Do Hebraisms In The Doctrine & Convenants Undermine The Ones In The Book Of Mormon?

[jkwilliams]

Because they are not quotations from God or one of His messengers. Read the Joseph Smith History in the Pearl of Great Price and note the difference when Joseph is speaking of his experiences and when he is quoting Moroni.

 

Glenn

 

Much of the Doctrine and Covenants is also not quotations from God or one of His messengers (unless of course you are talking about Joseph Smith as a messenger). For example, sections 121-123 are excerpts from letters Joseph Smith wrote from Liberty Jail. It could be argued that verses 7 through 25 of section 121 quote God, as Joseph introduces that section with "When the heart is sufficiently contrite, then the voice of inspiration steals along and whispers, ..." But the rest of the section quotes from Joseph Smith, without attributing it to God or His messengers. But even when Joseph Smith is speaking, the same quasi-KJV style language is used.

 

Based on this and other portions of the D&C, as well as much of Joseph's personal writing, I would argue that it was Joseph's stylistic choice when he was discussing religious or spiritual issues. Just my two cents.

[CV75]

It sounds like you're picking and choosing when it's convenient. You say they can be used to "convey sacred ideas" in modern scripture but are evidence of pre-existing Hebraisms in the BoM.

 

This suggests you're happy to flip-flop between them based on what is convenient to your already completed conclusions.

This is hilarious. Yes, I'm flip-flopping between apples and oranges, when one fruit is an apple I see an apple, and when one is an orange I see an orange.

 

God speaks in whatever language He pleases, whether in ancient scripture or modern revelation and whether by the voice of the Spirit or face-to-face. It is that simple.

 

D&C can reflect God's words as conveyed to Joseph in a Hebrew style, Joseph's own use of Hebraisms as sacred language, transcriptions from the Bible, and Joseph's use of 19th century Northeastern American English. D&C as far far as I can tell is not a translation of Hebrew-influened scripture from ancient documents, and was never claimed to be. This is the flip.

 

The Book of Mormon is an inspired translation of scripture written in the language of the prophets' Hebrew fathers (including their descenant Hebrew-inspired Nephite fathers). While it could conceivably contain all the elements of D&C "isms" described above, it would also contain actual literal translations of Hebraisms that the Nephites retained, both in everyday and sacred language. This is the flop.

 

You're trying to make a flip out of flop!

[Darren10]

Do you apply the same reasoning to the Book of Mormon? If it had been translated in Japan would the Book of Mormon also lack the Hebraisms?

 

In fact... do translations of the Book of Mormon even retain the Hebraisms?

 

If the restoration ocurred in Japan than I would say that the modern language dictation would be different. That while Hebraism would exist it would be ore difficult to detect.

[Darren10]

So why aren't D&C 138 and OD 1&2 written in "the language of scripture"?

 

I don't see why they need to be.

[Glenn101]

Much of the Doctrine and Covenants is also not quotations from God or one of His messengers (unless of course you are talking about Joseph Smith as a messenger). For example, sections 121-123 are excerpts from letters Joseph Smith wrote from Liberty Jail. It could be argued that verses 7 through 25 of section 121 quote God, as Joseph introduces that section with "When the heart is sufficiently contrite, then the voice of inspiration steals along and whispers, ..." But the rest of the section quotes from Joseph Smith, without attributing it to God or His messengers. But even when Joseph Smith is speaking, the same quasi-KJV style language is used.

 

Based on this and other portions of the D&C, as well as much of Joseph's personal writing, I would argue that it was Joseph's stylistic choice when he was discussing religious or spiritual issues. Just my two cents.

 

In section 121, verses 1-6 are a prayer by Joseph directed to God, using the thee, thy, thou style (the style I use in my own prayers). The rest of 121 and 122 are attributed to God speaking to Joseph. Thee, thine, thou, etc are prominent. I have not checked for Hebraisms, but at first glance, none stand out to me in Joseph's prayer, although I am hardly an expert in the matter.

Contrast that to section 123. No conversation with God, and no thee, thine, and thou.

The same goes for sections 128, 129, 130, and 131. A quote from God uses the thee, thine, and thou expressions. The rest is a rather matter of fact presentation from Joseph. It seems that Joseph uses the more formal language when addressing Deity. It also seems that all of the verses attributed to God use those expressions. Now we need to go back and see if Joseph uses any Hebraisms in his "normal" writings, and in his formal writings.

 

Glenn

[jkwilliams]

In section 121, verses 1-6 are a prayer by Joseph directed to God, using the thee, thy, thou style (the style I use in my own prayers). The rest of 121 and 122 are attributed to God speaking to Joseph. Thee, thine, thou, etc are prominent. I have not checked for Hebraisms, but at first glance, none stand out to me in Joseph's prayer, although I am hardly an expert in the matter.

Contrast that to section 123. No conversation with God, and no thee, thine, and thou.

The same goes for sections 128, 129, 130, and 131. A quote from God uses the thee, thine, and thou expressions. The rest is a rather matter of fact presentation from Joseph. It seems that Joseph uses the more formal language when addressing Deity. It also seems that all of the verses attributed to God use those expressions. Now we need to go back and see if Joseph uses any Hebraisms in his "normal" writings, and in his formal writings.

 

Glenn

 

If you read the actual letters, sections 121 and 122 are selections from various places in the letters and are not attributed to God, except possibly where I noted (vv. 7-25).

[omni]

Because they are not quotations from God or one of His messengers. Read the Joseph Smith History in the Pearl of Great Price and note the difference when Joseph is speaking of his experiences and when he is quoting Moroni.

Glenn

Do you believe God and his messengers speak in Jacobean English when they speak to us?

[CV75]

I can't exactly put my finger on it, but when reading the Book of Mormon in English and in the Spirit, I get a strong sense of its antiquity (it speaks to me as if from the dust of old) that I don't get from the D&C or the Late War, even given the KJV language in common. Do I get this strong sense in part because of Hebraism, or the extent and nature of the Hebraisms? I am not sure. However, I suspect that it may be a minor factor--with the major factor being the Spirit.  Who knows?

I think this might get to whether it can be shown that the Hebraisms themselves are of an ancient or a 19^th century tonality, which would reflect an ancient or more modern mind, respectively.

 

It could then be said that Joseph translated the ancient mind into a modern mind while retaining the indelible traces of ancient tonality and associated Hebraisms. It could be that an Eternal mind (which is certainly ancient; at least “timeless”) was conveyed to the ancient Hebrew mind (creating the original Hebraisms in the scriptural record), which was passed on to later Nephite minds that also received word from the Eternal mind (as reflected in their records and abridgements), which were then translated for modern consumption (while yet retaining some of the original tone and manner of expression) —so yes, the Spirit would be the factor that prepares our modern minds to receive God’s Eternal mind through the vehicle of the Book of Mormon.

[canard78]

Do you believe God and his messengers speak in Jacobean English when they speak to us?

 

With a very few exceptions the majority of "God's voice" in the D&C is channeled via Joseph (either through the U&T or direct dictation). I don't think God limits himself to speaking in Jacobean English. I don't think God speaks directly much at all. Instead Joseph speaks what he understands to be God's will and doctrine and does so in what he considers to be scriptural language - the language he was most familiar with from the scriptures he grew up with. I think we see this in D&C and BoM. Dictated in the language Joseph considered to be scriptural.

[omni]

With a very few exceptions the majority of "God's voice" in the D&C is channeled via Joseph (either through the U&T or direct dictation). I don't think God limits himself to speaking in Jacobean English. I don't think God speaks directly much at all. Instead Joseph speaks what he understands to be God's will and doctrine and does so in what he considers to be scriptural language - the language he was most familiar with from the scriptures he grew up with. I think we see this in D&C and BoM. Dictated in the language Joseph considered to be scriptural.

 

 

This is the 1832 account of the First Vision.  Notice the change in vernacular from when Joseph is speaking and when the Lord is speaking.  This is a direct quote from  Jesus Christ while he appeared to him in person, not simply some impressions or revelations that would come to Joseph's mind and he would then be required to put into his own words.

 

"At about the age of twelve years my mind become seriously imprest with regard to the all importent concerns for the wellfare of my immortal Soul which led me to searching the scriptures . . . thus from the age of twelve years to fifteen I pondered many things in my heart concerning the sittuation of the world of mankind the contentions and divisions the wickedness and abominations and the darkness which pervaded the minds of mankind my mind become excedingly distressed for I become convicted of my sins . . . I looked upon the sun the glorious luminary of the earth and also the moon rolling in their magesty through the heavens and also the stars shining in their courses and the earth also upon which I stood and the beast of the field and the fowls of heaven and the fish of the waters and also man walking forth upon the face of the earth in magesty and in the strength of beauty whose power and intiligence in governing the things which are so exceding great and marvilous even in the likeness of him who created them and when I considered upon these things my heart exclaimed well hath the wise man said it is a fool that saith in his heart there is no God my heart exclaimed all all these bear testimony and bespeak an omnipotant and omnipreasant power a being who makith Laws and decreeeth and bindeth all things in their bound who filleth Eternity who was and is and will be from all Eternity to Eternity and when I considered all these things and that that being seeketh such to worship him as worship him in spirit and in truth therefore I cried unto the lord for mercy for there was none else to whom I could go and obtain mercy and the Lord heard my cry in the wilderness and while in the attitude of calling upon the Lord in the 16th year of my age a piller of fire light above the brightness of the sun at noon day come down from above and rested upon me and I was filled with the spirit of god and the Lord opened the heavens upon me and I saw the Lord and he spake unto me saying Joseph my son thy sins are forgiven thee. go thy way walk in my statutes and keep my commandments behold I am the Lord of glory I was crucifyed for the world that all those who believe on my name may have Eternal life behold the world lieth in sin at this time and none doeth good no not one they have turned asside from the gospel and keep not my commandments they draw near to me with their lips while their hearts are far from me and mine anger is kindling against the inhabitants of the earth to visit them acording to their ungodliness and to bring to pass that which hath been spoken by the mouth of the prophets and Apostles behold and lo I come quickly as it is written of me in the cloud clothed in the glory of my Father and my soul was filled with love and for many days I could rejoice with great Joy and the Lord was with me but I could find none that would believe the hevnly vision nevertheless I pondered these things..."

[jkwilliams]

I'm not seeing the change in vernacular.

[omni]

I'm not seeing the change in vernacular.

 

 

You're right, after a second reading I don't see much of a difference, I was thinking of the more commonly used 1838 version which is clearly written in 19th century English.  My point still stands that when Joseph was directly quoting the Lord--not simply impressions that came to his mind--he used Jacobean English. 

[prismsplay]

Joseph speaks what he understands to be God's will and doctrine and does so in what he considers to be scriptural language - the language he was most familiar with from the scriptures he grew up with.

 

I agree with this statement as far as it goes. At the end of the statement I would add: "and with the language he translated from the Book of Mormon." For the experience of translating by the gift and power of God had to have had a profound influence on this unlearned person called to translate.

 

One advantage of having similar language patterns in the Bible, the Book of Mormon, and the revelations of Doctrine and Covenants is that students of them can use concordances to often find the same terms and phrases in all three of these books, which allows statements in one book to throw light on interpreting similar statements in another. A good example is "precept upon precept" in Isaiah 28:10, 13. By using a concordance, similar phrases in both the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants can throw light on the meaning of Isaiah 28:10, 13. God probably intended for us to enjoy this convenience.

[canard78]

 

I agree with this statement as far as it goes. At the end of the statement I would add: "and with the language he translated from the Book of Mormon." For the experience of translating by the gift and power of God had to have had a profound influence on this unlearned person called to translate.

 

One advantage of having similar language patterns in the Bible, the Book of Mormon, and the revelations of Doctrine and Covenants is that students of them can use concordances to often find the same terms and phrases in all three of these books, which allows statements in one book to throw light on interpreting similar statements in another. A good example is "precept upon precept" in Isaiah 28:10, 13. By using a concordance, similar phrases in both the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants can throw light on the meaning of Isaiah 28:10, 13. God probably intended for us to enjoy this convenience.

 

I work in marketing research and we're forever telling our clients the importance of consistency of message over time and synergy of message across channels. I agree that whatever their source, there is certainly consistency and synergy in the standard works. I see that and appreciate it.

 

My question has been about "admissible evidence."

 

I pointed out on the late war 'sister thread' that the 'double negatives' evidences for Hebraisms/Egyptianisms in the Book of Mormon should also be considered with caution given Joseph's personal writing, his mother's personal writing AND one of the earliest versions of D&C 20 contain double negatives.

 

If most of the "Hebraisms" are found both in Joseph's writings, revelations AND in the writing of other contemporaries (who had no exposure to the Book of Mormon given they were writing before its publication) then I consider the "Hebraisms" to be weak evidence.

 

I agree that if the Book of Mormon is based on Gold Plates written in the Hebrew language using Egyptian characters and if Joseph is doing a direct translation of the plates then we might reasonably expect some Hebraisms in the output.

 

But I don't think it works in the other direction. So I don't agree that we can say that: Given there is phraseology that appears to match Hebrew or Egyptian writing styles that we can therefore conclude with confidence that the original Book of Mormon text was written in those ancient languages.

[Glenn101]

Do you believe God and his messengers speak in Jacobean English when they speak to us?

 

 

I have not had one speak to me. I only know what I have read, so it does not matter what I believe.

 

Glenn

[Glenn101]

If you read the actual letters, sections 121 and 122 are selections from various places in the letters and are not attributed to God, except possibly where I noted (vv. 7-25).

 

 

Are those letters on the Joseph Smith papers web site??

 

Thanks,

Glenn

[jkwilliams]

Are those letters on the Joseph Smith papers web site??

 

Thanks,

Glenn

Yes.

Letter to the Church and Edward Partridge, 20 March 1839

[Glenn101]

Yes.

Letter to the Church and Edward Partridge, 20 March 1839

 

 

I will have to take some time to analyse that letter. My time for such right now is limited due to my work schedule and the fact that I have to rest longer now in order to be able to work. I keep finding myself nodding off while working with my computer, but that is much better than nodding off at the whell of my car.

 

Glenn