Could the Book of Mormon be a 17th Century pious fraud?

[cdowis]

On 2/15/2018 at 9:22 PM, JarMan said:

My hypothetical author was an accomplished writer that almost certainly knew about chiasmus. He was also a virtual encyclopedia of the bible and wrote extensively about the bible and the Christian religion, in general. He was a master historian who had read all of the classical greco-roman and jewish writers and was familiar with aspects of greco-roman history consisting of secret combinations almost identical to those found in the Book of Mormon. This hypothetical writer's views on atonement theory and soteriology are virtually identical to that found in the Book of Mormon. He wrote extensively on warfare and the rules of warfare and those rules are followed to a T by the righteous in the Book of Mormon. He was also a government official who served as a public official in a republican government very similar to the Nephite government during the time of the judges. During his life his free government came under attack by powerful people trying to establish a king. He wrote extensively about the ideal form of government, a righteous monarchy, which is reflected perfectly by King Benjamin and which is reflected in the perfect anti-type by King Noah. He wrote works of literature about the Garden of Eden and Joseph of Egypt and clear traces of those works can be found in the Book of Mormon. He was a known associate and admirer of Galileo accounting for the Galilean thought in the Book of Mormon. He was one of the greatest minds of the 17th Century and possibly of all time and his life reflects the absolute perfect qualities for someone capable of producing the Book of Mormon.

You failed to mentiont his extensive research in ancient Middle Eastern names -- sheum, Paanchi, Pahoran, NHM, as well as the extensive knowledge of geography of the Saudi Arabian peninsula and mesoamerica.  Perhaps he had invented the TARDIS to acquire such knowledge.

Brilliant!

Edited February 21, 2018 by cdowis

[JarMan]

On 2/21/2018 at 10:49 AM, cdowis said:

You failed to mentiont his extensive research in ancient Middle Eastern names -- sheum, Paanchi, Pahoran, NHM, as well as the extensive knowledge of geography of the Saudi Arabian peninsula and mesoamerica.  Perhaps he had invented the TARDIS to acquire such knowledge.

Brilliant!

This map of mesoamerica was produced by Dutch cartographer who was also a known associate of my hypothetical writer:

There were also various maps of the Arabian peninsula available from contemporary sources:

Paanchi and Pahoran are supposed to be Egyptian names according to Nibley. But I don't think he makes a convincing case. Even so, some 17th Century scholars such as Athanasius Kircher were studying Egyptian and publishing about it at the time. It's not unreasonable my hypothetical author could have been exposed to Egyptian names. Also, he did know Hebrew and could have easily come up with sheum. As far as NHM, it's possible this name was known in the 17th Century.

[Rajah Manchou]

On 2/22/2018 at 12:49 AM, cdowis said:

You failed to mentiont his extensive research in ancient Middle Eastern names -- sheum, Paanchi, Pahoran, NHM, as well as the extensive knowledge of geography of the Saudi Arabian peninsula and mesoamerica.  Perhaps he had invented the TARDIS to acquire such knowledge.

Brilliant!

We did discuss a contemporary of Grotius doing extensive research into a manuscript written by an Egyptian Jew named Nephi.

But there were thousands of these documents and manuscripts being pulled out of archives and shared across Europe. I wouldn't be surprised if all the names you mentioned were found in fragments of some of them. Nephi, for example. I haven't seen any good explanations for it.
 

Edited February 23, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[cdowis]

57 minutes ago, JarMan said:

 

 

 

Paanchi and Pahoran are supposed to be Egyptian names according to Nibley. But I don't think he makes a convincing case. Even so, some 17th Century scholars such as Athanasius Kircher were studying Egyptian and publishing about it at the time. It's not unreasonable my hypothetical author could have been exposed to Egyptian names. Also, he did know Hebrew and could have easily come up with sheum. As far as NHM, it's possible this name was known in the 17th Century.

1. sheum is not Hebrew but Akkadian.

2.  Paanchi and Pahoran

Dear Mr. Howard:

Thanks for sending me a copy of the publication of Joseph Smith's Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar. There does appear to be evidence that Joseph Smith had studied some Egyptian. For one thing, he undoubtedly spent a great deal of money and effort in trying to master Egyptian, but, as you know, when the Book of Mormon was written, Egyptian had just begun to be deciphered and it is all the more surprising that there are two Egyptian names, Paanch and Pahor(an) which appear together in the Book of Mormon in close connection with a reference to the original language as being "Reformed Egyptian." I read an extremely interesting account by Fawn Brodie, No Man Knows My History, in chapter 12, in which she deals with Joseph Smith's tremendous efforts to learn languages. There were, however, as yet no Egyptian grammars or dictionaries in existence, so the best he could do was to follow books from the seventeenth and eighteenth centures (including some from the nineteenth) which treated the hieroglyphs very much as Horapollo did about the sixth century A.D.--as pure ideographs. Joseph Smith's translation does not, however, follow the pseudo-Neo-Platonism of Athanasius Kircher in the seventeenth century, but is a kind of quasi-biblical composition. In any case it has nothing whatever to do with the original Egyptian manuscript of a copy of the Book of the Dead.

The supposed digits have nothing whatever to do with the figures. You must remember that our digits go back to India through the Arabs and were not brought to Europe until less than a thousand years ago.

I do not for a moment believe that Joseph Smith was trying to mislead anyone; I accept the point of view of a Jewish friend of mine at the University of Utah, that he was a religious genius and that he was quite honest in believing that he really could decipher these ancient texts. But to insist that he did is really doing a disservice to the cause of a great church and its gifted founder.

Cordially,

(signature)

W. F. Albright

See the full discussion  http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/19547-the-full-text-of-the-william-albright-letter/

Also see wiki on Dr.W F  Albright  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_F._Albright

 

 

[JarMan]

1 hour ago, cdowis said:

1. sheum is not Hebrew but Akkadian.

Well that's a problem. How did Zeniff know an Akkadian word?

1 hour ago, cdowis said:

2.  Paanchi and Pahoran

Dear Mr. Howard:

Thanks for sending me a copy of the publication of Joseph Smith's Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar. There does appear to be evidence that Joseph Smith had studied some Egyptian. For one thing, he undoubtedly spent a great deal of money and effort in trying to master Egyptian, but, as you know, when the Book of Mormon was written, Egyptian had just begun to be deciphered and it is all the more surprising that there are two Egyptian names, Paanch and Pahor(an) which appear together in the Book of Mormon in close connection with a reference to the original language as being "Reformed Egyptian." I read an extremely interesting account by Fawn Brodie, No Man Knows My History, in chapter 12, in which she deals with Joseph Smith's tremendous efforts to learn languages. There were, however, as yet no Egyptian grammars or dictionaries in existence, so the best he could do was to follow books from the seventeenth and eighteenth centures (including some from the nineteenth) which treated the hieroglyphs very much as Horapollo did about the sixth century A.D.--as pure ideographs. Joseph Smith's translation does not, however, follow the pseudo-Neo-Platonism of Athanasius Kircher in the seventeenth century, but is a kind of quasi-biblical composition. In any case it has nothing whatever to do with the original Egyptian manuscript of a copy of the Book of the Dead.

The supposed digits have nothing whatever to do with the figures. You must remember that our digits go back to India through the Arabs and were not brought to Europe until less than a thousand years ago.

I do not for a moment believe that Joseph Smith was trying to mislead anyone; I accept the point of view of a Jewish friend of mine at the University of Utah, that he was a religious genius and that he was quite honest in believing that he really could decipher these ancient texts. But to insist that he did is really doing a disservice to the cause of a great church and its gifted founder.

Cordially,

(signature)

W. F. Albright

See the full discussion  http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/19547-the-full-text-of-the-william-albright-letter/

Also see wiki on Dr.W F  Albright  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_F._Albright

 

 

I don't see how any of this is relevant. Even though Kircher couldn't read hieroglyphics, he learned Coptic. In this way he would have encountered Egyptian names.

[Rajah Manchou]

6 minutes ago, JarMan said:

I don't see how any of this is relevant. Even though Kircher couldn't read hieroglyphics, he learned Coptic. In this way he would have encountered Egyptian names.

Is it just me or is the whole Nephi thing blowing right past the scholarship? For all that has been written on NHM, I couldn't find a mention of Kircher's Nephi in an apologetic work. Nibley, who read Kircher, does not mention Nephi. Albright skips over it too while marveling about how the Book of Mormon contains the Egyptian names Paanch and Pahoran. Albright then mentions Kircher, but no mention of Nephi.

Is there any explanation as to how the very unique personal name Nephi found only in Kircher's manuscript ends up in the Book of Mormon?

[JarMan]

22 minutes ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Is it just me or is the whole Nephi thing blowing right past the scholarship? For all that has been written on NHM, I couldn't find a mention of Kircher's Nephi in an apologetic work. Nibley, who read Kircher, does not mention Nephi. Albright skips over it too while marveling about how the Book of Mormon contains the Egyptian names Paanch and Pahoran. Albright then mentions Kircher, but no mention of Nephi.

Is there any explanation as to how the very unique personal name Nephi found only in Kircher's manuscript ends up in the Book of Mormon?

For the most part the scholars aren't interested in a 17th Century connection. Not yet anyway. You have to be the scholar.

[cdowis]

32 minutes ago, JarMan said:

Well that's a problem. How did Zeniff know an Akkadian word?

The same way we borrow Greek and Latin words, etc, ad nauseum.  In this case it is a proper noun, a name  for a grain.  Perhaps it was used by the Jaredites and passed on to the Nephite language.  The Nephites used Jaredite proper names.

I

 

[cdowis]

50 minutes ago, JarMan said:

I don't see how any of this is relevant. Even though Kircher couldn't read hieroglyphics, he learned Coptic. In this way he would have encountered Egyptian names.

Indeed you don't.  Perhaps you could do some research to SEE if those names would have been available to him in the Coptic rather than just blathering away.  Perhaps sheum was also found in the Coptic language as well.

Edited February 23, 2018 by cdowis

[Rajah Manchou]

47 minutes ago, cdowis said:

Indeed you don't.  Perhaps you could do some research to SEE if those names would have been available to him in the Coptic rather than just blathering away.  Perhaps sheum was also found in the Coptic language as well.

Friend. We've been talking (blathering if you prefer) here about how Kircher was knee deep in Egyptian and Coptic texts that would have been full of Egyptian, Coptic and Arabic names. Kircher was translating a manuscript written by an Egyptian Jew named Nephi. So yes, at least one very unique Egyptian-Jewish personal name that is found in the Book of Mormon was available to him. 

Edited February 23, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[JarMan]

1 hour ago, cdowis said:

The same way we borrow Greek and Latin words, etc, ad nauseum.  In this case it is a proper noun, a name  for a grain.

In which case it would have been a Hebrew word. But it's not a Hebrew word as you pointed out.

1 hour ago, cdowis said:

Perhaps it was used by the Jaredites and passed on to the Nephite language.  The Nephites used Jaredite proper names.

Did the Jaredites get it from the Akkadian before or after the confusion of tongues?

1 hour ago, cdowis said:

Indeed you don't.  Perhaps you could do some research to SEE if those names would have been available to him in the Coptic rather than just blathering away.  Perhaps sheum was also found in the Coptic language as well.

Coptic is just a different way to write Egyptian. Names didn't suddenly change because the writing did.

[cdowis]

2 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Friend. We've been talking (blathering if you prefer) here about how Kircher was knee deep in Egyptian and Coptic texts that would have been full of Egyptian, Coptic and Arabic names. Kircher was translating a manuscript written by an Egyptian Jew named Nephi. So yes, at least one very unique Egyptian-Jewish personal name that is found in the Book of Mormon was available to him. 

This is called the "anything is possible" argument.  I guess this would include sheum, Moroni, Mormon, Coriantumr, and even Timothy.
Since we are blathering away, I will argue  Joseph Smith was telling the truth == it is certainly possible, is it not?

BTW, I do know you, and we are not friends.

Edited February 23, 2018 by cdowis

[cdowis]

1 hour ago, JarMan said:

Did the Jaredites get it from the Akkadian before or after the confusion of tongues?

Anything is possible.

Coptic is just a different way to write Egyptian. Names didn't suddenly change because the writing did.

Thank you

 

[Rajah Manchou]

15 minutes ago, cdowis said:

This is called the "anything is possible" argument.  I guess this would include sheum, Moroni, Mormon, Coriantumr, and even Timothy.

Then I will argue  Joseph Smith was telling the truth == it is certainly possible, is it not?

Yes, it is. If you have read any of my other threads on these topics, including possible sources for the name Mormon, Coriantumr, Maroni/Moroni (a title for military chiefs with preternatural abilities used by the Kumr people of Comoro). I've provided an explanation for even Timothy. So yes. In my opinion, the Book of Mormon could very well be an authentic historical document, of the Indies, not specifically limited to Mesoamerica. It is possible, in my opinion, Joseph Smith was telling the truth, albeit he may have been describing events that only he experienced. But I would not discount those.

15 minutes ago, cdowis said:

BTW, I do know you, and we are not friends.

Have I met you IRL? If so, and you don't consider me a friend, my apologies.

PS. I am not Ralph Olsen, but I do consider him a friend, even we have never met.

Edited February 23, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[cdowis]

6 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

 I've provided an explanation for even Timothy.

So has Hugh Nibley -- an interesting connection to the Mulekite migration.  Also, Discover magazine had reported that DNA research discovered that a full-blooded Native American had a common ancestor with someone from Greece.  That URL is no longer available.

So yes. In my opinion, the Book of Mormon could very well be an authentic historical document, of the Indies, not specifically limited to Mesoamerica.

If you are speaking of Madagascar == 

Quote

Beginning in the 10th or 11th century, Arab and Zanzibari ivory merchants working their way down the east coast of Africa in their dhowsand established settlements on the west coast of Madagascar....Arab immigrants were few in total number compared to the Indonesians and Bantus, but they left a lasting impression. The Malagasy names for seasons, months, days, and coins are Arabic in origin      wiki

Have I met you IRL? If so, and you don't consider me a friend, my apologies.

In context your use of "friend" appeared to be rather condescending

 

[Rajah Manchou]

1 hour ago, cdowis said:

If you are speaking of Madagascar

Not Madagascar. But I'm sure everybody is tired of hearing me repeat, and I'm obviously not winning any friends with it here. So I'll just leave it at that. 

1 hour ago, cdowis said:

In context your use of "friend" appeared to be rather condescending

I reread that and I can see how it could come across wrong. Not my intention. Again, my apologies. 

Edited February 23, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[Calm]

"Also, Discover magazine had reported that DNA research discovered that a full-blooded Native American had a common ancestor with someone from Greece.  That URL is no longer available."

That may be out of date with new technology, you should double check that.

[Nevo]

14 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Is it just me or is the whole Nephi thing blowing right past the scholarship? For all that has been written on NHM, I couldn't find a mention of Kircher's Nephi in an apologetic work.

Just curious why you would you expect it to be mentioned in an apologetic work. How do you suppose Kircher's "Rabbi Barachias Nephi of Babylon" // "Abenephius the Arab" is connected to the Book of Mormon Nephi?

[Calm]

4 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Not Madagascar. But I'm sure everybody is tired of hearing me repeat, and I'm obviously not winning any friends with it here. So I'll just leave it at that. 

I reread that and I can see how it could come across wrong. Not my intention. Again, my apologies. 

I enjoy your writings, Rajah even if they don't persuade me.  Your posts are upbeat and interesting, I learn new things, which is why I frequent the board.

[JarMan]

7 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

I reread that and I can see how it could come across wrong. Not my intention. Again, my apologies. 

I read you as showing mildness in the face of contention. Based on this post it looks like I was right. 

[cdowis]

4 hours ago, Calm said:

"Also, Discover magazine had reported that DNA research discovered that a full-blooded Native American had a common ancestor with someone from Greece.  That URL is no longer available."

That may be out of date with new technology, you should double check that.

https://dnaconsultants.com/cherokees-spoke-greek-came-east-mediterranean/

https://www.accessgenealogy.com/native/cherokee-dna.htm

[Rajah Manchou]

7 hours ago, Nevo said:

Just curious why you would you expect it to be mentioned in an apologetic work. 

There are reasons to believe that Nephi, the Egyptian Jew, really existed and that the manuscript Kircher was working from referenced authentic Jewish material from antiquity. An authentic Jewish manuscript written by an Egyptian Jew named Nephi would be relevant to the apologetic effort, no?

BYU also has one of the largest collections of Kircher material in the world. What is the point, if no one is going to mention it?
 

Edited February 24, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[Rajah Manchou]

9 hours ago, Nevo said:

]How do you suppose Kircher's "Rabbi Barachias Nephi of Babylon" // "Abenephius the Arab" is connected to the Book of Mormon Nephi?

I'm just speculating here, as usual, so proceed with caution @The Nehor 

(1) The Book of Mormon is clear that Nephi was a hereditary title or personal name passed down through the descendants of Nephi. 
(2) Moroni, son of Mormon, was a pure descendent of Nephi. (3 Nephi 5:20, Mormon 8:13)

So Moroni was a Nephi, something that seemed to greatly confuse Joseph Smith.

So let's suppose that the Book of Mormon, like Dr. Paul Owen has proposed, "could be taken as a genuinely restored ancient text with a fictional narrative that originated in the Old World, an account that bore some connection to the mysterious (and probably later) History of the Rechabites."

(1) The Rechabites are said to have been led by God away from the destruction of Jerusalem in the 6th century BC to an island promised to them.
(2) The Nephites are also said to be led led by God away from the destruction of Jerusalem in the 6th century BC to an island promised to them.

/beginspeculation

What if it was the same island? If the Rechabite island is the same as the Nephite island, then there was correspondence with the Old World when Zosimus brought back a manuscript account called the "Abode of the Blessed or History of the Rechabites" to Egypt. If the Rechabite Island is the same as the Nephite Island, then a manuscript carried by Moroni/Nephi could also have found its way to Egypt, such as the letters we find from the Indies in the Cairo Geniza.

/endspeculation

My research aims to demonstrate that the Rechabite Island is the same as the Nephite Island. IMO, the similarities are too numerous to ignore.

Edited February 24, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[Calm]

4 hours ago, cdowis said:

https://dnaconsultants.com/cherokees-spoke-greek-came-east-mediterranean/

https://www.accessgenealogy.com/native/cherokee-dna.htm

2008 is old technology when it comes to DNA testing as I understand it.

[Nevo]

1 hour ago, Rajah Manchou said:

I'm just speculating here, as usual, so proceed with caution @The Nehor

Thanks for your reply. I'm still not exactly clear on how you get from Nephi to Rabbi Barachias Nephi. You say "let's suppose" that the Book of Mormon is "a genuinely restored ancient text with a fictional narrative"—so far, so good—but then you talk about Nephi and Moroni and Zosimus as real people and the Island of the Blessed Ones as a real place. You say: "If the Rechabite Island is the same as the Nephite Island, then a manuscript carried by Moroni/Nephi could also have found its way to Egypt." I don't follow. Are you saying Moroni is Barachias Nephi? But Kircher's Arabic manuscript discussing Egyptian mysteries really has nothing to do with the Book of Mormon, does it?

I dusted off my copy of Charlesworth's The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha and skimmed "The History of the Rechabites." It seems pretty clear that the island of the Blessed Ones is a mythical place, on another plane of existence, where the inhabitants live a Millennium-like existence: "And again we announce to you, O brothers, that among us here there is no sickness, pain, fatigue to our bodies, mutilation, weariness, or temptations; not even Satan's power can touch us, for there is not among us rage, jealousy, evil desire, or hateful thoughts" (14:1). Also, everyone is naked. That doesn't sound much like the Nephite island to me. And Zosimus, it should be noted, doesn't travel there by boat but is carried through the air and "over the great ocean" by two magical trees (3:4).