Anachronisms Aplenty In The Bom

[cdowis]

>anachronisms a plenty in the book of Mormon

Here is a thread dedicated to your assertion, Noggin.

We are very interested.

[cksalmon]

Okay. I'll bite. How 'bout references to 'synagogues' built after the 'manner of the Jews,' when synagogues postdate Lehi's exodus?

Best.

CKS

[cksalmon]

There's always this.

Best.

CKS

[Uncle Dale]

Okay. I'll bite. How 'bout references to 'synagogues' built after the 'manner of the Jews,' when synagogues postdate Lehi's exodus?

Best.

CKS

There were always synagogues -- Enoch had one -- so did Moses.

It's only because of the deleterious hidden handiwork of the Great and Abominable Church that

these sacred truths -- this fulness of the gospel -- has been kept from us. Why, Adam was baptized

in a Christian baptism and Methuselah's favorite hymn was "Onward Christian Soldiers"....

If only the rest of the world knew...

[/sarcasm]

UD

[Moksha]

Is there such a thing an anachronistic apologetics? I suspect Jerusalem being a suburb of Bethlehem or vise a versa could fall into that category.

[Uncle Dale]

Is there such a thing an anachronistic apologetics? I suspect Jerusalem being a suburb of Bethlehem

or vise a versa could fall into that category.

That takes care of the past -- then there is the future. Those patriarchal blessings saying elders would

be preaching the gospel on other planets before they died, etc.

I liked that that thread where somebody suggested that we give the Church another 5,000 years to

build the Jackson County Temple, bring the Lost Tribes down from the North Pole, and finally hold a

retirement banquet for the Three Nephites.

As for me, I'm thinking of taking up the new hobby of collecting 5th century BCE broken steel bows.

UD

[MiniDriver]

Here is a thread dedicated to your assertion, Noggin.

Tips for Attracting the Elusive Noggin:

Whatever you do...

1. Make sure your spell checker is on.

2. Do NOT use too many emoticons.

Here is a little play titled, "Cdowis Did Not Heed My Advice":

Cdowis: Noggin. We've got you cornered and are feeling just a bit self-important. Show yourself.

Cdowis: I'm WAITING.

Noggin: dum dee dee, dum dee dee. Huh? Wha? A challenge? Battle!

Noggin (reading): ACK! My EYES!

Cdowis: I have you now, exmo pariah! That's no rebuttal! Your feet are made of sand! The Church is tru!

Noggin: (typing whilst turning face away) There were no horses prior to the Spanish conquistadors!

Cdowis: Tapirs!

Cdowis: Take THAT!

Noggin: Wheat! Barley! Unknown to this continent before the advent of Europeans!

Cdowis: Uh.

Cdowis:

Noggin: Oh, and, Cdowis?

Cdowis: Yeah...?

Noggin: THAT'S for all the emoticons! Plus, you mis-spelled "true"!

Cdowis:

The End.

Mini

[Hammer]

I hate soaps. But this was actually entertaining.

[MiniDriver]

Oh, another helpful tip: you might try emailing him. He might not even be aware you've called him out.

I would do it...but...it would play out something like this:

Mini: ohhhh NOGG-in...!

Noggin:

Mini: (faltering) uh...some...someone over at FAIR...

Noggin:

Mini: (clears throat)

Mini:

Noggin:

Mini:

If YOU do it, Cdowis, it will go like this:

Cdowis: Hi.

Noggin:

Cdowis: Daniel? DANIEL??

Noggin:

Mini:

Kay?

Love,

Mini

[Olavarria]

syn

[cksalmon]

syn

[Bill Hamblin]

I didn't notice that CK himself engaged the data to which he made a link:

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?id=207&table=jbms

In any event, CK is simply unaware of current scholarship on the matter. To wit:

AS might be expected, the theories propounded to explain the emergence of the synagogue range far and wide. Some scholars date its origins as early as the ninth or eighth century B.C.E., and some look to the late seventh century. Most have opted for either a sixth-century date, at the time of the Babylonian exile, or a fifth-century date and a Judean setting, wherein the synagogue emerged as a outgrowth of the reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah. (Lee Levine, The Ancient Synagogue, Yale UP, 2000, p. 20)

Furthermore, the Greek sunagoge occurs over 200 times in the Septuagint, translating either 'edah or qahal. It is not clear to me why it is anachronistic in the BOM, but not in the Septuagint.

[Uncle Dale]

I didn't notice that CK himself engaged the data to which he made a link:

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?id=207&table=jbms

In any event, CK is simply unaware of current scholarship on the matter. To wit:

AS might be expected, the theories propounded to explain the emergence of the synagogue range far and wide. Some scholars date its origins as early as the ninth or eighth century B.C.E., and some look to the late seventh century. Most have opted for either a sixth-century date, at the time of the Babylonian exile, or a fifth-century date and a Judean setting, wherein the synagogue emerged as a outgrowth of the reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah. (Lee Levine, The Ancient Synagogue, Yale UP, 2000, p. 20)

Furthermore, the Greek sunagoge occurs over 200 times in the Septuagint, translating either 'edah or qahal. It is not clear to me why it is anachronistic in the BOM, but not in the Septuagint.

I think that it is rather unbelieveable that the Davidic monarchy would have tolerated such religious

gathering places, apart from the Temple cultus centered in Jerusalem -- and especially so from the days

of King Josiah onward to the fall of Judah.

However, there is a parallel intriguing possibility, and this is that the dislocated shrine-priesthoods from

the days after the Assyrian invasion, may have congregated into priestly and prophetic "schools," in

Judah -- and that it was largely the program of one of the groups, the dislocated "Shiloh school," which

gave rise to the Deuteronomic Reform. Another school may have centered around the students and

followers of Isaiah. These schools, because they were perhaps bound together by ethnic, family and

social ties, could not easily be dis-established by the waning Davidic rulers and their Temple associates.

In the Babylonian exile, the individual schools, each centered about a charismatic or influential leader,

may have been the spark which gave rise to the post-exilic synagogues.

For the BoM-believing LDS, there is a possibility here, that such a priestly or prophetic school, in the

days of Lehi, might be termed a "synogogue."

I'd suggest that the Mormons turn their attention upon such possibilities, rather than projecting the

synogogues of Hellenistic times backwards into the pre-exilic period.

Then again, nobody here ever listens to my suggestions anyway.

Uncle Dale

[Lachoneus]

Furthermore, the Greek sunagoge occurs over 200 times in the Septuagint, translating either 'edah or qahal. It is not clear to me why it is anachronistic in the BOM, but not in the Septuagint.

It also is not clear to me what the existence of an anachronism in a translation means. If a translation contains an anachronism, does that tell us something about the original text, or about the translator, or both?

[Bill Hamblin]

I think that it is rather unbelieveable that the Davidic monarchy would have tolerated such religious

gathering places, apart from the Temple cultus centered in Jerusalem -- and especially so from the days

of King Josiah onward to the fall of Judah.

...

For the BoM-believing LDS, there is a possibility here, that such a priestly or prophetic school, in the

days of Lehi, might be termed a "synogogue."

I'd suggest that the Mormons turn their attention upon such possibilities, rather than projecting the

synogogues of Hellenistic times backwards into the pre-exilic period.

Then again, nobody here ever listens to my suggestions anyway.

Uncle Dale

Synagogues as places of prayer and study were not in competition in any way with the Temple.

It is the anti-Mormons, not the Mormons, who are retrojecting Hellenistic and Rabbinic types of synagogues into the BOM. LDS tend to claim that BOM synagogues would not necessarily have any relationship with Hellenistic and Rabbinic style synagogues.

[Uncle Dale]

It is the anti-Mormons, not the Mormons, who are retrojecting Hellenistic and Rabbinic types of

synagogues into the BOM. ...

Would that fact -- if it is a fact -- then automatically make any reader who did not accept the historicity

of such mentions in the BoM an anti-Mormon?

Could a reputable biblical or religious authority say, "I reject this story, of Lehi," etc., without being

considered an enemy of the latter day work?

Or, was Brigham right, when he said that it was a hellish thing to reject the book?

UD

[Olavarria]

It is the anti-Mormons, not the Mormons, who are retrojecting Hellenistic and Rabbinic types of synagogues into the BOM. LDS tend to claim that BOM synagogues would not necessarily have any relationship with Hellenistic and Rabbinic style synagogues.

Bill, Im sorry but you are wrong.

Dont you know that we LDS have alaways maintained that the BoM peoples, aside from having synagogues, also spoke yiddish ate latkas,gafilka fish and during nephite weddings said "mazeltof" as they stepped on a jaredite wine glass?

Seriously,

I don't see any rebuttal here that synagogues postdate Lehi's exodus. Have you found any that you find convincing.

The BoM was translated into english and synagouge is a word in the english language. What word would you use to describe a place of worship and learning used by diaspora jews?

[Bill Hamblin]

Would that fact -- if it is a fact -- then automatically make any reader who did not accept the historicity

of such mentions in the BoM an anti-Mormon?

No. I can't think of any reason why it would. However, CK, who raised the issue, is an anti-Mormon, new editor of a rather infamous anti-Mormon magazine, The Evangel.

Could a reputable biblical or religious authority say, "I reject this story, of Lehi," etc., without being

considered an enemy of the latter day work?

Of course. Nothing I said would indicate otherwise. But that does not demonstrate that anti-Mormons don't exist. They do, you know.

[Uncle Dale]

What word would you use to describe a place of worship and learning used by diaspora jews?

That's just the point... we are not talking about those people, but about their ancestors, the Israelites

of Judah. I gave a possible alternative word: "schools," though more in the sense of a "school of fish"

than of a structure called a "school."

The Mormons have had many decades to add in the proper footnotes to the LDS edition of the Book of

Mormon. The word is only a matter of controversy because it remains, unexplained, in one of the standard

works.

And, while the editors of the next edition are adding in Bill's note, they can also explain that BoM horses

are really deer; that BoM mentions of Old World grains are really wild American grasses; and that the

Nephite "North" was really a sort of direction off to the northeast about 35 degrees.

UD

[Uncle Dale]

that does not demonstrate that anti-Mormons don't exist. They do, you know.

Of course -- I am one of them. But if a non-Mormon response or opinion is not meant as an attack upon

LDS authority, we all might be best advised to simply call it that: a non-Mormon opinion.

And, if anti-Mormons in general are voicing unsupporable views concerning the standard works, some of

their number, at least, should call them to task for their sloppiness. That would help us all get past the

"fluff" that makes up about 99% of these exchanges, so we can concentate upon more substantial things.

IMHO.

UD

[Bill Hamblin]

Dont you know that we LDS have alaways maintained that the BoM peoples, aside from having synagogues, also spoke yiddish ate latkas,gafilka fish and during nephite weddings said "mazeltof" as they stepped on a jaredite wine glass?

Absolutely; and here is a picture of Lehi and Nephi.

[Olavarria]

L'Chaim!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEU5DzpcRSA

Did you know that a lost tribe of Nephites has invaded Israel? If you get past the first 30 seconds of this news report, you'll see their proselytizing efforts in Eretz Israel.

[Olavarria]

What word would you use to describe a place of worship and learning used by diaspora jews?

That's just the point... we are not talking about those people, but about their ancestors, the Israelites

of Judah. I gave a possible alternative word: "schools," though more in the sense of a "school of fish"

than of a structure called a "school."

The Mormons have had many decades to add in the proper footnotes to the LDS edition of the Book of

Mormon. The word is only a matter of controversy because it remains, unexplained, in one of the standard

works.

And, while the editors of the next edition are adding in Bill's note, they can also explain that BoM horses

are really deer; that BoM mentions of Old World grains are really wild American grasses; and that the

Nephite "North" was really a sort of direction off to the northeast about 35 degrees.

UD

Stranger things have happened.

I speak chinese. Her are the ultra-literal translations of words that the chinese invented to describe animals.

dolphin=海豚，hai3tun1, sea piglet.

seal=海豹，hai3 bao4, sea leopard.

giraffe=長頸鹿，changjinglu, "long neck deer"

crocodile=鱷魚，e-yu, "fish like fish"

panda=熊貓， xiong mao, bear cat

Now, Joseph translated the BoM by the power of God. That is a different thing from saying, God translated it. Isnt it possible that "anachronisms" such as horse,pig,cow or other animals mentioned in the text where actually indegenous american species that the Nephite/Jaredites gave old world names to via their primitive taxonomical system? Imagine, if I translated a chinese text that mentioned big vegetarian cats, big carniverous river fish and swimming leopards and swimming pigs, would you dismiss them as anachronistic?

[Uncle Dale]

Now, Joseph translated the BoM by the power of God. That is a different thing from saying, God translated it. Isnt it possible that "anachronisms" such as horse,pig,cow or other animals mentioned in the text where actually indegenous american species that the Nephite/Jaredites gave old world names to via their primitive taxonomical system? ...

Many things are theoretically possible. It is possible that the vapour of darkness that covered the

land Bountiful and the regions round about could only be perceived by persons of Lehite or Mukelite lineage,

and that an ancient weather satellite would have never picked up its strange image at all.

It is possible that the brother of Jared had faith so strong as to remove Mount Zerin, because it was an

imploding volcano that left only a hole in the ground when it destroyed itself.

Such things may fly in LDS Sunday meetings -- to the remainder of the world they appear nonsensical.

Inside the "LDS bubble" the faithful believe precepts that they would think foolish in any other circumstance.

We all know that -- and we all know that it is useless to try and change their minds, unless the change comes

from the GAs.

Setting all of that to one side, the language of the BoM and the JST look to me more like an example of

mostly ignorant copying from the biblical scriptures than it does like parallel, largely BCE documents.

This is not the forum I would go into, in order to change people's minds -- but it is sometimes fascinating

to watch the LDS apologists squirm and flip-flop mentally, trying to reconcile what the rest of us in the

world see as obvious problems. The classic example of this is found in the JST, where the two different

accounts of the death of Judas are combined into a single, absurd story.

For the most part, these latter day absurdities are harmless -- but you cannot blame the rest of us for

rolling our eyes at it all, now and then -- can you?

Uncle Dale

[cksalmon]

Would that fact -- if it is a fact -- then automatically make any reader who did not accept the historicity

of such mentions in the BoM an anti-Mormon?

No. I can't think of any reason why it would. However, CK, who raised the issue, is an anti-Mormon, new editor of a rather infamous anti-Mormon magazine, The Evangel.

Bill,

It's nice to see that I've taken up residence in your heart to the degree that you refer to me, personally, as often as possible.

If I understand your argument so far: there is no reason to conclude that one is an anti-Mormon simply because he rejects the historicity of synagogue references in BoM.

I agree.

The rest is purely fallacious ad hominem argumentation that's completely disconnected from your admission to UD. If you're using the term "anti-Mormon" in the same way your colleague Daniel Peterson does, then it's not a label I mind bearing.

Somehow, though, I think you mean to imply something with a bit more bite.

Anyhow, my best to you this evening, Bill.

CKS