1 Nephi 10

[Kevin Christensen]

Hi John,

Indeed, Isaiah 40 marks the start of the Deutero-Isaiah section from the book which derives from an exilic author. I'm afraid that I don't have a good answer yet for this issue and in my mind, it is the greatest challenge the Book of Mormon faces in terms of its historicity.

best,

--DB

FWIW, I don't think an Exilic dating for Deutero-Isaiah means that the author composed in a vaccum (that is, not quoting earlier works), nor that all sections currently attributed to Deutero-Isaiah necessarily were composed in Exilic or Post exilic times. (See Margaret Barker's essay on "The Background of the Fourth Servant Song", which makes a good case for that chapter having been composed in response to Hezekiah's bout with the plague, and therefore, defensibly pre-exilic.) I like John Welch's minimalist approach, arguing that only the parts of Isaiah quoted in the Book of Mormon (except perhaps, for parts quoted by Jesus) need to be pre-exilic. Indeed, I've even argued that the absense of the various Isaiah chapters from the Book of Mormon makes good sense on those grounds.

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

[Olavarria]

bump

[David Bokovoy]

FWIW, I don't think an Exilic dating for Deutero-Isaiah means that the author composed in a vaccum (that is, not quoting earlier works), nor that all sections currently attributed to Deutero-Isaiah necessarily were composed in Exilic or Post exilic times. (See Margaret Barker's essay on "The Background of the Fourth Servant Song", which makes a good case for that chapter having been composed in response to Hezekiah's bout with the plague, and therefore, defensibly pre-exilic.) I like John Welch's minimalist approach, arguing that only the parts of Isaiah quoted in the Book of Mormon (except perhaps, for parts quoted by Jesus) need to be pre-exilic. Indeed, I've even argued that the absense of the various Isaiah chapters from the Book of Mormon makes good sense on those grounds.

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

Thanks Kevin. I've played around with similar thoughts.

All the best,

--DB

[David Bokovoy]

DB

If we had the plates in our hands and were able to read the writings out loud, what do you think it would sound like? Some form of Hebrew?

Pedro,

That's a very good question. I believe that the Book of Mormon used a type of Egyptian based script to compose Hebrew. So yes, I believe that if read out loud, we would actually hear a type of Hebrew. It would be equivalent to an Akkadian quiz my professor once gave where he took Akkadian syllablic signs to write an English sentence. Of course it threw all of the students for a loop, since no one read the quiz out loud, trying to understand the sentence as an Akkadian phrase which obviously made no sense.

It seems that Will has a somewhat different idea that I found intriguing, but these are my thoughts based in part upon a tremendous amount of discoveries similar to the one discussed in this thread.

At some point, I intend to translate the entire Book of Mormon into Biblical Hebrew in order to reflect and identify these types of Semitic literary devices.

best,

--DB

[J Green]

I like John Welch's minimalist approach, arguing that only the parts of Isaiah quoted in the Book of Mormon (except perhaps, for parts quoted by Jesus) need to be pre-exilic. Indeed, I've even argued that the absense of the various Isaiah chapters from the Book of Mormon makes good sense on those grounds.

Kevin,

I've always wondered what Moroni's statement means for this theory:

Mormon 8:23

Search the prophecies of Isaiah. Behold, I cannot write them.

On the one hand, his message seems to imply that there are other passages from Isaiah that aren't written on the plates, otherwise, why would he say that he can't write them if all of them have already written by Nephi and Jacob? On the other hand, the rest of the verse--indeed, the rest of the chapter almost--is referring to the coming forth of these very plates as a fulfillment of prophecy, so is he saying he can't write them because they've already been written in their entirety on the plates?

Every once in a while I catch phrases or ideas that I think are based on Isaiah passages not included on the small plates, so I've always felt that perhaps we don't have all the Isaiah material in the BoM.

Regards

[J Green]

At some point, I intend to translate the entire Book of Mormon into Biblical Hebrew in order to reflect and identify these types of Semitic literary devices.

For purely selfish reasons, I move that that you do this in blog format.

Many thanks for posting this insight.

[Olavarria]

At some point, I intend to translate the entire Book of Mormon into Biblical Hebrew in order to reflect and identify these types of Semitic literary devices.

That would be awesome!!!! You'de just have to make sure it doesn't make it's way to Israel, otherwise the Jerusalem Centre will be toast .I understand part of the agreement for being there is no Hebrew BoM.Correct me if I'm wrong.

Speaking of which, There are some verses that I've discussed in my blog that I don't have the expertise to analyze(I can only read from "beroshit" to "yom shilishi").

Enos 1:1

Behold, it came to pass that I, Enos(???????), knowing my father that he was a just man

[Olavarria]

That would be awesome!!!! You'de just have to make sure it doesn't make it's way to Israel, otherwise the Jerusalem Centre will be toast .I understand part of the agreement for being there is no Hebrew BoM.Correct me if I'm wrong.

Speaking of which, There are some verses that I've discussed in my blog that I don't have the expertise to analyze(I can only read from "beroshit" to "yom shilishi").

Enos 1:1

Behold, it came to pass that I, Enos(???????), knowing my father that he was a just man

[David Bokovoy]

Dont know how this would work ib B.Hebrew. Thanks for playing.

Ok, so the way I go about this process is to assume that the Book of Mormon intentionally reflects the KJV of the Bible. Therefore, when I approach the task, it

[USU78]

Pedro,

That's a very good question. I believe that the Book of Mormon used a type of Egyptian based script to compose Hebrew. So yes, I believe that if read out loud, we would actually hear a type of Hebrew. It would be equivalent to an Akkadian quiz my professor once gave where he took Akkadian syllablic signs to write an English sentence. Of course it threw all of the students for a loop, since no one read the quiz out loud, trying to understand the sentence as an Akkadian phrase which obviously made no sense.

It seems that Will has a somewhat different idea that I found intriguing, but these are my thoughts based in part upon a tremendous amount of discoveries similar to the one discussed in this thread.

At some point, I intend to translate the entire Book of Mormon into Biblical Hebrew in order to reflect and identify these types of Semitic literary devices.

best,

--DB

You are aware, no doubt, that a couple of partials have been done . . . might give you a leg up in your own efforts.

The Church has put all such that it has control over on ice because of the deal done with Israel over the yBu Jerusalem Center. Nothing preventing a scholarly version making inroads, though. Maybe even some $$ could be found to fund the effort. The Miller family, for example. Mac Christensen, maybe.

[David Bokovoy]

You are aware, no doubt, that a couple of partials have been done . . . might give you a leg up in your own efforts.

The Church has put all such that it has control over on ice because of the deal done with Israel over the yBu Jerusalem Center. Nothing preventing a scholarly version making inroads, though. Maybe even some $$ could be found to fund the effort. The Miller family, for example. Mac Christensen, maybe.

Unfortunately, none of the partials I've examined have effectively captured the literary and poetic nuances of Biblical Hebrew that should be reflected in the text. It's not simply a matter of knowing Biblical Hebrew (which is not even a real language), it's also a matter of knowing biblical literary patterns and rhetoric, so that these issues are not lost in translation. Most of what I've looked at reflects modern Israeli grammar rather than Biblical nuances and therefore fails to capture the spirit of the text. Moreover, from a methodological perspective, again, I think any translation must incorporate the King James Version as a guide, and it seems to me that the examples I've seen neglected this approach.

The project really needs to be done, because in all sincerity, I think such an effort would reveal many of the poetic and literary nuances in the text that have yet to be explored.

best,

--DB

[Olavarria]

Ok, so the way I go about this process is to assume that the Book of Mormon intentionally reflects the KJV of the Bible. Therefore, when I approach the task, it

[Olavarria]

bzump

[David Bokovoy]

bzump

Thanks, Brother. I love you guys. But I'm on my way to Church to begin setting up the greatest spook alley in the history of the world.

[volgadon]

Personally, I would translate the BoM into something between biblical Hebrew and what is known as mishnaic Hebrew.

A lot of the doctrinal ideas in the BoM are easier to express in MH. Also, the BoM wasn't produced by professional Judean scribes, so they have their own traditions and quirks, some of which are closer to the spoken dialects preserved in the writings of the sages.

Also, the 1st person voice is better preserved in later Hebrew than in BH. Ezra-Nehemiah is one of the few in the Bible itself.

There is only one person I can think of who I'd love to see translate the BoM into Hebrew, and even he would agree with me that it is a pity his father passed away.

[volgadon]

That would be awesome!!!! You'de just have to make sure it doesn't make it's way to Israel, otherwise the Jerusalem Centre will be toast .I understand part of the agreement for being there is no Hebrew BoM.Correct me if I'm wrong.

Forget the Jerusalem Center. Try bans on the local members being able to hold church. Perhaps I'm looking at this selfishly, but that seems the bigger issue.

[volgadon]

How idiomatically would the following read if it were rendered in biblical Hebrew?

I admire and appreciate the modesty with which you share this insight. Since you seem to be disclaiming (or at least de-emphasizing) any evidentiary value to your observation, perhaps I'd be out of order to question whether the Hebraism is necessarily authentically ancient. My sense (uninformed by any actual study of biblical Hebrew) is that imitating translated biblical language will often produce Hebraisms naturally (as above, I'm guessing).

If I were to read that in Hebrew, it would read like one of the medieval commentators on the Bible, rather than Biblical Hebrew. Though whether it is an Ashkenazic commentator, or a Babylonian gaon, or one of the Golden Age (of Spain), or a Provence Jew, or a Yemenite mori, well we can debate that.

[David Bokovoy]

Personally, I would translate the BoM into something between biblical Hebrew and what is known as mishnaic Hebrew.

No doubt a knowledge of Mishnaic Hebrew from the 3rd century AD would help as a guide for understanding ways in which the language developed over time, however, it