Project Reason is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit foundation devoted to spreading scientific knowledge and secular values in society. The foundation draws on the talents of prominent and creative thinkers in a wide range of disciplines to encourage critical thinking and erode the influence of dogmatism, superstition, and bigotry in our world.
The Reason Project has a brief article here that discusses the phrase “And it came to pass” in the Book of Mormon, explaining why it merits the repeated use of the “Absurdity” icon in its Scripture Project. This thread will show that that article grossly misunderstands the phrase in question and the significance of its usage in the Book of Mormon.
The article states:
The author of the Book of Mormon tried hard to make it sound like the King James Bible. Way too hard, in fact.
It then sardonically cites Mark Twain. Does Joseph Smith try way too hard, though?
“And it came to pass” is how the King James Version translates the Hebrew word ויהי. This word is made of the conjunction waw and the Qal imperfect conjugation of the verb היה, “to be.” This particular combined form changes the tense of the conjugation, putting it in the simple past. A literal translation would be “and it was,” “and it became,” or “and it happened.” The word is virtually exclusive to narrative, where it is very common in the Hebrew Bible, occurring 1204 times. The KJV only translates the phrase “and it came to pass” 727 times, as it can get rather repetitive translated the same way repeatedly within the same verse. It uses a number of other phrase in substitution. The Hebrew Bible has roughly 22,500 verses of Hebrew in it, giving the phrase a frequency of about 5.4%.
The phrase “and it came to pass” appears 1297 times in the Book of Mormon. There are almost 6,600 verses in the Book of Mormon, which gives the phrase a frequency of 19.7%. The discrepancy in frequency is clear and that ends the story for the Scripture Project, but there’s much more to it. As stated above, the word ויהי appears virtually exclusively in narrative in the Hebrew Bible. It very rarely occurs in poetry, prophetic literature, or law. The Book of Mormon is almost exclusively narrative, and, chapter for chapter, contains much more narrative than the Bible. There are about a dozen verses of poetry scattered around it and a few hundred verses of exclusively prophetic material. If we remove 500 verses from the Book of Mormon to account for non-narrative, we get a frequency of about 21.3%. The Book of Mormon, however, does not employ the substituting phrases that the English translations of the Hebrew Bible do.
The Hebrew Bible has much greater frequencies of non-narrative verse. This publication has, on pp. 165-84, a statistical analysis of prose v. poetry in the Hebrew Bible. It points out that the Hebrew Bible contains 900 chapters written Hebrew. It breaks down the text according to frequency of a combination of particles virtually exclusive to prose. Chapters with less than 5% frequency for the particles are purely poetic. 10-20% frequency marks mixed poetry and prose. This is where prophetic literature falls, for the most part. Over 20% marks pure prose, or historical narrative, where the word in question occurs by far with the most frequency.
392 chapters fall below 10%, meaning the word in question rarely if ever appears. To illustrate this, 40 of the 66 chapters of Isaiah have a frequency of less than 7%, but the word ויהי appears in none of them. It only appears 11 times in the other 26 chapters. The word appears 4 times total in the 150 chapters of the book of Psalms, which rises above 10% 11 times. The Wisdom books (Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Job, Proverbs, Song of Solomon) have a frequency of 0.28% for the word ויהי. The 386 chapters between 10-20% are a mixture of poetry and prose, which means the word will occur sporadically. This is primarily the major and minor prophets and large chunks of the Torah, in which the verses with the word ויהי have a frequency of around 3 to 4%. The chapters over 20% (122) are most likely to have the word. These are the historical books, which make up about a third of the Hebrew Bible. The segments of pure narrative and genealogy in these books have the same frequency of the word ויהי as the narrative and genealogy in the Book of Mormon.
When the literary genre is taken into account, the frequency of the word ויהי in the Hebrew Bible is roughly the same as in the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon was putatively written in a language which is referred to as a reformed Egyptian. It is described as a mixture of Jewish and Egyptian languages. Many recent philological discoveries show that it was not uncommon for Northwest Semitic grammar and syntax to be combined with Egyptian scripts. (For instance, see here for a version of Psalm 20:2-6 written in Aramaic with Demotic script.) The Anthon Transcript, ostensibly copied from the gold plates, shares a number of similarities with Demotic characters. The Book of Mormon would have been Hebrew or Aramaic written in an Egyptian script.
Joseph Smith was not at all trying too hard. If anything, this shows that the Book of Mormon is more closely related to Semitic literary conventions than to English. If the Reason Project is indeed concerned about reason and objectivity and not about dogmatism and intellectual dishonesty, it will remove the “Absurdity” icon from the phrase “and it came to pass” in the Book of Mormon. I am happy to provide further examples of faulty logic and misunderstanding in the Scripture Project’s assessment of the Book of Mormon and the Bible if it shows itself willing to abandon erroneous and misleading argumentation when made aware of it.
My own personal suspicion is that no such thing will happen. Most likely, this thread will engender a number of attempts to assert it doesn’t matter because the Book of Mormon is a fraud anyway. This is flagrantly begging the question, but that doesn’t seem to concern many here. I hope the Reason Project can prove my suspicions inaccurate.
You can’t blame the man for knowing bullshit when he smells it. The book of Mormon flies in the face of everything we know about North America’s history. Are we supposed to believe an 19th century charlatan over scientists and historians?
The BOM was supposedly written in “reformed Egyptian” not Hebrew. Of course, we don’t know, because the original transcripts (golden plates) were supposedly taken to heaven by the angel Moroni, and no copies were made. But no non-Mormon scholar has ever agreed that such language ever existed. So why would Smith choose the words “and it came to pass” to translate reformed Egyptian (whatever that is) to King James English in the 1800’s? It’s because he was trying to make his creation sound as religious as possible. He knew that he had to copy the KJV manner of writing, as much as he could, to create a book that would be capable of standing beside the KJV as a revelation from God.
You can’t blame the man for knowing bullshit when he smells it. The book of Mormon flies in the face of everything we know about North America’s history. Are we supposed to believe an 19th century charlatan over scientists and historians?
But every day everything we know changes, and so far nothing has come forward to preclude the Book of Mormon. Can you address the actual topic of the thread, please?
The BOM was supposedly written in “reformed Egyptian” not Hebrew.
It was written in a language that mixed Hebrew and Egyptian. I explained this and showed what that language would look like. The argument I produced is in no way compromised by Reformed Egyptian.
Bruce Burleson - 01 January 2010 06:50 PM
Of course, we don’t know, because the original transcripts (golden plates) were supposedly taken to heaven by the angel Moroni, and no copies were made.
That’s what the Anthon Transcript is.
Bruce Burleson - 01 January 2010 06:50 PM
But no non-Mormon scholar has ever agreed that such language ever existed. So why would Smith choose the words “and it came to pass” to translate reformed Egyptian (whatever that is) to King James English in the 1800’s? It’s because he was trying to make his creation sound as religious as possible. He knew that he had to copy the KJV manner of writing, as much as he could, to create a book that would be capable of standing beside the KJV as a revelation from God.
This doesn’t address my evidence, this just begs the question.
Of course, we don’t know, because the original transcripts (golden plates) were supposedly taken to heaven by the angel Moroni, and no copies were made.
That’s what the Anthon Transcript is.
Which Anthon himself said was as a result of a hoax by Martin Harris.
Which Anthon himself said was as a result of a hoax by Martin Harris.
No. Anthon denied having certified that it was legitimate, which isn’t surprising because it wasn’t recognizable to Anthon. His two letters give conflicting accounts of what happened, exactly, but Harris’ account is by far the most sound. Irrespective, the transcript has a group of characters on it that have been linked with Demotic characters, but also with some unknown scripts discovered on cylinder seals in southern Mexico. The story’s always a lot deeper than what online anti-Mormonism will let you know.
You can’t blame the man for knowing bullshit when he smells it. The book of Mormon flies in the face of everything we know about North America’s history. Are we supposed to believe an 19th century charlatan over scientists and historians?
But every day everything we know changes, and so far nothing has come forward to preclude the Book of Mormon. Can you address the actual topic of the thread, please?
This is a slight of hand here, Daniel. You say you are not interested in proving the BOMM, I suspect to sound neutral, when in fact you want to prove that the BOMM has not been disproved. Funny how all the pro-Moron web sites cover their ass with the same disclaimer, “it hasn’t been disproved”.
Daniel McClellan : sorry I haven’t picked up on this yet, but ARE you a member of the LDS church ? If so, have you been with it for long ? Or are you just thinking about joining ?
If any of those things is a “Yes” , then please hear what I have to say : The Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price, are a lot of reading so I don’t want to challenge it word by word or sentence by sentence, but instead I want to ask you a few questions . One : have you ever heard of a church member named Bringham Roberts ? You probably have because he has been an outstanding figure in Mormon history .
Brigham H. Roberts had been held forth by many as the greatest defender of Mormonism ever. He was a highly regarded spokesman and lecturer for the church. He was a talented and dedicated writer and historian. He wrote eight books on theology and nine on history , including a big 6- volume one called “The Comprehensive History of The Church ” He also wrote two books of biolgraphies and three on sermons and commentaries. He was an intellegtual dynamo for the Mormon church, and someone everyone looked up to and regarded as a great source of reliable knowledge . He was so dedicated and committed that nobody would think of doubting him. He was raised by Mormon parents and they named him after the other Mormon great Brigham Young . He was an all-around high church authority and a missionary also . He spent his adult life preaching to everyone that the Book of Mormon and Joeseph Smith were genuine and should be accepted as truth .
He did, that is, untill he reached his later years, and before he died he composed a manuscript that the Church has tried to keep in concealment ever since. They don’t want Roberts last manuscript to be examined by the public or anyone else for that matter. That’s because Robert’s finale decision about the church was negative. He said he had finally concluded that the Book of Mormon had to be a fake and that Joesph Smith was also. He felt grieved by that , but said he could no longer in good conscience,pretend to support what he discovered to be a lie. It was shocking, and he was being honest . In a nutshell, he said that The Book of Mormon was a crock of fiction and Joesph Smith was a clever con-artist , crook, charlatan, who captivated thousands of people with his charismatic style and brilliant mind. That Brigham Roberts should have spent all his life’s years expounding on the virtue and truth of the Book of Mormon and ended up believing it was all a big hoax is worth knowing; it’s a glaring testament to the failability of the Mormon “Truth”. It is really all you should need to understand what to think of that church. Brigham Roberts was a brilliant man and a dedicated scholor of LDS. What he decided should count a lot !
Another thing that should interest you and make you start wanting to try to connect more dots : If you have been to the church etc. you know that they have a lot of symbols they are very proud of and consider important to the teachings of the church. What would you say if I told you that most all those symbols and the ideas that came with them were copied from the Freemasons ? Well, it’s true ! And you can’t say that the Masons took it from the church because the Freemasons are far far far older than the Mormon church. They had those symbols etc. before Joe Smith ever came into the world. Smith , like so many men in those days aspired to be a member of the Freemason’s Lodge . It was a status thing and Masonry was associated with so much integrity and power befitting an American patriot and citizen. If you were anything worth while as a male citizen you were in the Masons. So Smith wanted very much to be a part of it all, and he indeed, did become a member. He was very agressive as a member also and tried to put himself in an authoritive posistion so he could have some say about how things were run . The trouble is, the Freemasons questioned his character and decided he was too shady a person to be accepted into the exclusive circle. They told him to leave and he was furious . It troubled him deeply and soon he -surprise—came up with a church of his own ! Strange how the Mormon church has all those neat tokens, names, and ideas….!! Trouble is the church STOLE the whole caboodle from the Freemasons !! Yup, everything from the beehive to parts of special rituals, to ideas, to names etc. etc. !! Sorry to shock you, but that is imformation every Mormon or Mormon-to-be should know.
Daniel McClellan : sorry I haven’t picked up on this yet, but ARE you a member of the LDS church ? If so, have you been with it for long ? Or are you just thinking about joining ?
If any of those things is a “Yes” , then please hear what I have to say : The Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price, are a lot of reading so I don’t want to challenge it word by word or sentence by sentence, but instead I want to ask you a few questions . One : have you ever heard of a church member named Bringham Roberts ? You probably have because he has been an outstanding figure in Mormon history .
Brigham H. Roberts had been held forth by many as the greatest defender of Mormonism ever. He was a highly regarded spokesman and lecturer for the church. He was a talented and dedicated writer and historian. He wrote eight books on theology and nine on history , including a big 6- volume one called “The Comprehensive History of The Church ” He also wrote two books of biolgraphies and three on sermons and commentaries. He was an intellegtual dynamo for the Mormon church, and someone everyone looked up to and regarded as a great source of reliable knowledge . He was so dedicated and committed that nobody would think of doubting him. He was raised by Mormon parents and they named him after the other Mormon great Brigham Young . He was an all-around high church authority and a missionary also . He spent his adult life preaching to everyone that the Book of Mormon and Joeseph Smith were genuine and should be accepted as truth .
He did, that is, untill he reached his later years, and before he died he composed a manuscript that the Church has tried to keep in concealment ever since. They don’t want Roberts last manuscript to be examined by the public or anyone else for that matter. That’s because Robert’s finale decision about the church was negative. He said he had finally concluded that the Book of Mormon had to be a fake and that Joesph Smith was also. He felt grieved by that , but said he could no longer in good conscience,pretend to support what he discovered to be a lie. It was shocking, and he was being honest . In a nutshell, he said that The Book of Mormon was a crock of fiction and Joesph Smith was a clever con-artist , crook, charlatan, who captivated thousands of people with his charismatic style and brilliant mind. That Brigham Roberts should have spent all his life’s years expounding on the virtue and truth of the Book of Mormon and ended up believing it was all a big hoax is worth knowing; it’s a glaring testament to the failability of the Mormon “Truth”. It is really all you should need to understand what to think of that church. Brigham Roberts was a brilliant man and a dedicated scholor of LDS. What he decided should count a lot !
Another thing that should interest you and make you start wanting to try to connect more dots : If you have been to the church etc. you know that they have a lot of symbols they are very proud of and consider important to the teachings of the church. What would you say if I told you that most all those symbols and the ideas that came with them were copied from the Freemasons ? Well, it’s true ! And you can’t say that the Masons took it from the church because the Freemasons are far far far older than the Mormon church. They had those symbols etc. before Joe Smith ever came into the world. Smith , like so many men in those days aspired to be a member of the Freemason’s Lodge . It was a status thing and Masonry was associated with so much integrity and power befitting an American patriot and citizen. If you were anything worth while as a male citizen you were in the Masons. So Smith wanted very much to be a part of it all, and he indeed, did become a member. He was very agressive as a member also and tried to put himself in an authoritive posistion so he could have some say about how things were run . The trouble is, the Freemasons questioned his character and decided he was too shady a person to be accepted into the exclusive circle. They told him to leave and he was furious . It troubled him deeply and soon he -surprise—came up with a church of his own ! Strange how the Mormon church has all those neat tokens, names, and ideas….!! Trouble is the church STOLE the whole caboodle from the Freemasons !! Yup, everything from the beehive to parts of special rituals, to ideas, to names etc. etc. !! Sorry to shock you, but that is imformation every Mormon or Mormon-to-be should know.
This thread managed to get shoved aside for something else, but I want you to read it Daniel, so I’m trying to bring it to the forefront again
Daniel McClellan : sorry I haven’t picked up on this yet, but ARE you a member of the LDS church ? If so, have you been with it for long ? Or are you just thinking about joining ?
If any of those things is a “Yes” , then please hear what I have to say : The Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price, are a lot of reading so I don’t want to challenge it word by word or sentence by sentence, but instead I want to ask you a few questions . One : have you ever heard of a church member named Bringham Roberts ? You probably have because he has been an outstanding figure in Mormon history .
Brigham H. Roberts had been held forth by many as the greatest defender of Mormonism ever. He was a highly regarded spokesman and lecturer for the church. He was a talented and dedicated writer and historian. He wrote eight books on theology and nine on history , including a big 6- volume one called “The Comprehensive History of The Church ” He also wrote two books of biolgraphies and three on sermons and commentaries. He was an intellegtual dynamo for the Mormon church, and someone everyone looked up to and regarded as a great source of reliable knowledge . He was so dedicated and committed that nobody would think of doubting him. He was raised by Mormon parents and they named him after the other Mormon great Brigham Young . He was an all-around high church authority and a missionary also . He spent his adult life preaching to everyone that the Book of Mormon and Joeseph Smith were genuine and should be accepted as truth .
He did, that is, untill he reached his later years, and before he died he composed a manuscript that the Church has tried to keep in concealment ever since. They don’t want Roberts last manuscript to be examined by the public or anyone else for that matter. That’s because Robert’s finale decision about the church was negative. He said he had finally concluded that the Book of Mormon had to be a fake and that Joesph Smith was also. He felt grieved by that , but said he could no longer in good conscience,pretend to support what he discovered to be a lie. It was shocking, and he was being honest . In a nutshell, he said that The Book of Mormon was a crock of fiction and Joesph Smith was a clever con-artist , crook, charlatan, who captivated thousands of people with his charismatic style and brilliant mind. That Brigham Roberts should have spent all his life’s years expounding on the virtue and truth of the Book of Mormon and ended up believing it was all a big hoax is worth knowing; it’s a glaring testament to the failability of the Mormon “Truth”. It is really all you should need to understand what to think of that church. Brigham Roberts was a brilliant man and a dedicated scholor of LDS. What he decided should count a lot !
No, none of that’s true. First of all, his first name was Brigham, not Bringham. B. H. Roberts died as faithful as ever. Knowledge of his manuscript had been made public well before his death. What it was was a tract that would critically examine the Book of Mormon to anticipate any arguments that would come up and provide responses for them. In order to anticipate the arguments, Roberts formulated a number of criticisms of the Book of Mormon to which he then responded. He maintained all the way up to his death that none of the arguments he formulated concerned him in the least regarding his testimony. He was actually working on another book at the same time, which he considered his masterpiece. It was only published 17 years ago. See B. H. Roberts, The Truth, the Way, the Life: An Elementary Treatise on Theology (ed., John W. Welch; Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University Studies, 1994). The following publications also document B. H. Robert’s faithfulness: Davis Bitton, “B. H. Roberts and Book of Mormon Scholarship,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 8/2 (1999): 60–69; Truman G. Madsen, “B. H. Roberts and the Book of Mormon,” Brigham Young University Studies 19:4 (Summer 1979): 427–445; Madsen, “B. H. Roberts after Fifty Years: Still Witnessing for the Book of Mormon,” Ensign (December 1983): 11; Daniel C. Peterson, “Yet More Abuse of B. H. Roberts (Review of The Disappointment of B. H. Roberts: Five Questions That Forced a Mormon General Authority to Abandon the Book of Mormon),” FARMS Review of Books 9/1 (1997): 69–86; John W. Welch, “B. H. Roberts: Seeker After Truth,” Ensign (March 1986): 56.
sheba - 01 January 2010 10:38 PM
Another thing that should interest you and make you start wanting to try to connect more dots : If you have been to the church etc. you know that they have a lot of symbols they are very proud of and consider important to the teachings of the church. What would you say if I told you that most all those symbols and the ideas that came with them were copied from the Freemasons ? Well, it’s true ! And you can’t say that the Masons took it from the church because the Freemasons are far far far older than the Mormon church. They had those symbols etc. before Joe Smith ever came into the world. Smith , like so many men in those days aspired to be a member of the Freemason’s Lodge . It was a status thing and Masonry was associated with so much integrity and power befitting an American patriot and citizen. If you were anything worth while as a male citizen you were in the Masons. So Smith wanted very much to be a part of it all, and he indeed, did become a member. He was very agressive as a member also and tried to put himself in an authoritive posistion so he could have some say about how things were run . The trouble is, the Freemasons questioned his character and decided he was too shady a person to be accepted into the exclusive circle. They told him to leave and he was furious . It troubled him deeply and soon he -surprise—came up with a church of his own ! Strange how the Mormon church has all those neat tokens, names, and ideas….!! Trouble is the church STOLE the whole caboodle from the Freemasons !! Yup, everything from the beehive to parts of special rituals, to ideas, to names etc. etc. !! Sorry to shock you, but that is imformation every Mormon or Mormon-to-be should know.
I’m well aware of the sources of the symbols used by the Latter-day Saints, and the above is another gross misrepresentation. Please stay on topic in the future.
This is a slight of hand here, Daniel. You say you are not interested in proving the BOMM, I suspect to sound neutral, when in fact you want to prove that the BOMM has not been disproved. Funny how all the pro-Moron web sites cover their ass with the same disclaimer, “it hasn’t been disproved”.
