Did Joseph Smith plagiarize the KJV in the Book of Mormon?

[_JAK]

Plagiarism is using others’ ideas and words without clearly acknowledging the source of that information.

To avoid plagiarism, you must give credit whenever you use:

- another person’s idea, opinion, or theory;
- any facts, statistics, graphs, drawings—any pieces of information—that are not common knowledge;
- quotations of another person’s actual spoken or written words; or
- paraphrase of another person’s spoken or written words.

Does it count as plagiarism when both people have the same speach writer (the Holy Ghost) and they both give credit to Him?

Truth by assertion regarding your claim “the Holy Ghost.”

Not a shred of evidence supports such a claim. And denying that we can have evidence is merely evasion.

I’m not suggesting you are doing that, asbestosman. But you cite “the Holy Ghost” as if you were citing a document.

No evidence for any claim of that kind.

So your question is moot. We have clear evidence for the KJV (1611 A.D.) of the Bible.

We have clear evidence with regard to J. Smith’s birth and death.

Had the actual KJV been written after some writing of J. Smith, and there was clear evidence for J. Smith’s complete writings, we could conclude the reverse of what the present rational conclusion is regarding authorship.

J. Smith plagiarized the KJV of the Bible.

JAK

[_Pokatator]

If he merely tranlsated what God wrote, then you don't have one scintilla of an accusation.

Charity, am I to assume that both Joseph and God knew which parts of the KJV were translated correctly and the parts that were not translated correctly.

[_JAK]

If he merely tranlsated what God wrote, then you don't have one scintilla of an accusation.

Charity, am I to assume that both Joseph and God knew which parts of the KJV were translated correctly and the parts that were not translated correctly.

Why do you assume “God”?

No evidence for the assumption. There is evidence for the J.Smith's plagiarism of the Bible. God is irrelevant.

JAK

[_moksha]

What do the errors in the KJV that appear also in the Book of Mormon signify? Were these errors put in to strenghten the testimony of the faithful?

[_JAK]

Well, we're specifically talking about plagiarism, which charity can't seem to accept.

The Book of Mormon uses the KJV Bible, but does not give credit.

Yeah, I do seem to get hung up on what words mean. So when someone uses the word "plagiarism" I think they ought to use it correctly. What a weakness.

Of course, it gets down to a more basic question. Even if Joseph Smith made it up himself, composed the Book of Mormon as a piece of 19th century fiction, there is still a technical question. He never claimed he wrote it.

If he merely tranlsated what God wrote, then you don't have one scintilla of an accusation.

Charity,

You make an IF statement, then proceed to assume that if statement were an established fact.

No evidence has been established for any claim “God.”

Hence, your “if” statement is irrelevant as you draw a conclusion assuming that which is not established.

You can believe in God, you can believe in the tooth fairy. Such belief makes neither credible, reliable, or valid.

Truth by assertion fails.

Your claim for God is out of ancient superstition/religion. Then, people could go around claiming they had see God and be believed.

The evolution is from gods to God historically. That is, we can document that people invented gods prior to the invention of God.

While this is far beyond your purview, since you only look at history if it serves your doctrine and in doctrinal purposes, it falls on blind eyes.

Absent clear, transparent evidence for a claim (“God” in this case), the claim should be rejected or viewed with extreme skepticism.

JAK

[_charity]

If he merely tranlsated what God wrote, then you don't have one scintilla of an accusation.

Charity, am I to assume that both Joseph and God knew which parts of the KJV were translated correctly and the parts that were not translated correctly.

God knows everything. I don't think Joseph ever claimed infallibility.

[_antishock8]

Well, we're specifically talking about plagiarism, which charity can't seem to accept.

The Book of Mormon uses the KJV Bible, but does not give credit.

Yeah, I do seem to get hung up on what words mean. So when someone uses the word "plagiarism" I think they ought to use it correctly. What a weakness.

Of course, it gets down to a more basic question. Even if Joseph Smith made it up himself, composed the Book of Mormon as a piece of 19th century fiction, there is still a technical question. He never claimed he wrote it.

If he merely tranlsated what God wrote, then you don't have one scintilla of an accusation.

This is what I despise about Mormons. They're so goddamn ignorant.

Joseph Smith Jr. was the author of the Book of Mormon. His name is on the book as such. He clearly plagiarized the Bible and other sources for material. This is not in dispute.

Stop lying, please.

[_charity]

This is what I despise about Mormons. They're so goddamn ignorant.

Joseph Smith Jr. was the author of the Book of Mormon. His name is on the book as such. He clearly plagiarized the Bible and other sources for material. This is not in dispute.

Stop lying, please.

And this is what is so disgusting about anti-Mormons. They can't keep a civil tongue in their heads.

Joseph Smith's name is on the Book of Mormon as "author and proprietor" because that was what the copyright application required. But he clearly states in multiple places in that first edition that he was the "translator."

And your false accusation is most certainly disputed.

And if the only way you think you can win an argument is to accuse someone of lying, well, that just leads one to believe that you really don't have an argument. It's like a little boy throwing rocks because he can't win the fight.

[_Sethbag]

No evidence for the assumption. There is evidence for the J.Smith's plagiarism of the Bible. God is irrelevant.

JAK

I actually think Charity's response would be considered an affirmative defense. She admits that Joseph Smith copied the Bible, but asserts that it's not a problem because God had him do it. That's unprovable, so strictly speaking, all we're left with is her admission that he copied the Bible. But in reality it's just a matter of faith, and those who don't have it can say what we want, but it won't matter much to those who do.

Abman: I absolutely think that Joseph's copying the KJV reflects negatively on the question of whether the Book of Mormon is an authentic ancient text actually written by Nephi, Mormon, etc. I think John's argument is a really good one, ie: Nephi claimed to get the Isaiah passages from the Brass Plates, which came from Jerusalem and were based on pre-existing Israelite scripture. But portions of what allegedly came off the brass plates had never actually been written yet at the time the Brass Plates are supposed to have left Jerusalem. This reflects negatively on the truth claims, because in this part, the truth claims are contradicted by fact.

[_Sethbag]

What do the errors in the KJV that appear also in the Book of Mormon signify? Were these errors put in to strenghten the testimony of the faithful?

Yes, absolutely. You see, because the Book of Mormon appears to be historically impossible, a member must believe in it based on faith alone. Believing on faith alone is apparently far superior to believing because it actually appears to be historical fact, ergo the errors from the KJV that also appear in the Book of Mormon were put there on purpose to make sure that those members who believed it anyway held superior faith. ;-)