Egyptian Names In The Book Of Mormon

[Gervin]

The letter is irrevelant. Whether these are authentic Egyptian names is what is at issue.

The letter certainly is relevant to this discussion. Go back and look at the first post on the first page. If we take the letter out of consiglieri's first post we get this:

I think it is pretty well established by now that authentic Egyptian names show up in the text of the Book of Mormon.

<snip>

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

That's not a very compelling argument.

[cdowis]

Thanks gervin for your profound insight.

[Gervin]

hey, that's okay. glad to help.

[consiglieri]

I return to this thread from a journey through the internet in an attempt to locate the entire Albright letter, only to report no dice.

I can see Gervin's and Jaybear's point that it would be helpful to see the entire letter, and I would like to see the entire letter, as well; a digital photo reproduction would be best.

The point of seeing Albright's letter is that, if in context and in its entirety, Albright does actually say what the excerpted quote indicates he said, that is substantial evidence for ancient Egyptian influence in the Book of Mormon; inasmuch as Albright was a non-Mormon who was world reknowned in the field of Near Eastern Studies.

I see Gervin's and Jaybear's posts as reflecting a similar point of view regarding Albright's stature, and demonstrating a willingness to give a listening ear to what Albright may have said on this issue.

Producing the Albright letter in its entirety is a reasonable request, and may help Gervin and Jaybear (and myself) to settle this issue.

Has anybody else had any luck in locating a copy of the original Albright letter in its entirety?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[consiglieri]

I checked this thread first thing this morning in hopes of seeing some enterprising and technologically adept person having produced the Albright letter in its entirety. Apparently it was not to be. I have put in a request to a friend of mine who may have it in his archives, but have yet to hear back. I will let you know when I hear anything.

My search of the internet for the Albright letter was not completely in vain, however, as it yielded a couple of interesting (and ironic) insights. Because I was using the search words of Albright's name and "Mormon," I stumbled into some sites critical of Mormons, who used quotes from Albright in their defense.

On one of those sites, titled "The Bible v. Book of Mormon: Archaeology Verifies Truth," the claim was made that there is no archaeological verification for the Book of Mormon while there is a plenitude of same for the Bible. In support of the latter claim, William F. Albright was quoted as follows: There can be no doubt that archaeology has confirmed the substantial historicity of the Old Testament tradition. (Archaeology and the Religions of Israel, Albright, Baltimore, 1956, p. 176.)"

On another site, "Probe Ministries--Examining the Book of Mormon," dealing with the same argument, I found the following: "Archaeological discoveries confirming biblical accounts have been acknowledged by Christians as well as skeptics. Foremost Middle East archaeologist Dr. William Albright wrote, Discovery after discovery has established the accuracy of innumerable details, and has brought increased recognition to the value of the Bible as a source of history." This article goes on to conclude, "Historical research has led both Christians and skeptics to affirm the historicity of the Bible. However, historical research has proven damaging for the Book of Mormon."

The irony of the Albright quotes used in support of the Bible (and against the Book of Mormon) is, of course, that nowhere is there a mention of the fact that Albright elsewhere wrote that the Book of Mormon contains two authentic Egyptian names; a fact that, if mentioned, would tend to dilute the arguments being advanced.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Luigi]

I don't know if anyone has brought this up-but as far as acccounting for the Book of Mormon names which are Greek-are those considered by apologists to just be a coincidence?

[charity]

Greek names a coincidence? No, how about whoever it was that transported the Mulekites having some Greek on board. Or Greek names from other migrations who were here already or who got here?

[consiglieri]

While I am waiting for the complete transcript of the Albright letter, which I am now assured I should have tomorrow, let me state that the Greek name "Lachoneus" in the Book of Mormon has always struck me as unusual in that it is both extra-biblical, while at the same time being a legitimate Greek name, meaning as I recall, a person from the Greek city-state of Laconia, from which we get our word "laconic." (Something I have rarely been accused of being.)

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[The Dude]

...let me state that the Greek name "Lachoneus" in the Book of Mormon has always struck me as unusual in that it is both extra-biblical, while at the same time being a legitimate Greek name, meaning as I recall, a person from the Greek city-state of Laconia, from which we get our word "laconic."

Consig-

Did you happen to see the other thread I started this morning?

[consiglieri]

...let me state that the Greek name "Lachoneus" in the Book of Mormon has always struck me as unusual in that it is both extra-biblical, while at the same time being a legitimate Greek name, meaning as I recall, a person from the Greek city-state of Laconia, from which we get our word "laconic."

Consig-

Did you happen to see the other thread I started this morning?

Hi, Dude!

I will check it out when I get the chance. Thanks for the heads-up.

I always appreciate your input and insights.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri (Italian for, "Just because we don't agree doesn't mean we can't be friends.")

[Olavarria]

In terms of the romance languages and the name Petros, we have a provable connection and evolution of the changes between greek and latin, and the romance languages that developed from them. we have no such evidence for book of mormon names and Egyptian.

Ok, here is an analogy: Suppose you made a trip down to Saudi Arabia. You are greeted at the airport by a Saudi man named Ahmed ibn Fahalan,ibn Rashid,ibn Alabast al Nehemi(pun intended). You and Ahmed really hit it off on the way to the hotel. He invites you over for dinner. Upon going to his house you meet his children: Hiawatha,Pocahontas,Sitting Bull and Squanto. How much research do you have to do have to do before you acknowledge that his children have American names?

Sure we would expect the names to evolve. I didnt say otherwise. But once you change the names to reflect a culture outside of Egypt, they are no longer Egyptian names. In other words, Nephi, Paanchi, Pahoran, and Deseret are not demonstrably Egyptian names.

It one thing to say that names are similar to Egyptian names, and therefore MAY have evolved from Egyptian names, and its quite another to boldly claim that all the names listed "are demonstrably Egyptian names."

Semanitcs, semantics, semantics. Im not going to argue about the definition of term egyptian name. Thank you for begrudgingly admitting the likely origin of many BoM names. Now ask your self, how did Joseph cathch this bulls eye? He says he owns a record writen in some form of egyptian and viola; "egyptian sounding" or "likely derived from egyptian names" are all over the text, all coming from a text that claims some form of egyptian as its language. Where are the Chinese names in the BoM? Where are the Hiawathas,Squanto's or Pochahontas's Joseph could have had access to? Where are the russian,polish,dutch,mongolian,norse,swahili,indonesian "sounding" names?

Seems like a book claiming egyptian language, having egyptian "sounding" names is quite a coincidence

I can trace their origin really easily. Lehi was a Jew in 600BC with connections to egyptian culture, for example he could read and write in egyptian. Lehi and his egyptophile family come to america, with records writtin in egyptian. His descendants continue the tradition. The abridged version of many of those records are the BoM. Joseph translated the BoM(originally written in some form of egyptian) into english. Hence they are egyptian names.

[The Dude]

Seems like a book claiming egyptian language, having egyptian "sounding" names is quite a coincidence

Her Amun-

Did you happen to see the other thread I started this morning?

[Olavarria]

nope but ill check it out

[consiglieri]

I am happy to report that, through the courtesy of a well-connected friend of mine, I have obtained a copy of the William Albright letter that initiated this thread, and which many of you have expressed a desire to see in its totality.

I am unhappy to report that, though I now have a digital version of this letter on my computer, I am unable to transfer a copy of same to a post on this message board. I tried everything I could think of and nothing would work. If anybody has any ideas on how to accomplish this, please let me know.

In the meantime, I will transcribe the letter in its entirety below.

The letter is on William F. Albright's letterhead with his name at the top, and underneath that is the address of 100 Gilman Hall, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, 21215(8?). The letter is dated July 25, 1966 and is addressed to Mr. Grant S. Howard, 124 W. 7065 South, Midvale, Utah 84047. The full text of the letter is as follows:

_____________________________________________

Dear Mr. Howard:

Thanks for sending me a copy of the publication of Joseph Smith's Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar. There does appear to be evidence that Joseph Smith had studied some Egyptian. For one thing, he undoubtedly spent a great deal of money and effort in trying to master Egyptian, but, as you know, when the Book of Mormon was written, Egyptian had just begun to be deciphered and it is all the more surprising that there are two Egyptian names, Paanch and Pahor(an) which appear together in the Book of Mormon in close connection with a reference to the original language as being "Reformed Egyptian." I read an extremely interesting account by Fawn Brodie, No Man Knows My History, in chapter 12, in which she deals with Joseph Smith's tremendous efforts to learn languages. There were, however, as yet no Egyptian grammars or dictionaries in existence, so the best he could do was to follow books from the seventeenth and eighteenth centures (including some from the nineteenth) which treated the hieroglyphs very much as Horapollo did about the sixth century A.D.--as pure ideographs. Joseph Smith's translation does not, however, follow the pseudo-Neo-Platonism of Athanasius Kircher in the seventeenth century, but is a kind of quasi-biblical composition. In any case it has nothing whatever to do with the original Egyptian manuscript of a copy of the Book of the Dead.

The supposed digits have nothing whatever to do with the figures. You must remember that our digits go back to India through the Arabs and were not brought to Europe until less than a thousand years ago.

I do not for a moment believe that Joseph Smith was trying to mislead anyone; I accept the point of view of a Jewish friend of mine at the University of Utah, that he was a religious genius and that he was quite honest in believing that he really could decipher these ancient texts. But to insist that he did is really doing a disservice to the cause of a great church and its gifted founder.

Cordially,

(signature)

W. F. Albright

___________________________________________________

Now that I have produced the letter in its entirety, are we able to achieve a consensus that William F. Albright was surprised to see two authentic Egyptian names in the Book of Mormon?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

P.S. I think I will start a new thread with this letter, because this one is getting pretty old.