A Hebraism In The Book Of Mormon

[robuchan]

Just curious, would the linguists see Hebraisms or otherwise antiquity in the Lectures on Faith?

[Cobalt-70]

....I believe that would have been not only beyond the capability of Joseph Smith to produce (with his head buried in a hat, dictating at the phenomenal rate of on average ten pages a day, without rereading or editing of the text); but it would have been beyond the capability of the most learned and gifted men on earth to produce. The Book of Mormon is either what it claims to be, or it is inexplicable.

I think that is a non sequitur. Just because it would be an incredible or perhaps impossible feat for Joseph Smith to have written the Book of Mormon with his own conscious effort does not mean that there is no explanation for the book unless the Book of Mormon is a literal history of ancient American tribes. There are plenty of explanations, and many of them are good for Mormons, too. For example, a Mormon could believe that the book is the direct word of God revealed to Joseph Smith. I think setting up the all-or-nothing scenario only succeeds at daring people to have their faith shattered. How many people have lost their faith because they think that if the Book of Mormon is not the literal writings of actual ancient Americans, then it is a fraud? Why would any rational Mormon argue or admit that there is any circumstance (be the book fictional or otherwise) in which the book is not the word of God?

[zerinus]

I think that is a non sequitur. Just because it would be an incredible or perhaps impossible feat for Joseph Smith to have written the Book of Mormon with his own conscious effort does not mean that there is no explanation for the book unless the Book of Mormon is a literal history of ancient American tribes. There are plenty of explanations, and many of them are good for Mormons, too. For example, a Mormon could believe that the book is the direct word of God revealed to Joseph Smith. I think setting up the all-or-nothing scenario only succeeds at daring people to have their faith shattered. How many people have lost their faith because they think that if the Book of Mormon is not the literal writings of actual ancient Americans, then it is a fraud? Why would any rational Mormon argue or admit that there is any circumstance (be the book fictional or otherwise) in which the book is not the word of God?

The Book of Mormon IS "the literal writings of actual ancient Americans;" and there is NO "circumstance in which the book is not the word of God".

[robuchan]

How many people have lost their faith because they think that if the Book of Mormon is not the literal writings of actual ancient Americans, then it is a fraud?

The idea that the BOM is pseudepigraph is an interesting concept. It would allow you to maintain that God inspired it even though it's not ancient. But it will still be a fraud, right? There's no way around that.

[Robert F. Smith]

Just curious, would the linguists see Hebraisms or otherwise antiquity in the Lectures on Faith?

Probably anywhere KJV style language is used, it might be possible to imagine the presence of an Hebraism. However, whether it is actually anything more than a KJV-ism or biblicism is the true key issue. That quite aside from the presence of accidental Hebraisms, i.e., phrases which appear to fit a Hebrew syntax, vocabulary, and figurative reference, but which only just happen to coincide with such characteristics. An effect like that would have to be sustained and unique enough to be of real value as an analytical or classificatory device. In addition, the fact that the "Lectures on Faith" do not purport to be a translation from Hebrew would seem to exclude them from consideration. In the same way, that the Book of Mormon does not purport to be a translation from Hebrew could easily lead to the same dilemma (unless one claimed that Hebrew speakers wrote it in Egyptian characters).

Edited February 23, 2012 by Robert F. Smith

[Robert F. Smith]

I think that is a non sequitur. Just because it would be an incredible or perhaps impossible feat for Joseph Smith to have written the Book of Mormon with his own conscious effort does not mean that there is no explanation for the book unless the Book of Mormon is a literal history of ancient American tribes. There are plenty of explanations, and many of them are good for Mormons, too. For example, a Mormon could believe that the book is the direct word of God revealed to Joseph Smith. I think setting up the all-or-nothing scenario only succeeds at daring people to have their faith shattered. How many people have lost their faith because they think that if the Book of Mormon is not the literal writings of actual ancient Americans, then it is a fraud? Why would any rational Mormon argue or admit that there is any circumstance (be the book fictional or otherwise) in which the book is not the word of God?

I recall first hearing the proposition that the Book of Mormon is holy scripture and yet is not literally true from Bill Russell of Graceland College in Lamoni, Iowa -- then an RLDS institution. The notion was that the Book of Mormon was truthful about human nature and religion in the same way that a good piece of fiction might be "true," and useful for that reason. Its "scriptural" and perhaps holy status came primarily from its position as part of the RLDS and LDS heritage. That point of view came to prevail within the RLDS leadership and led that church to become a mainstream Protestant institution now known as the Community of Christ. They are nice people who have basically jettisoned the Book of Mormon.

[DubaDNura]

Reading tonight in Alma 5, I am intrigued by something. Alma says of certain people, that "their souls did expand." The word expand appears nowhere in the KJV, nor, to my knowledge, elsewhere in the Book of Mormon, although Alma famously does expound upon the concept later, in Alma 32.

However, expanse, a related term, does appear in the Bible, translated as firmament, rawkeeyah, consonants r-k. I would like to ask our resident Hebraists whether there could be any connection between this term and the chariots envisioned by Ezekiel, merkavah, which led to a school of mystical Jewish thought. It would be interested if these terms, which led to mystical experiences on opposite sides of the world, were related.

At this risk of hijacking this, I want to go back to the original question. I'm not going to address the debate about whether the BoM reflects speech patterns of the 1800s, rather than the Bible.

You claim that רקיע, ("Rakiah") means "expanse." But it means expanse more in the sense of something vast, rather than in the sense of increasing in size. Its purpose was

וִיהִי מַבְדִּיל בֵּין מַיִם לָמָיִם, to separate between the water above and the water below. See Tractate Bava Kamma 17a, which I am freely translating as "Water refers to Torah/G-d's teaching." This will become important in a minute.

In the Kabalistic sense, what that means is that the Rakiah was an interface.

An interface is something that separates even as it brings together. If you and I are talking over the internet (haha!), there is much that you are missing about me: for starters, I happen to think that I'm quite good looking. You'll just have to take my word for it, because you can't see me. You also aren't even hearing me speak. Rather, you're seeing what I write after I've had an opportunity to consider what I want to say, and had a chance to edit for content. So in that sense, the "interface" of the internet, and this message board, serve to hide (just like this world,

עולם - which come from the same Hebrew root as

עלום, hidden - hides the truth of G-d).

At the same time, this message board brings people together and lets them talk with one another. In this way, it has a revelatory purpose and function. You now know a lot more about me than you did before I posted, despite the fact that you haven't seen me interact in real time, and you don't know what I look like. A firmament is a language: language conceals what is in the mind, even as it reveals what is in the mind. Someone who is good at reading people will be more successful at gleaning insights from the language others use than someone who is not skilled at reading people. People who are insightful will be able to read the world, so to speak, to glean insights into G-d, and into His plan for us. Just like an experienced car mechanic doesn't have to read a book in order to figure out how to change a tire, a spiritually insightful person is able to glean the truth of G-d's desire for us without looking into a book. (Those types of people usually are the ones who write the books that we simple people look into in order to figure out what G-d wants.)

Turning to the quote, in Alma 5:9, "they were loosed [from the chains of hell], their souls did expand, and they did sing." This is a three step process: 1.) chains of hell loosened, 2.) souls expanded, 3.) and they did sing. The first step in growth is to cast off destructive habits. Those habits chain a person to hell - a hell of one's own making, as it says in Jeremiah, 2:19, "your own evil torments you" (I'm done trying to type in Hebrew. It messes up the format.) Once a person has cleansed himself of destructive or inefficient habits, he can expand his ability to comprehend the world around him - and his place in it. That understanding of the word "expand" encompasses both the concept of "expanding" as growing, and the "expanse" like a firmament. The interface referred to in Genesis is (according to this understanding) the actual letters of the Torah - which conceal G-d's intent by hiding it behind stories and commands that seem to have more to do with mundane life on earth (don't steal, don't wear forbidden mixtures of linen and wool, don't thresh a field with two different kinds of animals, etc.) than with the great hereafter. In other words, the lower waters are the simple understandings of Torah seemingly divorced from the true desire that prompted G-d from creating the world. The higher waters are the reasons behind the Torah (or, if you will, the Bible) that only make sense to a person after much dedication and prayer. Through dedication and prayer, the letters cease to be an interface that conceals, and function only as an interface that reveals.

Finally, "they did sing." Singing expresses truths that are higher than intellect. A song reaches a person in a very deep and profound way. A recent Wall Street Journal article (about a song I'd never heard by a singer I'd never heard of, by the name of Adele) says what Kabbalah has always taught: that singing actually triggers pleasure centers in the brain. Pleasure (related to the Sefirah of Keter - crown) is the highest level of the soul. When the soul wants something, it bribes the intellect into thinking that it makes sense. (Try this the next time you would like chocolate ice cream - its amazing how Vulcan logic demands the consumption of ice cream when its sitting right in front of you). Even though the "expanse" of the intellect really cannot compare to simply having pleasure on doing G-d's will (in a way that it comes naturally, without someone even having to think of what to do), the loft heights of Keter nonetheless do not present themselves to someone who has not struggled with his mind.

Don't ask me if what I just said is the correct rendition of the verse in Alma. I'm not Mormon, and not usually given over to offering Kabbalistic interpretations of Christian/Mormon verses. I was fascinated by the comparison of the verse to the Hebrew term Rakiah.

[DubaDNura]

I'm going to try posting this again without the Hebrew words. The formatting on that last one was awful, and I don't know how to edit it. I previewed what it looks like, and it isn't perfect, but I can't figure out how to fix it.

At this risk of hijacking this, I want to go back to the original question. I'm not going to address the debate about whether the BoM reflects speech patterns of the 1800s, rather than the Bible.

You claim that ("Rakiah") means "expanse." But it means expanse more in the sense of something vast, rather than in the sense of increasing in size. Its purpose was "to separate between the water above and the water below." See Tractate Bava Kamma 17a, which I am freely translating as "Water refers to Torah/G-d's teaching." This will become important in a minute.

In the Kabalistic sense, what that means is that the Rakiah was an interface. An interface is something that separates even as it brings together. If you and I are talking over the internet (haha!), there is much that you are missing about me: for starters, I happen to think that I'm quite good looking. You'll just have to take my word for it, because you can't see me. You also aren't even hearing me speak. Rather, you're seeing what I write after I've had an opportunity to consider what I want to say, and had a chance to edit for content. So in that sense, the "interface" of the internet, and this message board, serve to hide (just like this "world," or Olam which come from the same Hebrew root as, hidden, Helem or Alum - hides the truth of G-d).

At the same time, this message board brings people together and lets them talk with one another. In this way, it has a revelatory purpose and function. You now know a lot more about me than you did before I posted, despite the fact that you haven't seen me interact in real time, and you don't know what I look like. A firmament is a language: language conceals what is in the mind, even as it reveals what is in the mind. Someone who is good at reading people will be more successful at gleaning insights from the language others use than someone who is not skilled at reading people. People who are insightful will be able to read the world, so to speak, to glean insights into G-d, and into His plan for us. Just like an experienced car mechanic doesn't have to read a book in order to figure out how to change a tire, a spiritually insightful person is able to glean the truth of G-d's desire for us without looking into a book. (Those types of people usually are the ones who write the books that we simple people look into in order to figure out what G-d wants.)

Turning to the quote, in Alma 5:9, "they were loosed [from the chains of hell], their souls did expand, and they did sing." This is a three step process: 1.) chains of hell loosened, 2.) souls expanded, 3.) and they did sing. The first step in growth is to cast off destructive habits. Those habits chain a person to hell - a hell of one's own making, as it says in Jeremiah, 2:19, "your own evil torments you." Once a person has cleansed himself of destructive or inefficient habits, he can expand his ability to comprehend the world around him - and his place in it. That understanding of the word "expand" encompasses both the concept of "expanding" as growing, and the "expanse" like a firmament. The interface referred to in Genesis is (according to this understanding) the actual letters of the Torah - which conceal G-d's intent by hiding it behind stories and commands that seem to have more to do with mundane life on earth (don't steal, don't wear forbidden mixtures of linen and wool, don't thresh a field with two different kinds of animals, etc.) than with the great hereafter. In other words, the lower waters are the simple understandings of Torah seemingly divorced from the true desire that prompted G-d from creating the world. The higher waters are the reasons behind the Torah (or, if you will, the Bible) that only make sense to a person after much dedication and prayer. Through dedication and prayer, the letters cease to be an interface that conceals, and function only as an interface that reveals.

Finally, "they did sing." Singing expresses truths that are higher than intellect. A song reaches a person in a very deep and profound way. A recent Wall Street Journal article (about a song I'd never heard by a singer I'd never heard of, by the name of Adele) says what Kabbalah has always taught: that singing actually triggers pleasure centers in the brain. Pleasure (related to the Sefirah of Keter - crown) is the highest level of the soul. When the soul wants something, it bribes the intellect into thinking that it makes sense. (Try this the next time you would like chocolate ice cream - its amazing how Vulcan logic demands the consumption of ice cream when its sitting right in front of you). Even though the "expanse" of the intellect really cannot compare to simply having pleasure on doing G-d's will (in a way that it comes naturally, without someone even having to think of what to do), the loft heights of Keter nonetheless do not present themselves to someone who has not struggled with his mind.

Don't ask me if what I just said is the correct rendition of the verse in Alma. I'm not Mormon, and not usually given over to offering Kabbalistic interpretations of Christian/Mormon verses. I was fascinated by the comparison of the verse to the Hebrew term Rakiah.

[DubaDNura]

After scrolling through other posts, I think it is worth noting that the function of the Hebrew term masach (rendered curtain or vail) is similar to the concept of a firmament or rakiah. Masach emphasize the aspect of concealment, while rakiah emphasizes the aspect of revelation. Two sides of the same coin.

BTW, if anyone is interested in sources for any of these things, I'll provide them if you're patient

[volgadon]

Don't ask me if what I just said is the correct rendition of the verse in Alma. I'm not Mormon, and not usually given over to offering Kabbalistic interpretations of Christian/Mormon verses. I was fascinated by the comparison of the verse to the Hebrew term Rakiah.

Shalom u-vrachah! Nice to see you post again. It is fun to read a Kabbalistic musar interpretation, I think you have probably gotten very close to the intention of the verse by explaining it as repentance = growing understanding = ascent of the soul.

[volgadon]

After scrolling through other posts, I think it is worth noting that the function of the Hebrew term masach (rendered curtain or vail) is similar to the concept of a firmament or rakiah. Masach emphasize the aspect of concealment, while rakiah emphasizes the aspect of revelation. Two sides of the same coin.

BTW, if anyone is interested in sources for any of these things, I'll provide them if you're patient

I think I've guessed some, but I'd love to see your sources, even if it means plodding through Rashi script.

[DubaDNura]

Wow. That was fast. Good to see/read you again, too. I'll get back to you with the sources. Like I said, you'll have to be patient.

[Cobalt-70]

The Book of Mormon IS "the literal writings of actual ancient Americans;" and there is NO "circumstance in which the book is not the word of God".

So what is the point, then, of saying that IF the Book of Mormon is not the literal writings of ancient ancient Americans, THEN the book is not the word of God? I've heard so many Mormons make this allegation, including prominent Mormon leaders, but why would any rational Mormon say this?

[altersteve]

So what is the point, then, of saying that IF the Book of Mormon is not the literal writings of ancient ancient Americans, THEN the book is not the word of God? I've heard so many Mormons make this allegation, including prominent Mormon leaders, but why would any rational Mormon say this?

Do you believe Moroni appeared to Joseph Smith? If so, then did he lie about the golden plates containing the written history of an ancient American civilization?

[Cobalt-70]

The idea that the BOM is pseudepigraph is an interesting concept. It would allow you to maintain that God inspired it even though it's not ancient. But it will still be a fraud, right? There's no way around that.

How so? The Great Gatsby is not a fraud, even though Nick Carraway didn't actually write it. That the author is not literally Nick Carraway does not change the book's status as a great work of literature, any more than the particular identity of who penned the Book of Mormon would necessarily change its status as a great work of scripture.

You presumably wouldn't say that the Books of Moses are a fraud, even though Moses didn't write them, or that 2 Peter is a fraud, even though Peter surely did not write it. For that matter, you wouldn't say that it is fraudulent to claim that the Bible is the word of God, even though God did not actually write it. If you believe a work is the word of God, the identify of its author is beside the point, because frankly, the person who made the original inscriptions is dead and all that remains is a set of markings that he may or may not have had some connection with. The author is absent and has no further power over writings ascribed to him. He cannot raise them to the level of scripture, or debase them to the level of pulp fiction, because he is dead.

[Cobalt-70]

I recall first hearing the proposition that the Book of Mormon is holy scripture and yet is not literally true from Bill Russell of Graceland College in Lamoni, Iowa -- then an RLDS institution. The notion was that the Book of Mormon was truthful about human nature and religion in the same way that a good piece of fiction might be "true," and useful for that reason. Its "scriptural" and perhaps holy status came primarily from its position as part of the RLDS and LDS heritage. That point of view came to prevail within the RLDS leadership and led that church to become a mainstream Protestant institution now known as the Community of Christ. They are nice people who have basically jettisoned the Book of Mormon.

I don't think that is a fair characterization. I think most of them would say that they have not jettisoned the Book of Mormon, but have subordinated it to the Bible.

That is not a natural consequence, however, of a fictional interpretation of the Book of Mormon. After all, much or most of the Bible is fictional. The Books of Job and Jonah, for example, are fictional short stories, but also happen to be some of the most poignant and important parts of the Old Testament.

[Cobalt-70]

Do you believe Moroni appeared to Joseph Smith? If so, then did he lie about the golden plates containing the written history of an ancient American civilization?

I believe Joseph Smith had an angel vision. What Moroni told him, and how accurately Smith was able to remember over 15 years the exact words he heard Moroni say, I don't think any of us will ever know. I don't think Smith lied, and I can't think of a reason why an angel would lie. According to Smith, Moroni said that there was "an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang." Most Mormon apologists don't believe this anyway, because they have adopted the "limited geography model." But the angel did not actually say whether or not the "account" was fictional or nonfictional, or some combination of both.

[altersteve]

I believe in a "limited geography model," but I also believe every word that Moroni said. But hey, if you're comfortable with believing that Joseph Smith is the author of the Book of Mormon and are still able to believe it is a volume of holy scripture that contains the gospel of Jesus Christ in its fullness, then by all means, be my guest. But there is no explanation for the Book of Mormon that is more consistent and coherent than the one Joseph Smith himself gave: that he, by the gift and power of God, translated a record written by ancient American prophets upon golden plates. This is what I choose to believe.

Also, citing the fact that Moroni did not specifically say that the account was fictional or nonfictional is pretty ridiculous. I think it was quite clearly implied.

[zerinus]

So what is the point, then, of saying that IF the Book of Mormon is not the literal writings of ancient ancient Americans, THEN the book is not the word of God? I've heard so many Mormons make this allegation, including prominent Mormon leaders, but why would any rational Mormon say this?

Sorry Cobalt, your question makes no sense at all.

[Mike Reed]

In FAIR’s recently uploaded youtube video, Dan Peterson speaks about Book of Mormon Hebraisms (which he evidently believes supports the volume of scripture’s claim for authenticity), saying, “In the book of Mormon, Lehi is saying, 'Behold I have dreamed a dream, or in other words I have seen a vision.' The dreamed a dream is a really obvious cognate accusative, the 'seen a vision' is a little less obvious, but I suspect originally it was 'seen a seeing.' 'I have dreamed a dream, I have seen a seeing.'”

http://www.youtube.c...u/0/4GfFTry88JM (remarks can be heard at 44:33)

I am surprised that anyone would find this impressive. I did a very brief google search and gathered the following list (pardon and redundancy):

-------------------

The table book: or, Daily recreation and information concerning ... - Page 653

William Hone - 1827 - 870 pages - Free Google eBook - Read

Joe Davis had dreamed a dream; or, as my narrator informed me, had seen a vision. Sitting one evening in his little parlour, with his wife and childien before him, he, on a sudden, leaned back in his chair — his eyes became glazed, ...

The age of reason - Page 50

Thomas Paine - 1818 - Free Google eBook - Read

'They pretend to have dreamed dreams, and seen visions, because it was unsafe for them to speak facts or plain language. We ought, however, to suppose, that the persons to whom they wrote understood what they meant, and that it was not ...

Arcana cœlestia: or Heavenly mysteries contained in the sacred ... - Page 46

Emanuel Swedenborg - 1808 - Free Google eBook - Read

... they who worshipped Baalim and other Gods, also prophesied, saw visions, and dreamed dreams, and likewise that the things which were spoken by them came to pass, whereby many were seduced, concerning whom see Jeremiah, chap. xxiii; ...

The poetical works of Sir Walter Scott, baronet: Volume 2 - Page 59

Sir Walter Scott - 1821 - Free Google eBook - Read

boasted of prophetic powers, and were often warned of the approach of the soldiers by supernatural impulse,* Captain John Creichton, on the other side,dreamed dreams, and saw visions, (chiefly, indeed, after having drunk hard,) in...

Repentance, and other poems - Page 110

Mary Ann Gray - 1829 - Free Google eBook - Read

And I have seen a vision, — And I have dreamed a dream, And sure that hour Elysian Was no deceiving beam ! There stood a spirit there, Before my sleeping sight, And her voice had not a tone of care, And her form was pure and bright ..

Remarks on ecclesiastical history: In two volumes. ... - Page 136

John Jortin - 1767 - Free Google eBook - Read

St. Peter had a vision, St. "John saw vifions, St. Paul had visions and dreams. But Christ neither Jaw vistons, nor dreamed a dream, but had an intimate and immediate communication with the Father, he was in the Father's bosom, and he

The New Testament, arranged in chronological & historical order, ...: Volume 2 - Page 30

George Townsend - 1825 - Free Google eBook - Read

But Christ neither saw visions, nor dreamed a dream, but had an intimate and immediate communication with the Father — he was in the Father's bosom — and he, and no man else, bad seen the Father. Moses and Christ are the only two in all ...

The theological works: containing his porta Mosis and English ...: Volume 1 - Page 305

Edward Pococke, Leonard Twells - 1740 - Free Google eBook - Read

Kimchi seems not to make that diffe- and by visions to young men ? It may cer- rence here betwixt dreams and visions, ... These named we may reckon among old men, yet it is not said that they dreamed dreams, but saw visions.

Lectures on the gospel of St. Matthew; ... - Page 55

Beilby Porteus - 1805 - Free Google eBook - Read

This we must after all be content to dor even if we adopt the idea of vision ; for even that does not remove every difficulty, ... It is this : All the prophets of the Old Testament, except Moses, saw visions, and dreamed dreams, ...

Remarks on ecclesiastical history: In two volumes. ... - Page 136

books.google.comJohn Jortin - 1767 - Free Google eBook - Read

All the prophets of the Old Testament saw visions and dreamed dreams , all the prophets of the Neva were in the fame state. St. Peter had a vision, St. "John saw vifions, St. Paul had visions and dreams. But Christ neither Jaw vistons, ...

Discourses concerning the truth of the Christian religion and ...: Volume 1 - Page 283

books.google.comJohn Jortin - 1805 - Free Google eBook - Read

All the prophets of the Old Testament saw visions and dreamed dreams ; all the prophets of the New were in the same state. St. Peter had a vision, St. John sawvisions, St. Paul had visions and dreams. But Christ neither saw visions, ...

Lectures on the Gospel of st. Matthew - Page 85

Beilby Porteus (bp. of London.) - 1802 - Free Google eBook - Read

St. Peter had a vision, St. John saw visions, St. Paul had visions and dreams ; but Christ himself neither saw visions nor dreamed dreams. He had an' intimate and immediate communication with the Father ; and he, and no one else in his ...

The theological works - Page 50

Thomas Paine - 1827 - Free Google eBook - Read

They pretend to have dreamed dreams, and seen visions, because it was unsafe for them to speak facts or plain language. We ought, however to suppose, that the persons to whom they wrote understood what they meant, and that it was not ...

Discourses preached at the Temple church, and on several ...: Volume 4 - Page 124

Thomas Sherlock - 1812 - Free Google eBook - Read

our blessed Saviour, and not to any otiier prophet, either before or aster him : all the prophets of the Old Testament saw visions, and dreamed dreams ; all the prophets of the New were in the fame state. St. Peter had a vision, ...

Blackwood's Edinburgh magazine: Volume 17 - Page 366

1825 - Free Google eBook - Read

I- should opine your sleep to be haunted by many visions, dismal and delightful. SHEPHERD. ... crunkling on ray knee,— on such a couch, Mr North, hath your Shepherd seen visions and dreamed dreams ; but his een were never sleeked...

The republican: Volume 1, Issues 2-16 - Page 122

W. T. Sherwin, Richard Carlile - 1819 - Free Google eBook - Read

They pretend to have dreamed dreams, and seen visions, because it was unsafe for them to speak facts or plain language* We ought, however, to suppose, that the persons to whom they wrote understood what they meant, and that it was not ...

The Annual register of world events: a review of the year: Volume 5 - Page 245

1787 - Free Google eBook - Read

For, out of the mouths of babes and sucklings, is once again, as of oid, perfected praise; the young men saw "vision i, and the old men dreamed dreams" " All these wonders were not worked for nothing. The Spirit of the Lord was gone out ...

More editions Add to My Library▼

Annual register: Volume 5 - Page 245

1805 - Free Google eBook - Read

For, out of the mouths of babes and sucklings, is once again, as of old, perfected prake ; the young men saw visions, and the old men dreamed dreams." " All these wonders were not worked for nothing. The Spirit of the Lord was gone out, ...

Dodsley's annual register: Volume 24 - Page 243

Edmund Burke - 1763 - Free Google eBook - Read

For, out of the mouths of babes and sucklings, is once again, as of old, perfected praise; the young mn sans 'visions, and the old men dreamed dreams." " All thefe wonders were not worked for nothing. The Spirit of the Lord was gone out ...

Fifty sermons on several subjects and occasions ... - Page 140

Charles Wheatly - 1746 - Free Google eBook - Read

The Prophets of the Old Testament, we are told, saw Visions and dreamed Dreams : And the Prophets also of the New Testament had the same Privilege vouchsafed to them. For St. Peter had a Vision ; Acts x. Saint John had a Series of them ...

The Annual Register, or a View of the history, politicks and ... - Page 243

Robert Dodsley - 1763 - Free Google eBook - Read

... is once again, ' as of old, perfected praise; the young mtn sawu <visons, and the old men dreamed dreams. ... They cautioned him not to regard 'visions or dreams, or to fancy people had remijjion of fins because of their cries or ...

Literæ sacræ; or, The doctrines of moral philosophy and scriptural ... - Page 220

A. Norman - 1825 - Free Google eBook - Read

Of the former part of the prophecy, each prediction, at the time above named, received its accomplishment. The Spirit was poured out upon all flesh *; Sons and daughters prophesied f ; old men dreamed dreams J ; young men saw visions §...

Essays on the nature, causes and effects of national antipathies, ... - Page 99

Richard Otley - 1828 - Free Google eBook - Read

This was the case with the sects alluded to above ; some of them dreamed dreams, saw visions, and received new revelations. Earth was to become a paradise; the church pure and perfect; and human policy and ...

Annual register: Volume 5 - Page 243

Edmund Burke - 1763 - Free Google eBook - Read

For, out of the mouths of babes and sucklings, is once again, as of old, perfected praise; the young men faiv 'vifions, and the old men dreamed dreams." " All these wonders were not worked for nothing. The Spirit of did inward trials ...

The works of the Rev. Charles Buck, late minister of the Gospel: Volume 3 - Page 169

Charles Buck - 1822 - Free Google eBook - Read

their own account, have dreamed dreams, seen visions, heard voices, and pretend to predict future events, as if inspired of God for that purpose. They have set themselves up as oracles, as the peculiar favorites of heaven; while, ...

A collection of tracts on several subjects connected with the ... - Page 141

John Lingard - 1826 - Free Google eBook - Read

DURING the long lapse of more than fifteen centuries, the visions of the apostle St. John had been enveloped in the thickest ... expositors, and anno- tators, who may truly be said to have seen visions, and to have dreamed dreams : and, ...

The North American review: Volume 22 - Page 99

1826 - Free Google eBook - Read

We are inclined to think, that at the commencement of his career he was a fanatic, who had ' seen visions and dreamed dreams,' and who believed the doctrines he professed and inculcated. This practical conquest of the imagination over ...

Minstrelsy of the Scottish border: consisting of historical and ...: Volume 2 - Page 59

Walter Scott - 1812 - 456 pages - Free Google eBook - Read

boasted of prophetic powers, and were often warned of' the approach of the soldiers, by supernatural impulse, * captain John Creichton, on the other side,dreamed dreams, and saw visions, (chiefly, indeed, after having drunk ha1'd,) in ...

Tait's Edinburgh magazine: Volume 1 - Page 558

William Tait, Christian Isobel Johnstone - 1832 - Free Google eBook - Read

When September sent back the citizens to Cheapside, and brought forward an in. flux of " rank and fashion" in their place, his heart was amid the preserves of the Hall ; he saw visions of percussion guns, and dreamed dreams of his ...

A debate on the Roman Catholic religion: held in the ... - Page 244

Alexander Campbell, John Baptist Purcell - 1837 - 360 pages - Free Google eBook -Read

From the days of Luther to the present, we have possessed a numerous and uninterrupted succession of translators, lecturers, expositors, and annotator3, who may truly be said to have seen visions, and to have dreamed dreams; and, ...

The variations of Popery - Page 60

Samuel Edgar - 1838 - 551 pages - Free Google eBook - Read

Peter was a Franciscan and famed for sanctity, miracles, and celestial visions ; Catharine of Sienna, ... All these, in favour of their several patrons, saw visions, uttered revelations, wrought miracles, and dreamed dreams.1 The evils ...

Essays, moral and humorous: also essays on imagination and taste - Page 9

Joseph Addison - 1839 - 194 pages - Free Google eBook - Read

NEW DISTRIBUTION OF HONOURS: A VISION. I was last week taking a solitary walk in the garden of Lincoln's Inn (a favour that is ... I no sooner fell into them, but 1dreamed a dream, or saw a vision, for I know not which to call it

Journal of the Franklin Institute: Volume 18 - Page 366

Franklin Institute (Philadelphia, Pa.) - 1834 - Free Google eBook - Read

Mr. Edson has not merely conceived the idea in his own mind, but has actually tested its correctness; but, most assuredly, this term has been used prematurely. He may have "seen visions," or "dreamed dreams;" but, like some other dreams...

Edited February 27, 2012 by Mike Reed

[zerinus]

In FAIR’s recently uploaded youtube video, Dan Peterson speaks about Book of Mormon Hebraisms (which he evidently believes supports the volume of scripture’s claim for authenticity), saying, “In the book of Mormon, Lehi is saying, 'Behold I have dreamed a dream, or in other words I have seen a vision.' The dreamed a dream is a really obvious cognate accusative, the 'seen a vision' is a little less obvious, but I suspect originally it was 'seen a seeing.' 'I have dreamed a dream, I have seen a seeing.'”

http://www.youtube.c...u/0/4GfFTry88JM (remarks can be heard at 44:33)

I am surprised that anyone would find this impressive. I did a very brief google search and gathered the following list (pardon and redundancy):

-------------------

<snip>

The expression "dreamed a dream" is a Hebraism; it has entered into English from the KJV. Everybody knows that the KJV has had profound influence on the English language, and many unique words and phrases have entered into English from the KJV. See here for examples. The following are examples of "dreamed a dream" in the KJV:

Genesis 37:

5 And Joseph dreamed a dream, and he told it his brethren: and they hated him yet the more.

9 And he dreamed yet another dream, and told it his brethren, and said, Behold, I have dreamed a dream more; and, behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me.

Genesis 40:

5 And they dreamed a dream both of them, each man his dream in one night, each man according to the interpretation of his dream, the butler and the baker of the king of Egypt, which were bound in the prison.

8 And they said unto him, We have dreamed a dream, and there is no interpreter of it. And Joseph said unto them, Do not interpretations belong to God? tell me them, I pray you.

Genesis 41:

11 And we dreamed a dream in one night, I and he; we dreamed each man according to the interpretation of his dream.

15 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, I have dreamed a dream, and there is none that can interpret it: and I have heard say of thee, that thou canst understand a dream to interpret it.

Judges 7:

13 And when Gideon was come, behold, there was a man that told a dream unto his fellow, and said, Behold, I dreamed a dream, and, lo, a cake of barley bread tumbled into the host of Midian, and came unto a tent, and smote it that it fell, and overturned it, that the tent lay along.

Daniel 2:

3 And the king said unto them, I have dreamed a dream, and my spirit was troubled to know the dream.

And here are examples of "dream" and "vision" used side by side:

Numbers 12:

6 And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.

Job 20:

8 He shall fly away as a dream, and shall not be found: yea, he shall be chased away as a vision of the night.

Job 33:

15 In a dream, in a vision of the night, when deep sleep falleth upon men, in slumberings upon the bed

Isaiah 29:

7 And the multitude of all the nations that fight against Ariel, even all that fight against her and her munition, and that distress her, shall be as a dream of a night vision.

The trick is to find examples which are not common in English, or which are too generic to have been derived form English, or in which the context supports an original Hebrew text rather than an English one.

Edited February 27, 2012 by zerinus

[Robert F. Smith]

I don't think that is a fair characterization. I think most of them would say that they have not jettisoned the Book of Mormon, but have subordinated it to the Bible.

A familiarity with the RLDS literature sponsored by and published by RLDS leaders during the 60s and 70s leads inexorably to the fictional interpretation of the Book of Mormon, and to the move to mainstream Protestant status for the Community of Christ.

That is not a natural consequence, however, of a fictional interpretation of the Book of Mormon. After all, much or most of the Bible is fictional. The Books of Job and Jonah, for example, are fictional short stories, but also happen to be some of the most poignant and important parts of the Old Testament.

Of course. The whole point of learning such things at the nearby Methodist St. Paul School of Theology (where many RLDS leaders were trained) is that the Bible and Book of Mormon are both fictional. Those RLDS members who disagreed with this conclusion have for the most part left that Church and formed their own dissident groups.

[Robert F. Smith]

The expression "dreamed a dream" is a Hebraism; it has entered into English from the KJV. Everybody knows that the KJV has had profound influence on the English language, and many unique words and phrases have entered into English from the KJV. See here for examples. The following are examples of "dreamed a dream" in the KJV:

Genesis 37:

5 And Joseph dreamed a dream, and he told it his brethren: and they hated him yet the more.

9 And he dreamed yet another dream, and told it his brethren, and said, Behold, I have dreamed a dream more; and, behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me.

Genesis 40:

5 And they dreamed a dream both of them, each man his dream in one night, each man according to the interpretation of his dream, the butler and the baker of the king of Egypt, which were bound in the prison.

8 And they said unto him, We have dreamed a dream, and there is no interpreter of it. And Joseph said unto them, Do not interpretations belong to God? tell me them, I pray you.

Genesis 41:

11 And we dreamed a dream in one night, I and he; we dreamed each man according to the interpretation of his dream.

15 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, I have dreamed a dream, and there is none that can interpret it: and I have heard say of thee, that thou canst understand a dream to interpret it.

Judges 7:

13 And when Gideon was come, behold, there was a man that told a dream unto his fellow, and said, Behold, I dreamed a dream, and, lo, a cake of barley bread tumbled into the host of Midian, and came unto a tent, and smote it that it fell, and overturned it, that the tent lay along.

Daniel 2:

3 And the king said unto them, I have dreamed a dream, and my spirit was troubled to know the dream.

And here are examples of "dream" and "vision" used side by side:

Numbers 12:

6 And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.

Job 20:

8 He shall fly away as a dream, and shall not be found: yea, he shall be chased away as a vision of the night.

Job 33:

15 In a dream, in a vision of the night, when deep sleep falleth upon men, in slumberings upon the bed

Isaiah 29:

7 And the multitude of all the nations that fight against Ariel, even all that fight against her and her munition, and that distress her, shall be as a dream of a night vision.

The trick is to find examples which are not common in English, or which are too generic to have been derived form English, or in which the context supports an original Hebrew text rather than an English one.

Both you and Mike Reed have missed the closest parallel, which is the ultimate source of all other occurences in the sources he cites:

Joel 2:28 (Massoretic text 3:1) "your old men shall dream dreams and your young men shall see visions" = Acts 2:17 (cf. Dan 4:9). The same applies to silly claims that the BofM quotes Shakespeare, when in fact the KJV and ancient texts have much closer parallels. Even if Joseph Smith had been composing fiction, why go further afield than the KJV??! Occam's Razor . . .

[Rob Bowman]

Robert,

Your posts in this thread represent a remarkably fluid approach to the text of the Book of Mormon—fluid as Jell-o on a hot sidewalk.

On the one hand, you claim (post #71) that the Book of Mormon preserves a “profusion” of Egyptianisms, largely linguistic in nature (though you also suggest it reflects an Egyptian system of weights and measures). You base this claim on the premise that Joseph Smith said that the Book of Mormon was written in Egyptian. Thus, you claim, for example, that the use of double negatives in the Book of Mormon is an example of Egyptianism, as is the expression “iron rod” as an idiomatic reference to God’s word, “an equivalence or pun only possible in Egyptian.” Likewise, in your first post to this thread (#4), you argued that Alma’s statement that “their souls did expand” (Alma 5:9) is an Egyptianism.

On the other hand, you claim (post #75) that the Book of Mormon is written in Joseph Smith’s own English idiom and even that it uses literary sources contemporary with Joseph Smith. I had presented evidence that not only is Alma 5:9 an English idiom but that the entire chapter uses English idiom and lifts phrases and even a whole sentence from the KJV New Testament. In response, you claim to be “not at all surprised” by that evidence, and you argue that all such evidence is easily handled via a translation “model” such as Blake Ostler’s in which the English Book of Mormon includes “midrashic expansion and dynamic metaphrase” reflecting modern knowledge and idiom. You explain:

For Joseph was certainly not well trained in reading and writing, but apparently knew a great deal about the Bible and revival phrasing from his oral information environment. Translating the material he encountered on the plates may have involved a mental feedback system in which he sought to make the Egyptian text readily accessible to readers of the Book of Mormon – even theologically accessible.

Robert, I do not think you can have your Egyptianism cake and eat it too. The translation model that finds a “profusion” of Egyptianisms throughout the Book of Mormon is not compatible with a translation model in which the Book of Mormon is composed in idiomatic English and drawing freely from revivalist speech forms, the KJV New Testament, and other modern sources to make the Book of Mormon linguistically and theologically “accessible” to modern readers. You mentioned modern English paraphrases of the Bible as an analogy, and they illustrate the problem of trying to have it both ways. Eugene Peterson’s The Message, for example, which rewrites the Bible in contemporary idiom, does not contain woodenly literal renderings of ancient Egyptian or Hebraic linguistic forms in the OT or Greek or Latin idioms in the New.

I realize that having it both ways is awfully convenient for Book of Mormon apologetics. Mormons can argue that the Book of Mormon has woodenly preserved ancient Hebraisms or Egyptianisms (some apologists actually argue for both) wherever they like, and at the same time explain away all instances of modern idiom, cribbing from the KJV New Testament, etc., as compatible with “translation” in the loosest sense of the word. Mixing the two approaches to the Book of Mormon would seem to give the apologist the best of both worlds. Those who mix both ways of viewing the Book of Mormon, however, do not have a coherent model of translation at all.

[wenglund]

Those who mix both ways of viewing the Book of Mormon, however, do not have a coherent model of translation at all.

Metaphorically speaking, this is a black/white view that doesn't carry much weight with those see in color and shades of gray.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-