[Page 211]Abstract: When the sons of Mosiah were returning from their preaching among the Lamanites, Ammon was accused by his brother Aaron of boasting. This article demonstrates how Ammon’s response to this charge employed wordplay involving the Hebrew roots ה-ל-ל (h-l-l) and ש-מ-ח (s-m-ch). Identifying and understanding Ammon’s use of wordplay helps us to appreciate the complexity and conceptual richness of his message.
Following their missionary experiences in “the land of Nephi” (Mosiah 28:5)1 the sons of Mosiah and their companions “did rejoice exceedingly, for the success which they had had among the Lamanites” (Alma 25:17). In fact, Ammon expressed so much elation in their success that his brother Aaron was afraid he had been carried away “unto boasting” (Alma 26:10). In Ammon’s capably crafted response to his brother, we encounter wordplay that can only be fully ascertained if his words are translated into Hebrew.2
Among its many meanings, the Hebrew root ה-ל-ל (h-l-l) — expressed by the verbal infinitives להלל (lehallel) and להתהלל (lehithallel) — can be subdivided into three principal definitions:3
- [Page 212]to shine or “flash forth light,”4 from which the name הילל (heylel), or Lucifer is believed to be derived (see Isaiah 14);5
- to praise or be praised;
- to boast or be boastful.
This root occurs nearly two hundred times in the Hebrew Bible, and in most of those instances it is rendered as to praise in the KJV and other English bible translations. Among these are the following passages:
For great is Jehovah, and praised (מהלל) greatly, And fearful He is above all gods. (1 Chronicles 16:25, Young’s Literal Translation6)They are to stand every morning to thank and to praise (להלל) the LORD, and likewise at evening. (1 Chronicles 23:30, New American Standard Bible7)Praise (הללו) ye Jehovah. Praise (הללו), O ye servants of Jehovah, Praise (הללו) the name of Jehovah. (Psalm 113:1, American Standard Version8)Our holy and beautiful house, where our fathers praised (הללוך) You, has been burned by fire; and all our precious things have become a ruin. (Isaiah 64:11, NASB)
The root ה-ל-ל (h-l-l), within its broad range of meaning, can also properly express the idea of to boast9 in English. Amid the various [Page 213]English translations of the Hebrew Bible this translation occurs more than a dozen times. These passages include the following:10
My soul shall make her boast in Jehovah (ביהוה תתהלל), in Yahweh she [my soul] will boast): The meek shall hear thereof, and be glad. (Psalm 34:2, ASV)In God we have boasted (באלהים הללנו) all day long, And we will give thanks to Your name forever. (Psalm 44:8, NASB)You will winnow them and a wind will carry them away, a whirlwind will scatter them. But you will rejoice in the LORD; you will boast in the Holy One of Israel (ביהוה בקדוש ישראל תתהלל). (Isaiah 41:16, Christian Standard Bible11)And if in a truthful, just and righteous way you swear, ‘As surely as the LORD lives,’ then the nations will invoke blessings by him and in him they will boast (ובֹו יתהללו). (Jeremiah 4:2, New International Version12)
It is also important to point out that in addition to praise and boast, the root ה-ל-ל (h-l-l) is also often translated as to glory13 in various English translations. In each of these cases where it is rendered to glory it would be equally as plausible to translate the verb as to boast. For example, in the last two examples cited above (Isaiah 41:16 and Jeremiah 4:2) the King James Version (KJV) renders each as glory rather than boast. Additional examples of this optional translation include:
1 Chronicles 16:10:
Glory ye (התהללו hithalelu) in his holy name: let the heart of them rejoice that seek the LORD. (KJV)Boast yourselves (התהללו hithalelu) in His holy name, rejoice doth the heart of those seeking Jehovah. (YLT)
[Page 214]Jeremiah 9:23–24:
Thus saith the LORD, Let not the wise man glory (יתהלל yithallel) in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory (יתהלל yithallel) in his might, let not the rich man glory (יתהלל yithallel) in his riches: But let him that glorieth glory (יתהלל המתהלל yithallel hamithallel) in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the LORD which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the LORD. (KJV)This is what the LORD says: “Let not the wise boast (יתהלל yithallel) of their wisdom or the strong boast (יתהלל yithallel) of their strength or the rich boast (יתהלל yithallel) of their riches, but let the one who boasts boast (יתהלל המתהלל yithallel hamithallel) about this: that they have the understanding to know me, that I am the LORD, who exercises kindness, justice and righteousness on earth, for in these I delight,” declares the LORD. (NIV)
As demonstrated above, different English translations of the Hebrew Bible render the verbs להלל (lehallel) and להתהלל (lehithallel) — both derived from the root ה-ל-ל (h-l-l) — as either to praise, to boast, or to glory. A key translation feature to point out is that in order for the verb to be rendered as to boast or to glory, the subject of the verb must boast or glory in someone or something (see above examples). The Hebrew equivalent of in is the preposition ב (the letter bet), which is always prefixed to the noun to which it is related. For example, the phrase “to boast/glory in Jehovah” would be expressed as “להתהלל ביהוה” (lehithallel bYahweh). One can boast/glory in the Lord as well as in one’s wisdom, strength, riches, etc.It is equally important to point out that to praise does not carry this same grammatical requirement. Rather, what we often find in the Bible is that when להלל (lehallel) is translated as to praise, the object of the verb (the Lord, for example) is often preceded by the preposition ל (the letter lamed). As with the Hebrew word for in (ב), ל is always prefixed to the object of the verb. The word ל can be translated as to or for, but when referring to the idea of praise, it is an unnecessary preposition in English grammar. So, “to praise Jehovah” would be expressed as “ליהוה להלל” (lehallel lYahweh) in Hebrew, with the ל prefixed to יהוה (Yahweh), resulting in ליהוה (lYahweh).[Page 215]With this introduction to biblical usage we can now examine Ammon’s response to Aaron’s charge of boasting. In the nine verses leading up to Aaron’s rebuke, Ammon never used the words boast or glory, and we find the word praise used only once but as a noun rather than as a verb: “Blessed be the name of our God; let us sing to his praise,14 yea, let us give thanks to his holy name, for he doth work righteousness forever” (Alma 26:8). However, following Aaron’s accusation, Ammon used the words praise, boast and glory a total of twelve times in his response. These usages appear to be an intentional repetition of Aaron’s original rebuke of boasting and need to be understood as related terms in Hebrew. Ammon’s repeated use of praise, boast, and glory are meant to counter Aaron’s implied accusation that Ammon was boasting in himself. On the contrary, Ammon’s repetitive use of these terms helped clarify that his initial words were intended to be understood as praising, boasting in, and glorying in the Lord, rather than in himself.Ammon’s response to Aaron is bracketed at the beginning and the end of his discourse by two groupings of the English words praise, boast, and glory. I propose that all these translated English words are derived from the Hebrew root ה-ל-ל (h-l-l). The first grouping of these words is found at the beginning of his response in verses 11 through 16, and the second grouping is found at the end of his discourse in verses 35 and 36. These two groupings form an inclusio15 similar to those often found in the Hebrew Bible and in Rabbinic literature. Broken into the two groupings, his words read:
I do not boast in my own strength or in my own wisdom;16 but behold, my joy is full. Yea, my heart is brim with joy, and I will rejoice in my God. Yea, I know that I am nothing; as to my [Page 216]strength, I am weak. Therefore I will not boast of myself, but I will boast of my God;17 for in his strength I can do all things. Yea, behold, many mighty miracles we have wrought in this land, for which we will praise his name forever. Behold how many thousands of our brethren hath he loosed from the pains of hell! And they are brought to sing redeeming love — and this because of the power of his word which is in us. Therefore have we not great reason to rejoice? Yea, we have reason to praise him forever, for he is the Most High God and has loosed these our brethren from the chains of hell. Yea, they were encircled about with everlasting darkness and destruction; but behold, he hath brought them into his everlasting light, yea, into everlasting salvation. And they are encircled about with the matchless bounty of his love. Yea, and we have been instruments in his hands of doing this great and marvelous work. Therefore let us glory.18 Yea, we will glory in the Lord; yea, we will rejoice, for our joy is full; yea, we will praise our God forever. Behold, who can glory too much in the Lord? Yea, who can say too much of his great power and of his mercy and of his long-suffering towards the children of men? Behold, I say unto you: I cannot say the smallest part which I feel. (Alma 26:11–16)Now have we not reason to rejoice? Yea, I say unto you, there never were men that had so great reason to rejoice as we, since the world began; yea, and my joy is carried away, even unto boasting in my God; for he has all power, all wisdom, and all understanding; he comprehendeth all things, and he is a merciful Being, even unto salvation, to those who will repent and believe on his name. Now if this is boasting, even so will I boast; for this is my life and my light, my joy and my salvation, and my redemption from everlasting wo. Yea, blessed is the name of my God, who has been mindful of this people, who are a branch of the tree of Israel, and has been lost from its body in a strange land; yea, I say, blessed be [Page 217]the name of my God, who has been mindful of us, wanderers in a strange land. (Alma 26:35–36)
As can be easily observed from even a casual reading of Ammon’s response to Aaron, it was not Ammon’s intent to praise himself, or to boast or glory in his own abilities or success. Rather, Ammon’s praising, boasting and glorying were all directed toward God. And while Ammon’s repeated usage of the Hebrew root ה-ל-ל (h-l-l) would have been difficult to miss in Hebrew, it is obscured in English because of the three separate English words used in translation: praise, boast, and glory.Ammon’s repetitive use of the root ה-ל-ל (h-l-l) can be described by two different types of wordplay: polyptoton and polysemy. Polyptoton is a “repetition of the same root word but in a different form.”19 More fully, it “is a repetition of the same word in the same sense, but not in the same form: from the same root, but in some other termination; as that of case, mood, tense, person, degree, number, gender, etc.”20 Steen added that polyptoton “is one of the most frequently employed types of repetition in the Bible.”21 Polysemy is “a linguistic term for a word’s capacity to carry two or more distinct meanings.”22 As noted previously, the root ה-ל-ל (h-l-l) carries multiple distinct meanings, including to shine, to praise, and to boast. The following are two examples of polyptotonic wordplay in the Bible:
I will stretch over Jerusalem the line of Samaria and the plummet of the house of Ahab, and I will wipe (מחיתי) Jerusalem as one wipes (ימחה) a dish, wiping (מחה) it and turning it upside down. (2 Kings 21:13, NASB)
This example of polyptoton is readily observable in English — I will wipe, one wipes, and wiping — and in Hebrew (the infinitive is למחות, from the root מ-ח-ה (m-ch-h)) — מחיתי (machiti), ימחה (yimchah), מחה (machah). However, in the following example from Isaiah, the polyptotonic wordplay is completely hidden in English, because it would not make sense to translate the text the way it is written in Hebrew. Isaiah’s double usage of hear and see makes the statement more emphatic in Hebrew, expressed by the word indeed in English:
[Page 218]And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed (שמעו שמוע, hear, you hear), but understand not; and see ye indeed (ראו ראו, see, you see), but perceive not. (Isaiah 6:9, KJV)
This type of polyptotonic wordplay is also a prominent feature of the Book of Mormon. For example, in 1 Nephi 8:2, Lehi told his family, “Behold, I have dreamed a dream, or in other words, I have seen a vision.” In this passage, Lehi twice utilized wordplay: חלמתי חלום (chalmati chalom — I dreamed a dream), and ראיתי מראה (raiti mareh — I saw a seeing).23 These two examples of polyptotonic repetition are comprised of the following elements: חלמתי (chalamti, I dreamed) and חלום (chalom, a dream), both derived from the root ח-ל-ם (ch-l-m), and ראיתי (raiti, I saw) and מראה (mareh, seeing or vision), which originate from the root ר-א-ה (r-a-h).In this final example of both polyptoton and polysemy, the wordplay is completely obscured in English while it is easily noticeable in Hebrew, just as we observed in Ammon’s response to Aaron:
If you see the donkey of one who hates you lying helpless under its load, you shall refrain from leaving (מעזב meazov) it to him, you shall surely release (עזב תעזב azov taazov) it with him (Exodus 23:5, NASB).
In this example the root ע-ז-ב (a-z-b) is used three times: מעזב (meazov, from leaving), and עזב תעזב (azov taazov, translated as you shall surely release, but literally meaning releasing you shall release). The wordplay in this verse is created with the infinitive לעזוב (laazov) which can signify both to leave and to release, and represents an ideal example of both polyptotonic and polysemic wordplay.While some wordplay is expressed in simple polyptotonic or polysemic constructions, Ammon’s discourse contains a much more complex expression of these types of wordplay. Tables 1 and 2 below show my proposed Hebrew expressions derived from the root ה-ל-ל (h-l-l) for Ammon’s response to Aaron, divided according to the two groupings of usage at the beginning (Table 1) and the end (Table 2) of his response. While there is some repetition of form in the Hebrew, most word usages are unique expressions.
[Page 219]Table 1
Usage | Verse | English | Hebrew |
1 | 11 | I do not boast | (al-mithallel) אל-מתהלל 24 |
2 | 12 | I will not boast | (al-tithallel) אל-תתהלל |
3 | 12 | I will boast | (tithallel) תתהלל |
4 | 12 | we will praise | (tehallelu) תהללו |
5 | 14 | to praise | (lehallel) להלל |
6 | 16 | let us glory | (hithallelu) התהללו or(tithallelu) תתהללו |
7 | 16 | we will glory | (tithallelu) תתהללו |
8 | 16 | we will praise | (tehallelu) תהללו |
9 | 16 | who can glory | (yithallel) ללהתי 25 |
Table 2
Usage | Verse | English | Hebrew |
10 | 35 | boasting | (tehilah) הלהת 26 |
11 | 36 | boasting | (tehilah) תהלה |
12 | 36 | I will boast | (tithallel) תתהלל |
As can be observed in Tables 1 and 2, the Hebrew rendering of Ammon’s words displays a significant amount of polyptotonic and polysemic wordplay with significant variations in the verb conjugations and forms, mixed with the noun boasting, Aaron’s original accusatory wording. In addition, Ammon’s repetitious usage of the root ה-ל-ל (h-l-l) allowed him to forcefully counter Aaron’s charge of self-directed boasting, and to reorient the focus of his boasting toward his actual target — God.In addition to Ammon’s wordplay with the root ה-ל-ל (h-l-l), it is also apparent that Ammon employed similar polyptotonic wordplay with the noun joy (שמחה, simchah) and the verb rejoice (לשמוח, lismoach) — both derived from the root ש-מ-ח (s-m-ch) — in his response. As with his usage of the ה-ל-ל [Page 220](h-l-l) root, his use of the ש-מ-ח (s-m-ch) root is restricted to the beginning of his discourse (verses 11–16) and then again at the end of his discourse (verses 35–37), with only one mention of joy outside of these ranges, in verse 30. As with the root ה-ל-ל (h-l-l), I have divided the usage of the root ש-מ-ח (s-m-ch) into two separate tables, with the uses of the root at the beginning of his discourse in Table 3 and those at the end in Table 4
Table 3
Usage | Verse | English | Hebrew |
1 | 11 | my joy | (simchati) שמחתי |
2 | 11 | joy | (simchah) שמחה |
3 | 11 | I will rejoice | (esmach) אשמח |
4 | 13 | to rejoice | (lismoach) לשמוח |
5 | 16 | we will rejoice | (nismach) נשמח |
6 | 16 | our joy | (simchatnu) שמחתנו |
Table 4
Usage | Verse | English | Hebrew |
7 | 30 | our joy | (simchatnu) שמחתנו |
8 | 35 | to rejoice | (lismoach) לשמוח |
9 | 35 | to rejoice | (lismoach) לשמוח |
10 | 35 | my joy | (simchati) שמחתי |
11 | 36 | my joy | (simchati) שמחתי |
12 | 37 | my joy | (simchati) שמחתי |
As we can observe in Table 3, the first six uses of joy or to rejoice fit the parameters of polyptotonic wordplay extremely well, with each use a unique employment of the root ש-מ-ח (s-m-ch). However, the final six occurrences of the root (see Table 4) rely on repetitious employment of previously utilized forms of ש-מ-ח (s-m-ch). Ammon’s usage of this root might also reveal a simple chiastic-type structure:From Table 3:
A Joy (my joy, joy)
B Rejoicing (I will rejoice, to rejoice, we will rejoice)
A Joy (our joy)27
[Page 221]From Table 4:
A Joy (our joy)
B Rejoicing (to rejoice, to rejoice)
A Joy (my joy, my joy, my joy)
Because Ammon’s usage of the root ש-מ-ח (s-m-ch, meaning joy or to rejoice) is so closely connected with his use of the root ה-ל-ל (h-l- l, meaning to praise or to boast) — in both physical placement and in meaning — it seems apparent that this repetition of roots was meant as intentional wordplay by Ammon. Perhaps of most importance for this paper, Ammon’s repetitive usage of the roots ה-ל-ל (h-l-l) and ש-מ-ח (s-m-ch) possibly displays an underlying Hebrew linguistic structure in the original wording of his response to Aaron.


Loren Spendlove has earned the following degrees: MA, Jewish Studies, PhD, Education, and Master of Business Administration (MBA). He is currently working on a MA in Christian Scripture. He has worked in many professional fields, including academics and corporate financial management. A student of languages, his research interests center on linguistics and etymology. Loren and Tina are the parents of five children and 12 grandchildren.
8 Comment(s)
DanB, 07-05-2020 at 10:43 am
BTW, it may be prudent to compare the strenuous and detailed efforts of Stanford Carmack and (by close association) Royal Skousen re: Understanding the nuances of three- to four-centuries-old Early Modern English found in the Book of Mormon (and championed happily by the Interpreter) vis-a-vis the twenty-five centuries-old assumptions proffered in this essay.
The author states that “The language of Lehi’s and Nephi’s culture was clearly Hebrew,” but – to mirror the author – “I assume” Nephi did not speak (or write) in the more modern Hebrew the author uses to analyze, interpret and help us understand. To wit, the prophet Moroni, in his (nearly) final message to his readers, states:
30 Behold, I speak unto you as though I spake from the dead; for I know that ye shall have my words.
31 Condemn me not because of mine imperfection, neither my father, because of his imperfection, neither them who have written before him; but rather give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest unto you our imperfections, that ye may learn to be more wise than we have been.
32 And now, behold, we have written this record according to our knowledge, in the characters which are called among us the reformed Egyptian, being handed down and altered by us, according to our manner of speech.
33 And if our plates had been sufficiently large we should have written in Hebrew; but the Hebrew hath been altered by us also; and if we could have written in Hebrew, behold, ye would have had no imperfection in our record.
34 But the Lord knoweth the things which we have written, and also that none other people knoweth our language; and because that none other people knoweth our language, therefore he hath prepared means for the interpretation thereof” (Mormon 7:30-34, emphasis added).
I hopefully join many of us in thanking God for ancient and modern prophets, seers and revelators!
[Note: The “Add Comment” format may not allow “emphasis added” highlights, but I did such to Moroni’s words “written,” “speech,” “hath been altered by us,” “the Hebrew hath been altered by us also,” etc.]
In this same context, according to a (notedly non-Semitist) linguist in a recent Interpreter essay, “Ancient written Hebrew contains only a fraction of what was in the spoken language.” Continuing, he states: “It is therefore important to understand why Semitists [the author (&/or Prof. Bowen)?] find it necessary to include related forms from other Semitic languages [e.g., more modern Hebrew?] for comparison” [1].
And so, beloved brother (and respected Interpreter editors), please “Block that [21st-century-leaning] pun!”, looking ever to “Christ and him crucified.”
[1] Brian Stubbs, ANSWERING THE CRITICS IN 44 REBUTTAL POINTS
Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 37 (2020): 237-292
https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/answering-the-critics-in-44-rebuttal-points/
DanB, 06-14-2020 at 4:56 am
An eloquent, erudite, educational, and enlightening essay, to be sure – and, please, forgive the trite alliteration.
BUT, as with other contributions to “Interpreter” – Matthew L. Bowen’s similar essays come to mind (even these two as co-authors!) – assumptions may be sandy soil on which to build a gospel-study foundation; to wit: “[n]2. I assume Ammon’s original words carried Hebrew linguistic and grammatical characteristics”.
Brother Joseph never told how he translated the Book of Mormon’s “language of the Egyptians (1 Nephi 1:2)” into English (although after doing so, he did study Hebrew intently, didn’t he? Hmm).
But to “assume” Ammon meant what the author here poses – Hebrew puns and wordplay to the max – just may be “looking beyond the mark” (Jacob 4:14).
After searching the phrase on “churchofjesuschrist.org,” and finding that the Brethren have repeatedly warned against it, I – as a spectator inside the world-renowned “COVID-19 Stadium,” and with perhaps limited years or days left to read – loudly stand up and chant, “Block that pun! Block that pun!”)
Replies
Loren Spendlove, 06-14-2020 at 11:46 am
DanB, I always welcome comments and feedback, especially when these are less than affirmative. First, a couple of questions for you, and then a brief explanation of my reasoning and methodology.
Question 1: You wrote: “After searching the phrase on ‘churchofjesuschrist.org,’” What phrase did you search on the church’s website? You are not clear on this point.
Question 2: Without knowing what phrase you may be referencing above it is impossible to respond to your comment that “the Brethren have repeatedly warned against it.” So, what is it that you discovered that “the Brethren” repeatedly have warned against?
A quick Google search of “wordplay and puns in the Hebrew Bible” (or something similar) yields thousands of results, many from scholarly articles. Jewish and Christian scholars are united in their recognition of abundant wordplay in the Hebrew Bible. Wordplay in Isaiah is particularly mentioned by scholars. Hebrew4christians.com is a very good resource for those interested in understanding foundational linguistic concepts of the Hebrew Bible. On their site we read the following:
“The Hebrew scriptures are filled with various kinds of wordplay. In addition to some humorous play on words (i.e., puns), you will discover alliteration, acrostics, parables, similes, metaphors, hyperboles, gematria, and other literary devices used in the Hebrew text. Some scholars even suggest that the first two words of the Torah (i.e., בְּרֵאשִׁית בָּרָא / bereshit bara) were intentionally spelled using the same initial three letters ( בּ.ר.א ) for the sake of “alliteration” (i.e., repetition of sound).” (https://www.hebrew4christians.com/Scripture/Parashah/Summaries/Vayera/Wordplay/wordplay.html)
Just as you began your comment with wordplay (alliteration) it is possible that the author of Genesis did the same thing. In truth, we find wordplay from the beginning to the end of the Hebrew Bible. You literally cannot escape it. Perhaps this is in part what Nephi meant by “the learning of the Jews.”
The language of Lehi’s and Nephi’s culture was clearly Hebrew. It was the language of their daily lives, as it was for all living in and around Jerusalem during pre-captivity times. We also learn from Nephi’s own hand that the record which he kept consisted “of the learning of the Jews and the language of the Egyptians.” While the words may have been written in an Egyptian script – if that is how we should interpret the phrase “language of the Egyptians” – it was definitely a “Jewish” record since it was comprised of “the learning of the Jews.” At best, only the outward form of the record would have been Egyptian, but the core was still Jewish (Hebrew). A book of Hebrew poetry, no matter the language in which it is rendered, should still bear the marks and linguistic characteristics of its source language. Nephi’s long citations from Isaiah – even though he may have used Egyptian script to record them – would undoubtedly still have carried Isaiah’s distinctive wordplays.
We know that the Hebrew language was preserved among the Nephites down to the very end of Nephite civilization (see Mormon 9:33). Moroni knew Hebrew, and the sons of King Mosiah some 500 years earlier most certainly did too. So, why would it be surprising for Ammon to have structured his response to Aaron in a way that carried Hebrew/Semitic wordplay? Almost certainly what Ammon wrote was not his original, unrehearsed, word-for-word response to Aaron. Ammon, as Alma and others, would have recorded his interaction with his brother at some later time. While remaining faithful to the intent of his original message, most certainly Ammon took the time to craft his written response in an eloquent and purposeful way. What better way to do this than the way that it had been done throughout time by prophets and scribes in the Hebrew Bible, with wordplay?
For the record, and not to embarrass him, but I believe Matt Bowen to be an innovative LDS scholar and consider him a mentor. His research has served as an inspiration for my own.
Brett DeLange, 04-05-2020 at 8:35 am
Thank you! The level of Hebraic influence in the Book of Mormon amazes me. It is amazing enough to contemplate the time line and circumstance by which Joseph Smith brought forth the Book of Mormon. To read more and more of the internal structures and language that sustain what the Book is presented to be is likewise amazing. And humbling. Thank you for your insight.
Replies
Loren Spendlove, 04-06-2020 at 1:15 pm
Brett, thank you for your kind comments.
Jeff Lindsay, 04-04-2020 at 1:12 am
This is a significant finding, adding some delightful examples of apparent wordplays in the original text of the Book of Mormon. Nicely explained. Many thanks for your work!
Replies
Loren Spendlove, 04-06-2020 at 1:17 pm
Thank you, Jeff. I plan on submitting additional articles in the near future.
Replies
DanB, 06-14-2020 at 11:06 pm
Dr./President/Brother Spendlove,
I appreciate your courteous response to my earlier “Comment,” and apologize if it seemed personal against you and/or Professor Bowen; that was not my intent.
The “phrase” I referred to on the Church’s website, which I had referenced (and cited) in my previous sentence, was “looking beyond the mark.” (Even ‘Googling” the phrase leads one directly to many LDS General Authorities’ warnings.)
My definition of “mark” is “Christ and him crucified” (1 Corinthians 2:2). Nephi may have understood more about Hebrew’s “humorous play on words (i.e., puns), … alliteration, acrostics, parables, similes, metaphors, hyperboles, gematria, and other literary devices” than any of us, yet chose to stay within the mark to “talk,” “preach,” and “prophesy of Christ” (2 Nephi 25:26).
Esoteria may be the language of academia and the intelligentsia, but if it goes “beyond” – or falls short of – “the mark” (which happened for me in your essay) it does little to turn hearts to the Savior.