Jump to content

An Impressive Hebraism in the BofM


David Bokovoy

Recommended Posts

As part of a very frustrating conversation on another board, I shared the following comment in a recent post. In my mind this is an impressive Hebraism for two reasons. One, in terms of linguistics, it shows evidence that the text possesses a fundamental Hebraic background, and two, from a literary perspective, this Hebraism provides another example of "Seidel's Law". I thought this board might be interested in the information.

And here
Link to comment

Evidence that I need to pay greater attention to the Journal of Book of Mormon Studies:

Thomas Wayment came to the same conclusion a few years ago. This really is an impressive Hebraism:

Alma Hebrew

Those interested should add to Wayment's observations the literary reversal that reflects an ancient Israelite scribal technique for denoting a citation.

Link to comment

Thanks, Gervin. I have not doubt that we can find the word pair "pains and sicknesses" in a variety of writings. Could you provide a link and/or a bit more context to the quote?

Best,

--DB

no context or background - sorry - I just did a google query based on my own curiousity. :P

Link to comment

David: This is an unusual English structure. Do you think it is a Hebraism?

Alma 13: 1

And again, my brethren, I would cite your minds forward to the time when the Lord God gave these commandments unto his children; and I would that ye should remember that the Lord God ordained priests, after his holy order, which was after the order of his Son, to teach these things unto the people.

How does "cite our minds forward" relate to "remember"?

Bernard

Link to comment

Hmmm.......where could Joseph Smith have possibly come up with this?

Matthew 8:17: "That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses."

Oh, yeah, that's where.

Link to comment

Hmmm.......where could Joseph Smith have possibly come up with this?

Matthew 8:17: "That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses."

Oh, yeah, that's where.

17 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses.

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/matt/8

Link to comment

Matthew 8:17: "That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses."

Alma 7:11: "And he shall go forth, suffering pains and afflictions and temptations of every kind; and this that the word might be fulfilled which saith he will take upon him the pains and the sicknesses of his people.

Another bullseye for Joseph Smith!

Link to comment
Hmmm.......where could Joseph Smith have possibly come up with this?

Matthew 8:17: "That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses."

Oh, yeah, that's where.

Ah, I see. So Joseph, who according to Emma did not have a Bible during the Book of Mormon translation period, nevertheless saw this Matthew citation of "infirmities and sicknesses," realised that it was a reference to Isaiah talking about "griefs and sorrows," and then arbitrarily decided that "infirmities" would look much better as "pains," thus unwittingly providing a better rendition than Matthew did.

Yes, I see that that explains everything.

Regards,

Pahoran

Link to comment

Ah, I see. So Joseph, who according to Emma did not have a Bible during the Book of Mormon translation period, nevertheless saw this Matthew citation of "infirmities and sicknesses," realised that it was a reference to Isaiah talking about "griefs and sorrows," and then arbitrarily decided that "infirmities" would look much better as "pains," thus unwittingly providing a better rendition than Matthew did.

Yes, I see that that explains everything.

Regards,

Pahoran

Emma was not his scribe the whole time. Not even for most of the time. And anyway, I thought absence of proof is not proof of absence.

Additionally, many apologists allow for Joseph Smith borrowing from the King James Bible when he recognized Book of Mormon passages that were similar---so the theory goes, anyway.

http://en.fairmormon...rs_from_the_KJV

http://www.lightplan...agerize_kjv.htm

But no, Pahoran, nobody could ever plagiarize another text but change the words a little to make it seem original. That could never possibly happen.

The best you can say about the OP is it doesn't prove anything, since the "Hebraism" Joseph Smith supposedly wouldn't have known about was right there in Matthew.

Now, Pahoran, you're changing to, "well, not all the words are exactly the same."

You know, earlier you seemed to find this thing to be faith-promoting:

The hebraisim in question is not simply the pairing of "pains and sicknesses." It is: (1) the claim, by Alma, that it was written that the Messiah would bear the pains and sicknesses of his people, (2) the existence of a scripture, unavailable to non-Hebrew speakers, attesting that he would indeed bear our sicknesses and pains, and (3) the fact that the precise reversal of the elements was a conventional way of indicating a citation, since they after all did not have numbered chapters and verses.

An attention span is often a useful thing to have, Gervin.

Regards,

Pahoran

Link to comment

David: This is an unusual English structure. Do you think it is a Hebraism?

Alma 13: 1

And again, my brethren, I would cite your minds forward to the time when the Lord God gave these commandments unto his children; and I would that ye should remember that the Lord God ordained priests, after his holy order, which was after the order of his Son, to teach these things unto the people.

How does "cite our minds forward" relate to "remember"?

Bernard

That is very interesting. I'll get back with you.

Link to comment
So does Matthew! I would say Darth J has as much of a bullseye as you, David.

Oh come now! Your desire to disbelieve the BofM can't prove this debilitating, can it?

Darth J's bullseye:

A previous text said Jesus would take away "sickness"

My bullseye:

A previous text said Jesus would take away "pain" and "sicknesses" and the sequential order follows the ancient Israelite pattern for citing a previous source.

Let's think this through critically, shall we? Under what form of logic does a bullseye with one link prove as strong as a bullseye with three?

Why do so many cries of "impressive Hebraism" turn out to also be impressive King Jamesisms?

That's the whole point. There is no such text in the King James Bible.

Link to comment

Oh come now! Your desire to disbelieve the BofM can't prove this debilitating, can it?

Darth J's bullseye:

A previous text said Jesus would take away "sickness"

My bullseye:

A previous text said Jesus would take away "pain" and "sicknesses" and the sequential order follows the ancient Israelite pattern for citing a previous source.

Let's think this through critically, shall we? Under what form of logic does a bullseye with one link prove as strong as a bullseye with three?

That's the whole point. There is no such text in the King James Bible.

the far more, utterly adtounding, off-the-charts bulls eye is the verse preceding this one in which the mother of Jesus, is mentioned by name, 100 years before the birth of Christ.
Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...