KJV translation errors in the Book of Mormon


Question: If the Book of Mormon is an accurate translation, why would it contain translational errors that exist in the King James Bible?

This page is still under construction. We welcome any suggestions for improving the content of this FAIR Answers Wiki page.

Introduction to Question

The Book of Mormon contains quotations from the King James Version of the Bible (Hereafter "KJV"). These quotations contain what are now considered to be translation errors on the part of the translators of the KJV. Thus the Book of Mormon includes some anachronistic, erroneous elements in its translation. Our critics ask “if the Book of Mormon is ‘the most correct book of any on earth,’ why would it contain translational errors that exist in the King James Bible?”[1]

There are actually two separate questions that arise when confronted with the KJV translation errors in the Book of Mormon. One is the question of whether the errors indicate that Joseph Smith plagiarized from the King James Bible. The other question is whether the Book of Mormon's translation errors change the meaning of the text so drastically as to mislead the reader into bad understandings of God. Joseph Smith declared that the Book of Mormon was the most correct book on earth not because it contained no translation errors, but because by following what the Book of Mormon teaches, a person would get closer to God and his nature than by reading any other book. Thus, Latter-day Saints and others interested in the Book of Mormon are concerned with the book's ethical message and whether these translation errors alter the quoted passages' meaning so much as to distort that ethical message. We'll deal with the latter question first.

Royal Skousen, a Latter-day Saint linguist and scholar of the textual history of the Book of Mormon, has given a definitive and exhaustive list of what can be considered translation errors. In some cases, the translation errors are legitimately errors. While the errors do change the meaning of the passages, they do not necessarily change the intent of them. In some cases, the errors are merely translation variants (rather than errors) where one variant is not necessarily superior to another. In some cases, the intent of the passage is changed, but the changed intent does not reflect an inaccurate doctrinal understanding. It doesn't give us a wrong view about God, who he is, and what we need to understand about him to become like him.

Below is a table that contains all of them including their location in the scriptures, the supposed erroneous translation, and commentary on the change. They are organized in the order they appear in the Book of Mormon. In the commentary section we will explain how, even given the translation errors, the Book of Mormon does not drastically alter the KJV passages' ethical message so much that they don't get an accurate understanding of God and his nature even given those errors.

Location in Canon Erroneous Translation Passage Commentary
1. Isaiah 2:4 ~ 2 Nephi 12:4 Rebuke "and he shall judge among the nations and shall rebuke many people" "The Hebrew verb here lacks the negative sense of rebuke—that is, it means 'to judge' rather than 'to reprove'; note the preceding parallel line: 'and he shall judge among the nations'."[2] The act of judging or arbitrating disputes between peoples may mean that God actually will rebuke peoples that come down on the negative side of God's judgements. In any dispute, there will be rebukes that God can send forth the wrongdoing that parties in a dispute have committed towards each other or that solely one party has inflicted on the other. The Lord tells us that he chastens us and scourges us because he loves us in Proverbs, Hebrews, and Helaman.[3]
2. Isaiah 2:16 ~ 2 Nephi 12:16 Pictures "and upon all the ships of Tarshish and upon all the pleasant pictures" The better translation according to Skousen is "and upon all the pleasant ships". Though there are plenty of biblical translations that render this verse similar to how it is rendered in the Book of Mormon. Isaiah intends to use the rhetorical device of accumulatio to describe everything that will be brought down so as to eliminate pride. Both ships and pleasant pictures can perhaps do that.
3. Isaiah 3:2 ~ 2 Nephi 13:2 Prudent "the judge and the prophet and the prudent and the ancient" "In the phrase 'the prudent and the ancient', the adjectival noun prudent is a mistranslation of the Hebrew word for divining. This phrase is translated, for instance, as 'the diviner and the elder' in the English Standard Version."[4] The verse concerns the Assyrians' coming invasion of Israel and carrying them away into captivity. The New Oxford Annotated Bible notes that "[t]he Assyrians were well known for deporting the leading figures and skilled craftspeople of a conquered society in order to explore their talents elsewhere in the empire and to destabilize the conquered society to prevent further revolt."[5] Thus, the essential meaning of the verse is that the most talented and wise of the society were being taken away and that can include the prudent.
4. Isaiah 3:3 ~ 2 Nephi 13:3 Orator "and the cunning artificer and the eloquent orator" "Here in the Hebrew the sense of orator is 'enchanter'. The English word derives from the Latin verb meaning 'to pray' (see definition 1 under orator in the [Oxford English Dictionary])."[6] Same commentary here as made for 2 Nephi 13:2
5. Isaiah 3:22 ~ 2 Nephi 13:22 Wimples "The changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles and the wimples, and the crisping pins" "The Hebrew word refers to a wide or flowing cloak. The English word used by the King James translators, wimple, is quite different: 'a garment of linen or silk formerly worn by women, so folded as to envelop the head, chin, sides of the face, and neck; now retained in the dress of nuns' (the first definition under the noun wimple in the Oxford English Dictionary)."[7] The verse is using the rhetorical device of accumulatio to emphasize everything that will be taken from the "daughters of Zion" (v. 17) so that they will be humble. Whether a cloak or a wimple, it doesn't change the intent of the verse.
6. Isaiah 3:22 ~ 2 Nephi 13:22 Crisping pins "The changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles, and the wimples, and the crisping pins" "The modern-day equivalent of crisping pin would be curling iron. The Hebrew is generally interpreted here as referring to purses or handbags."[8] Same commentary as that given for 2 Nephi 13:22.
7. Isaiah 3:24 ~ 2 Nephi 13:24 Rent "and instead of a girdle, a rent" "There are two Hebrew verbs, both with identical consonants, but with different meanings: one means 'to tear' and the other means 'to go around or to surround'. The noun rent derives from the first verb, but the noun rope or cord (meaning to go around the body) derives from the second. Here the word girdle takes the archaic meaning 'belt'. Modern translators have typically rendered this line in Isaiah 3:24 as 'and instead of a belt, a rope'."[9] The intent of Isaiah is to contrast the former dignity and pride of the daughters of Zion with their current shame. Interestingly, in the ancient Near East, uncovering someone's nakedness was a way to make them feel shame (see, for example, Isaiah 47:3 which reflects this attitude) so keeping "rent" (i.e. cut/gap) where perhaps a person's belt line was would uncover someone's buttocks and genitals and is an appropriate way to make the contrast between current dignity and subsequent shame or lower social status.
8. Isaiah 5:2 ~ 2 Nephi 15:2 Fenced "and he fenced it and gathered out the stones thereof" "The Hebrew verb for fenced in Isaiah 5:2 is now translated as 'to dig about' or 'to hoe or weed'; in other words, "he dug about it and cleared it of its stones."[10] The verse here is a part of verses 1–7 that describe Isaiah's song of the vineyard. The New Oxford Annotated Bible notes that it "allegorically portrays the Lord as Isaiah's friend...who worked so hard to ensure a productive vineyard only to be disappointed when it yielded sour grapes. The allegory, which is explained only at the end, draws in the audience, as many in ancient Judah would have had extensive experience in vineyards. Its conclusion makes puns to make its point, viz., the Lord expects justice (Heb "mishpat") but sees only bloodshed (Heb "mispah") and hopes for righteousness (Heb "tsedaqah") only to hear a cry (Heb "tse'aqah)."[11] Thus, the Lord does all this hard work to get a good vineyard but fails. Fencing can be a part of efforts to get a productive vineyard and those efforts can fail. Again, we have a change in meaning but no change in intent.
9. Isaiah 9:1 ~ 2 Nephi 19:1 Grievously afflict "and afterward did more grievously afflict by the way of the sea beyond Jordan in Galilee of the nations" The better translation is "but in the future he will honor Galilee of the Gentiles, by the way of the sea, along the Jordan". The Book of Mormon actually changes this verse quite a bit from the original one in Isaiah 9:1. Isaiah 9:1 reads: "Nevertheless the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation, when at the first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, and afterward did more grievously afflict her by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, in Galilee of the nations." 2 Nephi 19:1 reads: "Nevertheless, the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation, when at first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun, and the land of Naphtali, and afterwards did more grievously afflict her by the way of the Red Sea beyond Jordan in Galilee of the nations." Thus, the Book of Mormon makes the verse refer to the Red Sea and critics have made fun of the Book of Mormon for it. See here and here for commentary on that criticism. There's a question that arises now: could the translation of "grievously afflicting" actually be some sort of modification by Nephi that provides commentary on Nephi? We know that there were modifications done by Nephi to affect the meaning and intent of Isaiah's scripture as a sort of commentary on Nephi's present situation. Could there be something similar going on here?
10. Isaiah 13:12 ~ 2 Nephi 23:12 Wedge "I will make a man more precious. . .than the golden wedge of Ophir" The better translation is "more precious. . .than the gold of Ophir". Regardless of the translation, the essence is that a man is being made more precious than piece of gold from Ophir. No significant alteration in meaning.
11. Isaiah 13:21 ~ 2 Nephi 23:21 Satyrs "and satyrs shall dance there" "The Hebrew word here in the singular is sa'ir, which in the Hebrew refers to hairy demons or monsters that inhabit the deserts. This word has been incorrectly translated into its phonetically similar Greek word satyr, which refers to a woodland god that is half-human and half-beast."[12] Either way we just have a mythical creature dancing. No significant change in meaning.
12. Isaiah 14:2 ~ 2 Nephi 24:2 Handmaids "and the land of the Lord shall be for servants and handmaids" Skousen says that "In this verse the sense of handmaid is 'a female slave', especially since the paired noun servant means 'a male slave'. In biblical contexts, handmaid usually means 'a female personal servant', but not here."[13] But a handmaid in the 1828 Webster's Dictionary understands a handmaid to be a "maid that waits at hand; a female servant or attendant." Thus it's not certain why Skousen considers this to be an error.
13. Isaiah 14:4 ~ 2 Nephi 24:4 Golden city "how hath the oppressor ceased, the golden city ceased!" The better translation is "how hath the oppressor ceased, the assaulting ceased". This is Isaiah's taunt song against Babylon. Calling Babylon "the golden city" that is laid down and humbled is a great way to taunt Babylon given that Isaiah would then be contrasting their former glory with their current misery.
14. Isaiah 14:5 ~ 2 Nephi 24:5 Scepter "the Lord hath broken the staff of the wicked, the scepter of the rulers" Skousen proposes that the better translation is "the Lord hath broken the staff of the wicked, and the rod of the rulers". But the vast majority of translations render this verse with "scepter" or "sceptre" instead of rod. Either way, it does not seem that the essential object being referred to nor the ethical message change.
15. Isaiah 14:12 ~ 2 Nephi 24:12 Weaken "art thou cut down to the ground which did weaken the nations" "There are two meanings for this verb in the Hebrew: one means 'to weaken', the other 'to defeat or to lay prostrate'. In this context, the second of these works better and is the one adopted in modern translations, such as the English Standard Version: 'How you are cut down to the ground, you who laid the nations low!'"[14] The essential message of bringing the nations down and humbling them is not altered given this variation.
16. Isaiah 14:29 ~ 2 Nephi 24:29 Fiery flying serpent "and his fruit shall be a fiery flying serpent" "The correct rendition of the Hebrew for Isaiah 14:29 should be 'a flying fiery serpent'. The compound fiery serpent is represented in the Hebrew by a single word saraf, which comes from the verb saraf 'to burn'; here we have a flying serpent whose sting burns (in other words, 'a flying poisonous serpent')."[15] Regardless, we have a mythical serpent creature on the attack. No significant alteration in meaning.
17. Isaiah 29:21 ~ 2 Nephi 27:32 Reproveth "and lay a snare for him that reproveth in the gate" "The verb reprove is used four times in the Book of Mormon, all in biblical quotes. The King James use of reprove adds a negative sense that is not in the Hebrew original. In all cases, the neutral verb judge would be a more appropriate translation."[16] The act of judging or arbitrating disputes between peoples may mean that God actually will rebuke peoples that come down on the negative side of God's judgements. In any dispute, there will be rebukes that God can send forth the wrongdoing that parties in a dispute have committed towards each other or that solely one party has inflicted on the other. The Lord tells us that he chastens us and scourges us because he loves us in Proverbs, Hebrews, and Helaman.[17]
18. Isaiah 52:15 ~ 3 Nephi 20:45 Sprinkle "so he shall sprinkle many nations" The Hebrew verb for sprinkle doesn't make sense in context here. Other translations have made this verse something like "the nations shall marvel upon him". Joseph Smith in his "New Translation" of the Bible replaced sprinkle with gather, showing the difficulty of rendering this verse. Scholars today are still not certain about the meaning of the Hebrew. If that's the case, then this can't be considered a translation error. At worst, it can only be a translation variant.
19. Micah 5:14 ~ 3 Nephi 21:18 Groves "and I will pluck up thy groves out of the midst of thee" "Here the noun grove is used to refer to a sacred grove used for cultic rites. However, the original Hebrew in these passages refers to Asherim, that is, wooden images of the Canaanite goddess Asherah."[18] Given that 'groves' refers to areas where cultic, idolatrous rites were practiced, the Book of Mormon does not alter the essential message of Isaiah in its essence: that idolatry is wrong.

A closer look at these duplicate Isaiah texts actually provides us an additional witness of the Book of Mormon's authenticity

A closer look at these duplicate texts actually provides us an additional witness of the Book of Mormon's authenticity.[19] One verse (2 Nephi 12꞉16), is not only different but adds a completely new phrase: "And upon all the ships of the sea." This non-King James addition agrees with the Greek (Septuagint) version of the Bible, which was first translated into English in 1808 by Charles Thomson. It is also contained in the Coverdale 1535 translation of the Bible.[20] Such a translation was "rare for its time."[21]

John Tvedtnes has also shown that many of the Book of Mormon's translation variants of Isaiah have ancient support.[22]

This throws a huge wrench into any critic's theories that Joseph Smith merely cribbed off of the King James Isaiah. Why would Joseph Smith crib the KJV including all of its translation errors but then go to the trouble of finding the one phrase, "upon all the ships of the sea", from the Greek Septuagint and 1535 Coverdale Bible and make sure that his translation of Isaiah had support from ancient renderings of Isaiah as well? It's obviously possible that he did, but highly unlikely.

The only description of the translation process that Joseph Smith ever gave was that it was performed by the "gift and power of God"

We do not know the specific mechanism by which the biblical passages were included in the translation, therefore we cannot answer this question definitively based upon current historical information. The only description of the translation process that Joseph Smith ever gave was that it was performed by the "gift and power of God," and that the translation was performed using the "Urim and Thummim." Joseph Smith stated the following in July 1838:

Question 4th. How, and where did you obtain the book of Mormon? Answer. Moroni, the person who deposited the plates, from whence the book of Mormon was translated, in a hill in Manchester, Ontario County, New York, being dead, and raised again therefrom, appeared unto me, and told me where they were; and gave me directions how to obtain them. I obtained them and the Urim and Thummim with them; by the means of which I translated the plates and thus came the book of Mormon. (Joseph Smith, (July 1838) Elders Journal 1:42-43.)

That said, a well-documented textual history of the Book of Mormon and statements left by witnesses to the translation may provide us a path to some answers.

Manuscipt evidence, as well as several statements from eyewitnesses to the translation, almost definitively rules out that a Bible was consulted during the translation of the Book of Mormon.

Using the Original and Printer's Manuscripts of the Book of Mormon, Latter-day Saint scholar Royal Skousen has definitively shown that none of the King James language contained in the Book of Mormon could have been copied directly from the Bible. He deduces this from the fact that when quoting, echoing, or alluding to the passages, Oliver (Joseph's amanuensis for the dictation of the Book of Mormon) consistently misspells certain words from the text that he wouldn't have misspelled if he was looking at the then-current edition of the KJB.[23]

Witnesses to the translation process never reported that a Bible or any other book was present during the translation. Joseph performed most of the translation in the open using the stone and the hat. Thus how do we get the language from the King James version of the Bible? Given this evidence, we could assume that the Biblical passages were revealed to Joseph during the translation process in a format almost identical with similar passages in the King James Bible. Of course, it's possible that Joseph Smith dictated every portion of the Book of Mormon that quotes Isaiah to Oliver so that Joseph is always looking at the Bible and Oliver isn't; but that's less likely given the consistency with which Oliver misspells the words (wouldn't there be at least one time, throughout all the time that Joseph and Oliver were translating, where Joseph Smith hands Oliver the Bible to more efficiently copy the passages and where Oliver then spells the words correctly?) and the fact that no witnesses to the translation report a Bible in use.

When considering the data, Skousen proposes that, instead of Joseph or Oliver looking at a Bible, that God was simply able to provide the page of text from the King James Bible to Joseph's mind and then Joseph was free to alter the text as he pleased. In those cases where the Book of Mormon simply alludes to or echoes KJV language, perhaps the Lord allowed these portions of the text to be revealed in such a way that they would be more comprehensible/comfortable to his 19th century, Northeastern, frontier audience. This theology of translation may feel foreign and a bit strange to some Latter-day Saints, but it seems to fit well with the Lord's own words about the nature of revelation to Joseph Smith. The Lord speaks to his servants "after the manner of their language that they may come to understanding" (Doctrine and Covenants 1:24). Latter-day Saints should take comfort in fact that the Lord accommodates his perfection to our own weakness and uses our imperfect language and nature for the building up of Zion on the earth.


Notes

  1. ↑ Grant H. Palmer, An Insider's View of Mormon Origins (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2002) 10, 83. ( Index of claims ); Walter Martin, The Kingdom of the Cults (Revised) (Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1997), 205. ( Index of claims ); La Roy Sunderland, “Mormonism,” Zion’s Watchman (New York) 3, no. 7 (17 February 1838) off-site
  2. ↑ Royal Skousen, The History of the Text of the Book of Mormon, Part Five: King James Quotations in the Book of Mormon (Provo, UT: FARMS, 2019), 216. Bold added.
  3. ↑ Proverbs 3:11-12; Hebrews 12:5-6; Helaman 15:3
  4. ↑ Ibid. Bold added.
  5. ↑ Marvin A. Sweeney, "Isaiah," in The New Oxford Annotated Bible, ed. Michael D. Coogan, 5th ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2018), 984n3.1–12.
  6. ↑ Ibid. Bold added.
  7. ↑ Ibid., 219. Bold added.
  8. ↑ Ibid. Bold added.
  9. ↑ Ibid. Bold added.
  10. ↑ Ibid. Bold added.
  11. ↑ Sweeney, "Isaiah," 986n1–7.
  12. ↑ Ibid., 218.
  13. ↑ Ibid.
  14. ↑ Ibid. Bold added.
  15. ↑ Ibid.
  16. ↑ Ibid. Bold added.
  17. ↑ Proverbs 3:11-12; Hebrews 12:5-6; Helaman 15:3
  18. ↑ Ibid., 217. Bold added.
  19. ↑ See Michael Hickenbotham, Answering Challenging Mormon Questions: Replies to 130 Queries by Friends and Critics of the LDS Church (Springville, UT: Cedar Fort Publisher, 2004),193–196. (Key source)
  20. ↑ The implications of this change represent a more complicated textual history than previously thought. See discussion in Dana M. Pike and David R. Seely, "'Upon All the Ships of the Sea, and Upon All the Ships of Tarshish': Revisiting 2 Nephi 12:16 and Isaiah 2:16," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 14/2 (2005). [12–25] link For earlier discussions, see Gilbert W. Scharffs, The Truth about ‘The God Makers’ (Salt Lake City, Utah: Publishers Press, 1989; republished by Bookcraft, 1994), 172. Full text FAIR link ISBN 088494963X.; see also Milton R. Hunter and Thomas Stuart Ferguson, Ancient America and the Book of Mormon (Kolob Book Company, 1964),100–102.; Hugh W. Nibley, Since Cumorah, 2nd edition, (Vol. 7 of the Collected Works of Hugh Nibley), edited by John W. Welch, (Salt Lake City, Utah : Deseret Book Company ; Provo, Utah : Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1988),129–143. ISBN 0875791395.. See also Royal Skousen, “Textual Variants in the Isaiah Quotations of the Book of Mormon,” in Isaiah in the Book of Mormon, ed. Donald W. Parry and John W. Welch (Provo, UT: FARMS, 1998), 376.
  21. ↑ Wikipedia, "Thomson's Translation," <http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomson%27s_Translation> (11 February 2015).
  22. ↑ John A. Tvedtnes, “Isaiah Variants in the Book of Mormon,” in Isaiah and the Prophets: Inspired Voices from the Old Testament, ed. Monte S. Nyman and Charles D. Tate Jr. (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1984), 165–78. A critic, David Wright, responded to John Tvedtnes' chapter there. Tvedtnes responds to Wright in John A. Tvedtnes, "Isaiah in the Bible and the Book of Mormon," The FARMS Review 16, no. 2 (2004): 161–72.
  23. ↑ Interpreter Foundation, "The History of the Text of the Book of Mormon," <https://interpreterfoundation.org/the-history-of-the-text-of-the-book-of-mormon/> (25 January 2020).
Retrieved from "https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/index.php?title=KJV_translation_errors_in_the_Book_of_Mormon&oldid=217018"