Did Joseph Smith Copy King James Bible Errors?

The best confirmation that the Book of Mormon used the KJV Bible is the existence of poor KJV translations copied into the Book of Mormon text. The KJV translators were fallible and they produced a few inadvertent poor transliterations. These two Hebrew words, suchah and cuppah that have been poorly translated by the KJV translators (Isaiah 4:5, 5:25). Former BYU professor Louis Midgley thought that Daniel Peterson has answered this problem, “You will notice that he [Paulson] makes a fuss out of the supposed mistranslation of cuppah and suchah in the KJV which also turn up in the Book of Mormon. He [Paulson] is apparently unaware that you [Peterson] dealt with that phony issue in your review of the John Ankerberg and ‘Dr.’ John Weldon’s book.” This this a fabricated issue? Did Dr. Peterson answer this problem adequately It was a valiant effort, but he falls way short of defusing the issue.

Cuppah = Canopy or Defense

Peterson waxes his way in this argument on translation errors copied into the Book of Mormon: “But does the Book of Mormon’s ‘defense’ represent to serious a distortion of Isaiah’s meaning, so serious an error, as to call into question its own antiquity. I think not.” It is not the seriousness of the infraction that is very important. The fact that it is there shows that the Book of Mormon author used the KJV Bible and not ancient documents. It is supposed that Joseph Smith had no King James Bible to aid him in his translation. Compare the KJV with the NKJV at Isaiah 4:5:

Isa 4:5 “And the LORD will create upon every dwelling place of mount Zion, and upon her assemblies, a cloud and smoke by day, and the shining of a flaming fire by night: for upon all the glory shall be a defence.” KJV

Isa. 4:5 “The Lord will create above every dwelling place of Mount Zion, and above her assemblies, a cloud and smoke by day and the shining of a flaming fire by night. For over all the glory there will be a covering.” NKJV

Most modern translations have “canopy” or “covering.” Strong’s defines the Hebrew root word chuppah as, “to cover, overlay, wainscoted, covered with boards or paneling,” “to cover,” or “overlay.” It is the existence of the poor translation in the Book of Mormon that is very important. The argument is like this: Since the King James translators made a poor choice in the translation, and this same poor translation exists in the Book of Mormon, ergo, the Book of Mormon writer can only be utilizing the KJV Bible and not gold plates. Peterson admits” Their reading of chuppah is, it must be admitted, correct. It has the support of the majority of modern translations. Peterson attempts to make the case that a defense can be a type of shelter or canopy. He says, “The ancient Greek Septuagint, on the other hand, as pase te doxe skepasthestai, in which the final verb is clearly related to the nouns skepas and skepe, both of which mean ‘covering’ or ‘shelter.’” Peterson then asks, “Is ‘defence’ really so very out of place in such a context?”

Every translator wants to find the best word that reflects the original meaning. If they fail to find the best word, then they compromised the meaning of the text. For example, let’s say a foreign text says “Matt Paulson was born in a building.” Technically the translation is correct in a broad sense, however, the translation is poor or imprecise. He or she should have used hospital, rather than building. Likewise, the King James translators (as good as they are) made, on a few occasions, poor translations. KJV translators fell short when they translated the Hebrew text “for upon the glory shall be a defence.” Also, out of the 17 times chuppah is used in the Bible, defence is never a means of protection from the weather. It is highly unlikely that two translators would look at a Hebrew word and come up with the same poor translation. The Isaiah 4:5 quotation in the Book of Mormon was a missed opportunity for Joseph Smith to show his translation skills and improve upon the Kin James Bible. Thus, Smith failed to exhibit that he was not utilizing the KJV in his creation of the Book of Mormon.

Suchah = Refuse or Torn

Isaiah 5:25 matches perfectly with 2 Nephi 15:25. Unfortunately, the King James scholar made a small mistake in the translation. This verse reads, “ . . . and their carcasses were torn in the midst of the streets.” The Hebrew word succah does not mean “torn” but, in fact means “filth” or “dung.” Peterson admits that the King James translators erred at Isaiah 5:25. He confesses, “Secondly, it is true that ‘refuse’ is a better translation of suchah than is ‘torn.’ However, one must ask whether the difference is really so great as to justify rejection of the Book of Mormon.” Yes. Of course, there is a difference that substantiates an essential translation problem. Smith exasperated the translation problem by not correcting the error, proving that his source must be the KJV Bible. It becomes more certain that the Book of Mormon author is looking at the KJV and not gold plates.

Yet, Peterson must admit that Smith’s translation of suchah as “torn” is a poor choice of words. He is perplexed about this issue and be cannot suggest a logical solution for the matching of the translator’s error. Left without a clue, Peterson attempts to say that the poor translations are not unimportant and then appeals to the work of other scholars who have done favorable research on this subject. Peterson has said,

Perhaps, for the same reason, there would have been more loss than gain in making alterations, even improvements, to unimportant elements of the text. (The English translation of the Book of Mormon is unafraid to make changes in quoted biblical texts, as the works of scholars as John A. Tvedtnes and John Welch . . . make abundantly clear)

Likewise, Tvedtnes and Welch have no explanation for the translation error. Peterson has not offered any real solution. His speculation that there would be more “loss than gain in making the alteration” is naive is not ludicrous. FARMS contributor Kevin L. Barney admits, “I agree with Shepherd that translation errors appear in the KV an that some of these are reflected in the Book of Mormon.”