Posted by SWN on July 08, 1998 at 02:43:37:
sneily@usa.net
Before I respond to the "challenges" of the letter I posted on this site,
I wanted to share a little of my background.
I was not born into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. In
fact, I was extremely anti-mormon as a youth growing up. I disliked the
Church so much I gave anti-mormon book reports in high school. I went to
high school in Thatcher Arizona, the birthplace of President Spencer W.
Kimball. As you may have guessed, Thatcher was about 96% LDS.
I have never taken anything for granted. I investigate everything, and I
do not blindly follow the Church. While trying to prove the Church wrong I
became very troubled by the material that I was basing my study on. When
I tried to verify the sources that were being used by the anti-mormon
authors, I found their sources didn't exist or that they had taken the
statements of the authors they had quoted out of context, or had changed
the authors statements all together. Suddenly my interest was peaked as
to why, if the Mormon Church was so wrong, was it necessary to distort
the pro-mormon literature. My research eventually led me to join the
Church.
None of the comments I received had any substance behind them. Many of the
comments reminded me of my teenagers when they start blurting out opinions
about subjects they haven't studied, or have little or no knowledge about.
One comment I received said, and I quote, "Had Nibley been born in a
non-Jedeo-christian society, studied the ancients, and then converted to
Mormonism based on his findings his 'credentials' may be a bit more
interesting." To suggest that because someone is born a member of the
Church, they can't be objective in their chosen field of study, is a
ridiculous and uneducated statement with no basis or foundation. In all
my studies, if I had ever found anything that would have shown the Church
to be false, I would have left.
One of the problems that I see with the anti-mormon approach to scholarly
study is that they believe the only ones who can possibly know what they
are talking about are other anti-mormons. How objective can that be?
On one anti-mormon site that I visited, the author of the site challenged
anyone to find fault with anything he had said concerning the LDS Church,
but then he said, don't bother sending him a challenge if you are going to
try and discredit his sources because he already knew they were right.
One false claim that is circling the anti-mormon forums is that the LDS
Church teaches its members that God the Father had 'physical' relations
with Mary. To back up this claim one site used the Book of Mormon Student
Manual as its source. No where in any LDS literature is that concept
taught or even mentioned. This was another example of anti-mormon
misinformation. I sent him a copy of the 'quote' he used. Examine it for
yourself:
Book of Mormon Student Manual Page 12
Elder Bruce R. McConkie said: "Jesus is the Son of God, not of the Holy
Ghost. Just as Jesus is literally the Son of Mary, so he is the personal
and literal offspring of God the Eternal Father, who himself is an exalted
personage having a tangible body of flesh and bones. (d. & C. 130:22.)
Apostate religionists-unable to distinguish between the Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost--falsely suppose that the Holy Ghost was the Father of our Lord.
Matthew's statement, 'she was found with child of the holy Ghost,' properly
translated should say, 'she was found with child by the power of the Holy
Ghost.' (Matt. 1:18.) took place. Alma perfectly describes our Lord's born
of Mary,... she being a virgin, a precious and conceive by the power of
the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God.' (Alma 7:10.)
Nephi spoke similarly when he said that at the time of her conception,
Mary 'was carried away in the Spirit,' with the result that the child born
of her was 'the Lamb of God, yea, even the Son of the Eternal Father.'
(1Ne. 11:19-21.) As Gabriel told Luke, he was the "Son of the Highest'
(Luke 1:32), and 'the Highest' is the first member of the Godhead, not the
third" (Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, 1:82-83).
I also included the following scripture from John:
John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, (and we beheld
his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace
and truth.
If you really want to pursue truth, you have to be willing to challenge
your beliefs, and the foundation that those beliefs were built upon.
To give you a chance to challenge your beliefs, I have included several
articles, some of which are by Non-mormons. These articles will especially
challenge those of you who said there is no evidence to support the Book of
Mormon or the Book of Joseph. Following is a list of the Articles:
Rabbi Nissim Wernick's Dissertation on the Book of Abraham
Tel Arad - Implications For the Book of Mormon
Why is there no Archaeological or Historical Remains of the Book of Mormon
From Mesoamerica?
How Can the Book of Mormon Be True When it Mentions Jewish Synagogues in
Ancient America?
Metallic Documents of Antiquity
How Many Ancient Metallic Documents (this list almost goes on forever)
A similar treaty on metal is known from ancient Anatolia
Religious Metallic Documents
INSTANT EXPERTISE ON BOOK OF MORMON ARCHAEOLOGY
Literary Style Used in Book of Mormon Insured Accurate Translation
Mayan Information Irretrievably Destroyed
Rabbi Nissim Wernick's Dissertation on the Book of Abraham
This is one Jewish Rabbi's view of the Book of Abraham, with its marvelous
doctrines being substantiated in ancient Jewish literature. We have all
ignored this source for too long. I notice also that not one critic against
the Book of Abraham has ever utilized this source. Is it any wonder? Among
other interesting things said here, Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Melchizedek
and the other Patriarchs had the Priesthood. In other words, Adam, from the
very beginning, did have the Gospel as Joseph Smith taught. As each
dispensation of the Gospel closed, an apostasy occurred, with a new
Patriarch heading up another Restoration of the original Gospel that Adam
had. Nothing about this bothers this Jewish Rabbi, as that was certainly
the ancient Jewish teaching!
Summarized by Kerry A. Shirts
I have been into quite a few sources, however, one we have all ignored for far
too long is the Jewish Rabbi's Doctorate Dissertation, Nissim Wernick, in
1968, as a Non-Mormon has given us all tremendous food for thought in "A
Critical Analysis of the Book of Abraham in the Light of Extra-Canonical
Jewish Writings", submitted to the BYU Religion Department. A *most
interesting source indeed*!
He starts off with an absolute bang. The Pre-existence, something *missing*
in the Bible account of Abraham in Genesis. Wernick says "...the concept of
pre-mortal existence appears in Jewish history as a common tenet of the
religion..." (p. 18). In order to gain
an understanding of the once believed Jewish concept of Pre-Mortal
existence, Wernick describes the Hebrew word "nefesh" as soul, which he
acknowledges has several different sahdes of meaning in differing contexts.
"It denotes the principle of life, the thing
that constitutes a living being." (p. 19). "Nefesh chaya" - man became a
living soul. The terms "ruach" and "neshama" are sometimes used
synonymously denoting, of course, spirit and breath. This reflects the
dualism of human nature according to Wernick and "is frequently mentioned in talmudic-midrashic literature." (p. 20). "The souls of all generations are said to have been created at the beginning of the world, and kept until the time of their birth in a heavenly repository called "guf" (body). (p. 20).
"According to kabbalistic teachings, the destiny of every soul is to return
to the source whence it came." (p. 21). This is very reminiscent of Orson
Pratt's idea found in "The Seer." Speaking of our bodies, and their origin,
and our souls or spirits and their original place of creation, Pratt notes
Eccles. 12:7 - "Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the
spirit shall *return* unto God who gave it." Pratt notes that this shows
that spirit does not have its origins in the earth, but it has a heavenly
origin - it came from God - it returns to God, "God who gave it", also
receives it back into his presence. (p. 17). "Could the spirit *return* to
God if it were never in his presence? Could we return to a place where we
never were before?
Wernick also notes this scripture as well as one from the "Wisdom of
Solomon", which states that when the body returns to earth its possessor
"is required to render back the soul which was lent him." Wernick notes
that the "Slavonic Book of Enoch" states "All souls are prepared before
the foundation of the world." In 2 Esdras we are told that the number of
the righteous who are to come into the world is foreordained from the
beginning, (2 Esdras 4:35). (p. 22).
More interesting still, from the "Midrash Kee Tov", we learn that "before
the creation of the present world there were 1,972 generations. During this
time all the souls of the righteous were present including Adam, Noah,
Abraham, Moses, etc. And it ends with the following statement: "They
[souls] were with God before the creation of the world." (p. 22).
The "Midrash Tanhuma Pekude" is where God commands the angel, who is the
prefect of the spirits saying:
"Bring me such a spirit which is in paradise and has such a name and such
a form; for all spiritis which are to enter the body exist from the day of
creation of the world until the earth shall pass away! The spirit answered,
Lord of the world! I am content with the earth, where I have lived since
Thou didst create me!" (p. 22). And Wernick notes the parallel with the
BofA! And they who keep the first estate sahll be added upon; and they who
keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom, etc.
"Throughout Jewish thought it is apparent that man is placed on this earth
to be proved. The "Midrash Tanhuma Pekude" reveals a spirit (soul) that was
placed on earth. It had a shape and form. Presumably the soul passed the
test - or it "kept the second estate", and therefore would be rewarded
with an existence "even more beautiful" than the present - i.e. "shall
have glory added upon their heads forever and ever." (p. 23).
Similar to the Book of Abraham, Jewish writings confirm that the spirit
(soul) has its origins in the Supreme Intelligence, in which the forms of
the living existence may already be distinguished from one another.
"At the time the Holy One, Blessed be He, desired to create the world, it
came in His will before him, and He formed all the souls which were prepared
to be given afterward to the children of men; and all were formed before
Him." (Book of Zohar I. 96b - Wernick,p. 23).
Another interesting idea is that in Jewish literature we see a mortal
ascending heaven and while there, is shown the pre-mortal soul of a future
teacher in Israel, studying the Torah with pupils. This happened to Moses,
Abraham, Noah, and Enoch. Wernick notes that this leads to another concept
found in Jewish literature that of the pre-knowledge of the pre-mortal soul.
"The soul knew everything before entering the world." (p. 25).
Even further, The BofA shows that the intelligences are not equal in
knowledge, but some are more intelligent than others. This is a concept
that is not foreign to Jewish literature. The "Wisdom of Solomon" states
that "Now I was a child of parts, and a good soul fell to my lot; nay
rather being good, I came into a body undefiled." (p. 26). The "Syriac
Apocalypse of Baruch" distinguishes between righteous and common souls.
(p. 26).
Wernick's conclusion of this:
"Comparisons, therefore, can be made; parallels do exist between the BofA
and Jewish literature, with regards to pre-mortal existence. Similar to
the BofA there is a pre-earth state of man, these souls are different, but
have the potential of becoming eqaul. These souls are consulted and take
part in the affairs of heaven. This analysis affords a fuller understanding
of some areas of correspondence between Judaism, its beliefs and concepts,
and those of the BofA. Man is here to be proved, and if man is successful
while on earth, then the Lord will accept the souls back to their eternal
abode where they will "have glory added upon their heads forever and ever."
(p. 27).
Wernick next notes something astonishing. "In the pagan world where the
Bible originally took form, the notion was current that the deity was born or created from a pre-Mortal eternal substance. One of the common themes in pagan mythologies is the
geneology of the gods who procreate. Is there perhaps an echo of this notion in the opening sentence of the Bible? As far as the grammatical structure of this sentence goes, it may be conceivably rendered thus: "In the beginning he created God together with
the heaven and the earth." This would certainly involve a doctrinal
revolution in the understanding of biblical religion...it is clear that
proper research is graught with great doctrinal difficulties and significance.
Such interpretations can be arrived at only through deliberate and careful
study of the biblical texts." (pp. 29f).
Wernick merely notes the idea of the Council of the Gods, but notes with
greater interest the blueprint of creation that was discussed and decided.
"Many Jewish philosophers finds in the word "beriah", the concept of
"Creation ex nihilo." However, a closer study of the Hebrew word refutes
this notion. The etymological meaning of the verb "beriah" (creation)
denotes, "to cut and put into shape", and therefore presupposes the idea
that some materials has to be employed. This was easily recognized by
Nachmonides and Maimonides in their respective commentaries on the Bible.
(p. 31). The "Wisdom of Solomon" posits a formless archmatter which the
creator simply brought into order.
Now while Genesis does not answer the concept of how much time it took for
the creation, Jewish tradition does answer this. Nachmonides states that
"one day according to the Lord is equal to one thousand years." The
"Genesis Rabbah" uses much the same language when it has God saying: "One
of my days is equal to one thousand years" (according to man's reckoning.
"In conclusion, both the BofA and Jewish literature are in agreement that
the creation did not occur in 7 days as is reckoned, but rather in seven
thousand years. (p. 34).
Wernick also notes that "so it is seen that the Bible, Jewish writings and
the BofA are emphatic in their inclusion of all peoples in God's concern
and in the recognition that all men have the capacity to respond to God's
word in deeds of penitence and in growth toward moral and spiritual perfection."
(p. 42).
"Both Jewish literature and the BofA view man with utmost dignity...both
literatures proclaim that man is created in God's image. Both aim at the
same goal and that is: through the emulation of the Godhead (to the best
of one's abilities), one can and muct become like God." (p. 43).
The BofA states that Adam had the Priesthood. "Jewish literature confirms
this hypothesis when it states in the "Yalkut Shimeoni" "Thus said the
Holy One Blessed Be He [to Abraham] 'Follow me and I will make you a High
Priest after the manner of Adam." Wernick goes on to note that LDS
literature even says
Adam, Noah, Enoch, Shem, Melchizedek and Abraham had the Priesthood. "It
can be shown that Judaism will accept fully the same concept... it is
agreed that Adam, Enoch, Noah, and Abraham possessed the Priesthood." (p.
57). "It is agreed by all that Shem and Melchizedek possessed the priesthood
and this is most relevant." (p. 57). And further he asks "Why did the
narrative [in Genesis] introduce the Melchizedek incident here at all?
[of Abraham paying tithes]...The Bible does not so much as hint as to the
reason for his inclusion. However, if the accounts of the "Talmud" and
Jewish literature be correct, then the plausible answer is that the Bible
saw fit to include Melchizedek because he was a high priest who had
already received authority from God. Melchizedek thereby becomes the agent
of God in transmitting the high priesthood to Abraham. This is sound Mormon
and Jewish thinking." (pp. 71f).
Wernick discusses the outset of the BofA. He says after Abraham saw that he
needed to get out of his homeland, that he was not satisfied with his
residence or with his own state of mind. Therefor, he sought the blessings
of the Fathers, for he was a man of righteousness. (p. 73). "The Rabbis
appear to have shared this very same conviction. They suggest that God did
not suddenly break in on Abraham to send him forth on his vocation to be
a religious pioneer of civilization, but rather that Abraham had taken
the first step. He had brooded on the nature of existence. By his own
quest to understand the universe, he came to fell the insufficiency of
existence without a divine sovereign... the divine influence needs a
receptive vessel through whom to perform its work. It finds it in one who
yearns for God, who cares deeply about the issues that involve righteousness
and truth. Thus begins the career of Abraham as a prophet." (p. 74). In
other words, Joseph Smith has it correct in his BofA according to Jewish
thinking.!
Wernick also notes that the "Midrash" states that "Abraham was the author
of a treatise on the subject of creation. This would coincide very nicely
with chapters 3,4, and 5 of the BofA." (p. 87).
The Doctrine and Covenants 84:14 relates that Abraham received the priesthood
from Melchizedek, and that this priesthood originated from Adam. Wernick
then notes that "The 'Midrash' states very clearly that God informed Abraham,
He was going to make him a High Priest after the same order as Adam.
(Yalkut Shimoni 14:74). The "Zohar" goes further in trying to show a connection
between Adam and Abraham - "Adam's book [Kerry notes Moses 6:4, 46!] which
contained celestial mysteries and holy wisdom, came down as an heirloom
into the hands of Abraham; he by means of it was able to see the glory of
his Lord." (p. 87). Which is perfectly and precisely what we find with the
Book of Enoch as well, and the Book of Moses in Moses 6! NONE of this is
in Genesis at all. Yet Joseph Smith has the correct Jewish concepts in his
revelations.
Wernick notes that L.D.S. Theology states that Melchizedek received the
priesthood from the lineage of the fathers, even till Noah (D&C 84:14).
"Rabbi Jochanan ben Nuri says: The Holy One Blessed Be He, took Shem and
separated him to be a priest to Himself, that he might serve before him.
He also caused his Chechinah to rest with him, and called his name Melchizedek,
priest of the Most High and King of Salem, where Abraham came and leaned the Law at the school of Shem, where God, Himself, instructed Abraham so that all else he had learned from the lips of man was forgotten. Then came Abraham and prayed to God that His Shechinah might
ever rest in the house of Shem which also was promised to him; as it is
said, "Thou are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek." (p. 88)
Again, the BOfA would have it believed that Abraham was a man possessing
great knowledge who knew the celestial mysteries and knew all about the
nature of man and of the universe. "This is a bold statement seeing that
nowhere else in the Old Testament could the veracity of this statement be
proven." (p. 89).
Yet, we look at the "Midrash" and Jewish literature, we find the "Book of
Jubilees" saying that Abraham watched the stars in order to forecast the
year's fertility. He receives the word to leave the Chaldeans and set out
on his mission to bless the nations by teaching them the higher truths.
And what do we find in Facsimile #3?
"Abraham sitting upon Pharoah's throne, by the politeness of the king,
with a crown upon his head, representing the priesthood", and "Abraham is
reasoning upon the principles of Astronomy in the King's Court." A perfect fit.
(pp. 89f).
The "Sefer Yetzirah" states "God lifted him above the vault of heaven to
cause him to see all the mysteries of life."
The "Nishmat Chayim" states: "The whole world once believed that the souls
of men were perishable, and that man had no pre-eminence above the beast,
till Abraham came and preached the doctrine of immortality."
The "Baba Batra, a Midrash from the Talmud states: When Abraham died, all
the chiefs of the nations of the world stood in line and exclaimed, 'Ala
for the world that has lost its leader! Alas for the ship that has lost
its helmsman!"
"All this supports the claim that Abraham was a wise man possessed of great
knowledge, nay the wisest of his day. He is revered by all and is a prince
among the nations...indeed Abraham was considered by all as the leader of
the world the "father of all the nations." (p. 90).
"The Jewish thought and Mormon tradition stand hand in hand with regards to
the man, Abraham. Both claim that he, indeed did live - that he was a High
Priest - that he attained the priesthood, the very same priesthood of Adam
and Noah, from Melchizedek. Both agree that he was one of the wisest men
of all in his time, that he learned the secrets of the universe and the
higher truth from God and that he sought to teach the world these truths.
He was recognized by all as the prince of the nations. Once again, Judaism
and Mormon tradition do not stand apart from each other in many of their
concepts, but rather their parallel concepts are a uniting influence."
(p. 91).
He notes how "The divine promise and how the reaffirmation of these promises
emerged are basic to both Judaism and Mormonism as seen through the BofA.
Identical concepts are found when viewing them, and the evidence suggests
they are similar." (p. 105).
Tel Arad - Implications For the Book of Mormon
Here scholars have found Hebrew language written in Egyptian characters,
demonstrating historically as early as 600 B.C. that some groups of Jews
were bilingual, with both Hebrew and Egyptian, which is reflected in the
Book of Mormon prophet, Nephi saying he was taught in the learning of the
Jews, in the language of the Egyptians.
Tel Arad demonstrates that Jews and Egyptians were hopelessly mixed in Lehi's
day of 700-600 B.C. In fact, there is ostraca showing a combination of
Hebrew and Egyptian Hieratic writing together. In fact, Hebrew characters
are written in Egyptian. The Egyptian values are given their Hebrew equivilants
as a sort of jargon (suggesting a differentiating Egyptian, or as the BofM
would put it, Reformed Egyptian) The person who wrote this ostraca obviously
was familiar with both languages and hence throws support on the BofM with
Lehi teaching his sons just these two languages, the Hebrew and Egyptian.
Thank goodness these aren't Mormon scholars or we would hear endless screams
of torment that they are bias and wishful thinking, and armchair antics in
phony archaeology and biased interpretations and what not endlessly. But
these are Biblical scholars, publishing in scientific peer review journals.
1. Ivan Tracy Kaufman - "New Evidence For Hieratic Numerals on Hebrew Weights"
in the "Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research" - BASOR -
Number 188, Dec. 1967, pp. 39-41.
2. Yohanan Aharoni - "The Use of Hieratic Numerals in Hebrew Ostraca and
the Shekel Weights", in BASOR, Number 184, Dec. 1966, pp. 13-19.
3. Rudolf Cohen - "Biblical Archaeologist", Spring 1981, pp. 98f. "Excavationsat
Kadesh-barnea 1976-1978", which shows the pictures of the ostraca called
"The Hebrew-Hieratic ostracon of the 7th-6th centuries B.C.E."
4. Rudolf Cohen - "Did I Excavate Kadesh-Barnea?" in "Biblical Archaeology
Review", May/June 1981, pp. 27-29 showing the analysis of the Hebrew-Hieratic
writing on the ostracon. There are combinations of hieratic numerals and
Hebrew terms.
5. Sh. Yeivin - "An Ostracon From Tel Arad Exhibiting a Combination of Two
Scripts", in "Journal of Egyptian Archaeology", Vol. 55/56, 1969-70, pp.
98-102. The ostracon exhibits a combination of two scripts, he says (p. 98).
6. Also showing the Egyptian weights and equivilants with the Hebrew is David
Diringer, "The Early Hebrew Weights found at Lachish", in the "Palestine Exploration Quarterly", 1942-43, pp. 88-101.
7. Y. Aharoni, "Hebrew Ostraca from Tel Arad", in "Israel Exploration Journal",
1966, pp. 1-7.
8. S. Yeivin - "A Hieratic Ostracon from Tel Arad", in "Israel Exploration
Journal", 1966, pp. 153-159. He notes that perhaps the most striking thing
about this is that we find Egyptian garrison troops working as mercenaries
in the Judaean army! (p. 158) So we Mormons always knew that Jews and Egyptians
were constantly mixed at this time as the Book of Mormon would indicate.
Archaeology is bearing the BofM out in this, most clearly...
9. A.F. Rainey, "Semantic Parallels to the Samaria Ostraca", in "Palestine
Exploration Quarterly", 1970-71, pp. 45-51.
Two conclusions and historical implications are caused by the incredible
Tel Arad Archaeological Excavations.
1. That in the 7th century B.C. there were close connections between Egypt
and the Jews - as the Book of Mormon correctly notes, but was unknown in
Joseph Smith's day.
2. There were persons in Judah in the late 7th century B.C. who knew both
the Hebrew and Egyptian scripts and systems of writings. Nephi says the
language of his father was that of the learning of the Jews and the language
of the Egyptians. Tel Arad may be possibly showing us that the combination
of Hebrew and Egyptian writing could be a type of Reformed Egyptian.
A Critic said:
"Fundamentalists" might be bothered by the negative evidence vis-a-vis the
Bible, but at least many non-Mormons face it honestly and openly. Can the
same be said for those arguing for the historical authenticity of the BOM?
Is their attitude toward the BOM as critical? I think not.
Kerry A. Shirts Responds:
My attitude of condemnation lies in the plain and obvious fact that you critics
refuse to come up to date with the archaeological evidences in favor of the
Book of Mormon, and still proclaim that there is not an iota of evidence for
the BofM. You apparently refuse to understand the true nature of the BofM,
being a product of both the Old World and the New World. I have already
admitted that we lose track of the Nephites and other BofM peoples in the
New World, but you have never looked and acknowledged that there certainly
is Old World evidence that is every bit as strong as anything found in favor
of the Bible. I have always, and I mean always seen that Christians claim
the Bible is fundamentally proven true, while the Book of Mormon has nothing
archaeologically for it. This is an outdated stance, and hardly a scholarly
approach to understanding the BofM. Tel Arad supports the Book of Mormon.
The Lachish Letters, Dead Sea Scrolls, Elephantine Papyri, Bar Kochba Documents,
Ras Shamra Texts, Nag Hammadi codices, all have more or less support for
the BofM, and yet critics still say there is nothing for the BofM? This a
pproach seems to be desparate in light of current understanding of archaeological
and historical information about the Book of Mormon.