Apologetic Methodology: Gardner, Gee And What Ive Learned(or Unlearned) In The Past Year.

[Olavarria]

1) Parallels may be the result of a common source, but they are notevidence of a common source.

2)All evidence must come from the right place and the right time.

Examples

Language: When we study the language of the BoM(names, grammer, word usage) and compare them with languages outside the BoM we should:

1) Limit ourselves to: Egyptian, Hebrew, Mayan, Zoque, Akkadian*and South Arabian. The words, names and grammer must be the words, names and grammer used between 600bc and 400ad*. If we cannot find it during those times, then we can extend ourselves geographically and chronologically, but we must remember that the further we stray from Egypt,Israel, South Arabia, Mesopotamia* and Mesoamerica the weaker the evidence becomes.

2) The names and words should sound the same and mean the same things. True, some allowance can be made for transliteration between languages and changes in meaning(burrito in Spain & burrito in SoCal), but again the greater the changes the weaker the evidence.

Religion

When we study the religion of BoM peoples and compare them with religion outside the BoM we should

1) Limit ourselves to Pre-Exilic Israel, Pre-Classic to Early Classic Mesoamerica and Mesopotamia*

2) The religious concepts should be almost identical. True, some allowance can be made for transliteration between cultures and adaptive changes in meaning, but again the greater the changes the weaker the evidence.

Warfare

When we study the warfare of BoM peoples and compare them with warfare outside the BoM we should

1) Limit ourselves to Pre-Classic to Early Classic Mesoamerica. What people did in the mediterranian may not have worked in the jungles of Chiapas.

2) The martial tactics should be almost identical. True, some allowance can be made for religious sensibilities(I doubt Captain Moroni wanted anyone sacrificed to YHWH, or did he?), but again the greater the changes and distance the weaker the evidence.

You get the picture.

Book of Abraham

Facsimilies

When we study the facsimilies of the BoA and compare them with vignettes that exist outside the BoA:

1) Limit ourselves to papyri from Greco-Roman Egypt, preferrably Thebes. True, we can also make allowances in terms of medium(temple walls) and time(go back to Saite, or up to Roman) and location(Alexandria) but the further we get in time and place and medium, the weaker the evidence.

2) When comparing any vignettes or hypocephali with the facsimilies the other egytian document should share at least 50% of the same elements it shares with the BoA facsimilies.

3)When interpreting figures we must find out how the Egyptians(right time and right place) identify a figure.

4)Pay especially close attention to how vignettes are used inGreco-Roman Egypt, the relations between text and image etc.

Religion

When we study the text of the religious concepts of the BoA and compare it with the religious concepts outside the BoA:

1) Limit ourselves to Ugarit. In the BoA, Abraham's Ur is in Syria for he was sacrificed near the plains of Olishem/Ulisim.

2)The religious concepts should be almost identical. True, some allowance can be made for transliteration between cultures(assuming an edition of the BoA in GR.E) and Abraham's own unique religious experience but again the greater the changes the weaker the evidence.

Above All

Pay especially close attention to Egyptian-Jewish syncretism during the Greco-Roman period. Afterall, that is what the BoA is: Egyptian-Jewish syncretism . During this time, Jews took Egyptian ideas and Egyptians took Jewish ones. Egyptian and Jewish texts that are the product of this Egypto-Jewish syncretism are more impotant that texts that are "purely"Jewish or "purely" Egyptian(assuming an edition of the BoA in GR.E).

I think, that if we have a tighter control of the stuff we use as evidence two things will happen:

1)We will have fewer evidences.

2)The evidences we do have will be very strong.

Exampes of BAD BoM apologetics and Criticism

1) Comparing BoM peoples to Aztecs, Iroquis and Plains Indians.

2)Limiting ourselves to homonyms.

3)Comparing BoM peoples to Persians,Mongols, Greeks and Romans.

4)Comparing BoM to New Testament Psuedpigrapha.

Exampes of BAD BoA apologetics and Criticism

1) Making absolute statements of what was on missing papyri.

2)Going back to Old,Middle and New Kingdom canons for the interpretation of vignettes.

What do you think?

*for Jaredites we will need to go futher back before 600ad. Also we may need to study the reconstructed Mixe-Zoquean or Akkadian for the Jaredite ruling lineage originated in Mesopotamia.

[Olavarria]

In other words, when looking for evidence for the BoM and BoA we should make this our mantra: "place and time, place and time".

[Sargon]

Excellent Post.

I have been waiting for Brant to write up some kind of "manifesto" on this issue as he suggested a few months ago. I can be patient though, since he did just churn out a huge volume of commentary.

In the mean time, Brant had some excellent remarks on this topic to make in a FAIR presentation that can be seen here:

[Olavarria]

bzump

[jadams_4242]

1) Parallels may be the result of a common source, but they are notevidence of a common source.

2)All evidence must come from the right place and the right time.

Examples

Language: When we study the language of the BoM(names, grammer, word usage) and compare them with languages outside the BoM we should:

1) Limit ourselves to: Egyptian, Hebrew, Mayan, Zoque, Akkadian*and South Arabian. The words, names and grammer must be the words, names and grammer used between 600bc and 400ad*. If we cannot find it during those times, then we can extend ourselves geographically and chronologically, but we must remember that the further we stray from Egypt,Israel, South Arabia, Mesopotamia* and Mesoamerica the weaker the evidence becomes.

2) The names and words should sound the same and mean the same things. True, some allowance can be made for transliteration between languages and changes in meaning(burrito in Spain & burrito in SoCal), but again the greater the changes the weaker the evidence.

Religion

When we study the religion of BoM peoples and compare them with religion outside the BoM we should

1) Limit ourselves to Pre-Exilic Israel, Pre-Classic to Early Classic Mesoamerica and Mesopotamia*

2) The religious concepts should be almost identical. True, some allowance can be made for transliteration between cultures and adaptive changes in meaning, but again the greater the changes the weaker the evidence.

Warfare

When we study the warfare of BoM peoples and compare them with warfare outside the BoM we should

1) Limit ourselves to Pre-Classic to Early Classic Mesoamerica. What people did in the mediterranian may not have worked in the jungles of Chiapas.

2) The martial tactics should be almost identical. True, some allowance can be made for religious sensibilities(I doubt Captain Moroni wanted anyone sacrificed to YHWH, or did he?), but again the greater the changes and distance the weaker the evidence.

You get the picture.

Book of Abraham

Facsimilies

When we study the facsimilies of the BoA and compare them with vignettes that exist outside the BoA:

1) Limit ourselves to papyri from Greco-Roman Egypt, preferrably Thebes. True, we can also make allowances in terms of medium(temple walls) and time(go back to Saite, or up to Roman) and location(Alexandria) but the further we get in time and place and medium, the weaker the evidence.

2) When comparing any vignettes or hypocephali with the facsimilies the other egytian document should share at least 50% of the same elements it shares with the BoA facsimilies.

3)When interpreting figures we must find out how the Egyptians(right time and right place) identify a figure.

4)Pay especially close attention to how vignettes are used inGreco-Roman Egypt, the relations between text and image etc.

Religion

When we study the text of the religious concepts of the BoA and compare it with the religious concepts outside the BoA:

1) Limit ourselves to Ugarit. In the BoA, Abraham's Ur is in Syria for he was sacrificed near the plains of Olishem/Ulisim.

2)The religious concepts should be almost identical. True, some allowance can be made for transliteration between cultures(assuming an edition of the BoA in GR.E) and Abraham's own unique religious experience but again the greater the changes the weaker the evidence.

Above All

Pay especially close attention to Egyptian-Jewish syncretism during the Greco-Roman period. Afterall, that is what the BoA is: Egyptian-Jewish syncretism . During this time, Jews took Egyptian ideas and Egyptians took Jewish ones. Egyptian and Jewish texts that are the product of this Egypto-Jewish syncretism are more impotant that texts that are "purely"Jewish or "purely" Egyptian(assuming an edition of the BoA in GR.E).

I think, that if we have a tighter control of the stuff we use as evidence two things will happen:

1)We will have fewer evidences.

2)The evidences we do have will be very strong.

Exampes of BAD BoM apologetics and Criticism

1) Comparing BoM peoples to Aztecs, Iroquis and Plains Indians.

2)Limiting ourselves to homonyms.

3)Comparing BoM peoples to Persians,Mongols, Greeks and Romans.

4)Comparing BoM to New Testament Psuedpigrapha.

Exampes of BAD BoA apologetics and Criticism

1) Making absolute statements of what was on missing papyri.

2)Going back to Old,Middle and New Kingdom canons for the interpretation of vignettes.

What do you think?

*for Jaredites we will need to go futher back before 600ad. Also we may need to study the reconstructed Mixe-Zoquean or Akkadian for the Jaredite ruling lineage originated in Mesopotamia.

I think parallels are a nessacery aspect of finding the true facts; To this day nobody has total proof,{science} but using the parallel method opens up many differant avenues in which to seek facts.

[jmordecai]

Hey this is great! I'm not LDS, but this approach I think would go a long way in shoring up Mormon apologia.

[MormonMason]

...

What do you think?

...

I disagree somewhat for your first number 2 example above, stated thus:

2) The names and words should sound the same and mean the same things. True, some allowance can be made for transliteration between languages and changes in meaning(burrito in Spain & burrito in SoCal), but again the greater the changes the weaker the evidence.

If there is valid evidence of vocalic shift (which often does happen between languages or even in original language stocks), the rules governing the shift should be consistent. If the shift is at least somewhat consistent, it strengthens the linguistic evidence rather than weakens it.

[Olavarria]

I disagree somewhat for your first number 2 example above, stated thus:

If there is valid evidence of vocalic shift (which often does happen between languages or even in original language stocks), the rules governing the shift should be consistent. If the shift is at least somewhat consistent, it strengthens the linguistic evidence rather than weakens it.

Damnit your right!!

A better statement would be:

The names and words should mean the same things.

Example: Petros(Greek),Pedro(Spanish),Pierre(French),Peter(English)=rock

Nfr(Egyptian), Noufi(Coptic), Nfy(Phonecian & Aramaic transliteration of the Egyptian)=good, beutiful

Nephite=Morm6: 17, 19; 3 Nephi 2:16;

http://farms.byu.edu/publications/jbms/?vo...&cat_id=454