Difference between revisions of "Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon"

 
(Response)
Line 13: Line 13:
 
For a Semiticism to be strong evidence it must be a) present in the Book of Mormon b)but not common to Joseph's language environment (ie. the KJV, or English of his day.)  
 
For a Semiticism to be strong evidence it must be a) present in the Book of Mormon b)but not common to Joseph's language environment (ie. the KJV, or English of his day.)  
  
Several such examples exist.  
+
Several such constructions exist.  
  
For example, in Alma 27:22, the Nephites give the land Jershon to the Anti-Nephi-Lehi's "for an inheritance." Jershon follows a common Hebrew practice of creating names by suffixing -on to the tri-consonantal root. In this case, we have the root y-r-sh, which means among other things, "to inherit." (Hebrew y is usually represented in English with a j.) In other words, the Nephites give the land "Inheritance" to the Anti-Nephi-Lehi's for an inheritance.  
+
For example, in Alma 27:22, the Nephites give the land Jershon to the Anti-Nephi-Lehi's "for an inheritance." Jershon follows a common Hebrew practice of creating names by suffixing -on to the tri-consonantal root. In this case, we have the root y-r-sh, which means among other things, "to inherit." (Hebrew /y/ is usually represented in English with a j.) In other words, the Nephites give the land "Inheritance" to the Anti-Nephi-Lehi's for an inheritance.  
  
 
If making up names at random, one could eventually make some that fit Hebrew patterns. However, the extreme unlikelihood of an imaginary name making sense in a reconstructed Hebrew original argues against this being the case with Jershon
 
If making up names at random, one could eventually make some that fit Hebrew patterns. However, the extreme unlikelihood of an imaginary name making sense in a reconstructed Hebrew original argues against this being the case with Jershon
 
  
 
==Conclusion==
 
==Conclusion==

Revision as of 20:59, 10 July 2006

This article is a draft. FairMormon editors are currently editing it. We welcome your suggestions on improving the content.

Criticism

The Book of Mormon does not contain Hebraic or Semitic language, as one should expect.

Source(s) of the criticism

Response

Many LDS sources argue that Hebraisms exist. Some have been overly enthusiastic or operated using problematic methodology. For example, Hebrew and other Semitic languages frequently give give a verb a cognate direct object for emphasis, eg. "he dreamed a dream" or "He hit him a hitting." Since the KJV translators were frequently literal in rendering the Hebrew, the Old Testament contains many English examples of this. Thus, the presence of the cognate accusative throughout the Book of Mormon , though a valid Semiticism, cannot be used as strong evidence for the Book of Mormon.

For a Semiticism to be strong evidence it must be a) present in the Book of Mormon b)but not common to Joseph's language environment (ie. the KJV, or English of his day.)

Several such constructions exist.

For example, in Alma 27:22, the Nephites give the land Jershon to the Anti-Nephi-Lehi's "for an inheritance." Jershon follows a common Hebrew practice of creating names by suffixing -on to the tri-consonantal root. In this case, we have the root y-r-sh, which means among other things, "to inherit." (Hebrew /y/ is usually represented in English with a j.) In other words, the Nephites give the land "Inheritance" to the Anti-Nephi-Lehi's for an inheritance.

If making up names at random, one could eventually make some that fit Hebrew patterns. However, the extreme unlikelihood of an imaginary name making sense in a reconstructed Hebrew original argues against this being the case with Jershon

Conclusion

The Book of Mormon does indeed have authentic Semitic constructions in it, but LDS need to tread cautiously in establishing them.

Endnotes

None


Further reading

FAIR wiki articles

FAIR web site

  • FAIR Topical Guide:

External links

Printed material