Could the Books of Jasher and Josephus Have Helped Joseph Fabricate the Book of Abraham?

[Scott Lloyd]

It’s several months old, but I just found this rebuttal video on YouTube that destroys an antagonistic criticism by Radio Free Mormon (consigliere) and Bill Reel. 
 

In the process, I was introduced to Kwaku (pronounced “kway-koo,” as RFM would learn to his embarrassment), a brilliant, young, Ghanaian apologist and hilarious YouTube comedian. I’ve since watched a couple of others of his videos, including one from last summer in which he confronted (in an amiable way) a couple of hardcore anti-Mormon protesters at the Manti Temple pageant. 
 

You should watch the above link to get the impact of the video. But in a nutshell, it shows that though Joseph in his lifetime had access to Jasher and Josephus, it would not have been soon enough — in the case of Jasher — to help him in fraudulently inventing the Book of Abraham — if indeed that were his intent. In the case of Josephus, the similarities are not close enough to conclude that Joseph plagiarized Josephus in creating the Book of Abraham. 

Of course, I hold to my conviction that the Book of Abraham is not a fraudulent invention at all, but an authentic scriptural record that Joseph brought forth by the gift and power of God. 

Edited April 9, 2020 by Scott Lloyd

[JamesBYoung]

https://www.gotquestions.org/book-of-Jasher.html

There is a book called “The Book of Jasher” today, although it is not the same book as mentioned in the Old Testament. It is an eighteenth-century forgery that alleges to be a translation of the “lost” Book of Jasher by Alcuin, an eighth-century English scholar. There is also a more recent book titled “The Book of Jashar” by science fiction and fantasy writer Benjamin Rosenbaum. This book is a complete work of fiction.

Another book by this same name, called by many “Pseudo-Jasher,” while written in Hebrew, is also not the “Book of Jasher” mentioned in Scripture. It is a book of Jewish legends from the creation to the conquest of Canaan under Joshua, but scholars hold that it did not exist before A.D. 1625. In addition, there are several other theological works by Jewish rabbis and scholars called “Sefer ha Yashar,” but none of these claim to be the original Book of Jasher.

In the end, we must conclude that the Book of Jasher mentioned in the Bible was lost and has not survived to modern times. All we really know about it is found in the two Scripture quotations mentioned earlier. The other books by that title are mere fictions or Jewish moral treatises.

[Maureen]

Even in the Gospel Topic Essay, Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham, footnote #46 says: "Some of these extrabiblical elements were available to Joseph Smith through the books Jasher and Josephus. Joseph Smith was aware of these books, but it is unknown whether he utilized them."

M.

[Scott Lloyd]

2 hours ago, Maureen said:

Even in the Gospel Topic Essay, Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham, footnote #46 says: "Some of these extrabiblical elements were available to Joseph Smith through the books Jasher and Josephus. Joseph Smith was aware of these books, but it is unknown whether he utilized them."

M.

I’m aware of that footnote. Obviously, Kwaku was as well. But Kwaku showed through his timeline that Joseph would not have had access to Jasher in time to have helped him do a Book of Abraham fabrication, because Jasher was not published in English until years later. 
 

And the similarities with Josephus are not close enough to show persuasively that Joseph relied on Josephus to invent the Book of Abraham. 

Edited April 9, 2020 by Scott Lloyd

[Fair Dinkum]

Your are correct Bro. Lloyd, This matter is several months old.   And because of this, my memory could be wrong.  But I'm almost certain that the anonymous pod caster RFM exposed Kwaku's initial and counter arguments as lacking any substance after which Kwaku abandoned the battlefield.   The timeline that Kwahu based his argument on was shown to be wrong.  At least that's what I remember.  https://radiofreemormon.org/2019/07/radio-free-mormon-80-going-down-to-kwaku-town/ In fact, I thought RFM so thoroughly thrashed and embarrassed Kwaku, that I'm surprised that you actually wanted to resurrect this subject again.  Some failed arguments are best left alone and forgotten.

I think the only way that the Book of Abraham makes any sense is to do exactly what you have done and just ignore all of the apologetic arguments, theories and conflicting evidence and instead just declare your belief that... "...the Book of Abraham is not a fraudulent invention at all, but an authentic scriptural record that Joseph brought forth by the gift and power of God" So there.

Edited April 9, 2020 by Fair Dinkum

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, JamesBYoung said:

..............................

There is a book called “The Book of Jasher” today, although it is not the same book as mentioned in the Old Testament. It is an eighteenth-century forgery that alleges to be a translation of the “lost” Book of Jasher by Alcuin, an eighth-century English scholar. ...................

The internet says that "In 1886, Joseph Hyrum Parry of Salt Lake City acquired the rights to the translation [of the Book of Jasher] from Mordecai Noah's estate. It was published by J. H. Parry & Company in Salt Lake City in 1887."

[Robert F. Smith]

6 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

Your are correct Bro. Lloyd, This matter is several months old.   And because of this, my memory could be wrong.  But I'm almost certain that the anonymous pod caster RFM exposed Kwaku's initial and counter arguments as lacking any substance after which Kwaku abandoned the battlefield.   The timeline that Kwahu based his argument on was shown to be wrong.  At least that's what I remember.  https://radiofreemormon.org/2019/07/radio-free-mormon-80-going-down-to-kwaku-town/ In fact, I thought RFM so thoroughly thrashed and embarrassed Kwaku, that I'm surprised that you actually wanted to resurrect this subject again.  Some failed arguments are best left alone and forgotten.

Here are some more videos from Kwaku, and he is actually quite good and responsible (and funny):

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vd9rQ7AZ_xghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ul62FNJ8tsA   (at UVU)

https://bookofmormoncentral.org/blog/watch-five-evidences-for-book-of-mormon-names

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRxdGUp3LKY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezaprqQwbhE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kf38PkkkWg&list=RDCMUC2LBmYIOq6Eu_ZC14i_YkIg&index=14

Quote

I think the only way that the Book of Abraham makes any sense is to do exactly what you have done and just ignore all of the apologetic arguments, theories and conflicting evidence and instead just declare your belief that... "...the Book of Abraham is not a fraudulent invention at all, but an authentic scriptural record that Joseph brought forth by the gift and power of God" So there.

Fair enough, Fair Dinkum.  You correctly distinguish between two very separate modes of thought:  Faith and Reason.  Since you clearly favor reason (a bloke after my own heart), I highly recommend my own piece, “A Brief Assessment of the LDS Book of Abraham,” version 11, Dec 23, 2019, online at https://www.scribd.com/document/118810727/A-Brief-Assessment-of-the-LDS-Book-of-Abraham .  I employ therein solely and only standard scholarship.  Unlike Kwaku, I tell no jokes, and try to get no laughs.

 

Edited April 10, 2020 by Robert F. Smith

[Tacenda]

Why wouldn't Joseph borrow from writings around him, he did that with the JST of the Bible. 

[Scott Lloyd]

18 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

Your are correct Bro. Lloyd, This matter is several months old.   And because of this, my memory could be wrong.  But I'm almost certain that the anonymous pod caster RFM exposed Kwaku's initial and counter arguments as lacking any substance after which Kwaku abandoned the battlefield.   The timeline that Kwahu based his argument on was shown to be wrong.  At least that's what I remember.  https://radiofreemormon.org/2019/07/radio-free-mormon-80-going-down-to-kwaku-town/ In fact, I thought RFM so thoroughly thrashed and embarrassed Kwaku, that I'm surprised that you actually wanted to resurrect this subject again.  Some failed arguments are best left alone and forgotten.

I think the only way that the Book of Abraham makes any sense is to do exactly what you have done and just ignore all of the apologetic arguments, theories and conflicting evidence and instead just declare your belief that... "...the Book of Abraham is not a fraudulent invention at all, but an authentic scriptural record that Joseph brought forth by the gift and power of God" So there.

I read your link. I suggest you review it yourself, because your memory of it appears to be somewhat garbled. 
 

You also might want to view Kwaku’s video that I linked to in my prior post, if you haven’t done so already. 
 

You might also view Kwaku’s earlier video, the one that caused Radio Free Mormon (consigliere) and Bill Reel to come after him, branding him as a “deceiver”. (Reel can’t just disagree; he has to defame. It’s a habit with him. It’s what helped bring on his excommunication. It’s toxic behavior, and RFM, to his detriment, seems to have gotten caught up in it. But I digress.) 

Here’s the link to the earlier video:
 

What you misremember is that Radio Free Mormon conceded Kwaku’s point on the Book of Jasher. RFM didn’t check the source on that, or he would have seen that the time frame was off, that the relevant part of the Book of Abraham was translated some time in 1835-36 and the Book of Jasher was not published in English until 1840. 
 

 

RFM did push back on Josephus. I’ll invite you to view Kwaku’s second video to see how he fielded that. 
 

Kwaku’s original point in the first video is that there are a number of ancient writings to which Joseph could not have had access that sustain extra-Biblical elements in the Book of Abraham. He cites two or three among many. 

 

Edited April 10, 2020 by Scott Lloyd

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Why wouldn't Joseph borrow from writings around him, he did that with the JST of the Bible. 

And Jesus borrowed from Old Testament texts repeatedly.

[Amulek]

33 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

And Jesus borrowed from Old Testament texts repeatedly.

Well, sure, but that wouldn't really be considered plagiarism would it? I mean, I always just kind of assumed that he had permission from the Author. 

 

[Kenngo1969]

1 hour ago, Amulek said:

Well, sure, but that wouldn't really be considered plagiarism would it? I mean, I always just kind of assumed that he had permission from the Author. 

 

Heh!  

[Scott Lloyd]

2 hours ago, Amulek said:

Well, sure, but that wouldn't really be considered plagiarism would it? I mean, I always just kind of assumed that he had permission from the Author. 

 

You could extend that reasoning to any of the Standard Works. 

[Rajah Manchou]

12 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

You should watch the above link to get the impact of the video. But in a nutshell, it shows that though Joseph in his lifetime had access to Jasher and Josephus, it would not have been soon enough — in the case of Jasher — to help him in fraudulently inventing the Book of Abraham — if indeed that were his intent. In the case of Josephus, the similarities are not close enough to conclude that Joseph plagiarized Josephus in creating the Book of Abraham. 

8 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The internet says that "In 1886, Joseph Hyrum Parry of Salt Lake City acquired the rights to the translation [of the Book of Jasher] from Mordecai Noah's estate. It was published by J. H. Parry & Company in Salt Lake City in 1887."

There's a lesser-known Book of Jasher (Sefer ha Yashar) that survived  among the Jewish diaspora of India. This Book of Jasher was said to be an account of Jews who migrated to Yemen and then the Indies following the Assyrian and Babylonian captivities. A similar narrative to the Book of Mormon. 

This text was said to have been destroyed in a fire during the Portuguese Inquisition in Goa, but some claim that a copy survived and was acquired by Claudius Buchanan who traveled to Cochin in 1806 to create copies of brass plate inscriptions that the community had preserved since the 5th century AD.  

Source: The Hebrew chronicles of Jews of Cochin

[Calm]

14 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

Some failed arguments are best left alone and forgotten.

Would you be kind enough to summarize one or two of the most important points.  My experience with podcasts Bill Reel has been connected to is there is an apparent lack of commitment to truth and accuracy and respect for the work (comes across as a means to an end rather than an interest in history and those involved).  An easy and obvious example is his complaint of Elder Holland's claim of using a specific Book of Mormon where Reel states "Elder Holland claims to hold the very copy of the book of Mormon that Bethsheba, Hyrum Smith’s wife...". (There were other issues with his claims, but this is the easiest one to identify and explain).

It has been pointed out to him in more than one conversation I am aware of that Bathsheba (spelling of her name is incorrect as well) was not Hyrum's wife, but his cousin's wife...and yet an easily fixed error remains.  If that little effort is repeatedly and intentionally ignored, then it is obvious that every detail claimed needs to be checked and doublechecked before accepting.  

I would like to see if there is anything significant enough to merit the effort in this case.

[Dan McClellan]

17 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I’m aware of that footnote. Obviously, Kwaku was as well. But Kwaku showed through his timeline that Joseph would not have had access to Jasher in time to have helped him do a Book of Abraham fabrication, because Jasher was not published in English until years later. 

The Book of Jasher was originally published in English in 1751, and it was next published in 1829 in English. Here's a PDF of the 1829 edition:

http://www.hiddenbible.com/bookofjasher/jasherwholebook.pdf

Am I missing something? Is the argument really that this wasn't published in English in time for the Prophet to have consulted it during the 1830s and early 1840s?

[Calm]

My memory is that Kwaku believed the relevant parts of Jasher were not available yet in English. 
 

Rechecking:  probably best to start watching about 2:30 in for his full discussion. Timestamp around 4:15 he quotes one thing that Joseph could have referenced, pointing out its lack of similarities. Then he follows with a timeline where the relevant chapters in Abraham are written in 1835 and the relevant chapters in Jasher in 1840 in New York if I understand him correctly. 
 

so his argument may be time and place, a book published in Bristol shouldn’t be assumed to be available in New York perhaps?

Probably would be best to contact Kwaku to confirm specifics 

Edited April 10, 2020 by Calm

[Dan McClellan]

17 minutes ago, Calm said:

My memory is that Kwaku believed the relevant parts of Jasher were not available yet in English. 
 

Rechecking:  probably best to start watching about 2:30 in for his full discussion. Timestamp around 4:15 he quotes one thing that Joseph could have referenced, pointing out its lack of similarities. Then he follows with a timeline where the relevant chapters in Abraham are written in 1835 and the relevant chapters in Jasher in 1840 in New York if I understand him correctly. 
 

so his argument may be time and place, a book published in Bristol shouldn’t be assumed to be available in New York perhaps?

Probably would be best to contact Kwaku to confirm specifics 

They're probably referencing the 17th century Hebrew text, not the 18th century English text. If that's the case, then that makes sense. 

[cacheman]

20 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

....brilliant, young, Ghanaian apologist....

I thought Kwaku was American.

[hope_for_things]

20 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

It’s several months old, but I just found this rebuttal video on YouTube that destroys an antagonistic criticism by Radio Free Mormon (consigliere) and Bill Reel. 
 

In the process, I was introduced to Kwaku (pronounced “kway-koo,” as RFM would learn to his embarrassment), a brilliant, young, Ghanaian apologist and hilarious YouTube comedian. I’ve since watched a couple of others of his videos, including one from last summer in which he confronted (in an amiable way) a couple of hardcore anti-Mormon protesters at the Manti Temple pageant. 
 

You should watch the above link to get the impact of the video. But in a nutshell, it shows that though Joseph in his lifetime had access to Jasher and Josephus, it would not have been soon enough — in the case of Jasher — to help him in fraudulently inventing the Book of Abraham — if indeed that were his intent. In the case of Josephus, the similarities are not close enough to conclude that Joseph plagiarized Josephus in creating the Book of Abraham. 

Of course, I hold to my conviction that the Book of Abraham is not a fraudulent invention at all, but an authentic scriptural record that Joseph brought forth by the gift and power of God. 

From what I've seen of Kwaku, his apologetic style is an attempt to infuse humor and entertainment to appeal to younger generations.  Perhaps that works for some.  His arguments aren't scholarly by any stretch and his reasoning doesn't adequately address issues.  He's also very immature and likes to throw out comments that come across to me not only shallow, but as disrespectful and arrogant.  

If this is the guy people want to see "defend the faith" then we're in a sad state of being these days.  

[Rajah Manchou]

2 hours ago, Dan McClellan said:

The Book of Jasher was originally published in English in 1751, and it was next published in 1829 in English. Here's a PDF of the 1829 edition:

http://www.hiddenbible.com/bookofjasher/jasherwholebook.pdf

Am I missing something? Is the argument really that this wasn't published in English in time for the Prophet to have consulted it during the 1830s and early 1840s?

This is Jacob Ilive's Book of Jasher and there's a fascinating story here.

Jacob Ilive's mother was Elizabeth Ilive, a follower of Jane Lead. Her father owned the shop below Palmer's printing house where Benjamin Franklin worked during his time in London. Franklin was struck by the odd beliefs of the Ilives: beliefs in a pre-existence, a plurality of worlds, and that this world is a sort of prison for spirits that had transgressed in a former state that we are now ignorant of, but will recall upon death.

Six years after Ilive published the Book of Jasher, one of his admirers stumbled upon an ancient text in India, which he translated. I won't paste the full text here, but if you have time to read it, you'll recognize the Plan of Salvation, in an ancient Indian text that Holwell claimed would restore Christianity. 

In Birth of Orientalism, Urs App writes:

Quote

"Holwell’s Shastah became officially the ultimate Old Testament of Christianity. This also meant that it had to form the basis for any true restoration since it alone contains “the original doctrines, and terms of restoration” that God himself revealed to the Indians and took care to preserve in Holwell’s Shastah. Even the mission of Christ became a confirmation of the Shastah ’s original doctrines:

"The above, we think, will suffice to prove, that the mission of Christ is the strongest confirmation of the authenticity and divine origin of the Chartah Bhade Shastah of Bramah ; and that they both contain all the great primitive truths in their original purity that constituted the first and original religion ; and that the very ancient scriptures now under our consideration, exhibit also the strongest conviction of the truth of the celestial origin of Christ’s mission."

The portrayal of the Shastah as the basis for a thorough reformation of Christianity is not simply a by-product of having found an ancient Indian text but rather a result of Holwell’s religious restoration project that included the production of an Old Testament that was more compatible with Ilive’s,

One year after Ilive's Book of Jasher was republished, Joseph Smith published the Book of Mormon, the basis for a true restoration that also contained original doctrines, and terms of restoration that God himself revealed to the Indians.

Edited April 10, 2020 by Rajah Manchou

[Stargazer]

19 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

From what I've seen of Kwaku, his apologetic style is an attempt to infuse humor and entertainment to appeal to younger generations.  Perhaps that works for some.  His arguments aren't scholarly by any stretch and his reasoning doesn't adequately address issues.  He's also very immature and likes to throw out comments that come across to me not only shallow, but as disrespectful and arrogant.  

I don't think he is trying to put on a scholarly robe, so criticizing him for that lack is a little out of place, wouldn't you think? As you say, he's appealing to his own generation. Is there something wrong with that?  I find this style to be on the same level as Spongebob Squarepants, and so it's not particularly compelling to me. But it's more accessible to some segments of the population who are bored to tears by scholarliness.

He is also part of the YouTube channel "Saints Unscripted", formerly known as "3 Mormons". See a representative video of theirs HERE. Saints Unscripted also had a show wherein a member of this board told about his journey away from the Church, and his return: An Ex Ex-Mormon's Story

19 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

If this is the guy people want to see "defend the faith" then we're in a sad state of being these days.  

It takes many cooks to prepare a banquet. Do we only want sober, scholarly and tedious discourse, or can we lighten it up a bit with some humor occasionally?  Paul H. Dunn once said that some people discuss the Gospel as if they had been raised on dill pickles and lemons. As if that were a bad thing?  

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, cacheman said:

I thought Kwaku was American.

No doubt the case. 
 

I was referring to ethnic heritage, reflected in the name Kwaku. Sorry if I misspoke. 
 

As I indicated, I have just become aware of Kwaku. 

[Scott Lloyd]

12 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

I don't think he is trying to put on a scholarly robe, so criticizing him for that lack is a little out of place, wouldn't you think? As you say, he's appealing to his own generation. Is there something wrong with that?  I find this style to be on the same level as Spongebob Squarepants, and so it's not particularly compelling to me. But it's more accessible to some segments of the population who are bored to tears by scholarliness.

He is also part of the YouTube channel "Saints Unscripted", formerly known as "3 Mormons". See a representative video of theirs HERE. Saints Unscripted also had a show wherein a member of this board told about his journey away from the Church, and his return: An Ex Ex-Mormon's Story

It takes many cooks to prepare a banquet. Do we only want sober, scholarly and tedious discourse, or can we lighten it up a bit with some humor occasionally?  Paul H. Dunn once said that some people discuss the Gospel as if they had been raised on dill pickles and lemons. As if that were a bad thing?  

Agreed. 
 

And for a style geared toward the YouTube generation, it is amazingly entertaining to me, an aging boomer. 
 

To his credit, even Radio Free Mormon, a member of my generation, said he thought Kwaku’s roasting of him, RFM, for RFM’s mangling of the pronunciation of Kwaku’s name was funny. 
 

This was in the interview John Dehlin did last November with RFM. (I can’t believe I watched all seven hours of that thing two days ago! Goes to show what being quarantined will do to a person.)

[Fair Dinkum]

4 hours ago, Calm said:

Would you be kind enough to summarize one or two of the most important points.  My experience with podcasts Bill Reel has been connected to is there is an apparent lack of commitment to truth and accuracy and respect for the work (comes across as a means to an end rather than an interest in history and those involved).  An easy and obvious example is his complaint of Elder Holland's claim of using a specific Book of Mormon where Reel states "Elder Holland claims to hold the very copy of the book of Mormon that Bethsheba, Hyrum Smith’s wife...". (There were other issues with his claims, but this is the easiest one to identify and explain).

It has been pointed out to him in more than one conversation I am aware of that Bathsheba (spelling of her name is incorrect as well) was not Hyrum's wife, but his cousin's wife...and yet an easily fixed error remains.  If that little effort is repeatedly and intentionally ignored, then it is obvious that every detail claimed needs to be checked and doublechecked before accepting.  

I would like to see if there is anything significant enough to merit the effort in this case.

I listened to both Kwaku and RFM's arguments at the time they came out.  I really have no desire to revisit either of them again.  Perhaps you have more time than I do and I would kindly suggest you listen to them both and come to your own conclusion.  I can only recall that I found RFM's argument's more compelling than Kwaku's which is why a declaration of faith, is the  best defense against indefensible arguments.

Edit to Add:  I remember declaring my testimony when I was caught in a tough a spot while on my mission.   That always seemed to shut them up.

Edited April 10, 2020 by Fair Dinkum