Continuing with more
of our reader’s comments and our responses, and information about Royal
Skousen’s Critical Test Project and Webster’s monumental dictionary.
11. Commend. “and now I would commend
you to seek this Jesus” (Ether 12:41)
Skousen: We would say "recommend,"
and that should be the word here, not "commend."
But what about Christ on the
cross, when it is said, “And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice,
he said, Father, into thy hands I commend
my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost” (Luke 23:46). Obviously,
he would not say, Father, I recommend my spirit.
Webster defined commend in 1828
as "to commit," "to entrust," "to make acceptable or more acceptable," "to send."
Thus, the word is correctly
used. The Lord, about to die, "commended" his spirit to his Father, i.e., he
committed his spirit, he entrusted his spirit, he had made his spirit more
acceptable to God, he was sending his spirit to his Father. All of these make
sense, but "recommend" does not.
Once again, Joseph chose the
correct English word and the scribe wrote it down correctly.
12. Counsel. “Counsel the Lord in all thy doings”
(Alma 37:37). Also, “Counsel your elder
brothers in your undertakings” (Alma 39:10).
Skousen points out that the word
"counsel" by itself does not convey what was intended, and in 1920, a revision
was made of these two scriptures, and the word “with” was added after the word
“counsel.”
However, in 1828, Webster points
out that the word “counsel” was not a one way, arbitrary dictation of what
should or should not be done, but meant: “to consult," "to have an interchange of
opinions,” also a "deliberation and an examination of consequences” also “to judge
with caution.”
Thus, counseling the Lord meant
to not only have an "exchange of ideas," "but to examine the consequences," as well
as "to judge with caution"—all of which would be acceptable behavior in dealing
with God. As the Lord has said, “Come now, and let us reason together,
saith the LORD” (Isaiah 1:18)
In addition, in counseling with
elder brothers, both senses of Webster’s use of the word would be correct. Again, Joseph used the right word and phraseology.
13. Put. “Yea come unto me and bring forth works of righteousness and ye shall
not be put down” (Alma 5:35).
The typesetter, John Gilbert,
for the 1830 edition, changed it to “hewn down” and Skousen believes it should
be “cut down,” though there is no original to compare it against.
On the other hand, one of the
definitions for “put” in Webster’s 1828 dictionary is the meaning, “to thrust
aside,” and also “to discard.”
Thus, the statement in the
verse, “ye shall not be put down” would be rendered in meaning, “you shall not
be thrust aside into the fire,” or “you shall not be discarded and put into the
fire.” Either way, the word “put” would be correct, even though by today’s
standards it sounds out of rhythm in the sentence.
Again, Joseph translated
the correct word and the scribe wrote it down correctly, even though Skousen
doesn’t like that word used.
14. Rejected. “Wherefore wicked
are rejected from the righteous,
and also from the tree of life” (1 Nephi 15:36)
Skousen claims this should have
been rendered "separated."
However, "separated" is a mild
term, meaning "parted," "disconnected," and "disunited,"
while "rejected" means to “refuse to grant or accept," "rebuff, to discard as
useless," "to cast out or eject,” all of which is a far stronger act than
"separation." Which is consistent with the fact that “God cannot look upon sin”
(Habakkuk 1:13), nor tolerate even the slightest amount of evil. Evil is
rejected by the righteous, not just separated. Therefore, the righteous reject
the wicked, and during the thousand years of the millennium, when Satan will be
bound, it will be because evil has been rejected by the righteous.
Thus, the word Joseph Smith translated
as rejected, is the correct word and the scribe wrote down correctly.
15. Shock. “And
it came to pass that the Lord said unto me: Stretch forth thine hand again unto
thy brethren, and they shall not wither before thee, but I will shock them, saith the Lord, and this
will I do, that they may know that I am the Lord their God”
(1 Nephi 17:53).
Skousen claims this
is the wrong word, that it should have been “shake,” to agree with the
following up verse: “And it came to pass that I stretched forth my hand unto my
brethren, and they did not wither before me; but the Lord did shake them, even according to the word
which he had spoken.”
However, the word
“shock” in 1828 New England, according to Webster, also meant "to “shake,” i.e.,
that is the “verb transitive” (an action verb with a direct object) of “shock”
is to “shake by sudden collision,” to “meet with force; to encounter," "to strike
or cause to recoil.”
This is exactly what
happened. Nephi’s touch "shocked" his brothers and the result “shook them,”
probably violently.
Thus, Joseph Smith’s
original word “shock” is correct, and the scribe wrote it down correctly.
16. Fathers. “Wherefore,
the record of my father, and the genealogy of his fathers, and the more part of all our proceedings in the wilderness
are engraven upon those first plates of which I have spoken”
(1 Nephi 19:2)
Skousen claims that
the word “forefathers” should have been used, not “fathers.” However, in the
Hebrew of the time, the word “fathers” meant forefathers, as shown in (1 Nephi
3:19; 4:2, 3; 5:14, 16; 6:1; 15:14; 17:23, 33, 34, 35, 40; 19:10, 15; 22:6—only
twice in 1 Nephi is forefathers used and both cases used along with fathers
having the same meaning).
Thus, Joseph used the correct word once again and it was written down correctly by the scribe.
17. What. “I,
Nephi, did make a record upon the other plates, which gives an account, or
which gives a greater account of the wars and contentions and destructions of
my people. And this have I done, and commanded my people what they should do after I was gone; and that these plates should
be handed down from one generation to another, or from one prophet to another,
until further commandments of the Lord” (1 Nephi 19:4).
Skousen claims that
“what” is in error, and the word should be “that.”
However, Webster
tells us “that” is a Pronoun or a noun, as well as a pro-sentence, the
substitute for a sentence already spoken or written, to save the repetition of
it as in –
“When Moses heard that he was
content” (Leviticus 10:3). On the other hand, “what” is defined as “a
substitute for a sentence or clause of a sentence to follow,” i.e., “the plates
were to be handed down from one prophet to another in each succeeding
generation.”
Again, Joseph Smith used the
correct word and the scribe wrote it down correctly.
(See the next post, “The
Critical Text Project or Webster’s 1828 Dictionary: An Interesting
Comparison-PtX,” for more of the reader’s comments and our responses, and
information about Royal Skousen’s project and Webster’s monumental dictionary)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment