Author Topic: Book Of Mormon False Language  (Read 1214 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


  • Guest
Book Of Mormon False Language
« on: Sat Jul 15, 2017 - 20:56:34 »
In the original edition of the Book of Mormon, there is much evidence of fraud—that is, the use of words, phrases, and sentences that reveal an obvious attempt to deceive. Instances of this are so numerousand so blatant they cannot be ignored. The following provide just a few examples.

• Alma 37:38, dated at 73 B.C., speaks of the people using a “compass.” However, such an instrument was NOT invented until about A.D. 1100. How could there be a divinely inspired translation of a word describing something that did not exist? This is a mark of fraud.

• 1 Nephi 18:25, dated at 589 B.C., speaks of “horses” and “asses.” But, these animals were unknown
in the Western Hemisphere until the Spaniards introduced them about 450 years ago. Can anyone
honestly believe that such a bungled mistake occurred as a result of divine revelation?

• Ether 9:19 speaks of “elephants” being in America when the Jaredites arrived, which was supposed
to have been around 2250 B.C. However, it is a well-known fact that elephants were not native to
America. To suggest that they were is absurd, and proves the Book of Mormon to be erroneous. If
someone were to argue that elephants might possibly have been brought to America in the Jaredites’
boats, such an argument could be disproved easily since elephants were not native to Bible lands either.

• Surprising as it may seem, no less than six times the Book of Mormon employs the abbreviation
“&c” (and so forth), a usage peculiar to the nineteenth century (subtitle of 2 Nephi; Jacob 1:11;
Mosiah 8:8; 23:5; Alma 3:5). It can hardly be suggested that such a symbol is a “translation” from
ancient writings. This kind of mistake is clear and compelling evidence of the recent origin of the

• In Jacob 7:27, the French word adieu occurs. But how could a modern French word have found its
way into those ancient plates? This is additional evidence of fraud, and presents grounds for rejecting
the Book of Mormon.

• In Jacob 3:11 and Mosiah 29:14, the word “faculties” appears. However, this is a term dating back
no earlier than middle English. Strange, indeed, that it would be “translated” from a word on an ancient plate dating over 1,000 years earlier.

• 2 Nephi 29:3 reads, “A Bible, A Bible, we have got a Bible...” This statement is made in reference tothe Jewish Old Testament, which is dated at about 550 B.C. However, the word “Bible” is the English transliteration of the Greek term “biblos,” which came into use over 1,500 years later. In using the word “Bible,” the writer of the Book of Mormon made a serious blunder that shows the book to be of recent origin and, hence, fraudulent in its claims.

• 3Nephi 15:21 is a word-for-word quote of John 10:16 (from the King James Version). However, this version is somewhat less than 400 years old. And, to make matters worse, the Book of Mormon
even quotes the italicized word “and” that was supplied by the King James translators. Here, the
writer of the Book of Mormon unwittingly demonstrates his work to be plagiarism.

• The entire fourteenth chapter of Mosiah, made up of 12 verses, is a duplication of Isaiah 53:1-12.
Interestingly, all eleven of the italicized words in the King James text are quoted, yet none is placed
in italics, which indicates that the writer of the Book of Mormon apparently was unaware that the
KJV translators used italics to highlight words that were not in the original manuscripts employed in
the translation process. Thus, Mosiah 14 had to have been copied from the King James Bible.

• Moroni 7:45, which is a quotation of 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 in the King James Version, is another example of fraud. In citing this verse, the writer included the italicized word “easily” (“ not easily
provoked”). However, the word “easily” is not in the original, but was placed there (incorrectly) by
the King James translators. [It is omitted, correctly, from later versions.] That the writer included this
word shows that Moroni 7:45 was copied from the KJV.

• In 2 Nephi 31:13 and other places, reference is made to the “Holy Ghost.” But, the term “ghost” did
not come into use until many hundreds of years after the Book of Mormon was supposed to have
been inscribed on ancient plates. That the writer borrowed this from the King James Bible is indisputable.

• The word “baptism” is found in 2 Nephi 31:13 and other places. But this cannot be an actual translation of a word found on ancient plates, because “baptism” is a transliteration of the Greek word baptisma, and was peculiar to the King James Version. This word is clearly a copy of an early English term, demonstrating again the fraudulent nature of the Book of Mormon.

• The word “epistle” in 3 Nephi 3:5 is an obvious copy from the King James Version. Like baptism,
the word “epistle” (epistolos) was left in its original Greek form, but given an English ending. This
shows the writer of the Book of Mormon was not very careful in selecting his words.

• The words “alpha” and “omega” appear in 3 Nephi 9:18. These, of course, are the English spellings
of Greek words found in the Bible (Revelation 1:8; 21:6; 22:13). Since the Book of Mormon was not
recorded in Greek, why were these words used? The simple fact is, they were copied from the King
James Version.

• 3 Nephi 20:23-26, dated at A.D. 34, refers to Moses’ prophecy about the Christ (Deuteronomy
18:15,18-19). However, the writer unwittingly used Peter’s New Testament paraphrase of this
prophecy (Acts 2:22-26), which was not written until around A.D. 63. This was almost 30 years too
soon, and thus proves the Book of Mormon is a hoax.

• In the Book of Mormon there are numerous instances where the writer uses words that were not relevant to his time. Rather, these are words peculiar to the English spoken in the early 1600s (“prayest,” “durst,” “thou,” “thee,” “thy,” “thine,” “hast,” “doth,” “knoweth,” “hearest,” “cometh,” “thirsteth,” etc.). Did God really select these words for the Book of Mormon? This obviously shows the writer’s exposure to King James terminology. [NOTE: Scores of passages in the Book of Mormon, either in part or whole, exact or paraphrased, have been taken directly from the King James Version.

Some researchers have estimated that as much as 4% can be traced to this English translation.]

These examples, and others too numerous to list here, clearly illustrate that the Book of Mormon is
not a translation from ancient plates, but is instead of rather recent origin and therefore fraudulent in its claims of antiquity.

reprinted with permission from Pastor Keith Piper.