What 1830 readers might not have understood when reading the Book of Mormon.

[Scott Lloyd]

On 3/6/2021 at 8:19 AM, champatsch said:

Is it possible that even 190 years ago, readers encountered obscure, archaic meaning in the Book of Mormon that they misread?

Contributions that might fit the bill are welcome.

I'll begin with two lexical possibilities (of many) that might have been misread. Perhaps later I will add some more, as well as some higher frequency items and some syntactic usage that might have been misread in 1830.

“therefore he was about to flatter away those people to rise up in rebellion against their brethren // and . . as he was about to do this / behold he was taken . . tried . . and condemned unto death / for he had raised up in rebellion” (Helaman 1:7–8)

Paanchi was not just on the point of doing these things, he was actually scheming to persuade others to rebel. As he was conspiring to raise a rebellion, he was condemned to death.  There's another one of these later in the chapter that someone else might like to point out and dissect.

This next one is curious, and an archaic reading is possible and perhaps the best reading. The typical reading is 'nevertheless', but but here might mean 'unless'.

“I greatly fear my case shall be awful but I confess unto God” (Jacob 7:19)

Sherem has just confessed to the people, and then utters this prospective line right before dying.  This prospective remark could have conveyed his intent, upon meeting God in the afterlife, to confess in person.

 

On 3/6/2021 at 9:03 AM, bluebell said:

Could he be saying that he fears he is beyond the point of being forgiven by God, but he is repenting anyway, just in case he's not?

I lean toward champ’s suggested alternate view of that passage as it is more consistent with our doctrinal understanding of repentance and confession.  

Edited May 12, 2021 by Scott Lloyd

[longview]

On 3/16/2021 at 2:16 PM, champatsch said:

What does "it supposeth me" mean in these passages?

Jacob 2:8
And it supposeth me that they have come up hither
to hear the pleasing word of God,
The Words of Mormon 1:2
And it supposeth me that he will witness the entire destruction of my people.
Alma 54:11
But behold, it supposeth me that I talk to you concerning these things in vain,
or it supposeth me that thou art a child of hell.

it seems to me?

it appears to me?

I am assuming that?

[longview]

On 3/16/2021 at 2:16 PM, champatsch said:

What does "it supposeth me" mean in these passages?

Jacob 2:8
And it supposeth me that they have come up hither
to hear the pleasing word of God,
The Words of Mormon 1:2
And it supposeth me that he will witness the entire destruction of my people.
Alma 54:11
But behold, it supposeth me that I talk to you concerning these things in vain,
or it supposeth me that thou art a child of hell.

it seems to me?

it appears to me?

I am assuming that?

[champatsch]

Jacob 2:8 could be 'it seems to me' or 'I believe'. WM 1:2 could be 'I expect', which is an older meaning of suppose. The two in Alma 54 could be 'I imagine' or even 'I suspect'.

[champatsch]

This next one also turns out to be an old meaning, and it is not in any previous write-ups on obsolete lexical meaning in the Book of Mormon. So there might be others out there that haven't yet been found. But it is increasingly difficult to find them. This is the only time the verb grant is used with a following infinitive in the Book of Mormon. The verb does not have its usual meaning.  Here it means 'agree', in the context of agreeing to Moroni's request. Notice that the last quote with an infinitive is Caxton (it's def. 1 in the OED), and the last example is from Shakespeare, before major American colonization. There are other very early ones like this, enough for the reasonable to dismiss the idea that all this older meaning was around in Joseph Smith's environment.

(Alma 54:20)
        Nevertheless I will grant to exchange prisoners according to your request gladly,
        that I may preserve my food for my men of war.

†1. intransitive. To agree, consent; to assent to the request of (a person: const. dative); to agree or consent to or to do (rarely at do) something. Obsolete.
1340   Ayenbite (1866) 225   Þe ilke bernþ þet to zenne graunteþ.
c1385   G. Chaucer Legend Good Women Hypermnestra. 2665   [Egiste commanded his daughter, with threats, to kill her husband;] And, for to passyn harmles of that place, She grauntyth hym.
1390   J. Gower Confessio Amantis III. 338   He..graunteth with hem for to wende.
a1400  (▸a1325)    Cursor Mundi (Vesp.) l. 16851   Ioseph..granted neuer wit wil ne werc, to þair gret felunni.
c1400   Mandeville's Trav. (Roxb.) xxx. 138   Þai graunted at do all þat he wald bidd þam do.
c1450  (▸c1400)    Sowdon of Babylon (1881) l. 250   I graunte to be his derlynge.
c1450   Jacob's Well (1900) 198   Þe freendys prayed þe preest to ley þe dede body on his asse. Þerto grauntyd he hem.
1485   W. Caxton tr. Paris & Vienne (1957) 12   At these wordes graunted Parys to goo to the sayd Ioustes.
1487  (▸a1380)    J. Barbour Bruce (St. John's Cambr.) iv. 352   I grant thar-till To ly heir mair war litill skill.
1523   Ld. Berners tr. J. Froissart Cronycles I. ccxliii. 363   He graunted to the warr with an yuell wyll.
a1547   Earl of Surrey tr. Virgil Certain Bks. Aenæis (1557) ii. sig. Aiv   Assigning me To the altar: whereto they graunted all.
a1616   W. Shakespeare Henry VI, Pt. 3 (1623) i. i. 246   The Souldiers should haue toss'd me on their Pikes, Before I would haue granted to that Act.

[telnetd]

On 3/11/2021 at 8:32 PM, Robert F. Smith said:

How is it possible for God to be responsible if it is self-marking?  You are ignoring the figurative language which goes both ways, in order to take the "skin of blackness" in the same chapter as literal, and you attribute that entirely to God

It sounds like you also believe Cain self-marked himself.

[telnetd]

On 3/11/2021 at 8:36 PM, Hamba Tuhan said:

Did the black skin of Job and Jeremiah (and other Jews who remained in Jerusalem) cover their entire bodies? Was it a permanent feature or a temporary one? And if temporary, where did it come from?

I don't understand your question.

[Hamba Tuhan]

2 hours ago, telnetd said:

I don't understand your question.

Did you read the links I provided? What was the nature of Job’s and Jeremiah’s black skin?

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, telnetd said:

It sounds like you also believe Cain self-marked himself.

Since Cain (and his descendants) are unrelated to the later markings (whatever they were), I don't see them as comparable.  However, the general rule is that God is always credited with whatever humans do.  For example, if humans go to war, win or lose, God takes the responsibility for aiding or destroying.  Usually as a consequence of some good or bad action.  Thus, when a text both claims that people marked themselves and that God did it, that ought to help you understand what is really going on.  One can see that in a variety of contexts throughout Holy Writ.

Also, from the anthropological point of view, we have to deal with etiological explanations which are frequently merely figurative.  For example, explaining how the leopard got his spots, or that woman was taken from a rib of man, or that eating some fruit resulted in knowledge of good and evil, etc.  No such explanations are meant to be taken literally.  The biblical text in such cases is not meant to be a science or linguistic text, but is meant to be taken as poetic, etiological literature.  Even children reading such literature understand that it is on a par with fantasy.  Thus, the Book of Mormon describing some Native American complexions as literally "black" makes no sense in an actual Native American context.  We might want to look more deeply to understand what is actually going on.

[Robert F. Smith]

On 5/12/2021 at 8:20 AM, champatsch said:

This next one also turns out to be an old meaning, and it is not in any previous write-ups on obsolete lexical meaning in the Book of Mormon. So there might be others out there that haven't yet been found. But it is increasingly difficult to find them. This is the only time the verb grant is used with a following infinitive in the Book of Mormon. The verb does not have its usual meaning.  Here it means 'agree', in the context of agreeing to Moroni's request. Notice that the last quote with an infinitive is Caxton (it's def. 1 in the OED), and the last example is from Shakespeare, before major American colonization. There are other very early ones like this, enough for the reasonable to dismiss the idea that all this older meaning was around in Joseph Smith's environment.

(Alma 54:20)
        Nevertheless I will grant to exchange prisoners according to your request gladly,
        that I may preserve my food for my men of war.

................................

Here is some odd phrasing I have been wondering about:

Alma 4:13,

WHILE OTHERS WERE ABASEING THEMSELVES[1]

Alma 7:18,

THAT YE WAS NOT IN THE STATE OF DILEMMA LIKE YOUR BRETHREN[2]

Alma 9:22,

AND THEY HAVING BEEN[3] WAXED STRONG IN BATTLE[4]

Alma 9:29,

AND YE HAD OUGHT TO BRING FORTH WORKS WHICH IS METE FOR REPENTANCE[5]

Alma 12:14

AND WE WOULD FANE BE GLAD

Alma 19:13

AND HE SUNK AGAIN WITH JOY

AND THE QUEEN ALSO SUNK[6] DOWN

BEING OVERPOWERED BY THE SPIRIT

Alma 20:30

AND THEY HAD CAST THEM OUT

AND HAD SMOTE[7] THEM

AND HAD DRIVEN THEM FROM HOUSE TO HOUSE

AND FROM PLACE TO PLACE

EVEN UNTIL THEY HAD ARIVEN TO[8] THE LAND OF MIDDONI

Alma 21:5

THEREFORE AS AARON ENTERED INTO ONE OF THERE[9] SYNAGOGUES

Alma 23:6

AS SURE AS THE LORD LIEVETH[10]....

AS THE LORD LIEVETH[11]

Alma 23:7

THAT THEY DID NOT FIGHT AGAINST GOD[12] NO[13] MORE

Alma 27:8

AND WE WILL BE THEIR SLAVES[14] UNTIL WE REPAIR UNTO THEM

THE MANY MURDERS AND SINS WHICH WE HAVE COMMITTED AGAINST THEM

---

[1] cf Isa 31:4, II Cor 11:7.

[2] ‖  II Chron 30:7, "be not ye.., and like your brethren"

[3] been P 1830 thru 1911TCC, RLDS 1908; deleted 1920 1981.

[4] cf Heb 11:34; Josh 17:13, II Sam 3:1, Lk 1:80, 2:40.

[5] ‖  Mat 3:8, "Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance" ‖  Acts 26:20; cf Mat 7:2, "mete"; is mete P 1830; is meet P^c; are meet 1837 thru 1981, RLDS 1908.

[6] cf Acts 20:9, “sunk down with sleep” [NJB & NRSV “overcome by sleep”]

[7] smote P 1830; smitten P^c 1837 thru 1981, RLDS 1908.

[8] ariven to P (OED archaic "ariven"); arriven to 1830 1837 1841 thru 1911TCC; arrived to 1840, RLDS 1908 1966 (OED); arrived in 1920    1981; cf 17:13, Mosiah 10:15.

[9] there P (OED unstressed possessive pronoun); their 1830 thru 1981, RLDS 1908; cf vs 11.

[10] lieveth 0 (OED archaic "leave, permit"); liveth P 1830 thru 1981, RLDS 1908.

[11] liev[eth] 0 (OED archaic "leave, permit"); liveth P 1830 thru 1981, RLDS 1908.

[12] ‖  Acts 23:9, "let us not fight against God" ‖  5:39; cf Wisdom of Solomon 12:14.

[13] no P 1830; any P^c 1837 thru 1981, RLDS 1908.

[14] cf Josh 9:8,11.

Edited June 12, 2021 by Robert F. Smith

[TheTanakas]

On 3/6/2021 at 10:19 AM, champatsch said:

Is it possible that even 190 years ago, readers encountered obscure, archaic meaning in the Book of Mormon that they misread?

I have not read the 1830 version but from everything I have searched, there is no indication of any doctrinal impact with
the current version.

[theplains]

On 3/9/2021 at 11:59 AM, Kevin Christensen said:

One obvious candidate for misreading has been the nature of the Lamanite curse in 2 Nephi 5:21, although that is due to the colliquial Ancient Near Eastern meaning of "skin of blackness", a phrase that only Nephi uses and that just once, Nephi being the only Book of Mormon author who was actually raised in the Ancient Near East, and therefore, the only one who would not even think about the possibility of being misunderstood

If you wish to be enlightened by some of your past *inspired* leaders on the subject, you
should read "The Way to Perfection", "The Progress of Man", and "Answers to Gospel 
Questions".

[Calm]

1 minute ago, theplains said:

If you wish to be enlightened by some of your past *inspired* leaders on the subject, you
should read "The Way to Perfection", "The Progress of Man", and "Answers to Gospel 
Questions".

Are you being serious or sarcastic?  Do you really believe Kevin is unaware of past comments?

Edited June 14, 2021 by Calm

[theplains]

On 6/14/2021 at 7:30 PM, Calm said:

Are you being serious or sarcastic?  Do you really believe Kevin is unaware of past comments?

I wasn't being sarcastic.  Past comments are summed up nicely by Boyd K. Packer - "It isn’t a question of
who said it or when; the question is whether it is true" (1977, Follow the Rule, speeches.byu.edu).