Jump to content

JarMan

Members
  • Content Count

    1,231
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

361 Excellent

About JarMan

  • Rank
    Separates Water & Dry Land

Recent Profile Visitors

2,410 profile views
  1. Apparently chiasmus was incorporated into many early modern songs. For example, the Dutch national anthem consists of 15 verses where the first and fifteenth verses are related and so forth. This song was written around 1570 and would have certainly been known by the likes of Hugo Grotius. As far as the Book of Abraham, perhaps it has early modern origins, as well.
  2. Chiasmus was known in the early modern world. So the Book of Mormon could have early modern origins.
  3. It’s a good thing he didn’t have to lug around some heavy, priceless object in addition to all his other gear. That would have made hunting and foraging, not to mention hiking, pretty tough. A water route seems more practical.
  4. I don't have a pre-conceived position I am trying to defend like an apologist. I have simply built a hypothesis based on the evidence and am now trying to fine-tune and test that hypothesis...based on the evidence, not my beliefs. This is a significant difference. You should apply this same measuring stick to supposed Meso-American parallels. The thing is, you don't need an exhaustive analysis to discredit any of them. You just need the right data point for comparison. So far I haven't seen a single piece of evidence for the historical conception of the Book of Mormon that isn't surpas
  5. Good point. I have a specific person in mind. He was well read in ancient history, both Roman and Greek. He cited Sallust, Tacitus, Josephus and many other ancients extensively. He wrote extensively about warfare, government, religion, and the bible. He knew Hebrew, was familiar with chiasmus, wrote his own country's history in the Tacitean style, wrote plays with themes in the Book of Mormon (Joseph in Egypt, Adam in the garden, Christ's passion). He was an Arminian (the flavor of doctrine in the Book of Mormon), opposed infant baptism, and fiercely critical of Calvinism (also themes
  6. Ok, I thought you were referring to the plot to take over Jerusalem. So this alters my scoring a little bit. It's hard to tell what John's motives were in the plot against Josephus. It doesn't look like he was trying to replace him. It looks more like Josephus was an obstacle to John's plans to cause havoc. I don't understand your logic here at all. I think there are both specific and general similarities to Roman history. We've concentrated on probably about a third or less of what I see as specific similarities, and only a portion of the general similarities. If the Catiline story wa
  7. Naturally, I disagree with some of your scoring. For instance, I would give 0 points for fleeing following a failed assassination attempt. His flight from Gischala has nothing to do with the story. I also didn't see where he promised his followers power and authority and I would give less than 1 for sending an assassin to kill the chief judge. There are methodological problems with the event you've chosen. Potential bias exists because this event occurs in the same general milieu as Catiline. Cultural and historiographical similarities can bias the results. The word "robber'' is a perfect
  8. Oh, I don't know. This isn't the first high-density development the people in Erda have opposed, though. But because the church is involved in this one, it also brought opposition from those who just like to oppose the church.
  9. The Erda residents aren’t opposed to development—just high density development. They are accustomed to 1 to 5 acre lots mainly. The common phrase you hear is that they don’t want to turn into another Daybreak. My guess is the church will still develop the surrounding land with larger lots.
  10. I think we need some definitions. "General" and "specific" are both relative terms with no bright line to delineate them. I think of it like a spectrum with general on one end and specific on the other. In the most general case possible you could say there are two people. This is a meaningless parallel, of course, but it serves to delineate one end of the spectrum. Now you could say there are two men. This is more specific but, of course, still meaningless are far as parallels go. But we've moved some distance along the spectrum from general towards specific. As we add attributes that these tw
  11. This is a line of argument you've used at least three times, but it is just not valid. I've addressed this before, but I'll do it again. My hypothesis is that someone borrowed from Roman history in creating the Book of Mormon. Some of that borrowing is very specific. Some is very general. Showing general similarities can only be additive. You may think it's so general that the additive value is zero. But it can't be subtractive. That is logically inconsistent. If I want to say the Book of Mormon borrowed from the bible and give the Alma/Paul story as an example there are some pretty specific s
  12. How would you test the hypothesis that significant chunks of the Book of Mormon were borrowed from Roman history?
  13. You said there was a significant amount of later stuff. By this I supposed that you meant stuff that didn't occur in the language until after some point in time. Maybe 1750? What later stuff did you have in mind?
  14. The easiest data set is common words and phrases. Skousen lists the following as not being early modern in origin: Since publication of that paper, "morrow month" and "murmur with" have been found leaving only 4 phrases. The phrase "an eye singled to" is likely a scribal error. That leaves only 3. These are likely to be found eventually, as well
  15. Since I'm thinking methodology, I'll give another approach I think could work for looking at different proposed models. Let's say we want to compare the Meso-American, heartland, Malaysian, 19th Century, and early modern models to each other. You could take a certain aspect, like military fortifications, and judge the relative position of each model. So it might look something like this: 1) Early Modern 2) Meso-American 3) Heartland 4) 19th Century 5) Malaysian. I'm not saying that's the right order (except that I'm certain Early Modern is #1 on this list.) Now do this for another 20 or 50 ite
×
×
  • Create New...