Book of Mormon Borrowings from the New Testament

[_ludwigm]

...The Tragedy of Man

It takes, I think, fluency in more than one language to grasp the points you make. People without such fluency can accept charlatanism such as speaking gibberish as pretending to be speaking in tongues. Or as in Joseph Smith's case, pretending to translate when merely writing fiction.

OK.
My sig line about "speaking gibberish" is the same since I've joined here.

When I have translated from Swedish to English and back again I know that circumstances and events and experiences can mean that I translate the same section with very different emphasis.

... and You are the same person - not four different one - only one entity shifted in time.

If I ask my sons to translate the same section they get entirely different but equal translations.

You may laugh, but I definitely use our children to understand the same thing differently. All five of them speak English, and all of them speak (minimum!!!) one more language. In the last few years, three of our 20 grandchildrens lenghten the line...

Joseph Smith never understood this, nor do his followers.

hehehe

[_ludwigm]

I ask that the discussion not get sidetracked or derailed.

To be serious:

Another parallelism can be found in matching Alma 34:13 (“yea, it shall be all fulfilled, every jot and tittle”) with Matthew 5:18: “one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled”. How could jot and tittle be translated from Reformed Egyptian the same way that it appears in the KJV of the New Testament, unless the Book of Mormon language was copied from the New Testament language?

*******************************************
Jot, meaning the Greek letter iota...
Iota (uppercase Ι, lowercase ι; Greek: Ιώτα [iɔ̌ːta]) is the ninth letter of the Greek alphabet. It was derived from the Phoenician letter Yodh (Phoenician yodh.png). Letters that arose from this letter include the Roman I and J and the Cyrillic І (І, і), Yi (Ї, ї), Je (Ј, ј), and iotified letters (e.g. Yu (Ю, ю)).
Iota represents the sound [_i_]. In ancient Greek it occurred in both long [_iː_] and short [_i_] versions, but this distinction has been lost in Modern Greek.

Up to now, I didn't find any Reformed Egyptian character*** for jot or iota

The picture of that letter can be seen in the next comment - if anybody have the balls to repeat...
*******************************************
A tittle is a small distinguishing mark, such as a diacritic or the dot on a lowercase i or j. The tittle is an integral part of the glyph of i and j, but diacritic dots can appear over other letters in various languages. In most languages, the tittle of i or j is omitted when a diacritic is placed in the tittle's usual position (as í or ĵ), but not when the diacritic appears elsewhere (as į, ɉ).

Up to now, I didn't find any Reformed Egyptian character*** using tittle as a modifier.
The picture of that mark can be seen in the next comment - if anybody have the balls to repeat...
*******************************************

*** Is Reformed Egyptian character oriented? Or syllable? Or picture?

We have prophets, seers, revelators and translators.
And we have Tobin.

[_ludwigm]

Pictures I can't show You without Your help...

iota:
[#img] http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... lc.svg.png[/img]

tittle:
[#img] http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... es.svg.png[/img]

[_Bazooka]

The translations were revealed to Joseph Smith in his mind...

The testimony of the people who acted as scribe for Joseph Smith says something entirely different, that God gave Joseph the specific words one at a time. Which he then repeated to the scribes verbatim.

[_bcuzbcuz]

You may laugh, but I definitely use our children to understand the same thing differently. All five of them speak English, and all of them speak (minimum!!!) one more language. In the last few years, three of our 20 grandchildrens lenghten the line...

I know the feeling. When my family gathers, as we did this last summer, my wife and her children and me and mine and my grandchildren (12!!!) we no longer have a common language. We speak English, French, Portugese, Spanish, Swedish and Norwegian around the table.

And as Vessr has expressed so well, translating a phrase can sometimes be a difficult task. Sometimes, things get lost in translation, but when the languages are shared, there is a richness to expressing thoughts that far outshines merely trying to capture a thought in one language.

Supposedly the Nephites and Jaredites lived for over a thousand years in the Americas and never delevoped any colloguialisms native to their language but hung on to all the colloquialisms of Hebrew in their reformed Egyptian language. Now that is strange.

[_bcuzbcuz]

A tittle is a small distinguishing mark, such as a diacritic or the dot on a lowercase i or j.

And here I thought "tittle" meant small breast.

[_ludwigm]

A tittle is a small distinguishing mark, such as a diacritic or the dot on a lowercase i or j.

And here I thought "tittle" meant small breast.

Please show my pictures three steps above, then You will see the tittles...

1. quote my comment with "[#img] "
2. delete the # characters
3. delete the spaces after ]
4. submit
5. take my warm thanks


(You know, my pictures was banned forever, because I showed real breasts, and Shades didn't like them - I am searching the ones he would like...)

[_ludwigm]

Something more about jot or iota. (please pronounce the "j" as "y"...)

The importance of iota begins at the time of Nicene Creed. It is not simply the smallest letter of Greek alphabet.

The Nicene Creed describes Jesus as being homooúsios with God the Father — that is, they are of the "same substance" and are equally God.
Homoousian (/ˌhɒmoʊˈaʊsiən/ HOM-oh-OW-see-ən; Ancient Greek: ὁμοούσιος, from the Ancient Greek: ὁμός, homós, "same" and Ancient Greek: οὐσία, ousía, "essence, being") is a technical theological term used in discussion of the Christian understanding of God as Trinity.

Homoiousia /ˌhɒmoɪˈaʊsiə/ HOM-oy-OW-see-ə is the theological doctrine that Jesus the Son of God and God the Father are of similar (ὁμοιο- homoio- or homeo-) but not the same substance, a position held by the Semi-Arians in the 4th century.

Please focus on the difference, the "ɪ". The homoiousia contrasts with the homoousia of orthodox Trinitarianism and the heteroousia of Arianism.

St. Jerome - the translator of the Vulgata, the Latin Bible - was familiar with Nicene Creed. (It was one generation before him.) The "jot" of Matt 5:18 comes from that cornerstone of theology.

All other translations thousand year later used the Vulgata - more or less. (all but JST...)

Apparently nephites, lamanites and other amerindians (amerhebrews or amerjews or amerisraelites...) know greek (and/or latin?) and used to read the normatives of Nicene Creed.


************************************************************
by the way
I've presented the scenes of The Tragedy of Man in another thread. I bet none of You read it...

In the SCENE VII - CONSTANTINOPLE (the whole scene can be found here to see it in real context)
(- Constantinople, AD 1096. Adam is Prince Tancred of Hauteville; Lucifer is his squire; Eve is a noble maiden forced to become a nun)
the writer handles the iota...

In Constantinople. A public square with a few CITIZENS lounging about. In the centre, the palace of the Patriarch, to the right a convent, and on the left a grove. ADAM as Tancred, in the prime of manhood, with other knights at the head of CRUSADERS returning from Asia, with waving flags and the beating of drums. LUCIFER as his esquire. Evening; later, night.
...
FOURTH CITIZEN
Speak, which dost thou confess, that we may know,
Homousion or Homoiusion?
ADAM
I understand not this.
LUCIFER
Admit it not.
Here, it is now the thing of chief import.
FOURTH CITIZEN
See, he doth doubt: that too is heresy!
...

A square with a few citizens strolling about. The palace of the Patriarch is seen in the centre, with a convent to the right and a grove to the left. Adam, as Tancred, a man in his prime, and other knights at the head of Crusaders returning from Asia with banners flying and drums beating. Lucifer is Tancred’s squire. Evening; later, night.
...
4TH CITIZEN
Is it HOMOIOUSIAN you profess,
or HOMOOUSIAN?
ADAM
Cannot see the point.
LUCIFER
Don’t tell them. It’s a burning issue here.
4TH CITIZEN
He hesitates! Another heretic!
...

Constantinople. Some CITIZENS loitering in the market. In the centre, the Patriarch’s palace, to the right a convent, to the left a grove. ADAM as TANCRED in the prime of manhood, with other knights, at the head of a troop of CRUSADERS returning from. Asia. They wave flags and heat drums. LUCIFER is his esquire. Evening. Later night.
...
FOURTH CITIZEN
Do you believe
In Homousion or Homousion?
ADAM
I don’t understand.
LUCIFER
Refuse to tell them which.
It happens to be a burning issue here.
FOURTH CITIZEN
He hesitates. A heretic all right.
...

Constantinople. Market with some loitering citizens. - In the middle the palace of patriarch, in the right a nunnery, in the left a grove. ADAM as TANCRED, in the flower of his manhood comes accompanied by knights at the head of crusaders returning from Asia and with colours flying and with drums beating. LUCIFER as squire to him. Evening, then night.
...
FOURTH CITIZEN
What do you believe: Homousion
Or Homoiusion?
ADAM
That's beyond me.
LUCIFER
Don't admit it, that's major above all.
FOURTH CITIZEN
He's in doubt, he is also of false faith.
...

[_vessr]

So we either have Joesph making it up, or we have God giving Joesph a word for word the Book of Mormon. Why does God then borrow from other peoples translation, not his, knowing that this provides evidence against the claim of the Book of Mormon being true? Especially incorrect translations of biblical passages. This seems another dumb and dumber theory.

I believe this is the most profound statement made on this thread. If you looked at the examples I provided of Book of Mormon exact or nearly exact wording as the New Testament in so many cases, this leaves us with a literal word for word translation from God of many King James passages from the New Testament (in addition to the Sermon on the Mount borrowings), if the Book of Mormon is to be believed. How is that explained (expecially my more recent examples of double preposition borrowings) with a theoery that Joseph translated this by studying it out in his mind rather than either as a sockpuppet for the Lord, at best, or a plagiarizer, at worst?

[_Bazooka]

So we either have Joesph making it up, or we have God giving Joesph a word for word the Book of Mormon. Why does God then borrow from other peoples translation, not his, knowing that this provides evidence against the claim of the Book of Mormon being true? Especially incorrect translations of biblical passages. This seems another dumb and dumber theory.

I believe this is the most profound statement made on this thread. If you looked at the examples I provided of Book of Mormon exact or nearly exact wording as the New Testament in so many cases, this leaves us with a literal word for word translation from God of many King James passages from the New Testament (in addition to the Sermon on the Mount borrowings), if the Book of Mormon is to be believed. How is that explained (expecially my more recent examples of double preposition borrowings) with a theoery that Joseph translated this by studying it out in his mind rather than either as a sockpuppet for the Lord, at best, or a plagiarizer, at worst?

Tobin?
TOBIN?
Where did Tobin go?