BoM name similarities in the Vernal Holley maps

[Guest johnny_cat]

"...just remember, there are one billion Chinese who really don't care whether we win or lose."

I must be Chinese because I don't care who "wins" either.

I'm sorry for contributing to the rather ugly discussion earlier.

[Corky Wallace]

Hey 'Cat,

I didn't think the discussion was all that ugly, and your contribution was fine & welcome.

[Magyar]

Blink: "And yet, that list of 30 names exists..."

Me: Not really. As has been noted, you need to pare it down at least a few. Take off Jerusalem, for example. which is a relatively common American place name across the states -- we have one here in Virginia -- and known to any half-wit reader of the Bible. Take off the silly ones (Ripple Lake, for example). Take off all those of Native American origin, as they COULD have been inspired by the Book of Mormon peoples, not the other way around. Take off those that don't fit the Smith era chronology, like Angola.

And you end up with a list that looks a lot shorter and a lot more like cooincidence. And you still provide no answer for the other names in the Book of Mormon that don't show anywhere that Joseph could have found them, such as Aha, Korihor, Paanchi, etc.

And you don't address the documented ancient formation patterns of names, such as nunation and mimation, of which there is convincing evidence in the Book of Mormon.

[Corky Wallace]

OK, I read the FARMS response to the Holley book and shall take up Dr. Peterson's challenge to offer my own response of said response.

I can't comment on the portion of the review that pertains to Holley's text, as I've not seen nor read that book. I only have the maps provided in the original post as a basis to analyze & comment from.

[A quick diversion - One interesting point in the FARMS article is the employment of of Dr. Nibley's admonition that "the significance of each parallel must be weighed and evaluated separately". IMO, this is a kind of "divide & conquer" approach.

Is this how things are considered in a court of law, for example? In a criminal trial, is there a separate trial for each bit of evidence? And then, as the verdicts for each mini-trial come in, a summary verdict is announced, sort of like adding up the scoring of each round in a boxing match in a "W" or "L" manner? In a legal trial, the evidence is considered both individually and as a whole. It seems to me people make judgements based on the credibility of the evidence, how much evidence there is, and how the evidence fits together, the impact it has in a cumulative manner.

I might have misread or misinterpreted Dr. Nibley's general admonition and I welcome clarification, something the folks on this board are very good at providing - sincerely.]

Now, back to the Holley maps & FARMS:

> The FARMS critique (TFC) points out errors in Holley's locating BOM places. OK, that means Holley may not understand BOM geography, as laid out by the text. But the existence of those places/names remains.

> TFC notes what might be dubious associations of names:

"... to draw etymological parallels between "Jacobugath" and "Jacobsburg," or "Shurr" and "Sherbrooke" is to strain one's credulity."

I don't see these names as being that dramatically different. It's not as though we're being asked to link "Michael" with "Steve". The very same name can be quite dramatically different between languages. Example: "John" in English is "Juan", "Jean" and "Sione", in Spanish, French & Tongan, respectively. In that light the names specified do seem quite remarkably similar, if one is asked to believe there is no link whatsoever.

Perhaps it is my own bias shining through, but I think I see a fair amount of the "divide & conquer" approach seemingly portrayed in Nibley's admonition in TFC, and a similar approach employed in other FARMS articles.

It is as though we are watching a large trial (the anti case against Mormonism) where there is a lot of evidence, where the defendant counsel (aka apologists) have convinced the judge that the trial should not be considered as one big trial, but many miniature trials, strung together, with either new juries for each mini-trial, or a way to purge the jurors' memories of previous mini-trials.

For piece of evidence "A", an up-or-down verdict of guilty or not guilty is sought, based on the standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt", and once that verdict is reached, the verdict is noted, the evidence is removed, and a new trial begins for "evidence B".

In this way there is an avoidance of making a summary, cumulative "judgement" for what the evidence and perspectives offer, together. It seems to me that this approach is employed to a considerable degree by apologists.

I hold open the possibility that antis are doing very much a similar thing, and certainly the evidence is prepared with a bias - just as the defense does in response.

That's the way it looks to this skeptic - I'm sure there are legitimate, well thought out divergent views from apologists. (That's one of the neat things about this board - exploring different mindsets & viewpoints.)

Well, I didn't do a comprehensive response to the FARMS article, but I think I did respond to a couple of key points.

[Brackite]

Michael T. Griffith also did a Great Response to Vernal Holley's Booklet. Here is the URL to his Response: http://ourworld.cs.com/mikegriffith1/id144.htm

[Zakuska]

I bet that with a good, detailed map book of US states, I or anyone else could probably come up with a pretty good list that "almost" matched names from the Book of Mormon, too.

Just take a look at Utah.

[Nighthawke]

Vernal Holley identifies these similarites in his two maps...

Vernal Holley may want to do more research. For example the map he "referenced" dates to "1820s era"??? Quite a feat since neither of the following towns existed before the 1850s...

The Township of Morin wasn't incorporated until 1855: "Government minister Augustin-Norbert Morin came with his Indian guide, Simon, in 1850 to survey the area."

History of Morin Heights

With reference to Ste-Agathe-des-Monts: "There is no evidence of any settlement of Europeans, English or French, in the Ste-Agathe area prior to the community that began with the Dufresnes and the Menards in 1849. . . . From 1850, a rapid colonisation of the Ste- Agathe area began."

The First European Settlers

C'mon people, this stuff's so see-through I was able to put this post together in under 10 minutes off the Internet. Why can't y'all do a modicum of research before posting?

[leeuniverse]

What, anti's doing "research"? Heck, if they did enough so, they would join the Church.

[Magyar]

Thank you, Nighthawke. People will seize upon the silliest things to try to disprove the Book of Mormon. Ain't nevah gonna happen, cause it's true!

But the antis rely on our own laziness, expecting that we will be shocked and shaken in our faith by their astounding claims and fall away without the slightest attempt at research. Unfortunately, for some, that's exactly what happens.

I know someone who joined the church, heard some ridiculous stories about the Temple, believed them hook line and sinker and fell away, brushing off the living witness of dozens of good people she knew who have been there many times.

If somebody said it, it must be true, seems to be their motto.

[Guest johnny_cat]

Here's more:

Rama Township, Ontario, was originally settled in 1836 and named Ramara, which later was shortened to Rama (see this web page).

Unless Joseph Smith could see into the future, Rama offers no support to Holley's theory.

[Brackite]

I 100% agree with Nighthawk and Zakuska on this topic, even though I disagree with them on another issue we have been disucussing on the FAIR Board. The Spaulding-Rigdon Theory on the Book of Mormon is so very weak, the Critics of the Book of Mormon will do very well if they just finally give this whole thing up. IMO, the Spaulding-Rigdon Theory of the Book of Mormon does damage to the BofM Critics claim since this theory has very well been de-bunked by the LDS Apologists.

[Magyar]

Holley's theory seems to be taking punch after punch, shrinking slowly away to nothing. Oh but we still have Palmyra. Definitely sounds like Zarahemla. Or maybe Chicago. Three syllables in that last one. Has to be a match. I'm turning in my church membership right now.

[Beowulf]

This sort of reverse name-calling happened just last summer on the RFM board, when Steve Benson came across the name Nauvoo in a gazetteer for northern Pennsylvania, and crowed mightily when he found out that JS and friends actually stayed the night there sometime during the 1830s.

I was curious, so I looked it up on the Internet, found the self-same document that Steve quoted from, and then read it carefully (unlike him, apparently). The place had another name in the 1830s, and was RENAMED Nauvoo in the mid-1840s, in honor of ... guess where... Yep. Nauvoo, Illinois.

Turns out there are five Nauvoos in the United States, all of them named AFTER the town in Illinois.

Vernal Holley has made the same mistake.

I don't think he did it on purpose, though. He was just sloppy, as so many amateur researchers are.

[Magyar]

So, umm, here I sit awaiting an apology on behalf of my church for this silly escapade in sloppy research, this failed foray into faith-shaking.

And waiting.

And waiting.

Oh, what's the use.

[Guest johnny_cat]

In all fairness, Mr. Holley's book is over 20 years old, and he did not have the resources we have now. The Internet is a great thing indeed. In some ways, it keeps us all a little more honest.

[Corky Wallace]

OK, scholars, just for argument's sake, we've taken off the map:

Morin

Ramah

Ste-Agathe-des-Monts

(We might have more off the list, I haven't kept a close track.)

So, who will handle the remainder?

It seems we should have the whole list discredited by 5:00p today.

For simplicity's sake, let's focus on the following:

- Angola / Angola

- Land of Midian / Land of Midian

- Shiloh / Shilom

- Onidah / Oneida

- Lehigh County / Land of Lehi-Nephi

- Alma / Alma

- Ephraim / Ephraim

Let's see you guys make it happen ! ! ! !

[dacook]

But the antis rely on our own laziness, expecting that we will be shocked and shaken in our faith by their astounding claims and fall away without the slightest attempt at research. Unfortunately, for some, that's exactly what happens.

Very unfortunately, and it happens all too often. I have a young (17 y.o.) neighbor right now who is all upset and shaken by the old Rev. 22:18 claim against LDS scripture her "anti" boyfriend has hit her with, and other similarly stupid, naive attacks on the church. Her parents are good members who have not seen any need to pay any attention to criticisms of the church, so are not really up on the answers. I have opened my library to them and help them all I can but the poor kid is just confused. My job's made a bit harder because she "doesn't like to read" and so won't read any of what I give her. So in her mind it's just what we (me and her parents) say againt what her boyfriend says. And guess who has the most influence on a 17 year-old?

How can some anti's feel good about this sort of conquest? (The boyfriend attends an evangelical congregration where the members are indoctrinated in this sort of attack on the Mormons)

[enummaelish]

In the apologist corner we have the heavyweight champion of the world:

NHM - Nahom

Let's not forget Jershon:

One of the strongest textual clues for the Hebraic background to the Book of Mormon includes the proper noun Jershon. In recent years, scholars have noted the connection between the name Jershon and the tri-literal Hebraic root yr

[Brackite]

Hello Jonny_Cat,

In all fairness, Mr. Holley's book is over 20 years old, and he did not have the resources we have now. The Internet is a great thing indeed. In some ways, it keeps us all a little more honest.

You are right there. Indeed the Internet is a Great thing that helps us keep more honest.

[Confidential Informant]

- Alma / Alma

So is the claim that he copped this one? Okay, fine. But how is it that he copped a name which, to that time, was unknown as a hebrew male name and it just happened to turn out to be correct? If he was just randomly coopting names, would you expect the randomly chosen names to fit so nicely into the paradigm of the work he was constructing?

Ephraim / Ephraim

Since this name appears quite prominently in the Bible, wouldn't the better argument be that Smith simply lifted it from the Biblical text? That would seem mor plausible.

Lehigh County / Land of Lehi-Nephi

Same as above. Why steal the name "lehigh" and change it when it would be much easier to charge him with plagerizing it from the Bible:

Then the Philistines went up, and pitched in Judah, and spread themselves in Lehi. Jud 15:9.  See also Judg. 15: 14; Judg. 15: 17; Judg. 15: 19

Surely you are making your conspiracy theory much more difficult than it need be.

Shiloh is also a common OT name See. Gen. 49: 10; Josh. 16: 6; Judg. 18: 31;

Midian also. See Gen. 25: 2; Gen. 25: 4; Gen. 36: 35; Ex. 2: 16; Num. 22: 4 and many others.

So, it appears to me that your are left with "Angola" and "Oneida". All the rest are legitimate OT names.

Is there a point beyond this that I'm missing?

C.I.

[dacook]

It seems we should have the whole list discredited by 5:00p today.

For simplicity's sake, let's focus on the following:

- Angola / Angola

- Land of Midian / Land of Midian

- Shiloh / Shilom

- Onidah / Oneida

- Lehigh County / Land of Lehi-Nephi

- Alma / Alma

- Ephraim / Ephraim

Let's see you guys make it happen ! ! ! !

Midian, Shiloh, Ephraim are in the bible.

[enummaelish]

Angola was also taken off the list since Norwood demonstrated in the FARMS review that Angola was incorporated in 1873; Leon E. Seltzer, ed., The Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer of the World, 1963, 73.

[kawikadave]

I better hurry and post this before all of this has been thoroughly debunked...

- Angola / Angola

- Land of Midian / Land of Midian

- Shiloh / Shilom

- Onidah / Oneida

- Lehigh County / Land of Lehi-Nephi

- Alma / Alma

- Ephraim / Ephraim

ANGOLA - Already stated in FAIR response that town was not incorporated until 1873.

MIDIAN - Biblical Name

SHILOH - Biblical Name

ONEIDA - This is a native american name, though I don't think you can relate it to Onidah.

The Oneida (Onayotekaono or the People of the Upright Stone) are a tribe of American Indians and comprise one of the five founding nations of the Iroquois Confederacy.

LEHIGH - (as stated in previous post, Lehi is biblical name - Judges 15)

ALMA - Already responded to by C.I.

So in the end you have Oneida/Onidah and Alma. That's a weak list. As has already been explained, the use of Alma could more easily be used as a proof of B of M authenticity.

So any critics willing to say "uncle" yet to this silly theory?

[Guest johnny_cat]

- Angola / Angola

Wasn't around until the 1870s per the FARMS article.

- Land of Midian / Land of Midian

I don't see any modern place name for this.

- Shiloh / Shilom

This is a Biblical name, so it isn't unique to the BofM and doesn't tell us much.

- Onidah / Oneida

A well-known Indian name, but the town in the location Holley puts it was founded in 1839.

- Lehigh County / Land of Lehi-Nephi

Again, a Biblical name

- Alma / Alma

Can't find this one anywhere.

- Ephraim / Ephraim

Biblical name again, but I can't find Holley's town anywhere either.

Maybe someone else will have better luck.

[Corky Wallace]

dacook sez:

Midian, Shiloh, Ephraim are in the bible.

So, did Lehi (or one of his descendents) give these places their names? Or did Joseph? Or did God?

Are they OT or NT? If they're OT presumably both Mormon/Moroni/BOM author got the same translation as the translators in English. If they're NT names, presumably they were transferred to the New World by other means, or they're simple coincidences.

(I feel like a discussion leader! This is kind of fun.)

Translating names into similar languages is sometimes interesting. For example, if we look at some common English names that have been translated into some closely related Polynesian languages, we see similar (but not identical) translations, as the names were introduced to different populations independently. You can see how each group attempted to apply Polynesian pronunciation to English names :

English, Tongan, Hawaiian

David, Tevita, Kawika

John, Sione, Keoni or Ione

George, Siaosi, Keoki

James, Semisi, Kimo

Mark, Ma'ake, Maleko

What does this exercise mean? I think it means that parallel translations of names from one language into a completely different language (even if two very similar languages) rarely results in identical spelling or pronunciation. How many times has there been a need for agreement on translation from one language to another when the translation has occurred separately?

It's not as though we should expect to start with a name from Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek, then translate it into some or multiple native american languages, then translate it into English, and end up with the same translation from the original language right into English.

If a real translation were occurring, wouldn't many (if not most or nearly all) biblical names come out differently?