العربية
中国
Français
Deutsch
Ελληνική
हिन्दी
Italiano
日本語
Português
Русский
EspañolLINGUISTICS AND THE BOOK OF MORMON
(Redirected from BoM Arabic)
According to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and other Latter Day Saint denominations, the Book of Mormon is a 19th century translation of a historical record of the inhabitants of the American continents, part of which was written in a script which the book refers to as "reformed Egyptian." The introduction to the modern LDS edition of Book of Mormon reads:
Both critics and proponents of the Book of Mormon have used linguistic methods to analyze the text. Proponents claim to have discovered stylistic forms that Joseph Smith and contemporaries are unlikely to have known about, as well as similarities to Egyptian and Hebrew. Critics of the Book of Mormon have pointed out places where the language could be anachronistic.
Chiasmus is a form of rhetorical parallelism wherein key ideas familiar to the reader are inverted, usually to make a point. It is found in the Bible and other ancient Middle Eastern poetry; for example, :
:Whoever sheds the blood of man,
:by man shall his blood be shed.
Chiasmus is also prominent in modern poetry and prose in many languages. The first lines of Keats' On First Looking Into Chapman's Homer, for instance, run,
:Much have I traveled in the realms of gold,
:and many goodly states and kingdoms seen.
Here "realms of gold" and "goodly states and kingdoms" are bookended by the verbs "traveled" and "seen" to form an ABBA pattern.
:Main articles: Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon
In 1969, LDS law and religion scholar John W. Welch, then a young missionary in Germany, discovered many instances of chiasmus in the Book of Mormon.[2] The longest and most commonly cited example of chiasmus in the Book of Mormon is the prophet Alma's religious experience, as recorded in . Some LDS scholars consider Alma 36 to be “the very best chiasm in the Book of Mormon.”[2] Welch offers the following caution regarding a tendency of enthusiastic readers to see chiasmus where it is not actually present:
With the Bible as the primary religious literary source in Joseph Smith's lifetime, some who believe Joseph Smith authored the Book of Mormon have speculated that the ability to create certain chiastic structures could have carried over into his writing.[5] According to John Welch and others, it is unlikely that Smith knew about chiasmus at the time of the Book of Mormon's publication.[2]
Writings in the form of chiasmus are also found in the Doctrine and Covenants and The Pearl of Great Price, two other works of scripture in the LDS Church.[7] Some readers of these suggested examples of chiasmus see only sporadic repetition, as opposed to deliberate and complete chiasmus found in .
Charles G. Kroupa and Richard C. Shipp published their findings regarding chiasmus found in the Doctrine and Covenants in 1972.[2] Shipp also produced a masters thesis out of BYU titled "Conceptual Patterns of Repetition in the Doctrine and Covenants and Their Implications" in 1975. This thesis shows evidence that writings found in the Doctrine and Covenants had both the rhythm of chiasmus and similar literary patterns.[2]
In 2004, a study was published by LDS researchers which used statistical analysis to determine the likelihood that a chiastic structure in LDS works appeared by chance as opposed to being created deliberately. Mathematical formulas were used to calculate a set of probabilities that provided the ability to distinguish between strong and weak chiastic structures.[2] The authors concluded:
With regard to the Book of Mormon, however, the use of chiasmus to support a claim of authenticity based upon this data must assume that Joseph Smith was unaware of the method of creating text using chiastic structure.[2]
Chiastic patterns have also been found in the Book of the Law of the Lord,[13] a purported translation of an ancient text by James J. Strang, who is considered by members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Strangite) to be the true successor to Joseph Smith. This book is not considered authentic by most Latter Day Saints.
Critics point out that the presence of chiasmus in Strang's writing as well as in the literature of other cultures implies that the source could be non-Hebrew. Additionally, they claim that the examination of a post-translation text might make identifying chiasmus in the original language difficult, and that the presence of chiasmus is not necessarily indicative of ancient origins.[14]
Stylometry is a method of statistical analysis used to determine authorship of various texts. It has been used to analyze disputed works of Shakespeare, contrast books of the Bible, identify the authors of twelve disputed ''Federalist Papers'', and compare styles of various authors such as Jane Austen. In 1980, researchers at Brigham Young University used stylometric techniques they called "wordprint analysis" to examine the possible authors of the Book of Mormon. They reached the conclusion that none of the Book of Mormon selections they studied resembled writings of any of the suggested nineteenth-century authors, including Joseph Smith.[2]
Jerald and Sandra Tanner challenged their findings on various points, most notably questioning the reliability of the data sources used and the methodology of the "wordprint analysis."[2] However, in 1987 an analysis was completed which verified the results of the earlier study, showing that it was statistically improbable that Joseph Smith or any other purported modern authors were the source of the writings of Nephi or Alma (who themselves have writing styles distinct from each other).[2] In this new study, the oldest Book of Mormon manuscripts were used.
Wordprint studies are rarely mentioned among Latter-day saints; church leaders teach that readers should pray to find confirmation of the Book of Mormon's divinity. One prominent Mormon scholar, John Tvedtnes, has rejected the use of wordprint evidence as the foundation for a testimony of the Book of Mormon's validity.[2]
Non-Mormon Thomas Donofrio claims to have found hundreds of parallels between peculiar wordings in the Book of Mormon and the writings of well-known historical and religious figures of the 18th and 19th centuries.[19] Unlike the earlier studies, Donofrio's research has not been peer-reviewed. Respondents to this study point out that the use of parallels to prove derivation can be used to illogical extremes. As an example, LDS apologist Jeff Lindsay composed a satirical documented essay "proving" the parallels between ''The Book of Mormon'' and Walt Whitman's ''Leaves of Grass'', which was published 25 years ''after'' the Book of Mormon.[20]
LDS scholars, however, say that the Book of Mormon is a translation, not originally written by Smith, but translated into the language with which he was familiar. While wordprint studies (by the same team used to verify the identity of the Unabomber in court) may be compelling, the inclusion of modern phraseology shouldn't surprise anyone. The word book, for example, was not used by the ancient Hebrews. Yet both in the King James Version of the Bible and the Book of Mormon, the word appears anachronistically. Scholars point out that this could well be the logical result of an ancient work translated by a modern man using the wording best suited to convey the ideas to a modern reader.
The Book of Mormon contains over 300 proper names, which provide a potentially valuable line of evidence in attempting to determine the book's origins. Place names are commonly recognized in historical linguistics as some of the strongest preservers of earlier language, and they are often preserved phonetically by speakers of later languages even when the original meanings have been lost.
Most of the Book of Mormon is purportedly the work of Nephite authors of Israelite ancestry, who wrote in reformed Egyptian and whose spoken language, though not specified in the book, is generally assumed to have been derived from Hebrew, perhaps with Egyptian or Native American influences. The Nephites also had access to portions of the Hebrew Bible. The Book of Ether is a somewhat different case, purportedly being a Nephite translation and abridgment of an originally Jaredite record. The Book of Mormon states that the Jaredites' language was not confounded at the Tower of Babel, so their language would have been descended from or identical to Adamic. None of these languages was familiar to Joseph Smith at the time he wrote or translated the Book of Mormon. However, he had access to numerous Hebrew and Greek proper names through his reading of the Bible.
Many of the proper names in the Book of Mormon are Hebrew names found in the Bible (e.g. Lehi, Lemuel, Ammon, and Enos). In addition, there are a number of attested Hebrew names found in the Book of Mormon which do not appear in the Bible. Examples of these are Aha, Ammonihah, Chemish, Hagoth, Himni, Isabel, Jarom, Josh, Luram, Mathoni, Mathonihah, Muloki, and Sam.[2] Richard Abanes, in his book ''One Nation Under Gods'', suggests that "[T]here are various Book of Mormon names such as 'Lemuel,' a wicked character. This may refer to Lemuel Durfee, a neighbor who in 1825 bought the Smith's farm when they could no longer afford it, thus forcing them to live as tenants."[22] LDS scholars point out, however, that a land agent had deceptively acquired the deed to the family farm, and that "[t]he Smiths were greatly relieved when they found that a Quaker named Lemuel Durfee would purchase their property from their antagonist."[23]
One question that arises is the occasional use of Biblical Hebrew names (e.g. Aaron, Levi, Ephraim) in the Book of Ether. This has been viewed by some as an anachronism, since the people of Ether are supposed to have originated from the time of the Tower of Babel, and no one knows exactly what their language would have been. However, some scholars suggest that Moroni, the Nephite abridger and translator of the Book of Ether, may have simply used a familiar (Nephite) form of the Jaredite names.
Some scholars have noted that some Jaredite names became a part of later Nephite culture, suggesting that there may have been survivors or refugees of the great Jaredite battle besides Coriantumr. LDS archaeologist Bruce V. Warren cites the names ''Kib'', ''Kish'', ''Shule'', and ''Com'' as examples Jaredite names that have been found in ancient Mesoamerica.[24]
Many non-biblical names found in the Book of Mormon resemble words from ancient Hebrew (e.g. Alma, Sariah, Aha, Ammonihah, Chemish, Hagoth, Himni, Isabel, Jarom, Josh, Luram, Mathoni, Mathonihah, Mosiah, and Muloki). Some, like Alma, are attested Hebrew names; others are unattested but plausible. These names are often interpreted as evidence in favor of the Book of Mormon, since Joseph Smith's knowledge of Hebrew was limited to names found in the Bible.[2]
Some Book of Mormon names appear to be Egyptian. Paanchi and Pahoran are attested Egyptian names.[2] The name Ammon could as easily be Egyptian as Hebrew. Less obvious Egyptian connections have been proposed for several other names, such as Cumenihah (cf. Egyptian Khamuni-ra) and Gidgiddoni (cf. Egyptian Djed-djhwt-iw-f-ankh).
The Book of Mormon also contains some names which appear to be Greek, some of which are Hellenizations of Hebrew names (e.g. Antipas, Archeantus, Esrom, Ezias, Judea and Zenos). Some of these are found in the New Testament and would have been known to Joseph Smith. Others are non-biblical and their presence in the book is puzzling to both believers and skeptics, since neither Smith nor the Nephites spoke Greek. One explanation has been offered by Brian D. Stubbs, who said that though the language of the Mulekites isn't put forward in the Book of Mormon, it could have consisted of Phoenician, Greek, or Arabic.[2]
The mechanics of the method by which the Book of Mormon was claimed to have been translated have been examined by various scholars in order to determine how words were chosen. Various accounts from witnesses to the translation process exist, including David Whitmer and Martin Harris, two of the Three Witnesses. Statements of the exact methods used in translation vary depending upon the account. A number of these accounts were written many years after the events occurred.
Mormon Church authorities do not claim to know the exact method by which translation and word choice was accomplished. In an address given 25 June 1992 at a seminar for new mission presidents at the Missionary Training Center, Mormon Apostle Russell M. Nelson stated that “[t]he details of this miraculous method of translation are still not fully known.” In order to illustrate this, Nelson quoted the words of Book of Mormon witness David Whitmer (who had not served as a ''Book of Mormon'' scribe), who wrote regarding the use of a seer stone in the translation process over 50 years after it had occurred, [2]
Nelson also noted statements made by Joseph's wife, Emma Hale Smith, who gave her account of the translation method in 1856:[2]
Emma also claimed that Smith would translate with the plates in front of him, wrapped in a cloth. This suggests that the process of translation involved viewing the Urim and Thummim or the seer stone rather than viewing the actual plates themselves..
Martin Harris (as quoted by Edward Stevenson in the ''Deseret News'' in 1881) described the translation process as follows:
One challenge in performing a linguistic analysis of the Book of Mormon is that no original text is available for analysis; only handwritten printers' copies transcribed from the original handwritten copies of the original English text, and a few pages of the original translation produced by Joseph Smith are available. As with any translation, the influence of the translator is inextricably part of the translated text in matters of word choice. Some Mormon scholars have theorized that when words are found in the Book of Mormon that seem anachronistic, or that refer to items not known to have existed in the pre-Columbian Americas during the period of time covered by the Book of Mormon (e.g. horse, elephant, chicken, cattle, swine, barley, bull, calf, and hilt), these words could be an approximation ''in translation'' to things that ''did'' exist in pre-Columbian America.[2]
Contemporary accounts by Joseph Smith and his principal scribe, Oliver Cowdery, assert that inspiration, study, thought, and effort were required to translate the plates.[34]
Some believe that if these accounts of the translation process are accurate, then there is very little room for error in the word choices used in the translation of the Book of Mormon (since each word was reportedly divinely approved and could not be written incorrectly). "Steel" must mean steel, "hilt" must mean hilt, "elephant" must mean elephant, and so forth. However, as Whitmer was never directly involved in the translation and Harris was involved for only a brief period of time, LDS scholars consider it unlikely that either of these accounts is as accurate as the accounts of Smith and Cowdery.[2]
The Book of Mormon deals with certain ''concepts'' for which some scholars believe no evidence exists either in pre-Columbian America or in the Jewish world of Lehi's time.
The word "''Christ''" is the English transliteration of the Greek word Χριστός (transliterated precisely as Christós); it is relatively synonymous with the Hebrew word rendered "''Messiah''." Both words have the meaning of "anointed," and are used in the Bible to refer to "the Anointed One".[36] In Greek translations of the Old Testament (including the Septuagint), the word "Christ" is used for the Hebrew "Messiah", and in Hebrew translations of the New Testament, the word "Messiah" is used for the Greek "Christ".[37] If you take any passage in the Bible that uses the word "Christ", you can substitute for it the word "Messiah" or "the Messiah" with no change in meaning (e.g. ).
The Book of Mormon uses both terms throughout the book. In the vast majority of cases, it uses the terms in an identical manner as the Bible, where it doesn't matter which word is used:
:"And now, my sons, remember, remember that it is upon the rock of our Redeemer, who is '(Christ/the Messiah)', the Son of God, that ye must build your foundation; that when the devil shall send forth his mighty winds, yea, his shafts in the whirlwind, yea, when all his hail and his mighty storm shall beat upon you, it shall have no power over you to drag you down to the gulf of misery and endless wo, because of the rock upon which ye are built, which is a sure foundation, a foundation whereon if men build they cannot fall" ().
:"And after he had baptized '(Christ/the Messiah)' with water, he should behold and bear record that he had baptized the Lamb of God, who should take away the sins of the world." ().
Apologists state that the original Reformed Egyptian text certainly used Hebrew forms of names and titles exclusively, but when translating Joseph Smith simply used whichever form of the name ("Christ" or "Messiah") was more appropriate in English.[38]
The Book of Mormon occasionally uses the word "Christ" in a way that is not interchangeable with "Messiah". For example in , the Book of Mormon prophet Jacob says an angel informed him that the name of the Messiah would be Christ:
The word "church" first occurs in 1 Nephi 4:26, where a prophet named Nephi disguises himself as Laban, a prominent man in Jerusalem whom Nephi had slain:
According to the Book of Mormon, this exchange happened in Jerusalem, around 600 B.C. The meaning of the word "church" in the Book of Mormon is more comparable to usage in the Bible than Modern English. The concept of a church, meaning ''a convocation of believers'', existed among the House of Israel prior to Christianity. For instance, Psalms speaks of praising the Lord "in the congregation of the saints"; the Septuagint contains the Greek word ''ecclesia'' for "congregation," which is also translated as "church" in the New Testament. The Book of Mormon using the word "church" in the same "style" as the Bible is seen by some apologists as support for the Book of Mormon.
A similar question regards the word "synagogue," found in Alma 16:13:
Scholars have said that synagogues did not exist in their modern form before the destruction of the temple and the Babylonian captivity. The usage in the Book of Mormon, instead, is comparable to that of the KJV. reads "the synagogues of God in the land." Similar to the use of the word "church," the word "synagogue" in the Bible generally refers to a place of assembly for religious worship.
Main articles: The Book of Mormon and the King James Bible
Hebrew idioms that are frequently found in the Book of Mormon are the repetitive use of the words ''yea'', ''and'', ''behold'' and the phrase ''it came to pass.''[2] LDS scholar Royal Skousen offers the following caution when attempting to compare languages in order to determine if they are related:
In the present edition of the Book of Mormon, the phrase "'it came to pass'" occurs 1297 times. This phrase occurs 457 times in the KJV of the Old Testament. There, it is the English translation of the single Hebrew word, 'hâyâh'. Jacob Weingreen, in his book ''Practical Grammar for Classical Hebrew'', suggests that the phrase means "now it happened."[2] Strong's Hebrew dictionary suggests "'to exist'" or "'to become'" as possible translations of 'hâyâh'. Royal Skousen suggests that in a number of cases the phrase "and it came to pass" is used as a "discourse marker facilitating narrative cohesion."[2] The Hebrew Old Testament has 1114 occurrences of the word 'hâyâh'.Most of these have either been ignored or reduced to simply "''and''".[43]
The Book of Mormon often uses a prepositional phrase in place of an adverb, which is consistent with the Hebrew language. Several examples of this construct as found in the Book of Mormon are:[2]
:"with harshness" instead of "harshly"
:"with joy" instead of "joyfully"
:"with gladness" instead of "gladly"
:"with patience" instead of "patiently"
:"with diligence" instead of "diligently"
John Tvedtnes states: "At least one adjective ('harebeh', 'many, exceeding') is used adverbially, but more often a prepositional phrase is used. The Book of Mormon is replete with adverbial usage of the adjective 'exceeding' (as in 'exceeding great joy'--instead of 'exceedingly'--in 1 Nephi 8:12)."[2]
LDS scholars claim that the "cognate accusative" is a Semitic language construct which consists of a verb immediately followed by a noun that is derived from the same root. For example, the phrase found in Genesis 37:5 "Joseph dreamed a dream" instead of the usual English method of phrasing "Joseph had a dream."[2]
The Book of Mormon contains many examples of the "cognate accusative" construct:[43]
:: "they are cursed with a sore cursing" is used instead of "they are sorely cursed."
:: "work all manner of fine work" instead of "do fine work."
:: "and he did judge righteous judgments" instead of "he judged righteously."
:: "Behold I have dreamed a dream" instead of "I had a dream."
:: "taxed with a tax" Instead of "taxed."
The cognate accusative is also a common feature in languages linguistically unrelated to the Semitic languages, such as Ancient Greek (e.g. ὁρᾶς ὄψιν, "you see a sight") and Latin (e.g. vitam vivere, "to live life")[48]. The cognate accusative also appears very commonly in both colloquial and non-colloquial English (e.g. "He talks the talk, but does he walk the walk?", and "I sing a song.").[49] Thus it is not clear why the cognate accusative should be labelled a "Semitic construct" at all.
Parallelisms are words, phrases, or sentences that correspond, compare, or contrast one with another, or are found to be in repetition one with another. Parallelisms rarely feature rhymes, the repetition of corresponding sounds; rather, they present the repetition of ideas. A few examples of three parallelistic structures: climactic forms, synonymous parallelisms, and alternating parallel lines.[50]
An example of climax is found in Moroni 8:25–26:
:And the first fruits of repentance is
:'baptism;' and
:'baptism' cometh by faith unto
:'the fulfilling the commandments'; and
:'the fulfilling the commandments' bringeth
:'remission of sins;' And the
:'remission of sins' bringeth
:'meekness, and lowliness of heart'; and because of
:'meekness and lowliness of heart' cometh the visitation of the
:'Holy Ghost', which
:'Comforter' filleth with hope and perfect
:'love', which
:'love' endureth by diligence unto prayer, until the end shall come, when all the saints shall dwell with God.
Simple synonymous parallelism consists of two lines, line two being a synonymous repetition, an echo, or a symmetrical counterpart of line one.
:'Wo unto him' that spurneth at the doings of the Lord; yea,
:'wo unto him' that shall deny the Christ and his works. (3 Nephi 29:5)
The Book of Mormon features scores of parallel statements. The alternating parallel lines may consist of synonymous or antithetical words, word pairs, or phrases.
Note the longer A-B-C-D-E-F/A-B-C-D-E-F pattern as recorded in 1 Nephi 9:3–4:
:Nevertheless, I have received a commandment of the Lord
:'A' that I should make 'these plates', for the special purpose that there should be an account engraven
:'B' of the 'ministry' of my people.
:'C' Upon the 'other plates' should be engraven
:'D' an account of the 'reign of the kings',
:'E' and the 'wars'
:'F' and 'contentions of my people';
:'A' wherefore 'these plates'
:'B' are for the more part of the 'ministry';
:'C' and the 'other plates'
:'D' are for the more part of the 'reign of the kings'
:'E' and the 'wars'
:'F' and 'contentions of my people'.
This form is characterized by an opposition or contrast of thoughts, or an antithesis between two lines. A common feature that joins the two lines is the conjunction ''and'' or the disjunction ''but''. Often the second line is introduced with one of these two words and immediately follows the contrasting element. 1 Nephi 17:45 is an example:[51]
'Ye are swift to do iniquity'
'but slow to remember the Lord your God.'
The contrast is apparent, the word ''swift'' standing opposite of ''slow'' and the phrase ''to do iniquity'' counterpointing to ''remember the Lord''.
The following antithetic parallelism from Alma 5:40 contrasts ''good'' with ''evil'' and ''God'' with the ''devil''. The expressions ''whatsoever is'' and ''cometh from'' are featured in both lines:
'For I say unto you that whatsoever is good cometh from God,'
'and whatsoever is evil cometh from the devil.'
The "prophetic perfect" is the use of the past tense or past participle verb forms (present and past perfect tenses) when referring to future events in prophecy. On occasion, Old Testament prophets prophesied using these forms "to express facts which are undoubtedly imminent, and therefore, in the imagination of the speaker, already accomplished." Book of Mormon prophets also used the prophetic perfect in their prophecies. Lehi declared, '"I have obtained a land of promise"' (1 Nephi 5:5) long before he actually arrived in the promised land; and Nephi spoke of Jesus' baptism and reception of the Holy Ghost as though those events had already happened: '"Wherefore, after he was baptized with water the Holy Ghost descended upon him in the form of a dove"' (2 Nephi 31:8).[51]
Mormon was writing on golden plates. Once you engraved a word, it wasn't easy to erase. So if you're working on the phrase ''"weapons of war, for peace"'' and make the error, ''"weapons of peace,"'' without an eraser you might just have to continue writing to add the correction, using '"or"' to introduce it. A few LDS writers have pointed to a variety of passages that are consistent with this "no eraser" theory.[53]
"And thus we see that they buried the weapons of peace, 'or' they buried the weapons of war for peace."
"And they stood before the king, and were permitted, 'or' rather commanded that they should answer the questions which he should ask them."
"Now if a man desired to serve God, it was his privilege; 'or' rather, if he believed in God it was his privilege to serve him. . ."
"Now behold, the people who were in the land Bountiful, 'or' rather Moroni, feared that they would hearken to the words of Morianturn . . ."
Although some have spent significant time searching for historical evidence concerning the Book of Mormon, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints discounts the utility of such in determining the book's legitimacy. Dallin H. Oaks, one of the Twelve Apostles of the LDS Church, stated:
Book of Mormon linguistic and textual issues are not discussed in missionary lessons or in Sunday School, but are typically addressed in LDS institute classes and religion classes at BYU, as well as in books and magazine articles published by the Church.[2]
1. Introduction to the Book of Mormon
2.
3.
4.
5. The Tanners claim; “Even if it could be established that there are real chiasms in the Book of Mormon, it would not prove anything more than that Joseph Smith borrowed from the style of chiastic passages found in the Bible.”
6.
7. Possible chiasmus in other LDS scripture: , , , and
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13. Chiasmus
14. See Ancient Chiasmus Studied (scroll to p 147) or Chiasmus and the Book of Mormon.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19. PostMormon.org: Tories
20. Was the Book of Mormon Plagiarized from Walt Whitman's Leaves of Grass?
21.
22. Abanes's reference for this information is a footnote in Vogel's ''Early Mormon Documents'', vol. 1, p. 321, footnote #128
23. Smith's Golden Book
Prophetic Autobiography Joseph Smith's mother Lucy's comments regarding Lemuel Durfee: "Mr. Durf[ee] gave us the privilege of the place [for] one year with this provision-that Samuel, our 4th son, was to labor for him 6 months. These things were all settled upon and the conclusion was that if after we had kept the place in this way [for] one year [and] we still chose to remain we could have the privilege" (Lavina F. Anderson, ed., Lucy's Book: A Critical Edition of Lucy Mack Smith's Family Memoir [Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2001], 372-73).
24. Surviving Jaredite Names in Mesoamerica, , Bruce, Warren, Meridian Magazine, See also Blaine M. Yorgason, Bruce W. Warren, and Harold Brown. New Evidences of Christ in Ancient America, Book of Mormon Research Foundation. Provo: 1999, Chaper 2, “Jaredite Connections with Mesoamerica,” pp. 17-19).
25.
26.
27.
28.
29. David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ, Richmond, Missouri: n.p., 1887, p. 12
30.
31. (Edmund C. Briggs, “A Visit to Nauvoo in 1856,” Journal of History, Jan. 1916, p. 454.)
32. Edward Stevenson, "One of the Three Witnesses," reprinted from Deseret News, 30 Nov. 1881 in Millennial Star, 44 (6 Feb. 1882): 86-87
33.
34. Joseph Smith History and D&C 9
35.
36. http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=510&letter=M
37. http://www.biblegateway.com/
38. http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_BMProblems.shtml#name
39.
40.
41.
42.
43. Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon
44.
45.
46.
47. Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon
48. Additional accusatives in Latin and Ancient Greek: Arguments against arguments
49. http://www.linguistlist.org/issues/9/9-1757.html
50. The Dynamics of Book of Mormon Parallelism
51. Hebraisms and Other Ancient Peculiarities in the Book of Mormon
52. Hebraisms and Other Ancient Peculiarities in the Book of Mormon
53. No Erasers
54. "1985 CES Doctrine and Covenants Symposium," Brigham Young University, Aug. 16, 1985, page 26
55.
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★ Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon A number of examples of chiastic structures in the Book of Mormon are illustrated.
★ Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon, A Remarkable Literary Art
★ Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon
★ The Dynamics of Book of Mormon Parallelism
★ King Benjamin's Speech
★ Hebraisms and Other Ancient Peculiarities in the Book of Mormon
★ Book of Mormon
★ Reformed Egyptian
★ Linguistics
According to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and other Latter Day Saint denominations, the Book of Mormon is a 19th century translation of a historical record of the inhabitants of the American continents, part of which was written in a script which the book refers to as "reformed Egyptian." The introduction to the modern LDS edition of Book of Mormon reads:
The book was written by many ancient prophets by the spirit of prophecy and revelation. Their words, written on gold plates, were quoted and abridged by a prophet-historian named Mormon. The record gives an account of two great civilizations. One came from Jerusalem in ca. 600 B.C., and afterward separated into two nations, known as the Nephites and the Lamanites. The other came much earlier when the Lord confounded the tongues at the Tower of Babel. This group is known as the Jaredites. After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they were the principal ancestors of the American Indians.[1]
Both critics and proponents of the Book of Mormon have used linguistic methods to analyze the text. Proponents claim to have discovered stylistic forms that Joseph Smith and contemporaries are unlikely to have known about, as well as similarities to Egyptian and Hebrew. Critics of the Book of Mormon have pointed out places where the language could be anachronistic.
Chiasmus
Chiasmus is a form of rhetorical parallelism wherein key ideas familiar to the reader are inverted, usually to make a point. It is found in the Bible and other ancient Middle Eastern poetry; for example, :
:Whoever sheds the blood of man,
:by man shall his blood be shed.
Chiasmus is also prominent in modern poetry and prose in many languages. The first lines of Keats' On First Looking Into Chapman's Homer, for instance, run,
:Much have I traveled in the realms of gold,
:and many goodly states and kingdoms seen.
Here "realms of gold" and "goodly states and kingdoms" are bookended by the verbs "traveled" and "seen" to form an ABBA pattern.
The Book of Mormon
:Main articles: Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon
In 1969, LDS law and religion scholar John W. Welch, then a young missionary in Germany, discovered many instances of chiasmus in the Book of Mormon.[2] The longest and most commonly cited example of chiasmus in the Book of Mormon is the prophet Alma's religious experience, as recorded in . Some LDS scholars consider Alma 36 to be “the very best chiasm in the Book of Mormon.”[2] Welch offers the following caution regarding a tendency of enthusiastic readers to see chiasmus where it is not actually present:
Some people, of course, have gone overboard with this search, and caution must be employed; otherwise, it is possible to find chiasmus in the telephone book, and the effort becomes meaningless…One must be careful in this quest, however, to avoid the problems of the "hammer syndrome"—to the person holding a hammer, everything looks like a nail. To the person who knows only chiasmus and no other form of literary composition, everything may start looking like a chiasm.[2]
With the Bible as the primary religious literary source in Joseph Smith's lifetime, some who believe Joseph Smith authored the Book of Mormon have speculated that the ability to create certain chiastic structures could have carried over into his writing.[5] According to John Welch and others, it is unlikely that Smith knew about chiasmus at the time of the Book of Mormon's publication.[2]
Occurrence in other LDS scriptures
Writings in the form of chiasmus are also found in the Doctrine and Covenants and The Pearl of Great Price, two other works of scripture in the LDS Church.[7] Some readers of these suggested examples of chiasmus see only sporadic repetition, as opposed to deliberate and complete chiasmus found in .
Charles G. Kroupa and Richard C. Shipp published their findings regarding chiasmus found in the Doctrine and Covenants in 1972.[2] Shipp also produced a masters thesis out of BYU titled "Conceptual Patterns of Repetition in the Doctrine and Covenants and Their Implications" in 1975. This thesis shows evidence that writings found in the Doctrine and Covenants had both the rhythm of chiasmus and similar literary patterns.[2]
In 2004, a study was published by LDS researchers which used statistical analysis to determine the likelihood that a chiastic structure in LDS works appeared by chance as opposed to being created deliberately. Mathematical formulas were used to calculate a set of probabilities that provided the ability to distinguish between strong and weak chiastic structures.[2] The authors concluded:
Based on these estimates, we conclude that the likelihood is high that chiastic structure appeared by design in the Pentateuch and in the Book of Mormon. Our estimates do not support such a conclusion for the Doctrine and Covenants, the Book of Abraham… indicating instead that chiasms could have appeared in these works by chance.[2]
With regard to the Book of Mormon, however, the use of chiasmus to support a claim of authenticity based upon this data must assume that Joseph Smith was unaware of the method of creating text using chiastic structure.[2]
Other works containing chiasmus
Chiastic patterns have also been found in the Book of the Law of the Lord,[13] a purported translation of an ancient text by James J. Strang, who is considered by members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Strangite) to be the true successor to Joseph Smith. This book is not considered authentic by most Latter Day Saints.
Critics point out that the presence of chiasmus in Strang's writing as well as in the literature of other cultures implies that the source could be non-Hebrew. Additionally, they claim that the examination of a post-translation text might make identifying chiasmus in the original language difficult, and that the presence of chiasmus is not necessarily indicative of ancient origins.[14]
Stylometry (Wordprint Studies)
Statistical analysis
Stylometry is a method of statistical analysis used to determine authorship of various texts. It has been used to analyze disputed works of Shakespeare, contrast books of the Bible, identify the authors of twelve disputed ''Federalist Papers'', and compare styles of various authors such as Jane Austen. In 1980, researchers at Brigham Young University used stylometric techniques they called "wordprint analysis" to examine the possible authors of the Book of Mormon. They reached the conclusion that none of the Book of Mormon selections they studied resembled writings of any of the suggested nineteenth-century authors, including Joseph Smith.[2]
Jerald and Sandra Tanner challenged their findings on various points, most notably questioning the reliability of the data sources used and the methodology of the "wordprint analysis."[2] However, in 1987 an analysis was completed which verified the results of the earlier study, showing that it was statistically improbable that Joseph Smith or any other purported modern authors were the source of the writings of Nephi or Alma (who themselves have writing styles distinct from each other).[2] In this new study, the oldest Book of Mormon manuscripts were used.
Wordprint studies are rarely mentioned among Latter-day saints; church leaders teach that readers should pray to find confirmation of the Book of Mormon's divinity. One prominent Mormon scholar, John Tvedtnes, has rejected the use of wordprint evidence as the foundation for a testimony of the Book of Mormon's validity.[2]
Parallels
Non-Mormon Thomas Donofrio claims to have found hundreds of parallels between peculiar wordings in the Book of Mormon and the writings of well-known historical and religious figures of the 18th and 19th centuries.[19] Unlike the earlier studies, Donofrio's research has not been peer-reviewed. Respondents to this study point out that the use of parallels to prove derivation can be used to illogical extremes. As an example, LDS apologist Jeff Lindsay composed a satirical documented essay "proving" the parallels between ''The Book of Mormon'' and Walt Whitman's ''Leaves of Grass'', which was published 25 years ''after'' the Book of Mormon.[20]
LDS scholars, however, say that the Book of Mormon is a translation, not originally written by Smith, but translated into the language with which he was familiar. While wordprint studies (by the same team used to verify the identity of the Unabomber in court) may be compelling, the inclusion of modern phraseology shouldn't surprise anyone. The word book, for example, was not used by the ancient Hebrews. Yet both in the King James Version of the Bible and the Book of Mormon, the word appears anachronistically. Scholars point out that this could well be the logical result of an ancient work translated by a modern man using the wording best suited to convey the ideas to a modern reader.
Proper Names
The Book of Mormon contains over 300 proper names, which provide a potentially valuable line of evidence in attempting to determine the book's origins. Place names are commonly recognized in historical linguistics as some of the strongest preservers of earlier language, and they are often preserved phonetically by speakers of later languages even when the original meanings have been lost.
Most of the Book of Mormon is purportedly the work of Nephite authors of Israelite ancestry, who wrote in reformed Egyptian and whose spoken language, though not specified in the book, is generally assumed to have been derived from Hebrew, perhaps with Egyptian or Native American influences. The Nephites also had access to portions of the Hebrew Bible. The Book of Ether is a somewhat different case, purportedly being a Nephite translation and abridgment of an originally Jaredite record. The Book of Mormon states that the Jaredites' language was not confounded at the Tower of Babel, so their language would have been descended from or identical to Adamic. None of these languages was familiar to Joseph Smith at the time he wrote or translated the Book of Mormon. However, he had access to numerous Hebrew and Greek proper names through his reading of the Bible.
Hebrew names
Many of the proper names in the Book of Mormon are Hebrew names found in the Bible (e.g. Lehi, Lemuel, Ammon, and Enos). In addition, there are a number of attested Hebrew names found in the Book of Mormon which do not appear in the Bible. Examples of these are Aha, Ammonihah, Chemish, Hagoth, Himni, Isabel, Jarom, Josh, Luram, Mathoni, Mathonihah, Muloki, and Sam.[2] Richard Abanes, in his book ''One Nation Under Gods'', suggests that "[T]here are various Book of Mormon names such as 'Lemuel,' a wicked character. This may refer to Lemuel Durfee, a neighbor who in 1825 bought the Smith's farm when they could no longer afford it, thus forcing them to live as tenants."[22] LDS scholars point out, however, that a land agent had deceptively acquired the deed to the family farm, and that "[t]he Smiths were greatly relieved when they found that a Quaker named Lemuel Durfee would purchase their property from their antagonist."[23]
One question that arises is the occasional use of Biblical Hebrew names (e.g. Aaron, Levi, Ephraim) in the Book of Ether. This has been viewed by some as an anachronism, since the people of Ether are supposed to have originated from the time of the Tower of Babel, and no one knows exactly what their language would have been. However, some scholars suggest that Moroni, the Nephite abridger and translator of the Book of Ether, may have simply used a familiar (Nephite) form of the Jaredite names.
Some scholars have noted that some Jaredite names became a part of later Nephite culture, suggesting that there may have been survivors or refugees of the great Jaredite battle besides Coriantumr. LDS archaeologist Bruce V. Warren cites the names ''Kib'', ''Kish'', ''Shule'', and ''Com'' as examples Jaredite names that have been found in ancient Mesoamerica.[24]
Many non-biblical names found in the Book of Mormon resemble words from ancient Hebrew (e.g. Alma, Sariah, Aha, Ammonihah, Chemish, Hagoth, Himni, Isabel, Jarom, Josh, Luram, Mathoni, Mathonihah, Mosiah, and Muloki). Some, like Alma, are attested Hebrew names; others are unattested but plausible. These names are often interpreted as evidence in favor of the Book of Mormon, since Joseph Smith's knowledge of Hebrew was limited to names found in the Bible.[2]
Egyptian names
Some Book of Mormon names appear to be Egyptian. Paanchi and Pahoran are attested Egyptian names.[2] The name Ammon could as easily be Egyptian as Hebrew. Less obvious Egyptian connections have been proposed for several other names, such as Cumenihah (cf. Egyptian Khamuni-ra) and Gidgiddoni (cf. Egyptian Djed-djhwt-iw-f-ankh).
Greek names
The Book of Mormon also contains some names which appear to be Greek, some of which are Hellenizations of Hebrew names (e.g. Antipas, Archeantus, Esrom, Ezias, Judea and Zenos). Some of these are found in the New Testament and would have been known to Joseph Smith. Others are non-biblical and their presence in the book is puzzling to both believers and skeptics, since neither Smith nor the Nephites spoke Greek. One explanation has been offered by Brian D. Stubbs, who said that though the language of the Mulekites isn't put forward in the Book of Mormon, it could have consisted of Phoenician, Greek, or Arabic.[2]
Word Choice in Translation
The mechanics of the method by which the Book of Mormon was claimed to have been translated have been examined by various scholars in order to determine how words were chosen. Various accounts from witnesses to the translation process exist, including David Whitmer and Martin Harris, two of the Three Witnesses. Statements of the exact methods used in translation vary depending upon the account. A number of these accounts were written many years after the events occurred.
Method of translation
Mormon Church authorities do not claim to know the exact method by which translation and word choice was accomplished. In an address given 25 June 1992 at a seminar for new mission presidents at the Missionary Training Center, Mormon Apostle Russell M. Nelson stated that “[t]he details of this miraculous method of translation are still not fully known.” In order to illustrate this, Nelson quoted the words of Book of Mormon witness David Whitmer (who had not served as a ''Book of Mormon'' scribe), who wrote regarding the use of a seer stone in the translation process over 50 years after it had occurred, [2]
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.[29]
Nelson also noted statements made by Joseph's wife, Emma Hale Smith, who gave her account of the translation method in 1856:[2]
When my husband was translating the Book of Mormon, I wrote a part of it, as he dictated each sentence, word for word, and when he came to proper names he could not pronounce, or long words, he spelled them out, and while I was writing them, if I made any mistake in spelling, he would stop me and correct my spelling although it was impossible for him to see how I was writing them down at the time. Even the word Sarah he could not pronounce at first, but had to spell it, and I would pronounce it for him.[31]
Emma also claimed that Smith would translate with the plates in front of him, wrapped in a cloth. This suggests that the process of translation involved viewing the Urim and Thummim or the seer stone rather than viewing the actual plates themselves..
Martin Harris (as quoted by Edward Stevenson in the ''Deseret News'' in 1881) described the translation process as follows:
By aid of the seer stone, sentences would appear and were read by the Prophet... when finished [the Prophet] 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.[32]
Word substitution
One challenge in performing a linguistic analysis of the Book of Mormon is that no original text is available for analysis; only handwritten printers' copies transcribed from the original handwritten copies of the original English text, and a few pages of the original translation produced by Joseph Smith are available. As with any translation, the influence of the translator is inextricably part of the translated text in matters of word choice. Some Mormon scholars have theorized that when words are found in the Book of Mormon that seem anachronistic, or that refer to items not known to have existed in the pre-Columbian Americas during the period of time covered by the Book of Mormon (e.g. horse, elephant, chicken, cattle, swine, barley, bull, calf, and hilt), these words could be an approximation ''in translation'' to things that ''did'' exist in pre-Columbian America.[2]
Contemporary accounts by Joseph Smith and his principal scribe, Oliver Cowdery, assert that inspiration, study, thought, and effort were required to translate the plates.[34]
Some believe that if these accounts of the translation process are accurate, then there is very little room for error in the word choices used in the translation of the Book of Mormon (since each word was reportedly divinely approved and could not be written incorrectly). "Steel" must mean steel, "hilt" must mean hilt, "elephant" must mean elephant, and so forth. However, as Whitmer was never directly involved in the translation and Harris was involved for only a brief period of time, LDS scholars consider it unlikely that either of these accounts is as accurate as the accounts of Smith and Cowdery.[2]
Concepts not believed to have existed during the Book of Mormon timeframe
The Book of Mormon deals with certain ''concepts'' for which some scholars believe no evidence exists either in pre-Columbian America or in the Jewish world of Lehi's time.
"Christ" and "Messiah"
The word "''Christ''" is the English transliteration of the Greek word Χριστός (transliterated precisely as Christós); it is relatively synonymous with the Hebrew word rendered "''Messiah''." Both words have the meaning of "anointed," and are used in the Bible to refer to "the Anointed One".[36] In Greek translations of the Old Testament (including the Septuagint), the word "Christ" is used for the Hebrew "Messiah", and in Hebrew translations of the New Testament, the word "Messiah" is used for the Greek "Christ".[37] If you take any passage in the Bible that uses the word "Christ", you can substitute for it the word "Messiah" or "the Messiah" with no change in meaning (e.g. ).
The Book of Mormon uses both terms throughout the book. In the vast majority of cases, it uses the terms in an identical manner as the Bible, where it doesn't matter which word is used:
:"And now, my sons, remember, remember that it is upon the rock of our Redeemer, who is '(Christ/the Messiah)', the Son of God, that ye must build your foundation; that when the devil shall send forth his mighty winds, yea, his shafts in the whirlwind, yea, when all his hail and his mighty storm shall beat upon you, it shall have no power over you to drag you down to the gulf of misery and endless wo, because of the rock upon which ye are built, which is a sure foundation, a foundation whereon if men build they cannot fall" ().
:"And after he had baptized '(Christ/the Messiah)' with water, he should behold and bear record that he had baptized the Lamb of God, who should take away the sins of the world." ().
Apologists state that the original Reformed Egyptian text certainly used Hebrew forms of names and titles exclusively, but when translating Joseph Smith simply used whichever form of the name ("Christ" or "Messiah") was more appropriate in English.[38]
The Book of Mormon occasionally uses the word "Christ" in a way that is not interchangeable with "Messiah". For example in , the Book of Mormon prophet Jacob says an angel informed him that the name of the Messiah would be Christ:
"Wherefore, as I said unto you, it must needs be expedient that Christ--for in the last night the angel spake unto me that this should be his name--should come among the Jews" ()The word "Messiah" was used frequently before this point, but here Jacob says the term "Christ" is a new term, and from this point on the word "Christ" is used almost exclusively in the Book of Mormon.
"Church" and "Synagogue"
The word "church" first occurs in 1 Nephi 4:26, where a prophet named Nephi disguises himself as Laban, a prominent man in Jerusalem whom Nephi had slain:
"And he [Laban's servant], supposing that I spake of the brethren of the church, and that I was truly that Laban whom I had slain, wherefore he did follow me" ().
According to the Book of Mormon, this exchange happened in Jerusalem, around 600 B.C. The meaning of the word "church" in the Book of Mormon is more comparable to usage in the Bible than Modern English. The concept of a church, meaning ''a convocation of believers'', existed among the House of Israel prior to Christianity. For instance, Psalms speaks of praising the Lord "in the congregation of the saints"; the Septuagint contains the Greek word ''ecclesia'' for "congregation," which is also translated as "church" in the New Testament. The Book of Mormon using the word "church" in the same "style" as the Bible is seen by some apologists as support for the Book of Mormon.
A similar question regards the word "synagogue," found in Alma 16:13:
"And Alma and Amulek went forth preaching repentance to the people in their temples, and in their sanctuaries, and also in their synagogues, which were built after the manner of the Jews" ().
Scholars have said that synagogues did not exist in their modern form before the destruction of the temple and the Babylonian captivity. The usage in the Book of Mormon, instead, is comparable to that of the KJV. reads "the synagogues of God in the land." Similar to the use of the word "church," the word "synagogue" in the Bible generally refers to a place of assembly for religious worship.
The King James Bible
Main articles: The Book of Mormon and the King James Bible
Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon
Hebrew idioms that are frequently found in the Book of Mormon are the repetitive use of the words ''yea'', ''and'', ''behold'' and the phrase ''it came to pass.''[2] LDS scholar Royal Skousen offers the following caution when attempting to compare languages in order to determine if they are related:
Just because two languages have similar syntactic constructions does not demonstrate that they are related languages. For instance, both Hebrew and Russian as well as pidgin English omit the present tense form of the be verb (thus producing sentences like "he the man" and "she good"). But this is not evidence that Russian is derived from Hebrew—or that Hebrew is derived from Hawaiian pidgin. There are some close syntactic connections between Hebrew and the original language of the Book of Mormon, but some of these may be due to independent historical development rather than linguistic relationship.[2]
"And it came to pass"
In the present edition of the Book of Mormon, the phrase "'it came to pass'" occurs 1297 times. This phrase occurs 457 times in the KJV of the Old Testament. There, it is the English translation of the single Hebrew word, 'hâyâh'. Jacob Weingreen, in his book ''Practical Grammar for Classical Hebrew'', suggests that the phrase means "now it happened."[2] Strong's Hebrew dictionary suggests "'to exist'" or "'to become'" as possible translations of 'hâyâh'. Royal Skousen suggests that in a number of cases the phrase "and it came to pass" is used as a "discourse marker facilitating narrative cohesion."[2] The Hebrew Old Testament has 1114 occurrences of the word 'hâyâh'.Most of these have either been ignored or reduced to simply "''and''".[43]
Prepositions in the place of adverbs
The Book of Mormon often uses a prepositional phrase in place of an adverb, which is consistent with the Hebrew language. Several examples of this construct as found in the Book of Mormon are:[2]
:"with harshness" instead of "harshly"
:"with joy" instead of "joyfully"
:"with gladness" instead of "gladly"
:"with patience" instead of "patiently"
:"with diligence" instead of "diligently"
John Tvedtnes states: "At least one adjective ('harebeh', 'many, exceeding') is used adverbially, but more often a prepositional phrase is used. The Book of Mormon is replete with adverbial usage of the adjective 'exceeding' (as in 'exceeding great joy'--instead of 'exceedingly'--in 1 Nephi 8:12)."[2]
The cognate accusative construct
LDS scholars claim that the "cognate accusative" is a Semitic language construct which consists of a verb immediately followed by a noun that is derived from the same root. For example, the phrase found in Genesis 37:5 "Joseph dreamed a dream" instead of the usual English method of phrasing "Joseph had a dream."[2]
The Book of Mormon contains many examples of the "cognate accusative" construct:[43]
:: "they are cursed with a sore cursing" is used instead of "they are sorely cursed."
:: "work all manner of fine work" instead of "do fine work."
:: "and he did judge righteous judgments" instead of "he judged righteously."
:: "Behold I have dreamed a dream" instead of "I had a dream."
:: "taxed with a tax" Instead of "taxed."
The cognate accusative is also a common feature in languages linguistically unrelated to the Semitic languages, such as Ancient Greek (e.g. ὁρᾶς ὄψιν, "you see a sight") and Latin (e.g. vitam vivere, "to live life")[48]. The cognate accusative also appears very commonly in both colloquial and non-colloquial English (e.g. "He talks the talk, but does he walk the walk?", and "I sing a song.").[49] Thus it is not clear why the cognate accusative should be labelled a "Semitic construct" at all.
Book of Mormon Parallelism
Parallelisms are words, phrases, or sentences that correspond, compare, or contrast one with another, or are found to be in repetition one with another. Parallelisms rarely feature rhymes, the repetition of corresponding sounds; rather, they present the repetition of ideas. A few examples of three parallelistic structures: climactic forms, synonymous parallelisms, and alternating parallel lines.[50]
Climactic Forms
An example of climax is found in Moroni 8:25–26:
:And the first fruits of repentance is
:'baptism;' and
:'baptism' cometh by faith unto
:'the fulfilling the commandments'; and
:'the fulfilling the commandments' bringeth
:'remission of sins;' And the
:'remission of sins' bringeth
:'meekness, and lowliness of heart'; and because of
:'meekness and lowliness of heart' cometh the visitation of the
:'Holy Ghost', which
:'Comforter' filleth with hope and perfect
:'love', which
:'love' endureth by diligence unto prayer, until the end shall come, when all the saints shall dwell with God.
Synonymous Parallelisms
Simple synonymous parallelism consists of two lines, line two being a synonymous repetition, an echo, or a symmetrical counterpart of line one.
:'Wo unto him' that spurneth at the doings of the Lord; yea,
:'wo unto him' that shall deny the Christ and his works. (3 Nephi 29:5)
Alternating Parallel Lines
The Book of Mormon features scores of parallel statements. The alternating parallel lines may consist of synonymous or antithetical words, word pairs, or phrases.
Note the longer A-B-C-D-E-F/A-B-C-D-E-F pattern as recorded in 1 Nephi 9:3–4:
:Nevertheless, I have received a commandment of the Lord
:'A' that I should make 'these plates', for the special purpose that there should be an account engraven
:'B' of the 'ministry' of my people.
:'C' Upon the 'other plates' should be engraven
:'D' an account of the 'reign of the kings',
:'E' and the 'wars'
:'F' and 'contentions of my people';
:'A' wherefore 'these plates'
:'B' are for the more part of the 'ministry';
:'C' and the 'other plates'
:'D' are for the more part of the 'reign of the kings'
:'E' and the 'wars'
:'F' and 'contentions of my people'.
Antithetic Parallelism
This form is characterized by an opposition or contrast of thoughts, or an antithesis between two lines. A common feature that joins the two lines is the conjunction ''and'' or the disjunction ''but''. Often the second line is introduced with one of these two words and immediately follows the contrasting element. 1 Nephi 17:45 is an example:[51]
'Ye are swift to do iniquity'
'but slow to remember the Lord your God.'
The contrast is apparent, the word ''swift'' standing opposite of ''slow'' and the phrase ''to do iniquity'' counterpointing to ''remember the Lord''.
The following antithetic parallelism from Alma 5:40 contrasts ''good'' with ''evil'' and ''God'' with the ''devil''. The expressions ''whatsoever is'' and ''cometh from'' are featured in both lines:
'For I say unto you that whatsoever is good cometh from God,'
'and whatsoever is evil cometh from the devil.'
The Prophetic Perfect
The "prophetic perfect" is the use of the past tense or past participle verb forms (present and past perfect tenses) when referring to future events in prophecy. On occasion, Old Testament prophets prophesied using these forms "to express facts which are undoubtedly imminent, and therefore, in the imagination of the speaker, already accomplished." Book of Mormon prophets also used the prophetic perfect in their prophecies. Lehi declared, '"I have obtained a land of promise"' (1 Nephi 5:5) long before he actually arrived in the promised land; and Nephi spoke of Jesus' baptism and reception of the Holy Ghost as though those events had already happened: '"Wherefore, after he was baptized with water the Holy Ghost descended upon him in the form of a dove"' (2 Nephi 31:8).[51]
No Erasers
Mormon was writing on golden plates. Once you engraved a word, it wasn't easy to erase. So if you're working on the phrase ''"weapons of war, for peace"'' and make the error, ''"weapons of peace,"'' without an eraser you might just have to continue writing to add the correction, using '"or"' to introduce it. A few LDS writers have pointed to a variety of passages that are consistent with this "no eraser" theory.[53]
Examples
"And thus we see that they buried the weapons of peace, 'or' they buried the weapons of war for peace."
"And they stood before the king, and were permitted, 'or' rather commanded that they should answer the questions which he should ask them."
"Now if a man desired to serve God, it was his privilege; 'or' rather, if he believed in God it was his privilege to serve him. . ."
"Now behold, the people who were in the land Bountiful, 'or' rather Moroni, feared that they would hearken to the words of Morianturn . . ."
Importance to Latter-day Saints
Although some have spent significant time searching for historical evidence concerning the Book of Mormon, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints discounts the utility of such in determining the book's legitimacy. Dallin H. Oaks, one of the Twelve Apostles of the LDS Church, stated:
Our individual, personal testimonies are based on the witness of the Spirit, not on any combination or accumulation of historical facts. If we are so grounded, no alteration of historical facts can shake our testimonies.[54]
Book of Mormon linguistic and textual issues are not discussed in missionary lessons or in Sunday School, but are typically addressed in LDS institute classes and religion classes at BYU, as well as in books and magazine articles published by the Church.[2]
Notes
1. Introduction to the Book of Mormon
2.
3.
4.
5. The Tanners claim; “Even if it could be established that there are real chiasms in the Book of Mormon, it would not prove anything more than that Joseph Smith borrowed from the style of chiastic passages found in the Bible.”
6.
7. Possible chiasmus in other LDS scripture: , , , and
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13. Chiasmus
14. See Ancient Chiasmus Studied (scroll to p 147) or Chiasmus and the Book of Mormon.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19. PostMormon.org: Tories
20. Was the Book of Mormon Plagiarized from Walt Whitman's Leaves of Grass?
21.
22. Abanes's reference for this information is a footnote in Vogel's ''Early Mormon Documents'', vol. 1, p. 321, footnote #128
23. Smith's Golden Book
Prophetic Autobiography Joseph Smith's mother Lucy's comments regarding Lemuel Durfee: "Mr. Durf[ee] gave us the privilege of the place [for] one year with this provision-that Samuel, our 4th son, was to labor for him 6 months. These things were all settled upon and the conclusion was that if after we had kept the place in this way [for] one year [and] we still chose to remain we could have the privilege" (Lavina F. Anderson, ed., Lucy's Book: A Critical Edition of Lucy Mack Smith's Family Memoir [Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2001], 372-73).
24. Surviving Jaredite Names in Mesoamerica, , Bruce, Warren, Meridian Magazine, See also Blaine M. Yorgason, Bruce W. Warren, and Harold Brown. New Evidences of Christ in Ancient America, Book of Mormon Research Foundation. Provo: 1999, Chaper 2, “Jaredite Connections with Mesoamerica,” pp. 17-19).
25.
26.
27.
28.
29. David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ, Richmond, Missouri: n.p., 1887, p. 12
30.
31. (Edmund C. Briggs, “A Visit to Nauvoo in 1856,” Journal of History, Jan. 1916, p. 454.)
32. Edward Stevenson, "One of the Three Witnesses," reprinted from Deseret News, 30 Nov. 1881 in Millennial Star, 44 (6 Feb. 1882): 86-87
33.
34. Joseph Smith History and D&C 9
35.
36. http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=510&letter=M
37. http://www.biblegateway.com/
38. http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_BMProblems.shtml#name
39.
40.
41.
42.
43. Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon
44.
45.
46.
47. Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon
48. Additional accusatives in Latin and Ancient Greek: Arguments against arguments
49. http://www.linguistlist.org/issues/9/9-1757.html
50. The Dynamics of Book of Mormon Parallelism
51. Hebraisms and Other Ancient Peculiarities in the Book of Mormon
52. Hebraisms and Other Ancient Peculiarities in the Book of Mormon
53. No Erasers
54. "1985 CES Doctrine and Covenants Symposium," Brigham Young University, Aug. 16, 1985, page 26
55.
References
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
★
External links
★ Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon A number of examples of chiastic structures in the Book of Mormon are illustrated.
★ Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon, A Remarkable Literary Art
★ Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon
★ The Dynamics of Book of Mormon Parallelism
★ King Benjamin's Speech
★ Hebraisms and Other Ancient Peculiarities in the Book of Mormon
See also
★ Book of Mormon
★ Reformed Egyptian
★ Linguistics
This article provided by Wikipedia. To edit the contents of this article, click here for original source.
psst.. try this: add to faves
