FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
KJV italicized text in the Book of Mormon
Question: What are the criticisms of the Book of Mormon based in its use of italics and how can one respond to those criticisms?
Introduction to Question
The Book of Mormon contains quotations, echoes, and allusions from the King James Bible. The quotations contain words from the King James Bible that are placed in italics. The italics in the King James Bible indicated that the word had been added to the text to make sense of the translation. The word was not present in the original Greek or Hebrew text but was added to explain and contextualize the translation.
Some critics believe that the presence of the italics is an indication that Joseph Smith didn’t translate an ancient text and instead just plagiarized a copy of the King James Bible. Critic Jeremy T. Runnells, author of the CES Letter, explains “When King James translators were translating the KJV Bible between 1604 and 1611, they would occasionally put in their own words into the text to make the Englsih more readable. We know exactly what these words re because they’re italicized in the KJV BIble.” He then asks “What are these 17th century italicized words doing in the Book of Mormon? Word for word? What does this say about the Book of Mormon being an ancient record?”[1] The assumption seems to be that the Book of Mormon, if truly a translation of an ancient text, should either not include these words or include different words that reflect the ancient, original text of the biblical passage in question.
Other critics look at how the Book of Mormon modifies the biblical text in ways that seem to suggest that Joseph was using a 1769 edition of the King James Bible to compose the text of the Book of Mormon. For example, critic Stan Larson argued the following in a 1993 book chapter on this subject:
The Book of Mormon text often revises biblical quotations at the very point where the original 1611 edition of the KJV prints the word or words in a different typeface in order to indicate that the words are not found in the Greek. This printing device was both inconsistently and sparsely applied in the 1611 KJV and improved in the 1769 printing. When Smith came to the KJV italics in the Sermon on the Mount, which he knew indicated that whatever was printed in italics was not in the original Greek, he would often either drop the word or revise it. The Book of Mormon sometimes revises the KJV italics that are only found in the 1769 and later printings. For example, the Book of Mormon drops the italics of the 1769 printing at Matthew 6:5, 7; 7:18 (3 Ne. 13:5, 7; 14:18), and the Book of Mormon changes the tense of the italics at Matthew 5:12 (3 Ne. 12:12). On the other hand, the Book of Mormon fails to revise places where the KJV text ought to have been printed in italics but is not. In two places the Book of Mormon copies the noun "men" from the KJV, where it is not in the original Greek and has been improperly added in the KJV.[2]:130–31
Thus Larson is arguing the essentially the same conclusion: that the Book of Mormon text cannot be a genuine translation of an ancient text. Though he’s arguing from a different angle. He doesn’t reason to his conclusion based on the mere presence of KJV italics in the Book of Mormon. He argues this based on the Book of Mormon’s interaction with the KJV italics. In some cases, the italics are simply dropped. In some cases, the italics are revised. In some cases, there is a passage that should have an italicized word but doesn’t. These considerations, and especially the Book of Mormon’s interaction with what appears to be the 1769 edition and later printings of the King James italics, date the Book of Mormon’s composition to the 1800s.
We deal with this reasoning below.
Response to Question
There’s Debate Over Whether Joseph Smith knew the meaning of the italics
Before all else, we should note that there is debate among scholars of the Book of Mormon as to whether Joseph Smith knew the meaning of the italics.
Scholar Kevin Barney outlined three lines of evidence that suggest Joseph Smith did know the meaning of the italics.
- The first is the distribution of KJV italics being revised as they come to the Book of Mormon and especially the Isaiah chapters of the Book of Mormon.
- The second is the practice of crossing out italicized words in the Joseph Smith Translation. The manuscripts are available for people today and anyone can see that there is a consciousness of the italicized words based in Joseph and/or his scribes crossing them out. The production of the JST began in 1831.
- The third is the
Why Drop the Italics?
The first point easily made against these arguments is that the italics make the English text of the Bible more readable. If Joseph Smith and God were trying to keep a good translation of the text and especially one that is readable, why wouldn’t God and Joseph Smith just keep those same italics in the Book of Mormon? It’s rather nonsense to claim
Notes
- ↑ Jeremy T. Runnells, CES Letter: My Search for Answers to My Mormon Doubts (n.p.: CES Letter Foundation, 2017), 14.
- ↑ Stan Larson, "The Historicity of the Matthean Sermon on the Mount in 3 Nephi," in New Approaches to the Book of Mormon: Explorations in Critical Methodology, ed. Brent Lee Metcalfe (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1993), 115–63.