Another Question About The Book Of Ether

[Sargon]

I think we all know the answer to that one: whatever it takes to retain the pretense of ancient authorship.

It's funny: apologists of varying degrees of skill compile lists of supposed parallels and "things Joseph couldn't have possibly known," but it only takes a single anachronism to disprove the whole thing. If you theorize that all swans are white, a thousand white swans aren't as important as the single black swan that disproves your theory. Critics have pointed out dozens of black swans with respect to Mormonism, and the BoM in particular. But here you've got one of the most simple and glaring black swans one could ask for--it's staring you right in the face. But it's unceremoniously brushed aside with barely a passing comment. After all, there's always the deus ex machina of the translation process--that is, "Joseph did it."

Care to actually address those silly apologetic arguments? Or, are you content to make elightened, objective, and completely bias-free commentary from the sidelines?

Nibley:

This would make the invention of glass far older than anyone dreamed it was until the recent finding of such objects as Egyptian glass beads from "the end of the third millennium B.C."50 and "plaques of turquoise blue glass of excellent quality" in the possession of one of the very earliest queens of Egypt.51 "Very little . . . is known," writes Newberry, "about the early history of glass," though that history "can indeed be traced back to prehistoric times, for glass beads have been found in prehistoric graves." 52 We need not be surprised if the occurrences of glass objects before the sixteenth century B.C. "are few and far between,"53 for glass rots, like wood, and it is a wonder that any of it at all survives from remote antiquity. There is all the difference in the world, moreover, between few glass objects and none at all. One clot of ruddy dirt is all we have to show that the Mesopotamians were using iron knives at the very beginning of the third millennium B.C.â??but that is all we need. Likewise the earliest dated piece of glass known comes from the time of Amenhotep I; yet under his immediate successors glass vases appear that indicate an advanced technique in glass working: "they reveal the art in a high state of proficiency; that must be the outcome of a long series of experiments," writes Newberry.54

http://mi.byu.edu/publications/books/?book...glass+beads#r49

[Joseph Antley]

Did anybody want to address the issue of Shelem v. Shalom?

I don't take the Babel story literally so I don't think the Jaredites were speaking some pure Adamic language. Maybe they were speaking Proto-Semitic.

[Sevenbak]

I don't take the Babel story literally so I don't think the Jaredites were speaking some pure Adamic language. Maybe they were speaking Proto-Semitic.

I tend to disagree, based on 2 references. Firstly, the writings of the brother of Jared, in it's pure Adamic state would have been powerful indeed. Perhaps the language changed over the course of thousands of years of Jaredite history, but initially, it was unaltered by the Lord.

Ether 12:24 Behold, thou hast not made us mighty in writing like unto the brother of Jared, for thou madest him that the things which he wrote were mighty even as thou art, unto the overpowering of man to read them.

2nd, it would seem that the Lord himself cements the deal for me.

Ether 3:24 For behold, the language which ye shall write I have confounded; wherefore I will cause in my own due time that these stones shall magnify to the eyes of men these things which ye shall write.

Cheers

[Flyonthewall]

I did what for the what now????

Yeah...don't you remember? Maybe it was the other Professor Scott.

Dr. Nichols of the San Francisco based Plexicorp, acquired the formula for transparent aluminum in 1986 from a mysterious engineer from Edinburgh, known as "Professor Scott". In exchange for the formula, Dr. Nichols provided enough plexiglass to "Professor Scott" to construct a giant whale-tank in the cargo hold of the stolen Klingon Bird of Prey. (Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home)

[zerinus]

I have a few more questions regarding the Book of Ether, specifically the manner in which the brother of Jared manufactured sixteen stones, as related in the verse below:

My first question has to do with the manner of producing these sixteen small stones. The stones are described as being "white and clear, even as transparent glass." Are the stones both "white and clear" or is "white" here being used as a synonym for "clear"?

I think it means that they were colorless crystal. My guess is that they were naturally occurring quartz. Quartz is the base material for many gemstones, such as agates of different colors:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quartz

http://mineral.galleries.com/minerals/Sili...ARTZ/QUARTZ.htm

http://www.mindat.org/min-3337.html

And for lots of examples of quartz images, try this Google search result:

http://images.google.co.uk/images?hl=en&am...mages&gbv=2

Quartz crystals can grow very big, so that you can even make quite large â??crystal ballsâ? out of them. A large crystal ball that was completely flawless would be very expensive. Smaller quartz crystals are quite plentiful and can be bought quite cheaply form new-age shops, and shops that specialize in the occult stuff.

But more importantly, it seems strange to me that clear stones would be "molten out of a rock." It sounds as if heat were used in the process. How does somebody apply heat to a rock and come up with clear stones? Perhaps there are some smelters or geologists on the board who could address this question.

The Book of Mormon is written in the old English of the KJV, and my guess is that in that sense it means more than just â??meltedâ?. I think it may have the meaning of â??carved,â? â??quarried,â? or â??fashionedâ?. In the KJV it is often used in â??molten images,â? and it is not always clear that it means â??meltedâ?. Job uses it in an unusual context: â??Hast thou with him spread out the sky, which is strong, and as a molten looking glass?â? (Job 37:18.) What it means by â??looking glassâ? is not clear. In ancient times mirrors (looking glass) were not made of â??glassâ? at all. They were made of polished metal. So it is not certain that what in the book of Ether refers to as â??molten out of a rockâ? means â??meltedâ?. I think it simply means â??fashionedâ? or â??carved outâ?.

A related question would involve the comparison with transparent glass. It appears the stones were not transparent glass, but looked like transparent glass. How does the author know about transparent glass in the first place in order to make the comparison?

Ask Job! See the above quote.

Was the comparison to "transparent glass" made by the original author or by Moroni or by Joseph Smith?

Most likely by Moroni, and literally translated by Joseph Smith.

Another question I have relates to the name of the mountain, which is described as being called "Shelem" specifically "because of its exceeding height." We would therefore expect the name to have something to do with the height of the mountain. Nibley offers that "Shelem" is related to the Hebrew "Shalom" which means the peace or safety provided by a high mountain retreat. I would be interested in knowing if that is correct.

That is Nibleyâ??s opinion. It may or may not be true; who knows.

But that sort of begs the question of why any Hebrew cognate should be expected in the Jaredite language, which appears to be singular to the Jaredites themselves, their language not being confounded by God at the time of Babel.

The Jaredites spoke the language that the inhabitants of the world spoke before the Lord â??confounded the languagesâ? of the people at the Tower of Babel. Who knows, perhaps the language that they spoke was a variant of the Semitic languages. There are (or have been) many different Semitic languages, including Hebrew, Arabic, Syriac, and ancient Egyptian; the last two of which are now dead languages.

zerinus

[zerinus]

I also like how the brother of Jared goes to all that work to come up with these 16-stones, and after the whole deal is over and they are made to shine, the Lord produces two similar stones He had all the time and said, "By the way, you can have these, too!"

Those were entirely different objects altogether. The "two stones" mentioned here refer to the Urim and the Thummim, which were used to translate the plates. They were not "luminescent" stones, like the ones used to light up the barges. Their purposes were different; and we don't know what they were made of. The expression â??shine forth in darknessâ? is also used in relation to these stones in the book of Alma:

Alma 37

:

23 And the Lord said: I will prepare unto my servant Gazelem, a stone, which shall shine forth in darkness unto light, that I may discover unto my people who serve me, that I may discover unto them the works of their brethren, yea, their secret works, their works of darkness, and their wickedness and abominations.

But that is used metaphorically. It mean in the sense of bringing â??hidden truth into lightâ?. It does not mean that they are â??luminescent stonesâ?.

Thanks, everybody, for your great comments. I have learned a lot!

Did anybody want to address the issue of Shelem v. Shalom?

Already done!

zerinus

[charity's child]

Cultural: When the brother of Jared has a solution to take to the Lord, he does it by climbing a very high mountain, which they called Shelem. In so doing, he is foreshadowing Moses who will go up in the mountain to speak to the Lord. In the days before constructed temples, the ancients used mountains as a natural temple. Remember that Jared and his brother had come from a land where the Tower of Babel was being built so that its top could reach the heavens. Ancient man was hardly stupid. They knew that they could not build a building so high that it physically touched the realm of God, but they certainly believed that by being on an elevated location they were closer to God, both physically and spiritually. It is therefore no surprise that the brother of Jared so seek out a mountain of â??exceeding heightâ? as he attempted to bring a particular problem before the Lord. He was going up to his natural temple.

I read somewhere (in an Ensign, I think) that the "tower" was possibly a ziggurat. That they weren't building something tall enough to reach heaven, but their own temple, wherein they would perform their own endowments, eschewing God's commandments.

[charity's child]

A related question would involve the comparison with transparent glass. It appears the stones were not transparent glass, but looked like transparent glass. How does the author know about transparent glass in the first place in order to make the comparison? Was the comparison to "transparent glass" made by the original author or by Moroni or by Joseph Smith?

Question for our hebrew specialists: the phrase "transparent glass" sounds to me like a word that doesn't translate perfectly into english. What was the original word, and what was its actual meaning? Does it mean glass? or something else, like window.

[paulpatter]

I have a few more questions regarding the Book of Ether, specifically the manner in which the brother of Jared manufactured sixteen stones, as related in the verse below:

My first question has to do with the manner of producing these sixteen small stones. The stones are described as being "white and clear, even as transparent glass." Are the stones both "white and clear" or is "white" here being used as a synonym for "clear"? But more importantly, it seems strange to me that clear stones would be "molten out of a rock." It sounds as if heat were used in the process. How does somebody apply heat to a rock and come up with clear stones? Perhaps there are some smelters or geologists on the board who could address this question.

A related question would involve the comparison with transparent glass. It appears the stones were not transparent glass, but looked like transparent glass. How does the author know about transparent glass in the first place in order to make the comparison? Was the comparison to "transparent glass" made by the original author or by Moroni or by Joseph Smith?

All the Best!

. . . .

--Consiglieri

These questions assume that there must be scientific explanations for the events described in Ether, and--by extraplation--for other, similar events recorded in scripture (Lazarus, five loaves and two fishes, Joseph's experience in the grove, etc.) These questions further assume (or at least suggest) that if no such science-based answers are to be found for them, the events are fictitious.

It seems to me that if you're not faith-based, very little that is recorded in the Bible and BoM will be acceptable to you. If you are faith-based, you will understand that with God all things are possible.

True, if you are faith-based but not LDS, you can argue that God wasn't involved in the events described in Ether, and, consequently, dismiss Joseph Smith as a fraud (which some--not all--are wont to do).

Just my thoughts. . .may be light years off base.

[Sevenbak]

These questions assume that there must be scientific explanations for the events described in Ether, and--by extraplation--for other, similar events recorded in scripture (Lazarus, five loaves and two fishes, Joseph's experience in the grove, etc.) These questions further assume (or at least suggest) that if no such science-based answers are to be found for them, the events are fictitious.

It seems to me that if you're not faith-based, very little that is recorded in the Bible and BoM will be acceptable to you. If you are faith-based, you will understand that with God all things are possible.

True, if you are faith-based but not LDS, you can argue that God wasn't involved in the events described in Ether, and, consequently, dismiss Joseph Smith as a fraud (which some--not all--are wont to do).

Just my thoughts. . .may be light years off base.

It was through faith that the brother of Jared moved Mount Zerin (Ether 12:3) So I don't get why some people can't allow him to smelt clear stones from elements from a high mountain. After all, this whole earth will one day be smelted with high heat and become a sea of glass, or a giant Urim and Thummim.

[paulpatter]

It was through faith that the brother of Jared moved Mount Zerin (Ether 12:3) So I don't get why some people can't allow him to smelt clear stones from elements from a high mountain. After all, this whole earth will one day be smelted with high heat and become a sea of glass, or a giant Urim and Thummim.

On-spot comment. Indeed, faith is the linchpin that supports the miracles described in scripture. Those who have no faith necessarily turn to science to explain those miracles. When their science-god cannot provide an explanation, they conclude that the miracles didn't happen; i.e., they are fictitious. Some, as I noted earlier, may use that conclusion to denigrate--as with the case at hand--a particular religion and its scripture. (Please note that I'm making a general statement here; I don't have a particular individual in mind.)

One should be careful, I think, about insisting on a science-based explanation for "impossible" events described in scripture. Why? Because the science of, say, 1950 is not the science of 2008; and the science of 2008 will, obviously, not be the science of 2050.

[MormonMason]

I remember somewhere hearing that you can alter the molecular structure of Aluminum to make it transparent. I don't see how gold would be any more difficult.

Actually, it is an oxide of aluminum that can be rendered transparent by current technology.

[MormonMason]

I think we all know the answer to that one: whatever it takes to retain the pretense of ancient authorship.

It's funny: apologists of varying degrees of skill compile lists of supposed parallels and "things Joseph couldn't have possibly known," but it only takes a single anachronism to disprove the whole thing. If you theorize that all swans are white, a thousand white swans aren't as important as the single black swan that disproves your theory. Critics have pointed out dozens of black swans with respect to Mormonism, and the BoM in particular. But here you've got one of the most simple and glaring black swans one could ask for--it's staring you right in the face. But it's unceremoniously brushed aside with barely a passing comment. After all, there's always the deus ex machina of the translation process--that is, "Joseph did it."

Glass was known thousands of years ago. A glass chalice was found dating to the time of Thuthmose III (1479 to 1425 BCE) in Egypt. The Book of Job contains a Hebrew word translated as crystal in the KJV but which is known to refer to clear substances. Modern Hebrew in fact applies the same Hebrew word to glass.

In addition, Pliny makes reference to accidental discovery of glass by Phoenician merchants around 5000 BCE. Artifacts made of colored glass dating back to at least 3500 BCE have been found in archaeological sites in Egypt and in Eastern Mesopotamia. These finds are well within both the timeframe and the location of the Brother of Jared, making them instead good evidence for the Book of Ether, in my opinion.