Exciting New Research On The Book Of Mormon!

[consiglieri]

Recent research has disclosed interesting parallels between the Book of Mormon and the apocryphal work, The Acts of John.

These parallels pertain specifically to â??resurrection stories,â? in which individuals are struck dead but subsequently brought back to life, usually by the interposition of some person, often by taking the hand of the one who is dead.

The New Testament gospels recount three incidents where Jesus performed such a miracle, with the son of the widow of Nain, the daughter of Jairus, and Lazarus. All three of these incidents involved the interposition of Jesus to raise these people from the dead; all three people appear to have met their death by natural causes.

The Book of Mormon

The Book of Mormon presents a â??resurrection storyâ? where the â??deathsâ? are not natural, but divinely caused, where the person who interposes to raise the dead is not the main protagonist, but a third-party; and even contains two remarkable accounts of women being the one to raise the dead. This appears unlike any Bible account with which I am familiar.

The Book of Mormon account is in Alma 18-19, where Ammon, fresh from his victory at the waters of Sebus, is the protagonist who preaches the gospel to King Lamoni and his court. King Lamoni cries to God and then falls down as though dead. After three days in this state, King Lamoni rises from his death-like state, praises God, and sinks down again. This time, his queen sinks down with him. Then his entire court cry unto God until they all sink down; all except for the servant girl, Abish, a secret convert to the gospel.

Abish sees this as a great opportunity for missionary work and runs about to gather people to see what has happened. When the crowd gets there, a spirited debate ensues as to what this means, and a brother of one slain by Ammon at Sebus tries to strike Ammon with a sword but falls down dead in the process. Now, nobody wants to touch any of the people who appear dead, and things get worse.

Abish is upset that her missionary effort did not go as planned, and Abish, a female, walks forward and raises the â??deadâ? queen. The queen rises, praises God, and then the queen raises her husband, the king.

So here we have two â??third-parties,â? both female, who raise the dead. This is unprecedented in any Bible stories to my knowledge. But the apocryphal Acts of John contains not one, but two such stories, with a number of interesting parallels to the Book of Mormon.

The Acts of John

A. The Cleopatra Resurrection Story (chapters 19-25)

In these chapters of The Acts of John, we are introduced to the commander-in-chief of Ephesus, whose name is Lycomedes, whose wife, Cleopatra, has lain dead for seven-days. The Apostle John comes to the city, is met by Lycomedes, and taken to the couch where Cleopatra lies. Lycomedes is so overcome with grief that he falls down dead. The multitude of the city of Ephesus is coming to the place, and John is concerned that he will be blamed for both bodies and will be killed by the crowd. John then prays to God to restore both Lycomedes and Cleopatra back to life in order to convert the crowd by means of the miracle.

John goes to Cleopatra, touches her face and raises her from the dead. The whole city of Ephesus is stirred by the miraculous sight.

John takes Cleopatra to the body of Lycomedes and directs Cleopatra to raise Lycomedes from the dead, which Cleopatra proceeds to do.

B. The Drusiana Resurrection Story (chapters 63-86)

Drusiana is a convert to Christianity who is so chaste she will not have sex even with her husband, Andronicus. An evil and prominent Ephesian named Callimachus is introduced who finds Drusiana so beautiful he wants to have sex with her and tells her so. Drusiana is so distraught that her beauty is leading Callimachus astray that she falls down dead.

Not satisfied, Callimachus wants to have sex with Drusianaâ??s body. In order to gain access to her tomb, he enlists the aid of a servant of Andronicus, by the name of Fortunatus, who uses his key to open the tomb to Callimachus. Callimachus has almost completely disrobed the body of Drusiana when a serpent appears and bites the servant, Fortunatus, killing him. The serpent then wraps itself around the feet of Callimachus, who falls down dead, and the serpent coils itself upon his body.

John and Andronicus go the tomb on the morning of the third day after Drusianaâ??s death and find the body of Fortunatus, the body of Callimachus with the serpent still on top, and the almost completely disrobed body of Drusiana.

John raises Callimachus first, who confesses to his crime, and says that right before he was going to rape the body of Drusiana, an angel appeared to him and struck him down with the words, â??Callimachus, die, that you may live.â?

When Callimachus arises, he is a new man and a convert to Christianity.

John then raises Drusiana from the dead.

John is about to raise Fortunatus from the dead, but Callimachus objects, at which point John directs the woman, Drusiana, to raise Fortunatus from the dead, which she does, taking the dead Fortunatus by the hand and raising him in the name of Jesus Christ.

COMPARISON POINTS:

1. These stories have common motifs of third-parties, including women, raising those who are dead.

2. The presence of crowds gathering together is in common with the Ammon episode and the Cleopatra story from Acts of John.

3. The fact that two such stories exist in Acts of John may indicate that this type of story is a template of sorts, a type-story, and may account for the fact that a similar story occurs shortly after the Ammon story in the Book of Mormon, which features Aaron and the King of all the Lamanites. (Alma 22) In other words, the Book of Mormon contains several such resurrection stories because they are supposed to fit a preconceived template. In the Aaron story, a crowd gathers as well, and Aaron, like John in the Cleopatra account, is concerned that the crowd will blame him for being present at the scene of the dead king. John in the Cleopatra account then wants to use the raising of the dead people to convert the crowd who has gathered, even as Abish goes out and gathers the multitude together as part of a planned missionary effort.

4. When King Lamoniâ??s queen is raised by Abish, the queen cries out to the Lord, â??speaking many words which were not understood.â? (Alma 19:30) This is similar to Drusiana who before she dies of mortification, speaks words â??without being understood by anyone.â? (Acts of John, chapter 64).

5. As part of the context of the Ammon resurrection story, Ammon is called before King Lamoni after the king hears of his amazing exploits at the waters of Sebus. Ammon goes to the king and asks what the king wants of him. â??And the king answered him not for the space of an hour, according to their time, for he knew not what he should say unto him.â? (Alma 18:14) The fact that everybody stood there for an hour without saying anything has caused much comment for its strangeness. Remarkably, after Callimachus is raised from the dead by John, we are told that â??the young man immediately rose and kept silence for a whole hour.â? (Acts of John, chapter 75)

6. Callimachus relates that he is struck by the appearance of an angel and after he is raised from the dead, he has become a new man; where once he was the epitome of wickedness, he is now changed and become a good Christian. Little prodding is needed to recognize the similarity between the experience of Callimachus and that of Alma the Younger, itself another resurrection story contained in the Book of Mormon.

7. The Cleopatra scene involves her husband, Lycomedes, who is styled the "commander-in-chief of Ephesus." This is a court-type of scene, and similar to those described in the Book of Mormon that happen with Lamanite kings and their queens.

Having set forth what appear to be a number of striking similarities between Book of Mormon resurrection stories and those contained in The Acts of John, I would be interested in knowing what others may think.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Zakuska]

I think Joseph Smith had access to drtmouth.google.com.

[urroner]

It's obvious to even the most casual observer that the Prophet Joseph Smith had access to the Acts of John in his vast library, so Consig, this isn't all that exciting.

Move along folks, nothing to see here.

But personally, I find it rather interesting. Where and how did you come up this this stuff Consig?

[consiglieri]

It's obvious to even the most casual observer that the Prophet Joseph Smith had access to the Acts of John in his vast library, so Consig, this isn't all that exciting.

Move along folks, nothing to see here.

But personally, I find it rather interesting. Where and how did you come up this this stuff Consig?

A number of years back, I got a copy of "Lost Scriptures," by Bart Ehrman, which is a compilation of books that didn't make the cut to get into the New Testament, and which contains extracts from The Acts of John, from which the quotes in the OP are taken.

I remember the first time reading through it, and coming to the Cleopatra resurrection story, and being struck by how much it sounded like the Book of Mormon accounts of Ammon and Aaron in the courts of the Lamanite kings.

I did a little preliminary research at the time, but didn't get around to putting anything on paper.

Then, just this week, I was getting ready for Sunday school where we are about to begin our venture into the Acts of the Apostles. As part of the preparation, I went back to review the Acts of John, and got all excited about it again, and decided to write it down finally, which I did this morning in a rather detailed fashion.

But that was too long, so I made a shorter abstract this afternoon, which I posted here.

I am especially excited about the corresponding scenes in Acts of John and the Book of Mormon about people standing around for a full hour looking at each other and not saying anything; and then finding them both contextualized within the framework of a rather unusual resurrection story in which third-party women are allowed to do the honors.

I will not say bull's-eye. I will not say bull's-eye. I won't, I won't, I won't.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[urroner]

I will not say bull's-eye. I will not say bull's-eye. I won't, I won't, I won't.

Ojo de toro! Ojo de toro! Ojo de toro! Ojo de toro! Ojo de toro!

[Uncle Dale]

... I would be interested in knowing what others may think.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

I guess my first question would be -- What did Alexander Campbell have to say about THAT old text?

Uncle "after all, we can't expect every bit of pseudopographia to have been in the Palmyra public library" Dale

.

[jadams_4242]

I guess my first question would be -- What did Alexander Campbell have to say about THAT old text?

Uncle "after all, we can't expect every bit of pseudopographia to have been in the Palmyra public library" Dale

.

But then again, how are we supposed to debate this issue?

I would say its a "no starter"?

[Uncle Dale]

But then again, how are we supposed to debate this issue?

I would say its a "no starter"?

Well, first of all, we might determine what versions of the John pseudopigraphic text were available

in America for study during the 1820s, and what was said about it -- and by whom.

I mention Campbell, because he published a newspaper and because he was a prolific letter-writer,

and the sort of guy who might have been interested in such an oddity -- after all, he re-published

the apocraphyal "Third Epistle of Peter" in his newspaper during the mid-1820s.

But Campbell was not the only writer who might have offered some comments -- Christian primitivists

like Elias Smith and Barton Stone were also looking backward into the Judeo-Christian experience

for information about religion's past. Elias Smith also re-published the "Third Epistle of Peter" oddity.

Only by spending a little time researching the religious/literary environment of that period (pre-1830)

can be begin to speak with any knowledge about whether texts like the John item might have been

available and known to the earliest Mormons.

UD

[Zakuska]

Of course this is assuming your Pet theory Unk. (ie 19th Century Authorship) AKA Joseph Smith the Front man.

[Uncle Dale]

Of course this is assuming your Pet theory Unk. (ie 19th Century Authorship) AKA Joseph Smith

the Front man.

The more I read Dan Vogel, the more I am inclined to think that JS actually believed in the BoM --

Now that may sound like a strange conclusion, coming from a reader of an author who sets JS

forth as a "pious fraud" ----- but, as I said, the more I read Vogel.....

Uncle "the more I'm beginning to think Smith was an impious believer" Dale

[Thinking]

I will not say bull's-eye. I will not say bull's-eye. I won't, I won't, I won't.

How did you know I was going to check this post to see if you said "bull's-eye?"

And you did!

That reminds me of the lyrics to "If I Had $1,000,000" by BNL.

...I just made you say underwear...

[urroner]

that reminds me of the joke I use to do as a kid:

I bet I can make you say "no."

No you can't.

[consiglieri]

Well, first of all, we might determine what versions of the John pseudopigraphic text were available

in America for study during the 1820s, and what was said about it -- and by whom.

Hi, Uncle Dale!

Thank you for gracing this thread with your presence and comments (and I mean that).

I did some research and have been unable to discover the history of the English translation of the Acts of John, and where it was available when.

You are right that these are important questions.

Do you have any resources that would help provide an answer?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[consiglieri]

How did you know I was going to check this post to see if you said "bull's-eye?"

And you did!

That reminds me of the lyrics to "If I Had $1,000,000" by BNL.

Yes, I did say "bull's-eye" while not saying it.

I am not above self-parody.

I am above precious little, actually.

I do think the parallels remarkable, though.

What really struck me was the time period of an hour where people just stand there and don't say anything.

If I do not use the term "bull's-eye" for this, what term do you think would be appropriate?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[USU78]

I guess my first question would be -- What did Alexander Campbell have to say about THAT old text?

Uncle "after all, we can't expect every bit of pseudopographia to have been in the Palmyra public library" Dale

Now Unk, what say you to the priestly aspect of the women being the ones in both the BoM and Pseudepigraphia to do the raising of the dead? If ever there was a priestly function, acting as G-d's functionary in affecting a miraculous resurrection has got to be one thinksme.

USU "I'm serious here" 78

[Uncle Dale]

USU "I'm serious here" 78

Yeah, but I'm not there.

Uncle "which makes two of us who are not everywhere -- nonomnipresent -- I sorta like that" Dale

[Uncle Dale]

Do you have any resources that would help provide an answer?

Charlesworth is the big expert on the extra-biblical pseudepigrapha....

Anybody near the BYU Lee Library can probably browse indexes for contemporary literature...

Google now has worldcat...

Might consult the Johanine parchment that lies behind the old D&C section...

Uncle "which is in the First Presidency's vault, I hope" Dale

[California]

I don't have much to add except that you can't discount the possibility of coincidence that somewhere in 1000 year of history something would happen on one side of the world that was that same as what happened on another side of the world during thousands of years of history.

â??Coincidence is the word we use when we can't see the levers and pulleys.â?

- Emma Bull

"When you live your life with an appreciation of coincidences and their meanings, you connect with the underlying field of infinite possibilities."

-Deepak Chopra

and one more for good measure:

â??A child can go only so far in life without potty training. It is not mere coincidence that six of the last seven presidents were potty trained, not to mention nearly half of the nation's state legislators.â?

- Dave Barry

[consiglieri]

I do not discount coincidence completely.

But I do feel that as the degree of specificity and unusualness of the parallels increase, the odds of coincidence decrease correspondingly.

Along those lines, I have just finished reviewing the list of holdings of the Manchester Public Library and discovered no Acts of John nor any other volume likely to contain the Acts of John.

The odds of coincidence just got smaller.

Next?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[ERMD]

The more I read Dan Vogel, the more I am inclined to think that JS actually believed in the BoM --

Now that may sound like a strange conclusion, coming from a reader of an author who sets JS

forth as a "pious fraud" ----- but, as I said, the more I read Vogel.....

Uncle "the more I'm beginning to think Smith was an impious believer" Dale

Which would be better, a pious fraud or an impious believer?

I think I would choose the latter.

[Dan Vogel]

Which would be better, a pious fraud or an impious believer?

I think I would choose the latter.

The pious fraud believes himself to be the penultimate believer, risking his own salvation to promote God's plan. Impious believers, on the other hand, are dime a dozen.

[Cold Steel]

Great post. As they wuld have said in the days of King James, I am astnied! But then I was astonied by Nahom and the Valley of Lemuel.

It's a great way to make converts. Let's try it on Uncle Dale....

[consiglieri]

Now Unk, what say you to the priestly aspect of the women being the ones in both the BoM and Pseudepigraphia to do the raising of the dead? If ever there was a priestly function, acting as G-d's functionary in affecting a miraculous resurrection has got to be one thinksme.

USU "I'm serious here" 78

I like the way USU78 has honed the issue to a fine point in this post: "The priestly aspect of the women being the ones in both the BoM and Pseudepigrapha to do the raising of the dead."

I am not aware of anything like it in the Bible. It is remarkable.

What do others think?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Nevo]

In Alma 19 individuals are not "struck dead but subsequently brought back to life." Not literally, anyway. It is not a "resurrection story" but a conversion story. Lamoni and his household, overcome by the Spirit, fall to the earth in a trance. Later, they are raised from the earth one by one, beginning with Lamoni's queen, who exclaims: "O blessed Jesus, who has saved me from an awful hell! O blessed God, have mercy on this people!" (Alma 19:29). The only person who actually dies in the story stays dead.

It should be noted that falling down, crying for mercy, and shouting praises were characteristic of nineteenth-century evangelical conversion narratives. Mark Thomas has also noted that "biblical allusions link Lamoni's conversion with the conversion of other heathens." Verses 8 and 10 contain direct allusions to three miraculous healings of Gentiles in the New Testament: the raising of Jairus' daughter in Luke 8:52 // Matt. 9:24 // Mark 5:39 (cf. Alma 19:8 ); the healing of the centurion's boy in Luke 7:9; and the healing of the Syro-Phoenician woman's daughter in Matt. 15:28 (cf. Alma 19:10). "Thus," Thomas writes, "the Book of Mormon spiritualizes three New Testament miracles of healing and raising the dead to describe the conversion of the spiritually dead" (Mark D. Thomas, Digging in Cumorah: Reclaiming Book of Mormon Narratives [salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1999], 140).

In any case, I am at a loss to see how purported similarities to a highly embellished apocryphal Christian writing from ca. 200 CE would constitute evidence that the Book of Mormon is true.

[e=mc2]

Consiglieri:

I am not aware of anything like it in the Bible. It is remarkable.

Because it came down through the ages of editing, changing, warping, etc., whilst the Acts of John more than likely didn't get edited to say what later writers thought it ought to say, as they have done to the Bible.