little changes here and there except for punctuation ..And only for clarification when that is corrected . Otherwise you enter into a problem with the understanding of the texts meaning being compromised ...

#1 I was not being sarcastic, I was trying to guess your meaning

#2 Let me ask for clairification again so I know that I understand your meaning, what it appears you are asking is why does the Bible and Book of Mormon have the same wording in some cases, if thats not what you are asking then you'll need to clairify. But to answer the question I think you are asking:

If we agree that God would teach the same thing to all His children no matter where they live, then, If I have a sentance in Greek and I have another sentance saying the same thing in Egyptian and I translate both into English choosing the best possible words to convey the exact meaning that was intended in both Greek and Egyptian (since Gods message was the same to both groups) wouldn't the resulting English translations be exactly the same?

[Misshalfway]

Nephi and his people had the writings of the Old testament prophets. It is what they struggled in their journeyings back to Jerusalem to retrieve from King Laban. They called them the brass plates.

In the earlier chapters of the BofM, the writings of Isaiah are quoted. This is important because it shows us that the Nephites were very familiar with the scriptures and religious education of the Jews and living the law of Moses.

Later in the Book of 3 Nephi, the words of the Savior...such as the sermon on the mount....are repeated. But they were repeated right from the mouth of the Savior as part of his address to these early Americans.

Some think that because certain Bible scriptures are duplicated in the BofM that this must mean that Joseph Smith simply copied the text. But, careful study of these passages and their contexts help to clear that up.

[AndrewCothran]

#1 I was not being sarcastic, I was trying to guess your meaning

#2 Let me ask for clairification again so I know that I understand your meaning, what it appears you are asking is why does the Bible and Book of Mormon have the same wording in some cases, if thats not what you are asking then you'll need to clairify. But to answer the question I think you are asking:

If we agree that God would teach the same thing to all His children no matter where they live, then, If I have a sentance in Greek and I have another sentance saying the same thing in Egyptian and I translate both into English choosing the best possible words to convey the exact meaning that was intended in both Greek and Egyptian (since Gods message was the same to both groups) wouldn't the resulting English translations be exactly the same?

There is no contention between us we simply have a misunderstanding due to text which is a common problem when you can't hear voice tones or see facial expressions everything must be interpreted ..if i misinterpreted you i apologize.

I think you have answered my question as best as you can and i thank you .

Peace be with you

Andrew Cothran

[AndrewCothran]

Nephi and his people had the writings of the Old testament prophets. It is what they struggled in their journeyings back to Jerusalem to retrieve from King Laban. They called them the brass plates.

In the earlier chapters of the BofM, the writings of Isaiah are quoted. This is important because it shows us that the Nephites were very familiar with the scriptures and religious education of the Jews and living the law of Moses.

Later in the Book of 3 Nephi, the words of the Savior...such as the sermon on the mount....are repeated. But they were repeated right from the mouth of the Savior as part of his address to these early Americans.

Some think that because certain Bible scriptures are duplicated in the BofM that this must mean that Joseph Smith simply copied the text. But, careful study of these passages and their contexts help to clear that up.

what i need to do is do a carefull comparison

thank you ..

[Brenton]

I think it's probably the Bible that Joseph knew, and through translating by the gift and power of God, he was doing so in the grammar that made the most sense to him.

[YoungMormonRoyalist]

I have noticed while reading the book of morman there are many new testament scriptures almost word for word contained there in .. How is this possible and why is this so?

I have not gotten a real clear answer on this and i if i have i honestly have forgotten what it was ..

I mean the following with all due respect

Because it is. is not an answer nor just take it on faith actually in my experience what the person is really saying is I dont know i dont care so don't ask me ..but as one investigating the church even on my own ,it is an important question to me ..

What God reveals to one people he can and does reveal to another.

Was Paul an inspired prophet of God? Yes, on that we can all agree. His words were inspired of our Heavenly Father?

If these words were so sacred and of good report does it not stand to reason that he would tell them to another of his prophets in another land?

I asked a friend once, who's father was a pastor, has your father ever preached the same sermon to different people?

[mnn727]

I think you have answered my question as best as you can and i thank you .

But did I answer it to your satisfaction??

[bytor2112]

From FAIR:

Of the approximately 264 thousand words in the Book of Mormon, about 17 thousand are close parallels to the King James translation of the Bible. Most parallel verses occurred when Nephi quoted the Isaiah of the Old Testament using records on brass plates brought from Jerusalem. Other parallels occurred when the resurrected Savior repeated his Sermon on the Mount to the Nephites and then quoted Malachi at length. In both cases, we are told in the text that these are quotations of scriptures that had been recorded elsewhere.

Joseph Smith left no record of how he translated the plates beyond saying that it was done by the power of God. LDS scholars generally agree that in instances where the Book of Mormon parallels the Bible, Joseph Smith must have noted the parallels and used the King James Bible to guide him in his choice of words. If the Book of Mormon agreed with the Biblical text in meaning, he apparently utilized the Biblical text, italicized words and all. However, when the plates differed from the Biblical text, he followed the text on the plates.

For example, of 433 verses of Isaiah quoted in the Book of Mormon, 46 percent are identical to those in the Bible, while 54 percent are modified to some extent. These different verses have been of great use to LDS scholars. Several Hebrew literary structures are found only in a degraded form in the King James Bible, while those literary structures are complete and intact in the Book of Mormon. This shows that the brass plates version found in the Book of Mormon was a different, older Isaiah text.

A slightly more difficult problem is posed by Book of Mormon similarities with Biblical scriptures which were not in existence when Lehi left Jerusalem. For instance, Moroni 7:45, 46 parallels 1 Corinthians 13:4-8 (Paul's discussion on charity) so closely that some explanation is called for.

Mormon, Moroni's father, lived after Christ and knew Christ's teachings. Since the ultimate source of Paul's teachings was also Christ, it should not be surprising to find both Mormon and Paul teaching the same thing. The fact that both wrote on charity indicates the importance of this gospel concept.

If Mormon delivered a sermon on charity, it could logically contain much of the same material as Paul's teachings on the same subject. However, one would not expect identical, word-for-word renderings of the two writings, and indeed they are not totally identical. Two significant clauses found in I Corinthians are absent from Mormon's sermon, and Mormon's definition of charity is absent from Paul's writings. Nonetheless, several phrases are identical. These identical phrases are understood the same way as the Isaiah passages by Latter-day Saints: Joseph Smith recognized Mormon's teachings as similar to Paul's and likely used the biblical text where it agreed in meaning with the plates. Where the meanings differed, he followed the plates.

Since the ultimate source of the teachings of the Book of Mormon is Christ, and since the ultimate source of the teachings of the Bible (both Old and New Testaments) is also Christ, it should surprise no one that there are many parallels between Book of Mormon and Bible passages. While one cannot conclusively prove that Joseph Smith used a King James Bible as an aid in translating the parallel passages, that explanation is reasonable.

[Guest ceeboo]

Joseph Smith left no record of how he translated the plates beyond saying that it was done by the power of God. LDS scholars generally agree that in instances where the Book of Mormon parallels the Bible, Joseph Smith must have noted the parallels and used the King James Bible to guide him in his choice of words. If the Book of Mormon agreed with the Biblical text in meaning, he apparently utilized the Biblical text, italicized words and all. However, when the plates differed from the Biblical text, he followed the text on the plates.

My friend bytor,

First, thanks for the " Elphaba like " post :)

I believe it was J Lindsay site ( forgive me as it was some time ago ) that I read that there was indeed a very specific record as to how JS translated the plates. This record included witnesses to the method as well as accuracy.

Memory of mine, please forgive any error. JS would translate ( using seer stones and sometimes hat ) each word to scribe next to him. Scribe would then repeat back to JS each word that he/she wrote down as to be very accurate with the translation process before JS would give the final OK to proceed with next word.

Is this NOT an accurate account of the JS translation???

God bless,

Carl

[bytor2112]

Translation of the Book of Mormon: Interpreting the Evidence

Stephen D. Ricks

Concerning the manner in which the seerstone or the "interpreters" functioned, Joseph Smith reported only that they operated "by the gift and power of God."1 This is particularly unfortunate, since only he was in a position to describe from personal experience how these instruments enhanced his power to translate. However, each of the Three Witnesses related, directly or indirectly, their ideas concerning the process of translation. These statements, with a few other contemporary or near-contemporary accounts, as well as some of my own reflections on translating, may provide some additional insight into the process by which Joseph translated the plates.2

According to Samuel W. Richards, Oliver Cowdery gave him the following description of the translation of the Book of Mormon:

He represented Joseph as sitting at a table with the plates before him, translating them by means of the Urim and Thummim, while he (Oliver) sat beside him writing every word as Joseph spoke them to him. This was done by holding the "translators" over the hieroglyphics, the translation appearing distinctly on the instrument, which had been touched by the finger of God and dedicated and consecrated for the express purpose of translating languages. Every word was distinctly visible even to every letter; and if Oliver omitted a word or failed to spell a word correctly, the translation remained on the "interpreter" until it was copied correctly.3

Martin Harris explained the translation to Edward Stevenson in this manner:

By the 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.4

In his Address to All Believers in Christ, David Whitmer wrote:

I will now give you a description of the manner in which the Book of Mormon was translated. Joseph would put the seer stone into a 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 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.5

The evidentiary value of these statements is, of course, lessened somewhat since (1) they derive from individuals who themselves were not actively involved in translating, (2) they were made many years after the fact, and (3) in the case of two of them (Harris and Cowdery) they come at second hand. However, they may still provide us some guidance in understanding Joseph Smith's method of translating.

What elements are common to each of these statements? At least two, both of which I think may be relied upon: (1) some instrument consecrated for the purpose of translation—a "seerstone," "translators," or "Urim and Thummim"—that was used by Joseph Smith is mentioned in each account; and (2) words or sentences in English would appear on that instrument and would then be read off to the scribe. David Whitmer, in his account, also claims that "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 interpreta tion in English." This statement is somewhat problematical from a linguistic point of view. It suggests a simple one-for-one equivalency of words in the original language of the Book of Mormon and in English. This is scarcely likely in two closely related modern languages, much less in an ancient and modern language from two different language families. An examination of any page of an interlinear text (a text with a source language, such as Greek, Latin, or Hebrew, with a translation into a target language such as English below the line) will reveal a multitude of divergences from a word-for-word translation: some words are left untranslated, some are translated with more than one word, and often the order of words in the source language does not parallel (sometimes not even closely) the word order of the target language. A word-for-word rendering, as David Whitmer's statement seems to imply, would have resulted in a syntactic and semantic puree. On the other hand, the statement given on the authority of Oliver Cowdery, "this was done by holding the 'translators' over the hieroglyphics, the translation appearing distinctly on the instrument," need not imply a word-for-word rendering, but simply a close link between the words of the original and those of the translation.

The Reverend Diedrich Willers, a minister of German Reformed Church congregations in Bearytown and Fayette, New York, at the time of the Church's restoration and a celebrated opponent of the Church, wrote in 1830 to two colleagues in York, Pennsylvania, concerning the rise of the Church. In the letter he included the following account concerning the coming forth of the Book of Mormon: "The Angel indicated that . . . under these plates were hidden spectacles, without which he could not translate these plates, that by using these spectacles, he (Smith) would be in a position to read these ancient languages, which he had never studied and that the Holy Ghost would reveal to him the translation in the English language."6 "With all its awkwardness and grammatical chaos," the translation was thus, "according to contemporary reports, a product of spiritual impressions to Joseph Smith rather than an automatic appearance of the English words. This would make Joseph Smith, despite his grammatical limitations, a translator in fact rather than a mere transcriber of the handwriting of God."7

If the translation took place through a process of spiritual impressions, it was still not without effort on the part of Joseph Smith, as a revelation given to Oliver Cowdery in 1829, now in the Doctrine and Covenants, suggests. In D&C 9:7–8, Oliver, who had desired the gift of translation, was told: "Behold you have not understood; you have supposed that I would give it unto you, when you took no thought save it was to ask me. But behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right." Had Oliver presumed an effortless, automatic translation? These verses strongly suggest that effort was required by the translator to search for and find the appropriate expression, something which would not have been the case if the words for the English translation had automatically appeared on the seerstone or interpreters.

But what kind of effort was involved? It must have been in rendering the ideas on the plates into English. But how would Joseph Smith have known those ideas? Part of the divine process by which Joseph worked may have allowed him to think, as it were, in that language, to understand, by inspiration, the ideas of the language. The effort in translating may have taken the form of expressing the ideas on the plates in felicitous English. Such effort can sometimes be daunting. I am currently engaged in the translation of two books, one in German and one in Hebrew, the former rather longer than the Book of Mormon, the latter somewhat shorter. I have found that it is one thing to grasp in my mind the ideas of the original without translating those ideas into English but that it is quite a different matter to find the most felicitous expression for those ideas in English. There is also very considerable effort involved in continuing the process of translation hour after hour. I would consider my day an unalloyed success if I were to complete a translation of five to seven pages. This is roughly the rate at which Joseph Smith labored on the translation of the Book of Mormon.

The accounts of the Three Witnesses speak of words appearing on the seerstone or "translators." But at what point in the translation process did they appear? I believe that it was after Joseph had formulated in his mind a translation that represented with sufficient accuracy the ideas found on the original. Was there only one correct translation for the ideas found on the plates? I do not believe so. Could a "correct" translation be improved upon in word choice or in some other manner, or could these ideas have been rendered into different words? Yes. I regularly teach a graduate course in ancient Hebrew, where we read parts of the Old Testament or the Dead Sea Scrolls in Hebrew. Were I to give my students a translation examination from Hebrew into English, it is possible—indeed, likely—that I would receive from them several different renderings of the same verse in English but still consider them all essentially "correct," since each reflected with acceptable accuracy the ideas found on the original. Joseph himself seems to have felt no particular compunctions about revising the Book of Mormon, as witness the numerous changes (mostly of a grammatical nature) made by him in 1837 in the second edition of the Book of Mormon. If he had considered only one rendering acceptable, then he would certainly have refrained from making any changes in it (unless the changes resulted from errors in transcription or printing).

A reasonable scenario for the method of translating the Book of Mormon, in my estimation, would be one in which the means at Joseph's disposal (the seerstone and the interpreters) enhanced his capacity to understand (as one who knows a second language well enough to be able to think in it understands) the sense of the words and phrases on the plates as well as to grasp the relation of these words to each other.8 However, the actual translation was Joseph's alone and the opportunity to improve it in grammar and word choice still remained open. Thus, while it would be incorrect to minimize the divine element in the process of translation of the Book of Mormon, it would also be misleading and potentially hazardous to deny the human factor.

[Guest ceeboo]

Hi again bytor,

Thanks again for the response.

I will offer 1 small thing in response as to not seem contentious.:) and I will leave it be.

After reading your offering " Stephen Ricks " I am not sure if that supports or contradicts and weakens the FAIR offering.

God bless,

Carl

Edited September 29, 2008 by ceeboo

[bytor2112]

Hello Ceeboo,

Interestingly.......both articles are from FAIRLDS My own humble opinion......I don't have any idea why the BOM contains quotations from the KJV. I had never read the BOM in it's entirety until many years after I had joined the church....indeed I didn't know much about the history of Joseph Smith or the early church....just some vague acknowledgements about polygamy. So why did Bytor just leap right in and become a Mormon????? Simple....the same reason most other LDS did...the Holy Spirit. Once you have recieved the witness......a direct communication from God....you can't deny it. I take it on faith and the Spirit confirms that the BOM is true and that Joseph was a Prophet and the church is true.......everything else is just lively debate and like most people I would love to visit the past and see first hand the events that we discuss, but alas, I am bound here in the 21st century and the only glimpses I get are through the scholarly efforts of others and the musings I find here at LDS.net. Oh....and as far as the huge compliment you paid me by comparing my posts to Elpie.......I just can't take the credit....my two Elph like posts were cut and paste and hers are her own scholarly works....apples and oranges I am afraid.

Edited September 29, 2008 by bytor2112