If a book thought to be taken from ancient plates is a true record, why is it in King James 17th English? Why does it plagiarize so many parts of the King James bible and often make the same mistakes King James made?

My real question is this: How do so many remain believers when the fact stands that ancient plates quoting Isaiah and Christ would undoubtedly sound differently from the family bible in 17th century English?

Thoughts?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/05/2013 03:33AM by Mormon-0|Science-1.

I've wondered the same thing too. Why use a bible that was propaganda for the Church of England? The reason, of course, is that the BOM is a fraud. Why do people remain believers? Denial? Wishful thinking?

The day I put two and two together I couldn't believe I had missed such a relevant sign that the BOM is a poorly written fraud. If only I'd realized this earlier on...*sighs.

It is depressing and upsetting that so many of us have been led almost trancelike into membership of the Mormon Church, and into giving ourselves over to blind obedience without question.
The BoM and its KJ similarity is just one of many obvious problems that the fraudulent LDS prophets and apostles are completely unable to answer.
Indeed, why didn't all the members know about the 2nd Anointing, especially those of us who worked tirelessly and faithfully in the Temple as workers and staff for so many years? It is beyond belief that the 2nd Anointing is being performed in Temples especially on Sundays, when Temples are supposed to be shut, and all this to keep it from the knowledge of the rest of the membership. What utter despicable arrogance.
Why all the insulting and disturbing secrecy of this abomination of a Temple ordinance that continues now even as we speak?

I have been a member for more than 50 yrs.Could I have someone explain to me about what the 2nd anointing is. I also thought that temples were closed on Sunday. I really like reading all of the interesting thoughts and messages that are posted. I have really opened my eyes for the last couple of months, my wife and I don't plan on attending any more church service. Thanks everyone it is a big LOAD off my shoulders. IT REALLY makes us MAD as HELL in knowing what a WAIST of TIME and $$$$ that we have put in over the Years. We have truly been led down a long and DEAD-END-- ROAD. I never thought that we have been so STUPID and DUMB and DENSE for so LONG. Thanks everyone.

Thanks bc for the posting it for us, that answered the question that I had. It sounds like the BIG SHOTS in SLC want those chosen to feel like they are the chosen and keep your mouth shut and continue to open up your wallet. What a BUNCH of BS. Thanks much!

I have records of Brigham Young , Heber Kimball , and John D Lee with wives all doing this at the same time . I found this about 20 years ago. I always assumed it was an ongoing thing.

We didn't realize it sooner because we had priorities other than seeing problems with the church's story. Usually the priorities were keeping our families and social networks intact. So the little bit of insight that can lead to bigger insights and possibly a lot of trouble gets set aside. We are no different from other human beings in that respect, although that tendency is quite a bit stronger in Mormonism than society as a whole. Mormonism punishes you for straying too far outside the lines with the threat of losing your belonging--a very potent threat for most people!

Most of the early church membership couldn't read(?)
It provided answers to contemporary questions such as the origin of the local burial mounds
Charismatic early leaders (who don't actually analyse the book in any detail).
People encouraged to 'know' it's true based on feelings rather than analysis.
Constant new revelation giving new insight into the path of salvation.

I can accept the glossing over of the plagiarism in 1830's burnt over district.
But 2013.

Seriously?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/05/2013 05:54AM by arend.

Actually, most people at the time did read and the book they most read was the King James version. The bible worse is the JST where Smith not only misses ALL the errors of the KJV but adds more! The errors, of course, were not intentional in the KJV but were intentional in the JST to match some of Smith's distortions.

In my case I was able to accept that Joseph Smith's translation was loose - that his personal worldview significantly impacted the translation - that since he was familiar with the Bible memories of the Bible were triggered as he translated and that's what came out.

I tried to accept a loose translation as well, but then I continually read about during the deception process...erm...translation process, that Joseph would stop reading and repeat until the transcriber had down the exact wording from the plates. This creates an issue with it just being a lose translation and making the same mistakes as King James...etc.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/05/2013 11:15AM by Mormon-0|Science-1.

Yep. I still go through that by assuming that it was somewhere in the middle and not taking those quotes too seriously (plus I had minimal exposure to the quotes - I had heard of them second hand and did the magic waive of the hand that I took it on faith and and humility that I didn't completely understand it.)

Also of note is that although I was aware there were repeated passages I didn't know the details. I was really good as a TBM of not looking too close at things I didn't want to see.

However, in the end the primary reason I determined I no longer believed was because I didn't buy that the BoM was true.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/05/2013 11:23AM by bc.

That's just it.... We Mormons supposedly believe in the bible "as far as it's translated correctly", but then we continue to use a 17th Century King James translation instead of a modernday translation, which is far more accurate.

Does that make any sense to you? You'd think the church would be seeking the most accurate translation of any of its scriptures which tosses the KJV out the window.

With over 4000 changes to the BOM and plenty were in fact doctrinal and even the nature of god is changed multiple times how can it be that the Bible can be called out for its translation error's and not the 4000 errors that god got wrong in a supposedly more pure rendition?

Pot calling the Kettle black! Why did I not see this before?

It's due to the lack of informed consent. Attention was diverted and key information omitted. That's why.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/05/2013 04:50PM by AmIDarkNow?.

Even more astonishing is that the revelations in the D&C are ALSO mostly in King James English (the actual words dictated by God himself!) and they are full of grammatical errors!

The English of 1611 had its grammatical rules, many of which were quite different from the grammatical rules of modern English. Although they were not always as strictly observed by the English of that time, there was not a lot of latitude. Many usages we now consider "correct English" were barely coming into use then, and were thus "incorrect." For example, "thou" "thee," "thy," and "thine" were used to refer only to the single (singular) person being addressed; "ye," "you," "your" and "yours" were used only when addressing more than one person, or a person to whom great respect was due. ("Ye" was the subject form, "you" the object form.) They were not interchangeable, any more than "I" and "we" are interchangeable in modern English. Nor were "ye" and "you" interchangeable, any more than "they" and "them."

"He has" is modern English. No Elizabethan would say that, but rather "he hath." ("Has" does not occur at all in the King James Bible, but 134 times in the Doctrine and Covenants, along with 100 occurrences of "hath.") The correct possessive for "it" in King James' time was not "its," as in modern English, but "his." (See the first chapter of Genesis for numerous examples.)

Surely if God were speaking modern English, he would not say things like "you is" or "we am," "Are Joseph here? Yes, they art." Nor would he arbitrarily switch from archaic English to modern English, often within the same sentence. And yet that is precisely the kind of ungrammatical imitation of King James English in Mormon scriptures. Here are some examples:

In D&C 3:10 God is speaking to Joseph only: "...repent of what thou hast done, which is contrary to the commandment which I gave you, and thou art still chosen..." (unnecessary switching from singular to plural and back again)

In D&C 6 God speaks to Oliver Cowdery, especially from v. 16 on. From verses 16 to 20, God addresses Oliver correctly with the singular forms "thou," "thee," etc. But from verse 21 to the end, he addressed Oliver incorrectly with the "you" (plural) forms. Similar switching back and forth are in sections 8 and 9.

At D&C 6:16 God says, "...there is none else save God that knowest thy thoughts..." It should be "knoweth," of course: "knowest" can only be used if "thou" is the subject: "thou knowest."

At D&C 105:1 God says, "“Verily I say unto you who have assembled yourselves here that you may learn my will....” (incorrect use of "you" as subject.)

In D&C 10 God is speaking to Joseph Smith. In the first fourteen verses he addresses Smith using the plural forms of "you" a total of 28 times. Then in verse 15 he correctly reverts to the singular: “..[Satan] has put it into their hearts to get thee to tempt the Lord thy God, ..”

The same kinds of error are also frequent in the Book of Mormon:

2 Nephi 1:30-32, Lehi speaks to Zoram (as divinely translated by God's inspired translator): "And now, Zoram, I speak unto you: Behold, thou art the servant of Laban...if ye shall keep the commandments of the Lord, the Lord hath consecrated this land for the security of thy seed with the seed of my son." (incorrect switching between singular and plural)

2 Nephi 3:1, Lehi says: "And now I speak unto you, Joseph, my last-born. Thou wast born in the wilderness of mine afflictions; yea, in the days of my greatest sorrow did thy mother bear thee. (incorrect switching between singular and plural)

Mosiah 2:19-20, King Benjamin says: "O how you ought to thank your heavenly King! ... if you should render all the thanks and praise..." (object form used as subject; should be "ye"; also verses 21, 34, 40, also 4:10, 21, 5:15. More examples of "you" incorrectly used as a subject: Mosiah 12:25, 30; 13:10; 18:10, 13; 24:14; 29:13; Alma 5:6, 16, 19, 20, 22, 55; 7:6, 17, 27; 9:18; 32:28, 30, 34; 37:16; 38:2; many others)

Alma 36 through 42 contain Alma's advice to his sons, each chapter addressed individually to the named son.. He repeatedly uses "ye" and "you" (plural) rather than the singular "thou" and "thee", although occasionally also using the singular (as in 36:3)

These are only a sampling of hundreds of other examples that could be cited, where God (or God's divinely inspired translator) is ungrammatical. Over the years, the Mormon church has corrected over 3,000 errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation and awkward wording in the Book of Mormon since its first publication in 1830, such things as "they was," "he seen," which would have been obviously incorrect to an educated speaker of modern English. One would think they would correct the many violations of King James era grammar as well. Especially if that style of English is God's preferred language when communicating with modern English speakers.

Brilliant!

Thanks Richard, very interesting.

Thanks Richard very interesting. I wish that we were all as smart and informed as You. YOU have opened both of our eyes here in Idaho. NO more lds meetings for us.

Thanks for bringing this up. It always bothered me too.

I've also noticed "ye" (second-person plural personal pronoun) being used to address a single person (second-person singular), as well as switching between "ye" (old English) and "you" (modern English).

I always figured Joe received the revelations through spirit and was just too ignorant to transcribe them properly to English ...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/05/2013 03:33PM by jackjoseph.

It's also interesting to see the changes made to the Book of Commandments when republished as D&C:

http://www.2think.org/hundredsheep/boc/boc_main.shtml (The chapters with the blue dots have the big changes)

Yeah, but Richard, he's GOD!

:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

the Book of Mormon was COMPLETELY MADE UP.
Even as a 14 year old girl, I could see that. The worst thing the missionaries do is hand people a copy of the BOM to read. It's like handing over the evidence. It's such a laughably bad fake.

Most people aren't aware of the mess of problems with the KJV Bible, so why would Mormons be any different? I explained that whole thing _with_ citation to a bunch of Christians and they completely flipped out. Then I made it even worse by explaining the problems with every single version of the Bible out there. I must have gotten lucky. Normally people just get angry at me, but I had a lot of seriously distraught people. My intent is knowledge and truth.

" Misquoting Jesus" does shake faith. I didn't want to know that my favorite NT stories were additions.

I questioned all the plagiarism in the BoM with my last bishop. His apologetic response was that gawd gives the same words to all of his prophets.

http://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V26N01_23.pdf

links to lavina fielding andersons famous chronology.

Skip down to 18 September 1985. Stan Larson wrote a paper comparing the book of mormon's sermon on the mount with the earliest biblical versions, and concluded it's errors would date it with the King James Version.

Larson works for the church as a scripture translation researcher and is told he can resign or be fired.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/05/2013 03:17PM by crom.

On my mission I discovered there were JST's for some of the plagiarized bible verses that weren't incorporated into the BOM. When I asked my mission president "WTF?", he said that Joe must have noticed those parts were similar to bible sections and just switched to copying his bible since that's so much easier than revelation.

Oh, it's so nice to think freely now and not suppress logic!