Is the Book of Mormon Divinely Inspired?

[I Have Questions]

Perhaps god made a few mistakes when he had Mormon say those things in the Book of Moroni. Then, to be consistent, he had Paul (with translators in between) cause the same mistakes to appear in the KJV Bible. And, before you ask, of course Mormon italicised some words, because reasons, so that the identical italics had to appear in the KJV.

Did you ever think of that, huh, IHQ?

[I Have Questions]

When King James translators were translating the KJV Bible between 1604 and 1611, they would occasionally put in their own words into the text to make the English more readable. We know exactly what these words are because they're italicized in the KJV Bible. What are these 17th century italicized words doing in the Book of Mormon? Word for word? What does this say about the Book of Mormon being an ancient record?

ISAIAH 9:1 (KJV)
Nevertheless the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation, when at the first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, and afterward did more grievously afflict her by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, in Galilee of the nations.

2 NEPHI 19:1
Nevertheless, the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation, when at first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun, and the land of Naphtali, and afterwards did more grievously afflict by the way of the Red Sea beyond Jordan in Galilee of the nations.

The above example, 2 Nephi 19:1, dated in the Book of Mormon to be around 550 BC, quotes nearly verbatim from the 1611 AD translation of Isaiah 9:1 KJV – including the translators’ italicized words.

https://read.cesletter.org/Book of Mormon/#_1769-kjv-errors

MALACHI 3:10 (KJV)
...and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.

3 NEPHI 24:10
...and pour you out a blessing that there shall not be room enough to receive it.

In the above example, the KJV translators added 7 italicized words to their English translation, which are not found in the source Hebrew manuscripts. Why does the Book of Mormon, which is supposed to have been completed by Moroni over 1,400 years prior, contain the exact identical seven italicized words of 17th century translators?

Smith did not understand the significance of the italicized words in the KJV Bible that he was plagiarising. He just copied them, unwittingly providing smoking gun evidence that the Book of Mormon is not what it claims to be.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Can we assume that you doubt whether Joseph Smith added passages from the Bible to the Book of Mormon?

I don’t know whether he himself did it or if the Bible quotes came through another source. Or a composite of the two.

Regards,
MG

-_-

You don’t know, huh? After all these years you still haven’t *snap* figured it out?

Well, GARSH! MG still ain’t figgered i’tout! Well, I’ll be a black cat dancin’ ‘round ona hot tin rerf! By God an’ dang nabbit, iffin i’twas like MG ain’t got no, what they say it, CHARACTER. He pretendin’ like he ain’t know after ‘bout 25 yers of people explainin’ to him

crap. *spits on ground*

Almost as iffin he playin’ possum n’ crap. Wut they sau up Noth ‘bout people like him? Ah. “He’s a real idiot.” Sounds ‘bout right iffin you ask me!

- Doc

[dantana]

You don’t know, huh? After all these years you still haven’t *snap* figured it out?

Well, GARSH! MG still ain’t figgered i’tout! Well, I’ll be a black cat dancin’ ‘round ona hot tin rerf! By God an’ dang nabbit, iffin i’twas like MG ain’t got no, what they say it, CHARACTER. He pretendin’ like he ain’t know after ‘bout 25 yers of people explainin’ to him

crap. *spits on ground*

Almost as iffin he playin’ possum n’ crap. Wut they sau up Noth ‘bout people like him? Ah. “He’s a real idiot.” Sounds ‘bout right iffin you ask me!

- Doc

Have you tried explaining it in Tamarian yet? Maybe that's what it would take.

[MG 2.0]

You don’t know, huh? After all these years you still haven’t *snap* figured it out?

Well, GARSH! MG still ain’t figgered i’tout! Well, I’ll be a black cat dancin’ ‘round ona hot tin rerf! By God an’ dang nabbit, iffin i’twas like MG ain’t got no, what they say it, CHARACTER. He pretendin’ like he ain’t know after ‘bout 25 yers of people explainin’ to him

crap. *spits on ground*

Almost as iffin he playin’ possum n’ crap. Wut they sau up Noth ‘bout people like him? Ah. “He’s a real idiot.” Sounds ‘bout right iffin you ask me!

- Doc

Have you tried explaining it in Tamarian yet? Maybe that's what it would take.

That may work both ways.

Regards,
MG

[Morley]

Have you tried explaining it in Tamarian yet? Maybe that's what it would take.

That may work both ways.

Regards,
MG

It's at this point that you probably should hit them with the ghost committee theory of translation, MG. That explains everything.

[Marcus]

I don’t know whether he himself did it or if the Bible quotes came through another source. Or a composite of the two.

Regards,
MG

-_-

You don’t know, huh? After all these years you still haven’t *snap* figured it out?

Well, GARSH! MG still ain’t figgered i’tout! Well, I’ll be a black cat dancin’ ‘round ona hot tin rerf! By God an’ dang nabbit, iffin i’twas like MG ain’t got no, what they say it, CHARACTER. He pretendin’ like he ain’t know after ‘bout 25 yers of people explainin’ to him

crap. *spits on ground*

Almost as iffin he playin’ possum n’ crap. Wut they sau up Noth ‘bout people like him? Ah. “He’s a real idiot.” Sounds ‘bout right iffin you ask me!

- Doc

Playin' possum after years. Perfect.

[MG 2.0]

That may work both ways.

Regards,
MG

It's at this point that you probably should hit them with the ghost committee theory of translation, MG. That explains everything.

What has never been explained is how Joseph dictated the text of the Book of Mormon without any ‘crib notes’ and yet we see the final product as being something of a miracle. Critics, of course, will disagree with that. Understood.

The witnesses to the translation verify that he was able to leave the translation room, go about other activities, come back and pick up where he left off. If that happened to be a section which included New Testament language, including words found as italics in the New Testament, he went right on with the ‘translation’.

Critics have not successfully, in my opinion, been able to get around the fact that we have a complex narrative with different ‘voices’ using Hebraic elements such as complex Chiasmus, etc. This is all occurring while Joseph Smith had his head in a hat.

Italics aren’t even an issue. IHQ earlier made a point that the translation came from Mormon’s mouth. Well, no it didn’t. It came from Joseph’s mouth and one needs to explain how in the world that happened without some kind of help. I mentioned that, yes, Mormon may have been involved in that process. And if he was involved why would we not consider that others were also involved?

Again, I have not seen any critical theory that explains the translation process from a purely ‘physical’ sense (Joseph did it) that even comes close to actually making sense.

The words came out of his mouth. His head was in a hat. The narrative is complex with various voices speaking in their own unique way. It was all done in less than three months. Etc.

And on top of that there is little if any evidence that Joseph used any exterior reference sources during the process of translation. Only conjecture on the part of disbelievers.

Were all the witnesses to the translation process lying?

Anyway, these things have been discussed over and over for many many years now. We have the Book of Mormon. We have Joseph’s testimony that it was given/translated by the power of God. I think we need to consider taking him at his word.

When taken as a whole, I don’t see the issue of italics and New Testament verses in the Book of Mormon as being a ‘smoking gun’. There’s just too much other stuff going on there.

I realize that your mileage may vary. I honor that.

Regards,
MG

[Morley]

It's at this point that you probably should hit them with the ghost committee theory of translation, MG. That explains everything.

What has never been explained is how Joseph dictated the text of the Book of Mormon without any ‘crib notes’ and yet we see the final product as being something of a miracle. Critics, of course, will disagree with that. Understood.

The witnesses to the translation verify that he was able to leave the translation room, go about other activities, come back and pick up where he left off. If that happened to be a section which included New Testament language, including words found as italics in the New Testament, he went right on with the ‘translation’.

Critics have not successfully, in my opinion, been able to get around the fact that we have a complex narrative with different ‘voices’ using Hebraic elements such as complex Chiasmus, etc. This is all occurring while Joseph Smith had his head in a hat.

Italics aren’t even an issue. IHQ earlier made a point that the translation came from Mormon’s mouth. Well, no it didn’t. It came from Joseph’s mouth and one needs to explain how in the world that happened without some kind of help. I mentioned that, yes, Mormon may have been involved in that process. And if he was involved why would we not consider that others were also involved?

Again, I have not seen any critical theory that explains the translation process from a purely ‘physical’ sense (Joseph did it) that even comes close to actually making sense.

The words came out of his mouth. His head was in a hat. The narrative is complex with various voices speaking in their own unique way. It was all done in less than three months. Etc.

And on top of that there is little if any evidence that Joseph used any exterior reference sources during the process of translation. Only conjecture on the part of disbelievers.

Were all the witnesses to the translation process lying?

Anyway, these things have been discussed over and over for many many years now. We have the Book of Mormon. We have Joseph’s testimony that it was given/translated by the power of God. I think we need to consider taking him at his word.

When taken as a whole, I don’t see the issue of italics and New Testament verses in the Book of Mormon as being a ‘smoking gun’. There’s just too much other stuff going on there.

I realize that your mileage may vary. I honor that.

Regards,
MG

So, like I said, you should mention the ghost committee.

It's the conclusion made by scholars defending the Book of Mormon as they tried to figure out a way that the translation errors and language could possibly make sense. You should talk about this perfectly reasonable explanation. It's kind of a coup de grace against any criticism, don't you think?

[MG 2.0]

What has never been explained is how Joseph dictated the text of the Book of Mormon without any ‘crib notes’ and yet we see the final product as being something of a miracle. Critics, of course, will disagree with that. Understood.

The witnesses to the translation verify that he was able to leave the translation room, go about other activities, come back and pick up where he left off. If that happened to be a section which included New Testament language, including words found as italics in the New Testament, he went right on with the ‘translation’.

Critics have not successfully, in my opinion, been able to get around the fact that we have a complex narrative with different ‘voices’ using Hebraic elements such as complex Chiasmus, etc. This is all occurring while Joseph Smith had his head in a hat.

Italics aren’t even an issue. IHQ earlier made a point that the translation came from Mormon’s mouth. Well, no it didn’t. It came from Joseph’s mouth and one needs to explain how in the world that happened without some kind of help. I mentioned that, yes, Mormon may have been involved in that process. And if he was involved why would we not consider that others were also involved?

Again, I have not seen any critical theory that explains the translation process from a purely ‘physical’ sense (Joseph did it) that even comes close to actually making sense.

The words came out of his mouth. His head was in a hat. The narrative is complex with various voices speaking in their own unique way. It was all done in less than three months. Etc.

And on top of that there is little if any evidence that Joseph used any exterior reference sources during the process of translation. Only conjecture on the part of disbelievers.

Were all the witnesses to the translation process lying?

Anyway, these things have been discussed over and over for many many years now. We have the Book of Mormon. We have Joseph’s testimony that it was given/translated by the power of God. I think we need to consider taking him at his word.

When taken as a whole, I don’t see the issue of italics and New Testament verses in the Book of Mormon as being a ‘smoking gun’. There’s just too much other stuff going on there.

I realize that your mileage may vary. I honor that.

Regards,
MG

So, like I said, you should mention the ghost committee.

It's the conclusion made by scholars defending the Book of Mormon as they tried to figure out a way that the translation errors and language could possibly make sense. You should talk about this perfectly reasonable explanation. It's kind of a coup de grace against any criticism, don't you think?

I’ve alluded to that.

Regards,
MG