tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post8281502362474950331..comments2023-11-02T07:25:45.884-05:00Comments on Mormanity - a blog for those interested in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: "You Make Them Live Again by Speaking Their Words": The Popol Vuh and Respect for Ancient ScriptureJeff Lindsayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08776493593387402607noreply@blogger.comBlogger26125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-27286758272369171242014-08-15T03:00:39.209-05:002014-08-15T03:00:39.209-05:00Took me time to read all the comments, but I reall...Took me time to read all the comments, but I really enjoyed the article. It proved to be Very helpful to me and I am sure to all the commenters here! It’s always nice when you can not only be informed, but also entertained! keep it up. <a href="http://sapapoonlinetraining.in/" rel="nofollow">SAP APO Online Training</a>Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04724309050888626805noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-37195779450125910122012-08-13T00:26:28.370-05:002012-08-13T00:26:28.370-05:00Mm, I'm skeptical that the best evidence for t...Mm, I'm skeptical that the best evidence for this book's authenticity as a God-given text in the face of numerous historical and geographical flaws is the style of writing. <br /><br />Nevertheless, the question is probably more along the lines of whether it can at least pass as a genuinely Hebraic document. <br /><br />I ask my next question about chiasm in your recent post, Jeff, but has the topic of writing styles we would expect to Not see in a Hebraic document ever popped up in the dialogue on writing styles?Openmindednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-49316180230212085532012-08-12T06:39:48.160-05:002012-08-12T06:39:48.160-05:00Yes, we must remember that chiasmus can occur freq...Yes, we must remember that chiasmus can occur frequently by chance and as Freedman observes (see my next post on chiasmus), it can be found in many writings and cultures. But not all chiasmus is equally compelling. Finding two or three verses in Strang's writings with chiasmus does not necessarily mean that chiasmus was deliberately being used. <br /><br />As for Bible scholars being well aware of chiasmus in Joseph Smith's day, you can survey the details of what was actually being said about chiasmus in limited corners of the Biblical scholar community in the detailed analysis provided by Welch in "<a href="http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=15&num=1&id=465" rel="nofollow">How Much Was Known about Chiasmus in 1829 When the Book of Mormon Was Translated?</a>. Lots of detail to consider there. The bottom line, though, is that it would have been highly unlikely that Joseph could have known anything about it, and much less likely to have been able to do anything about it. The role of chiasmus in Hebraic literature was still unproved, more like a new theory emerging from a couple of remote voices with little influence in the U.S. Why go through the bother to draw upon this unproven feature of Hebraic writing? And then why did neither Joseph nor any of his alleged co-conspirators ever bother to point out the internal "proof" of ancient origins they have labored to build into the text?<br /><br />It's presence doesn't make sense as the result of a deliberate fabrication drawing upon new and controversial theories of Hebraic poetry, and doesn't make sense as mere accident given its persistent, detailed, and artful implementation, even including its use of a Hebraic name as a key element linked to "Lord" at the center of one chiasm.Jeff Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776493593387402607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-45412193958151735902012-08-11T14:02:22.587-05:002012-08-11T14:02:22.587-05:00To repeat: chiasmus is no big deal. Anyone can pro...To repeat: chiasmus is no big deal. Anyone can produce it, though not everyone can use it to good literary effect. (I note that nowhere in his articles does Welch even try to demonstrate his claim that the loose and baggy chiasmus of Alma 36 is in any literary sense the "masterpiece" that his title implies.)<br /><br />FWIW, the term <i>chiasmus</i> comes to us from classical rhetoric, the study of which was central to the curriculum in 19th-century American schools. Biblical scholars were well aware of biblical chiasmus in Joseph Smith's day; the device was in fact discussed in at least one book advertised in upstate New York in the 1820s. I doubt that Smith himself would have read this book, but I bet a lot of the local ministers did. Just like theories of the Israelite origins of the Native Americans, biblical chiasmus was part of the religious atmosphere in which Smith lived, moved, and had his being prior to writing his fascinating book.<br /><br />-- EveningsunAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-76150217490622414292012-08-11T11:53:02.938-05:002012-08-11T11:53:02.938-05:00Ha, HTML fail. Here's the link to the Strangit...Ha, HTML fail. Here's the link to the Strangite book: <a href="http://www.strangite.org/Chiasmus.htm" rel="nofollow">Strangite Book of the Law of the Lord</a>Openmindednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-18449695223884490212012-08-11T11:52:08.421-05:002012-08-11T11:52:08.421-05:00So, Jack Welch took a perspective on chiasmus and ...So, Jack Welch took a perspective on chiasmus and went with it.<br /><br />I guess that proves the Hebraic origins of the <a href="http://www.strangite.org/Chiasmus.htm>Strangite Book of the Law of the Lord</a> too, doesn't it. <br /><br />Are the chapters in that book that chiasmus beautiful, too? Or is it just when it applies to your faith?Openmindednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-54995509975540274722012-08-11T10:43:23.453-05:002012-08-11T10:43:23.453-05:00Details on Alma 36 are in "A Masterpiece: Alm...Details on Alma 36 are in "<a href="http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=72&chapid=865" rel="nofollow">A Masterpiece: Alma 36</a>" by John Welch. Also see his presentation at the recent FAIRLDS.org conference. For a perspective on the significance of the discovery, see "<a href="http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/display/pdf.php?table=jbms&id=448" rel="nofollow">The Discovery of Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon: Forty Years Later</a>" (PDF).Jeff Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776493593387402607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-68689891610614512062012-08-10T14:08:08.139-05:002012-08-10T14:08:08.139-05:00You don't know the meaning of "equality.&...<i>You don't know the meaning of "equality."</i><br /><br />I think I do. Why do you think I don't?<br /><br />-- EveningsunAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-63750391032763015962012-08-10T13:30:14.249-05:002012-08-10T13:30:14.249-05:00Oh yeah, well where are all those Nephite coins! ...Oh yeah, well where are all those Nephite coins! (heh heh, just joking, very good post)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-91689780255933330402012-08-10T13:23:33.742-05:002012-08-10T13:23:33.742-05:00Ah, I read through a bit of it and this is address...Ah, I read through a bit of it and this is addressed. Quetzal in this case actually refers the the bird species named Quetzal, which explains it.<br /><br /><i>20<br /> Q'ukumatz may be translated as “Quetzal Serpent” or, less accurately, as “Feathered Serpent.” Q'uq'<br />refers to the quetzal bird, Pharomacrus mocinno, one of the most beautiful birds in the world. It inhabits the cloud forests of southern Mesoamerica between 3,000 and 4,000 feet in elevation. Both male and female have brilliantly colored iridescent blue/green feathers on their wings, tail, and crest, while their breasts are a bright crimson. The shade of blue or green depends on the angle of light striking its feathers.</i>Paul Senzeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02573580670699332421noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-15508609423807706852012-08-10T11:55:29.658-05:002012-08-10T11:55:29.658-05:00Jeff,
I'm intrigued by the appearance of Quet...Jeff,<br /><br />I'm intrigued by the appearance of <i>Quetzal Serpent</i>in the text, <i>quetzal</i> being a Nahuatl word (with <i>quetzalcoatl</i> meaning feathered serpent). I assume that <i>Quetzal Serpent</i> is a translation of the Quiché <i>Kulkulcan</i>.<br /><br />Seems like an interesting (if misleading) translation choice. I'll have to read through it.Paul Senzeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02573580670699332421noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-59113224417103466442012-08-10T11:22:10.986-05:002012-08-10T11:22:10.986-05:00I read the Popol Vuh on my mission in Mexico, in S...I read the Popol Vuh on my mission in Mexico, in Spanish. I've also read it since in both Spanish and English. Several of my companions had told me of the tremendous parallels between the Popol Vuh and the BoM or the old testament. I didn't see them, and I was then (and am now) very much a fan of literature and prone to see such things. At the time that was a disappointment.<br /><br />The Popol Vuh is beautiful and surreal (very surreal - early people made from wood, drowning in a sea of sap; gods conceived - inseminated by decapitated heads) and feels <i>very, very</i> alien. I've often thought, that were it true, the BoM <b>should</b> feel just as alien as the Popol Vuh, coming from a culture so far removed from our own.<br /><br />The contrast between the two is stark.<br /><br /><b>Eveningsun</b>, I've read a number of your posts; I'm fascinated with your study of Mormon scripture as 19th century lit. I don't know if you'd be willing to correspond a bit, but if so, my email is psenzee at gmail.Paul Senzeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02573580670699332421noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-25603842588543070932012-08-10T10:48:55.126-05:002012-08-10T10:48:55.126-05:00You don't know the meaning of "equality&q...You don't know the meaning of "equality".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-35624621651229033622012-08-10T10:36:58.719-05:002012-08-10T10:36:58.719-05:00Quite so, Openminded. The "literary quality&q...Quite so, Openminded. The "literary quality" argument is just a bad argument. The use of literary techniques such as chiasmus is in itself no guarantee of literary quality, no more than the use of rhyme guarantees a good poem. Yet LDS apologists routinely make an illogical leap from one to the other, saying, in essence, "Look! Chiasmus! The BoM's high literary quality is beyond the ability of a mere farmboy!" But the fact is, and on this point all non-LDS critics agree, the book's literary quality is actually pretty low. It could easily have been written by someone with Joseph Smith's modest formal education.<br /><br />@ Anonymous: You are correct: One of my aims here is to undercut the political influence of the LDS Church, which influence I see as a bigoted and un-American assault on the basic Constitutional guarantees of equality. My hope is that if members can see their Church's theological claims as bogus, then they're less likely to to toe the line politically. It's nothing personal; it's just politics. And no one forced the Church to enter the political arena. Many religions have made the choice to stay out of politics (e.g., the Jehovah's Witnesses); the LDS Church chose to step in, and having made that choice it cannot very well complain about politically-motivated criticism like mine. If you're gonna play the game you've gotta take the knocks.<br /><br />And of course the mere fact that I have an agenda (just like everyone else here) does not disprove my arguments. Those arguments still have to be evaluated on their merits.<br /><br />FWIW, I don't particularly like the politics of the Christian right, but that doesn't keep me from acknowledging the literary brilliance of the work of Paul or Luke. If the BoM were well-written I'd be happy to acknowledge the fact. But it just isn't.<br /><br />-- EveningsunAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-69618904133630210032012-08-10T09:59:23.875-05:002012-08-10T09:59:23.875-05:00Alma 36 is written just like every other chapter. ...Alma 36 is written just like every other chapter. The only reason Jeff thinks it has literary "beauty" is because it contains chiasmus, therefore it must've originated from the Hebrews--with their uncited monopoly on chiasmus that no one could possibly figure out on their own.Openmindednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-57192078471129165972012-08-10T07:51:47.277-05:002012-08-10T07:51:47.277-05:00Remember that EveningSun has already explained tha...Remember that EveningSun has already explained that his job is to tear down Mormonism because of its position on gay marriage. So it's impossible for him to admit to any literary value in the Book of Mormon, no matter how interesting.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-88097884206935697252012-08-10T07:40:05.292-05:002012-08-10T07:40:05.292-05:00Hi Eveningsun,
I think you were a bit too harsh o...Hi Eveningsun,<br /><br />I think you were a bit too harsh on Alma. Angst (Christian or otherwise) is a recurring theme throughout history. Biblical inspired thought are generally not described as having been "lifted" from the Bible (although I consider the Book of Mormon to be what it claims to be). I am willing to give a pass to Alma on not being a literary genius. If some talks from General Conference can put me to sleep, there would be a good bet that the Book of Mormon prophets would be just as soothing.<br /><br />SteveAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-13447004187733237942012-08-09T23:06:25.605-05:002012-08-09T23:06:25.605-05:00This is absolutely fascinating! I had no idea abo...This is absolutely fascinating! I had no idea about the Popol Vul, I'm going to have to check it out... it really does open the door to thoughts and studies of the ancients that bring the vivid picture we've already enjoyed into greater light. <br /><br />Thank you!Durantehttp://www.somethingundone.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-63949753265830342152012-08-09T22:52:52.376-05:002012-08-09T22:52:52.376-05:00Hey there, CF.
Back with more Mormon scholars who...Hey there, CF.<br /><br />Back with more Mormon scholars who disagree with your viewpoint (in this case, that chiasm is unique to the Hebrew):<br />"I conclude from this survey that most of the essential features of chiastic form and function were available to Mesopotamian authors from the late 3rd millenium through the mid-1st millenium B. C., and that chiastic usage in Ugaritic and Hebrew should not be considered unique–except insofar as local eccentricities are exhibited."<br /><br />-<a href="http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=111&chapid=1286" rel="nofollow">from Robert F. Smith of the Maxwell Institute</a><br /><br />Some meat from the article: "Via Akkadian texts, some of which were from tablets contemporary with the early biblical period, and via Sumerian texts mostly from Nippur of the early 2nd millenium B. C., I have demonstrated herein the existence of chiasm in nearly the full range of genres of Sumerian literature".Openmindednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-38251890621433749822012-08-09T22:19:16.873-05:002012-08-09T22:19:16.873-05:00Painting and drawing is also the easiest thing in ...<i>Painting and drawing is also the easiest thing in the world, Eveningsun. Every child can do it. That doesn't mean we should ignore the beauty of a Mona Lisa and dismiss it as kid stuff.</i><br /><br />I agree, Jeff. But the Mona Lisa is great art; the BoM is not great literature.<br /><br />I'm familiar with the specific claims made for Alma 36. It is not by any stretch of the imagination a "real gem of literature." It's a trite, rather amateurish rehearsal of a very commonplace kind of 19th-century Christian angst, expressed in 19th-century cliches lifted from the Bible. It just isn't very good. <br /><br />Please think of the fact that there are many, many nonbelievers like me who appreciate the literary beauty and brilliance of the Book of Job, Ecclesiastes, the David story, the Book of Isaiah, etc. But the ONLY people who ever argue for the literary greatness of the Book of Mormon are Mormons. Why do you suppose that is?<br /><br />-- EveningsunAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-24614011004753274792012-08-09T18:28:56.596-05:002012-08-09T18:28:56.596-05:00Painting and drawing is also the easiest thing in ...Painting and drawing is also the easiest thing in the world, Eveningsun. Every child can do it. That doesn't mean we should ignore the beauty of a Mona Lisa and dismiss it as kid stuff. Have you looked at the detailed case for Alma 36 as a real gem of literature?Jeff Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776493593387402607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-3280186417249251712012-08-09T17:54:32.701-05:002012-08-09T17:54:32.701-05:00Does that mean the Hebrew weren't the only one...<i>Does that mean the Hebrew weren't the only ones capable of, you know, stumbling upon and employing a literary technique?</i><br /><br />Yes...or it could mean that the writers of the <i>Popol Vuh</i> had the skill handed down from BoM times.<br /><br />@Eveningsun<br /><br />Good job! Now when you or Closeminded produce 531 more pages of it within the next two months you'll have proven you are at least as smart as a 4th grade educated farmer...CFnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-42477624965302058722012-08-09T09:44:38.622-05:002012-08-09T09:44:38.622-05:00Guess what, Openminded. Your post about chiasmus i...Guess what, Openminded. Your post about chiasmus is (like this very sentence) a chiasmatic post! Behold: <br /><br /><i><b>Chiasmus</b>[a], <b>coming from</b>[b] a group of <b>people whose religion has no resemblance to anything Biblical</b>[c]?<br /><br />Does that mean <b>the Hebrew</b>[c'] weren't the only ones capable of, you know, <b>stumbling upon</b>[b'] and employing a <b>literary technique</b>[a']?</i><br /><br />a.) "Chiasmus" is "a literary technique."<br /><br />b.) "Coming from" and "stumbling upon" are both metaphors of travel or motion.<br /><br />c.) "The Hebrews" is an antonym for "a people whose religion has no resemblance to anything Biblical."<br /><br />Chiasmus is nothing special. It's the easiest thing in the world to find, especially if one is desirous enough of finding it.<br /><br />-- EveningsunAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-8610411311668988452012-08-09T02:07:55.342-05:002012-08-09T02:07:55.342-05:00What an interesting post! As an avid studier of an...What an interesting post! As an avid studier of ancient texts and really any thing related to religion or the divine you have given me a great deal to think about and reminded me that there is still much out there to be studied and understood.<br /><br />www.thespiritualandthesacred.blogspot.comHaley Wilson-Lemmonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12312832983559360547noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-68489625341191403442012-08-09T01:34:37.391-05:002012-08-09T01:34:37.391-05:00Chiasmus, coming from a group of people whose reli...Chiasmus, coming from a group of people whose religion has no resemblance to anything Biblical?<br /><br />Does that mean the Hebrew weren't the only ones capable of, you know, stumbling upon and employing a literary technique?Openmindednoreply@blogger.com