Was Zeezrom A Collector Of Money Having Numismatic Value?

[cdowis]

I have to make a confession.

 

This whole thread has left me utterly speechless.  Zeezrom was a coin collector?  What can I say.

[CV75]

I have to make a confession.

 

This whole thread has left me utterly speechless.  Zeezrom was a coin collector?  What can I say.

Well, Korihor was a "stamp" collector... (Alma 30:59).

[Calm]

Well, Korihor was a "stamp" collector... (Alma 30:59).

Ow...

[mfbukowski]

Oh that's right... I must have gotten it BACKWARDS

[mfbukowski]

Well, Korihor was a "stamp" collector... (Alma 30:59).

More like "stomp". 

[mrmandias]

 

cinepro, on 16 Sept 2013 - 10:04 AM, said:

So you and cinepro are suggesting that we have a kind of parable with metonymic names (of no apologetic or polemic value) surrounding a kernel of actual Nephite weights & measures (which do have apologetic value)?

 

 

Did you read my comment and what I was responding to?  I can't make out how you got here from there.

 

I'll spell it out to you.

 

I agree that the dialogue between Zeezrom and Amulek sounds contrived.  There is no particular reason to think that Mormon or a contemporary Nephite chronicler couldn't have come up with a contrived dialogue.  There is also no particular reason to think that a 19th C. American couldn't have come up with a contrived dialogue.  So the mere existence of a contrived-sounding dialogue has no particular apologetic or anti-apologetic value.

[MormonMason]

Did you read my comment and what I was responding to?  I can't make out how you got here from there.

 

I'll spell it out to you.

 

I agree that the dialogue between Zeezrom and Amulek sounds contrived.  There is no particular reason to think that Mormon or a contemporary Nephite chronicler couldn't have come up with a contrived dialogue.  There is also no particular reason to think that a 19th C. American couldn't have come up with a contrived dialogue.  So the mere existence of a contrived-sounding dialogue has no particular apologetic or anti-apologetic value.

While that may be somewhat or possibly true, what has apologetic value is the numbering system underlying the standardized weights of metal that Mormon mentions.  That numbering/values system underlying the values of the weights in relation to each other is rooted in an Egyptian system of which Joseph Smith could have had zero knowledge at the time of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon.  That is wherein the apologetic value resides.

 

The Nephite silver standard off-handedly mentioned by Mormon is a basic 1, 2, 4, 7 system, which has no 19th Century American counterpart.  It is very "Egyptianish," on the other hand.

[mfbukowski]

While that may be somewhat or possibly true, what has apologetic value is the numbering system underlying the standardized weights of metal that Mormon mentions.  That numbering/values system underlying the values of the weights in relation to each other is rooted in an Egyptian system of which Joseph Smith could have had zero knowledge at the time of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon.  That is wherein the apologetic value resides.

Not to mention the fact that coins have never been found in the Americas.

[MormonMason]

Not to mention the fact that coins have never been found in the Americas.

Well, they have.  It's just been that they either were fakes or modern in origin. 

[prismsplay]

I agree that the dialogue between Zeezrom and Amulek sounds contrived.

 

Grant Hardy, the author of Understanding the Book of Mormon: A Reader's Guide (Oxford University Press, 2010) had a clever way of ending his book: "Whether Joseph Smith worked by craftiness, by genius, or by revelation, the Book of Mormon is a remarkable text, one that is worthy of serious study. It is better than it sounds."

 

If the dialogue between Zeezrom and Amulek sounds contrived to anyone, there may be others who treasure the entire dialogue as revealing the distance between worldly thinking and thinking open to the Spirit of God. Since Zeezrom would later teach faith in Christ (Helaman 5:41), Mormon's decision to include the entire dialogue, during which Zeezrom "began to inquire of them [Alma and Amulek] diligently, that he might know more concerning the kingdom of God" (Alma 12:, seems divinely inspired to me. Is there anything more satisfying to lovers of God than watching the spiritual transformation of a hardened sinner into one of His servants? I called attention to a portion of the dialogue out of curiosity. The entire dialogue, involving Alma as well, is much better than the portion of it that I quoted sounds.

Edited September 19, 2013 by prismsplay

[mfbukowski]

Well, they have.  It's just been that they either were fakes or modern in origin. 

And I have some in my couch cushions

[cdowis]

>"I agree that the dialogue between Zeezrom and Amulek sounds contrived."

 

Zeezrom was a lawyer, and was paid on how many cases he could bring to the court.  Clearly he was attempting to build a case that would stand up in court, so the language would be rather "odd", using rather arcane legal words and arguments

[mrmandias]

>"I agree that the dialogue between Zeezrom and Amulek sounds contrived."

 

Zeezrom was a lawyer, and was paid on how many cases he could bring to the court.  Clearly he was attempting to build a case that would stand up in court, so the language would be rather "odd", using rather arcane legal words and arguments

 

Quite possibly.  Or there could be other cultural issues at play.  Or the chroniclers could have cleaned up or dramatized the dialogue a bit or even a lot when they recorded it.  It would be surprising to find an ancient text that didn't.

[SargentYork]

"Historical pieces of money" was simply a guess. We don't know whether or not onties existed prior to the reckoning and measures established by king Mosiah (Alma 11:4). If onties existed prior to that establishment, and if Zeezrom was holding up onties that could be seen to be pre-Mosiah, perhaps they were known to be of great value to collectors.

 

I never thought of that.

 

Thank you.

[prismsplay]

I never thought of that.

Thank you.

 

The thought that you thanked me for would not have been thunk without the nature of the discussions here. I originally read the Book of Mormon in an attempt to discover where its teachings are contrary to the Bible. About halfway through, not only was I not finding false teachings, I could hardly wait for the free time necessary to continue reading. By the time I got to Moroni's challenge to pray concerning its truth, I found myself already believing the book to be true.

 

Not long after my baptism into the RLDS, that church's leadership began to suppress interest in the Book of Mormon being expressed in church publications, because the scholars that the leaders were listening to thought that the book was not what it claimed to be. Within a few years, RLDS Book of Mormon enthusiasts had to meet without church approval. Next, the leadership began characterizing avid Book of Mormon students as dangerous renegades.

 

Despite these embarrassments, Book of Mormon enthusiasts of the RLDS tradition have continued to find evidence that Mesoamerica was where Book of Mormon history took place. I attended many of these renegade meetings and was glad that I did. More recently, I attended a Book of Mormon conference at which scholars from LDS, RLDS, and RLDS offshoots memberships made presentations. There was a beautiful cooperation through common interest in the Book of Mormon.

 

I came to this discussion board looking for opportunities to engage in discussing the Book of Mormon. Although there are some here with serious doubts about the book, to have a place for intelligent discussions about it is wonderfully good.

[Tacenda]

The thought that you thanked me for would not have been thunk without the nature of the discussions here. I originally read the Book of Mormon in an attempt to discover where its teachings are contrary to the Bible. About halfway through, not only was I not finding false teachings, I could hardly wait for the free time necessary to continue reading. By the time I got to Moroni's challenge to pray concerning its truth, I found myself already believing the book to be true.

Not long after my baptism into the RLDS, that church's leadership began to suppress interest in the Book of Mormon being expressed in church publications, because the scholars that the leaders were listening to thought that the book was not what it claimed to be. Within a few years, RLDS Book of Mormon enthusiasts had to meet without church approval. Next, the leadership began characterizing avid Book of Mormon students as dangerous renegades.

Despite these embarrassments, Book of Mormon enthusiasts of the RLDS tradition have continued to find evidence that Mesoamerica was where Book of Mormon history took place. I attended many of these renegade meetings and was glad that I did. More recently, I attended a Book of Mormon conference at which scholars from LDS, RLDS, and RLDS offshoots memberships made presentations. There was a beautiful cooperation through common interest in the Book of Mormon.

I came to this discussion board looking for opportunities to engage in discussing the Book of Mormon. Although there are some here with serious doubts about the book, to have a place for intelligent discussions about it is wonderfully good.

I recently visited the The Church of Christ's headquarters. I had no idea they didn't hold the BoM in higher esteem than that. When they explain in a movie that JS was the man who started the church, it would probably be nice if they had a little more faith in the book that started it. BTW, that is quite the convert story, and nice to know your backstory! Edited September 20, 2013 by Tacenda