LDS Freedom Forum

In the Book of Mormon in Jacob 2:10 we read the following: "But, notwithstanding the greatness of the task, I must do according to the strict commands of God, and tell you concerning your wickedness and abominations, in the presence of the pure in heart, and the broken heart, and under the glance of the piercing eye of the Almighty God."
As far as I can tell it has been that way since the Book of Mormon was first published. I recommend that it be changed to this: "But, notwithstanding the greatness of the task, I must do according to the strict commands of God, and tell you concerning your wickedness and abominations, in the presence of the pure in heart, and the broken hearted, and under the glance of the piercing eye of the Almighty God."
Any input is welcome.

What is the difference in your suggestions?

scottja wrote: ↑March 10th, 2018, 12:51 am What is the difference in your suggestions?

"heart" becomes "hearted".

scottja wrote: ↑March 10th, 2018, 12:51 am What is the difference in your suggestions?

This just occurred to me yesterday when I was reading. The way it is written actually can make sense, but I was wondering what others thought, especially anyone with a background in scriptural studies. Could be that it makes more sense the way it is.

It's a nice sentiment. I would like to suggest that the "pure in heart" are "broken hearted." It sounds to me, however, that you probably mean that the word, broken, in this context, is the result of infidelity. In any case, Jacob explains what he means anyway so to etch extra words in the record might be redundant.

marc wrote: ↑March 10th, 2018, 10:40 am It's a nice sentiment. I would like to suggest that the "pure in heart" are "broken hearted." It sounds to me, however, that you probably mean that the word, broken, in this context, is the result of infidelity. In any case, Jacob explains what he means anyway so to etch extra words in the record might be redundant.

No, I was thinking he was talking about a group as opposed to a concept. The broken hearted would be a group, and for whatever reason that their hearts are broken I had no stipulated thoughts on that. "...and the broken heart..." would either be a concept or a group of one. I think. Not really sure. This is why I posted so I could get some other ideas. Thanks!

I'm trying to zero in on your thought process. Now I'm not sure if you're referring to the wives/children of the unfaithful husbands/fathers or a group of broken hearted people whose hearts are broken for some different reason other than they whose hearts are "broken" and spirits are "contrite." In any case, I can only think of two groups of people whose hearts are broken and they are the victims of infidelity and the pure in heart.

marc wrote: ↑March 10th, 2018, 10:56 am I'm trying to zero in on your thought process. Now I'm not sure if you're referring to the wives/children of the unfaithful husbands/fathers or a group of broken hearted people whose hearts are broken for some different reason other than they whose hearts are "broken" and spirits are "contrite." In any case, I can only think of two groups of people whose hearts are broken and they are the victims of infidelity and the pure in heart.

That is not what I was thinking. I was thinking that "the pure in heart" is a group. "The broken heart" does not sound like a group, it sounds like a concept that could be applied to a group. So, I was wondering if anyone has some intelligence on this. Would it be better to say "the broken hearted" because that would also indicate a group, such as indicated by "the pure in heart." You are going way deeper than I was.

I thought of it in terms of "The broken heart" as an individual. That is, in the phrase "in the presence of the pure in heart, and the broken heart, and under the glance of the piercing eye of the Almighty God.", groups are being represented as individuals. For instance, if you speak of "the little guy" or "The one who's lost his way", you often use those terms to represent any number of people who fit the description, though the terms are singular.

"in the presence of the (person who is)pure in heart, and the (person with a )broken heart, and under the glance..."

Jamescm wrote: ↑March 13th, 2018, 1:13 pm I thought of it in terms of "The broken heart" as an individual. That is, in the phrase "in the presence of the pure in heart, and the broken heart, and under the glance of the piercing eye of the Almighty God.", groups are being represented as individuals. For instance, if you speak of "the little guy" or "The one who's lost his way", you often use those terms to represent any number of people who fit the description, though the terms are singular.

"in the presence of the (person who is)pure in heart, and the (person with a )broken heart, and under the glance..."

Nice, food for thought!