FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Countercult ministries/The Interactive Bible/Difficult Questions for Mormons/Book of Mormon Script
Response to "Difficult Questions for Mormons: Book of Mormon Script"
| Book of Mormon Geography | A FAIR Analysis of: Difficult Questions for Mormons A work by author: The Interactive Bible
|
Book of Mormon Races |
- Response to claim: "Why are Greek names such as Lachoneus, Timothy, Jonas, and Alpha & Omega in a book that should have absolutely no Greek influence?"
- Response to claim: "Why aren't there other examples of "Reformed Egyptian" in Ancient America?"
- Response to claim: "Why doesn't a linguistical relationship exist between any native American language and ancient Egyptian or Hebrew?"
- Response to claim: "How did the Book of Mormon language evolve so rapidly into non-related Indian languages?"
- Response to claim: "Why are only four main types of Mesoamerican writing systems known (and none in pre-Columbus North America): (Aztec, Mixtec, Zapotec, and Maya)?"
- Response to claim: "Why can't the Anthon transcript (which contains copies of the supposed Reformed Egyptian characters) be identified with any forms of Egyptian?"
- Response to claim: "If the Book of Mormon took place outside of Mesoamerica (like in New York where the Hill Cumorah supposedly is), why are written languages of ancient America only found in Mesoamerica?"
- Response to claim: "Why haven't any of the Book of Mormon proper names such as Nephi, Laman, Zarahemla, etc. been found in all of the many writings that have been found in Mesoamerica?"
Response to claim: "Why are Greek names such as Lachoneus, Timothy, Jonas, and Alpha & Omega in a book that should have absolutely no Greek influence?"
The author(s) of Difficult Questions for Mormons make(s) the following claim:
Response to claim: "Why are Greek names such as Lachoneus, Timothy, Jonas, and Alpha & Omega in a book that should have absolutely no Greek influence?"
FAIR's Response
Why is the name of Christ (or other Greek terms such as "alpha" and "omega") mentioned in the Book of Mormon before Christ's birth?
Some have criticized 2 Nephi 25꞉19 for using the expression 'Jesus Christ' prior to the New Testament. The criticism has taken a few forms:
- Christ is a title, not a name.
- Both Jesus and Christ are terms that come from Greek—which was not known by the Nephites.
- A related complaint notes that alpha and omega are likewise Greek terms that the Nephites would not have known.
There are at least three possible answers to these questions.
Option #1: Joseph may have translated a Hebrew Equivalent of this name into English
The Book of Mormon clearly identifies the term 'Christ' (Greek) and 'Messiah' (Hebrew) as synonyms.[1]
'Jesus' is the Greek form of the name Joshua or Yeshua meaning Jehovah is salvation.[2]
Arthur E. Glass, a Jewish-Christian scholar, has observed that Isaiah 62꞉11 and several other Old Testament verses translated as "my salvation" or "thy salvation" should properly be translated as the name Yeshua, which is the shortened form of the name Yehoshua. (from Yeshua in the Tenach – Brochure; see also Gen. 49:18; Ex. 15:2; 1 Sam. 2:1; Ps. 9:14; 91:16; Isa. 12:2, 49:6, Luke 2:29-32; etc.)
According to Messianic Jewish scholar Dr. Michael Brown, “The original Hebrew-Aramaic name of Jesus is yeshuˈa, which is short for yehōshuˈa (Joshua), just as Mike is short for Michael. The name yeshuˈa occurs 27 times in the Hebrew Scriptures, primarily referring to the high priest after the Babylonian exile, called both yehōshuˈa (see, e.g., {s||Zechariah|3|3}}) and, more frequently, yeshuˈa (see, e.g., Ezra 3꞉2). So, Yeshua’s name was not unusual; in fact, as many as five different men had that name in the Old Testament. And this is how that name came to be ‘Jesus’ in English.”[3]
The Book of Mormon also repeatedly referred to "Jesus the Christ" (2 Nephi 26꞉12; Mormon 5꞉14; Moroni 7꞉44) or as "the Messiah" (1 Nephi 15꞉13; 2 Nephi 1꞉10; 2 Nephi 2꞉6; 2 Nephi 2꞉26). It is thus obvious that the use of 'Christ' as a title is understood by the Book of Mormon author(s).
The Book of Mormon author(s) could have known the Lord’s name in their own language. In Hebrew "Jesus the Messiah" would have been called Yeshua Hamashiyach, but for English readers this was translated as 'Jesus Christ'.[4] Any name used will be a translation of some sort.
Most researchers consider this the most likely explanation.
Option #2: Mormon could have changed all mentions of the Hebrew equivalent of Christ's name
By the time Mormon wrote his synopsis of Nephite history, he knew quite well how Jesus fulfilled the prophecies that had been made about him before his birth. Mormon could have 'modernized' (in his terms!) differences in terminology that might otherwise have been confusing. This was common a common strategy to improve understanding.
This option is less attractive for the material on the small plates, since Mormon included them intact and did not "rewrite" or otherwise redact them.
Option #3: The Greek name-title 'Christ' (Christos) was actually on the plates
Finally, the name-title Christ may have actually been on the plates. Many do not realize that Greeks had a prominent place in the Holy Land even during the time of Lehi. Hugh Nibley elaborated on this here. It is thus possible that a few Greek terms were already in use, though this seems less likely given the religious importance of a term like "Messiah," and the inherent conservatism of most religious language.
What about the Greek terms 'alpha' and 'omega'?
The same arguments apply for Greek words such as 'alpha' and 'omega' as for a Greek name 'Jesus Christ.' The Encyclopedia of Mormonism explains:
Equivalent to the Old Testament term "the first and the last" (e.g., Isaiah 44꞉6), alpha and omega are the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet. Just as no letters stand before alpha or after omega, so there are no other gods in this creation other than that represented in Jesus Christ. He encompasses all, from beginning to end; he extends beyond all extremities and categories.[5]
In such cases, either the Hebrew equivalent remained unchanged on the plate text and Joseph simply rendered it into something familiar to his audience, or different terms were used by the post-Christian Mormon.
Hugh Nibley on Greek Names in the Book of Mormon: "Syria and Palestine had been in constant contact with the Aegean world"
Hugh Nibley:
The occurrence of the names Timothy and Lachoneus in the Book of Mormon is strictly in order, however odd it may seem at first glance. Since the fourteenth century B.C. at latest, Syria and Palestine had been in constant contact with the Aegean world; and since the middle of the seventh century, Greek mercenaries and merchants closely bound to Egyptian interest (the best Egyptian mercenaries were Greeks) swarmed throughout the Near East.23 Lehi's people, even apart from their mercantile activities, could not have avoided considerable contact with these people in Egypt and especially in Sidon, which Greek poets even in that day were celebrating as the great world center of trade. It is interesting to note in passing that Timothy is an Ionian name, since the Greeks in Palestine were Ionians (hence the Hebrew name for Greeks: "Sons of Javanim"), and—since "Lachoneus" means "a Laconian"—that the oldest Greek traders were Laconians, who had colonies in Cyprus (Book of Mormon Akish) and of course traded with Palestine.24[6]
Response to claim: "Why aren't there other examples of "Reformed Egyptian" in Ancient America?"
The author(s) of Difficult Questions for Mormons make(s) the following claim:
Response to claim: "Why aren't there other examples of "Reformed Egyptian" in Ancient America?"
FAIR's Response
Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources
The term "reformed Egyptian" is not the name of a language. There is no language called "Reformed Egyptian." Moroni used the term "reformed Egyptian" to describe the modified Egyptian style characters he was using to write his record.
Question: What is "reformed Egyptian"?
The term "reformed Egyptian" is the name which the Nephites have given to a script based upon Egyptian characters, and modified over the course of a thousand years
Moroni makes it clear that "reformed Egyptian" is the name which the Nephites have given to a script based upon Egyptian characters, and modified over the course of a thousand years (See Mormon 9:32). So, it is no surprise that Egyptians or Jews have no script called "reformed Egyptian," as this was a Nephite term.
There are, however, several variant Egyptian scripts which are "reformed" or altered from their earlier form
There are, however, several variant Egyptian scripts which are "reformed" or altered from their earlier form. Hugh Nibley and others have pointed out that the change from Egyptian hieroglyphics, to hieratic, to demotic is a good description of Egyptian being "reformed." By 600 BC, hieratic was used primarily for religious texts, while demotic was used for daily use.off-site
One can see how hieroglyphics developed into the more stylized hieratic, and this process continued with the demotic:
What could be a better term for this than an Egyptian script that has been "reformed"?
Examples from the Holy Land 7th and 6th century before Christ
More recent research provides further corroboration:
The fourth presentation at BYU’s Willes Center for Book of Mormon Studies conference on 31 August 2012 was on “Writing in 7th Century BC Levant,” by Stefan Wimmer of the University of Munich. It was entitled “Palestinian Hieratic.” He examined an interesting phenomena in Hebrew inscriptions, the use of Egyptian hieratic (cursive hieroglyphic) signs.
Basically Hebrew scribes used Egyptian signs for various numerals, weights and measures. The changes in the form of these signs parallel similar chronological changes in the form of Egyptian hieratic characters, which indicates continued contact of some sort between Egyptian and Hebrew scribes, probably over several centuries. (If there had been a single scribal transmission with no ongoing contact, the changes in the Hebrew forms of hieratic signs would not parallel contemporary changes in Egyptian hieratic forms.) No other Semitic language used Egyptian hieratic signs except Hebrew (with one possible Moabite example.)
There are a couple of hundred examples of such texts, the majority dating from the late seventh century, and geographically mainly from Jerusalem southward. The phenomena ends after the Babylonian captivity. (In other words, Palestinian hieratic is most common in precisely the time and location of Lehi and Nephi, and only exists in Hebrew.)[7]
Additionally,
Documents from the kingdoms of both Israel and Judah, but not the neighboring kingdoms, of the eighth and seventh centuries contain Egyptian hieratic signs (cursive hieroglyphics) and numerals that had ceased to be used in Egypt after the tenth century (Philip J. King and Lawrence E. Stager, Life in Biblical Israel (Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001), 311.)
German Egyptologist Stefan Wimmer calls this script "palestinian Hieratic." See Stefan Wimmer, Palästinisches Hieratisch: Die Zahl- und Sonderzeichen in der althebräischen Schrift, Ägypten und Altes Testament 75 (Germany: Harrassowitz Wiesbaden, 2008).
Further examples
William Hamblin provides additional example of such reformation of Egyptian, including:
- Byblos Syllabic texts
- Cretan hieroglyphics
- Meroitic
- Psalm 20 in demotic Egyptian
- Proto-Sinaitic and the alphabet[8]
Given that Moroni says the Nephites then modified the scripts further, "reformed Egyptian" is an elegant description of both the Old World phenomenon, and what Moroni says happened among the Nephites.
Response to claim: "Why doesn't a linguistical relationship exist between any native American language and ancient Egyptian or Hebrew?"
The author(s) of Difficult Questions for Mormons make(s) the following claim:
Response to claim: "Why doesn't a linguistical relationship exist between any native American language and ancient Egyptian or Hebrew?"
FAIR's Response
The author(s) of Difficult Questions for Mormons make(s) the following claim:
Response to claim: "How did the Book of Mormon language evolve so rapidly into non-related Indian languages? Indo-European is much older than the Book of Mormon time period, yet vestiges of Indo-European exist through all of Europe and parts of Asia."
FAIR's Response
Response to claim: "Why are only four main types of Mesoamerican writing systems known (and none in pre-Columbus North America): (Aztec, Mixtec, Zapotec, and Maya)?"
The author(s) of Difficult Questions for Mormons make(s) the following claim:
Response to claim: "Why are only four main types of Mesoamerican writing systems known (and none in pre-Columbus North America): (Aztec, Mixtec, Zapotec, and Maya)?"
FAIR's Response
Response to claim: "Why can't the Anthon transcript (which contains copies of the supposed Reformed Egyptian characters) be identified with any forms of Egyptian?"
The author(s) of Difficult Questions for Mormons make(s) the following claim:
Response to claim: "Why can't the Anthon transcript (which contains copies of the supposed Reformed Egyptian characters) be identified with any forms of Egyptian? The only three Egyptologists that have looked at it say it does not contain any Egyptian (Ferguson Collection, BYU)"
FAIR's Response
Response to claim: "If the Book of Mormon took place outside of Mesoamerica (like in New York where the Hill Cumorah supposedly is), why are written languages of ancient America only found in Mesoamerica?"
The author(s) of Difficult Questions for Mormons make(s) the following claim:
Response to claim: "If the Book of Mormon took place outside of Mesoamerica (like in New York where the Hill Cumorah supposedly is), why are written languages of ancient America only found in Mesoamerica?"
FAIR's Response
Response to claim: "Why haven't any of the Book of Mormon proper names such as Nephi, Laman, Zarahemla, etc. been found in all of the many writings that have been found in Mesoamerica?"
The author(s) of Difficult Questions for Mormons make(s) the following claim:
Response to claim: "Why haven't any of the Book of Mormon proper names such as Nephi, Laman, Zarahemla, etc. been found in all of the many writings that have been found in Mesoamerica?"
FAIR's Response
Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader
Because there are very, very rare texts from Book of Mormon times, and only one from a place that might have been directly related to the Book of Mormon (and that is only a date).Plus, there are some interesting aspects of the naming in the Book of Mormon that the names had narrative purposes, and didn't actually reflect personal names in many cases. Finally, different languages and phonetics render things differently. Mark Wright and Kerry Hull played around with a Maya representation of a purported "Greek" name in the Book of Mormon and found that in Maya it might be "flaming mosquito"--which doesn't sound like it should be a thing--except there are artistic representations of flaming mosquitoes.
Notes
- ↑ New Testament repeatedly refer to the "name of Jesus Christ" as in Acts 2:38; 3:6; 4:10; 8:12; 1 Corinthians 1:2, 10; 2 Thessalonians 3:6.
- ↑ Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Universal Subject Guide - Jeshua; Bible Dictionary (LDS English edition of the Holy Scriptures)," 713.
- ↑ (Michael L. Brown, “What Is the Original Hebrew Name for Jesus? And Is It True That the Name Jesus Is Really a Pagan Corruption of the Name Zeus?” Ask Dr. Brown (3 January 2013; web Dec 27, 2016).
- ↑ Ensign (September 1984): pp. 24–25.
- ↑ [citation needed]
- ↑ Hugh W. Nibley, An Approach to the Book of Mormon, 3rd edition, (Vol. 6 of the Collected Works of Hugh Nibley), edited by John W. Welch, (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book Company; Provo, Utah: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1988), Chapter 22, references silently removed—consult original for citations.
- ↑ William J. Hamblin, "Palestinian Hieratic," Interpreter blog (1 Sept 2012).
- ↑ William J. Hamblin, "Reformed Egyptian," FARMS Review 19/1 (2007): 31–35. off-site wiki