Book of Mormon Transliteration

[_honorentheos]

It isn't clear to me why insistence on there being a creator god necessitates that god also be favorable to Mormonism. It seems the relationship in MGs thinking isn't linear (god exists-> has plan -> Mormonism best conveys that plan, therefore contradictory evidence regarding the reliability of the Mormon message is surficial rather than has substantial bearing on the question of the reliability of the message). It seems more to be the case that leaning against one another, each serving as the foundation for the other when one comes under scrutiny. If only there were a term for this.

O

[_honorentheos]

Dup

[_Fence Sitter]

Regarding the use of the KJV in writing the Book of Mormon. It is a frequent apologetic defense to state there is no record of Joseph Smith using the KJV when he created the Book of Mormon so therefore he must not have had one present.

Given that we now know he plagiarized from Clark's Bible Commentary to make some of the JST revisions, in spite of the lack of a record of him using it, it is then reasonable to conclude he had access to or directly used a KJV of the Bible when he wrote the Book of Mormon. BYU classics professor Tom Wayment has stated that the Book of Mormon quotes directly from the KJV of the New Testament over 80 times and that he has found 400 Book of Mormon verses with a direct textural influence from the KJV. But it gets worse, when Wayment ran a word comparison program which compared the text of the Book of Mormon to the text of the KJV, a program that was designed to find instances where 3 or more words in a row from one text matched the other, there were over 6000 hits.

Smith and Cowdery were absolutely using the KJV when they made up the Book of Mormon.

[_jfro18]

Given that we now know he plagiarized from Clark's Bible Commentary to make some of the JST revisions, in spite of the lack of a record of him using it, it is then reasonable to conclude he had access to or directly used a KJV of the Bible when he wrote the Book of Mormon. BYU classics professor Tom Wayment has stated that the Book of Mormon quotes directly from the KJV of the New Testament over 80 times and that he has found 400 Book of Mormon verses with a direct textural influence from the KJV. But it gets worse, when Wayment ran a word comparison program which compared the text of the Book of Mormon to the text of the KJV, a program that was designed to find instances where 3 or more words in a row from one text matched the other, there were over 6000 hits.

Smith and Cowdery were absolutely using the KJV when they made up the Book of Mormon.

This is the problem. Even if you accept MG's pretzel of apologetics trying to make some of the problems with the Book of Mormon even remotely possible, you then have to grapple with the JST plagiarism problems, the Book of Abraham being completely wrong, vast problems with the D&C, the caractors being repurposed English, the Kinderhook plates, Joseph just riffing off the Book of Moses or D&C 132 without any source material or stone, etc.

It sounds so cliché, but if you just take a step back and look at what you need to make this work it becomes so clear what a complete farce this church is.

[_Gadianton]

Lemmie,

Does Carmack think the kjv got in the Book of Mormon because Joseph Smith picked up a Bible and put it there or because the translation committee in the spirit world borrowed from the kjv, and that went directly to the stone?

[_Lemmie]

Lemmie,

Does Carmack think the kjv got in the Book of Mormon because Joseph Smith picked up a Bible and put it there or because the translation committee in the spirit world borrowed from the kjv, and that went directly to the stone?

I will have to confirm this, but to the best of my understanding, when he evaluates the Book of Mormon "text," as translated by Joseph Smith, for example to compare to other pseudo-biblical writings, or to compare to the KJV itself, he removes a set of words that are already noted as being from the KJV.

I took that as a tacit admission that the removed words were NOT received from God through the seer stone. If they did come through the stone, then it's inappropriate to remove them from the set of words being evaluated for Early Modern English content coming through the process.

Let me see if I can confirm if my assumption is correct.

ETA: I can't find my notes on that, so at the moment i would have to say Carmack thinks the kjv direct quotes came to Joseph Smith through the stone, along with everything else.

[Guest]

It isn't clear to me why insistence on there being a creator god necessitates that god also be favorable to Mormonism.

If there is a creator/God and if this God is a loving parent who wants the best for His children one might safely assume that this God has a purpose/plan for this earth and those that inhabit it. At least that is my view.

What other system of religion do you think might 'fit the bill' in having a schematic/plan of salvation/progression that out does the doctrines, principles, ordinances, and covenants within the CofJCofLDS? I honestly haven't seen anything better in the market place of religions or systems of belief that is more all encompassing in opportunities for growth and progress in righteousness and knowledge over the span of a lifetime.

But I'm open to an alternative. Got any?

God being favorable towards the CofJCofLDS, in regards to temples and the ordinances/covenants made therein, doesn't mean that this same God doesn't love all of His children and provides for their needs/wants/desires for their spiritual well being.

How would you answer Peter's question to the Christ?

Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.

Regards,
MG

[_honorentheos]

The phrasing that lumps creator god in with loving parent is what I mean. It's basically saying, "If we accept the Mormon view of God the Father as true, then here's everything that follows."

It reminds me of an online Evangelical website that claimed kangaroos lived in Europe which it then setup as, "Given Noah had two of every animal on the ark, and the ark came to ground in what is modern day Turkey, then yadda, yadda, yadda, kangaroos were in Europe. Let that explode your mind, young EV kiddies."

[_mentalgymnast]

Regarding the use of the KJV in writing the Book of Mormon. It is a frequent apologetic defense to state there is no record of Joseph Smith using the KJV when he created the Book of Mormon so therefore he must not have had one present.

Given that we now know he plagiarized from Clark's Bible Commentary to make some of the JST revisions, in spite of the lack of a record of him using it, it is then reasonable to conclude he had access to or directly used a KJV of the Bible when he wrote the Book of Mormon. BYU classics professor Tom Wayment has stated that the Book of Mormon quotes directly from the KJV of the New Testament over 80 times and that he has found 400 Book of Mormon verses with a direct textural influence from the KJV. But it gets worse, when Wayment ran a word comparison program which compared the text of the Book of Mormon to the text of the KJV, a program that was designed to find instances where 3 or more words in a row from one text matched the other, there were over 6000 hits.

Smith and Cowdery were absolutely using the KJV when they made up the Book of Mormon.

What is interesting is the form which the intertextuality between the Book of Mormon and the New Testament takes.

In the New Testament the authors will say, “As it’s written in the
Bible, or in the Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible,” or something
like that, then they’ll give you their quotation. Paul loves to do
this. The Book of Mormon never says this, or very rarely—it will
do this with Old Testament passages, but it won’t do this with
New Testament passages. It’s not looking back and saying,
“We’re consciously citing from this established book of text.”
Instead, what it will do is carefully weave these New Testament
passages into the larger text so that you almost don’t notice
they’re even there unless you’re carefully looking for them. You
have places like 1 Corinthian 13, and Romans 7, or the Sermon
on the Mount in 2 Nephi 12–14, but the majority of places where
the New Testament appears are just at the phrasal level. It’s just
four or five (rarely) consecutive words. They’ll just be four or
five words that are worked into a larger sentence, that are worked
into a larger paragraph. But the words will be clear enough and
obvious enough that you can say, “That’s likely drawn from the
New Testament.” The problem is you just have to work to find
them.
Grant Hardy’s work has been great here. His chapter on allusion
in Understanding the Book of Mormon, where he deals with
Hebrews 6 and 11 and Ether 12, and he shows that it isn’t just
Moroni just wholesale lifting Hebrews. What Moroni is doing is
carefully deconstructing and then reconstructing parts of Hebrews
to create an entirely new text. And that’s what the Book of
Mormon does with the New Testament that’s just so remarkable
and so much fun to look for.
http://hwcdn.libsyn.com/p/0/7/1/071b742 ... 0cd2ccad16

It's not a simple cut and paste between the two books of scripture. It's more of a meshing of the textual framework and fabric of the two books. With a Johannine twist.

In addition to Wayment's data we have this from Frederick:

I’ve identified
that we have about 650 phrases that I think you can demonstrate
pretty clearly are from the New Testament in the Book of
Mormon.

Regards,
MG

[_Lemmie]

....but it won’t do this with
New Testament passages. It’s not looking back and saying,
“We’re consciously citing from this established book of text.”
Instead, what it will do is carefully weave these New Testament
passages into the larger text so that you almost don’t notice
they’re even there unless you’re carefully looking for them.

That is exactly how Peterson's plagiarism problem got started! Is this where he got the idea?