Isaiah 3:24 (King James Bible) and it shall come to pass that instead of sweet smell there shall be stink
The occurrence of all in this common phrase seemed out of place to the 1830 typesetter, so he dropped it (perhaps after referring to his King James Bible). In the Book of Mormon text the universal quantifier all occasionally appears at the beginning of a subject noun phrase followed by the verb phrase “come to pass”:
But there are no other occurrences of the verb phrase “come to pass” with all following its grammatical subject (namely, it ), as in “it shall all come to pass” or “it all came to pass”.
The original manuscript is not extant for 2 Nephi 13:24, but it is possible that the all was inserted during copying because of the preceding word shall, which ends in all. The chances of such a partial repetition occurring are improved if in the original manuscript the word shall was hyphenated at the end of the line, with sh ending one line and -all beginning the next line. If after writing shall, Oliver Cowdery looked briefly away from the line, he might have then rewritten the all. We actually have quite a few examples of the scribes hyphenating shall in this way (namely, sh at the end of one line and -all at the beginning of the next line), as in these examples from the original manuscript:
| page 3 | lines 47–48 | 1 Nephi 2:20 |
| page 60 | lines 22–23 | 2 Nephi 8:11 |
| page 290 | lines 3–4 | Alma 34:13 |
| page 304 | lines 5–6 | Alma 41:4 |
| page 312 | lines 25–26 | Alma 44:11 |
In addition, there are 34 examples of the same hyphenation in the printer’s manuscript.
Although we don’t have any specific examples in the manuscripts of shall all as an error for shall, we do have evidence that partial repetition of a word can occur:
Here Oliver Cowdery initially rewrote the end of behold as the separate word hold (just as all is a separate word found at the end of shall ). The original manuscript is not extant here, but this error in 𝓟 would have been facilitated if in 𝓞 the word behold had been hyphenated at the end of a line (that is, be at the end of the line and -hold at the beginning of the next line).
Nonetheless, this argument is highly conjectural, and there is no explicit manuscript evidence that any shall all was ever an error for shall. Further, one can argue for the reading in 𝓟. Despite the fact that there are no other occurrences of all with “come to pass”, there are 15 examples elsewhere of shall all, of which one has the subject pronoun it:
Also note that in 2 Nephi 13:24 there is one additional difference between the earliest Book of Mormon text and the King James text: namely, the that at the end of the first line in the King James version. The that is not found in the Hebrew original and is supplied in italics in the King James Bible. The insertion of the all in the Book of Mormon text may be connected with the omission of the King James italicized that, with the result that “and it shall all come to pass” can be interpreted as declaring that everything that follows in verse 24 will happen. In the standard text, a colon could be placed after “and it shall all come to pass” in order to make the implication more explicit. Another possible interpretation, pointed out by David Calabro (personal communication), is that the all of “it shall all come to pass” could also refer back to the preceding list of deprivations that Isaiah prophesied would come upon the daughters of Zion (verses 17–23 of 2 Nephi 13).
Ultimately, the earliest text (the reading of 𝓟) will work here in 2 Nephi 13:24, and evidence for a scribal error is meager. For this reason, the critical text will maintain the reading of the earliest textual source (“it shall all come to pass”).
Summary: Restore the earliest reading with all in 2 Nephi 3:24 (“it shall all come to pass”), thus rejecting the 1830 typesetter’s emendation that removed the extra all; the inclusion of all seems to be connected with the omission of the King James that at the end of the clause; although the all may be a repetition of the end of shall, there is no manuscript evidence for this specific scribal error.