Smout analyzes the arguments between pro and anti-evolution sides.  He noted that with rhetoric, we often create artificial dichotomies.  For example, on page 6 he gives an example from the movie Mary Poppins.  Male is shown in a positive light, and female in a negative light in the movie .  The father wants to have the children break from “sugary female thinking.”

Often we use these dichotomies to prop our position, while showing the opposing side in a negative light.  This is the case with evolution/creation.  He also notes that while 2 sides use the same words, these words have different definitions.  From page 9,

From a rhetorical perspective, a terminology battle can thus be seen, not as a stubborn refusal to accept correct definitions of terms, but as a power struggle between competing communities.  These communities try to convince other communities that their own word meanings make the best sense.  The problem is that in a culture based on Enlightenment conceptions of a universal reasoning faculty in humans, people do not ask, “Best sense according to whom?”  In effect, the terminology battle becomes a battle about worldviews.  Those who win this battle attain the power to define the terms from within their own worldview for the culture as a whole.

His book has just 5 chapters.

1. Introduction
2. Beginnings of the Creation/Evolution Controversy
3. Bryan and the Scopes “Monkey” Trial
4. The Arkansas Creation-Science Trial
5. Conclusion

He goes into great detail into the 2 trials mentioned above, discussing witness testimony and the lawyers involved in the cases.  I was especially interested as he discussed the Biblical inerrancy during the Scopes trial.  I hadn’t realized that the evolution controversy played a significant role in this debate.  From page 62,

This notion of irreconcilable conflict between creation and evolution depends on the concept of biblical inerrancy, which developed late in the nineteenth century in the United States as an important theological position and a historical key to American fundamentalism.²⁹ James Barr defines biblical inerrancy as the belief that the Bible is free of error of any kind.  He writes “The inerrancy of the Bible, the entire Bible including its details, is indeed the constant principle of rationality within fundamentalism.”³⁰ This position on the Bible grounds all fundamentalists arguments; it is the measure–albeit a very narrow one, which is fraught with many disturbing implications for nonfundamentalists–of reasonableness itself.  In evaluating a statement for its truth, fundamentalists compare the statement to the Bible, resolving any conflict between the two by rejecting the statement and keeping the Bible.

It seems to me that fundamentalists have painted themselves into a corner with this notion of biblical inerrancy.  For example, did God really create the earth in 6 24-hour days?  I think most people don’t believe that, but there are some hard core people that apparently do.

While creationists won the battle at the Scopes trial (Scopes was fined $100 for teaching evolution, and many other southern states adopted similar laws as Tennessee to prevent evolution from being taught), it appears that they are losing the war.    We all know that evolution is taught in biology, and few textbooks mention creationism.  I wasn’t aware of the Arkansas battle in 1981; fundamentalists wanted to include creation science in the textbooks as well as evolution but were defeated.

I think it is funny that the two sides have created a dichotomy between evolution and creation.  Why can’t God use evolution?  Smout notes this conundrum as well, and notes that the two sides are continuing to battle as if there is no middle ground.  I liked Kary’s conclusion on page 186-7,

I finally agree more with the evolutionists than the creationists, but I do not want the creationists to give up the fight.  I am increasingly convinced that reason and knowledge are not the only bases on which to found a society, nor even that they are the best.  I am unsure that a strictly rational society it best.  How does one found a society on these values?  I doubt that either the creationists or the evolutionists will ever stop arguing so long as we have no simple way to know the truth beyond our own perceptions.  We in this pluralistic nation have had to continually deal with recurring tensions between professionalism and democracy, between the academy and other cultural institutions, between completing political philosophies, and between other differing persuasions, all arguing for, and from within, their own worldviews.  In this life, we walk by faith.  We must put our faith in those persuasions that seem most worthy of it.

So what do you think?  Must creation and evolution be at odds with each other?

I’ve been listening to a podcast from Yale University discussing the Bible.  There are definite similarities between the Babylonian story of  Gilgamesh and the stories of Adam and Noah.  Some people, such as Bishop Rick, have said

I think it is accurate to state that the flood story in the bible is both myth and a forgery. It is obviously a myth for reasons too numerous to mention here, but it is also copied from other cultures/religions, thus making it a forgery.

It could very well be a myth.  While some scholars believe the story is a myth, National Geographic put together a documentary called “In Search for Noah’s Flood”.  They discuss various flood stories, and make the case that a large, localized flood must have influenced these various cultures to write of this flood.  While there is no proof of a flood, it seems like a plausible explanation.

Recently I discussed a couple of sites in the Dead Sea region that some people believe are the sites of Sodom and Gomorrah.  While some people love to claim the Bible is actually a collection of myths, Dr. Carole Fontaine of the Andover Newton Theological School said, “Archeologists often find themselves hooted and hollered out of town, when they first suggest things like, ‘I’ve found Troy, or look, we’ve found Sodom and Gomorrah.’  But history has shown that in fact, the more you dig, the more you find.  It’s amazing how accurate the Bible sometimes turns out to be.”

Speaking of hooting and hollering, John Hamer recently recorded a famous comment regarding Book of Mormon archaeology.  He said,

The scholarly consensus on the alleged antiquity of the Book of Mormon was expressed way back in 1973 in Dialogue by Michael D. Coe, among the foremost Mayanist scholars, who wrote: “As far as I know there is not one professionally trained archaeologist, who is not a Mormon, who sees any scientific justification for believing the historicity of The Book of Mormon, and I would like to state that there are quite a few Mormon archaeologists who join this group”

The best Book of mormon archaeological site seems to be Nahom.  I’ve previously blogged about Nahom, and Daniel C. Peterson called it a “bulls eye”.  In the video called Journey of Faith (distributed by FAIR), a few BYU scholars state,

Daniel C. Peterson, Professor of Islamic Studies and Arabic, BYU, “The finding of Nahom strikes me as just a tremendously significant discovery.”

Noel B Reynolds, director of FARMS, BYU, “The gazetteers of Joseph Smith’s day listed no such place.”

Peterson, “What it really is, is a kind of prediction by the Book of Mormon, or something that we ought to find.”

William J Hamblin, Professor of Middle Eastern History, BYU, “Now the chances of finding that exact name from the exact time, in that exact place, by random chance, are just astronomical.”

Peterson, “And to find it in the right location, at the right time, is a really striking bulls eye for the book and there are those who say the book has no archeological substantiation. That’s a spectacular substantiation right there, it seems to me.  Something that would have been unexpected. It’s so unlikely that Joseph Smith could have woven into his story on his own.”

Hamblin, “The Book of Mormon has text, has made a complex prediction and modern archeology actually confirms that prediction.”

Peterson, “It’s a direct bulls-eye, as precise as you could wish it to be.”

I don’t think non-Mormon scholars are as impressed with the site as Peterson, but non-Bible believing scholars aren’t impressed with Sodom and Gomorrah either.  So, must we always believe that lack of evidence argues against historicity of the Bible or Book or Mormon, or is there reason to believe that some of these stories that scholars call myths, forgeries, or pious frauds really might have some historical use?  Is it true that “the more you dig, the more you find?”

Strang translated the Brass Plates: the official name is the Book of the Law of the Lord.  Strang initially denounced polygamy, but after translating these plates, he was commanded by an angel to practice polygamy.  This book of scripture plays a prominent role in Strangite worship services, outlining the proper practice of polygamy, marriage, adultery, and inheritance.  Strang was an abolitionist, and believed that servants should receive inheritances from masters, just as children.

Hamer detailed the history of the Strangites following Strang’s assassination in 1856 (by disgruntled followers).  Apparently, there were about 4-5 prominent families, and most members have descended from this family.  Strangites originally settled in Voree, Wisconsin, but later moved to Beaver Island, Michigan.  Following Strang’s death, the group was forcibly removed from Beaver Island and their property was confiscated.  They settled in other areas: Michigan, Kansas, Colorado, and New Mexico.  A schism in the group split the families, but the group unified in 1955.  The largest branch in Voree has added some new converts and no family currently dominates in Voree, unlike other branches.  Voree has the largest branch in the church, and their website is found here.

In another session, Max Muellar from Harvard talked about changing portraits of Emma Smith, and Darin Tuck discussed the story of the gulls eating crickets.  Apparently he irritated a few in the audience when he said the gull story had obtained “mythical” status—the question and answer was more animated than the presentation.

Livinia Fielding Anderson discussed some very general similarities of Joseph Smith Sr’s patriarchal blessings.  She outlined only blessings with known dates between Dec 9, 1834, and April 8, 1838.  LaJean Purcell Carruth described translating some old Mormon records written in Pittman Shorthand.  She noted that Brigham Young said that the law seemed tilted against the Mormons.  Gary James Bergera discussed some of the ethical and moral aspects of spiritual wives.  He noted that Joseph had 20 wives before Emma learned he had taken any polygamous wives.

So, that’s a quick summary from yesterday.  Questions or comments?

I thought it was very well done.  After the session, I was sitting on the floor next to a Wi-Fi hotspot when Ken walked by.  I told him I admired the film and asked him a few questions about film-making.  (I have wanted to create my own documentary on church history.)  When he learned that I was a blogger, he offered me an advance copy of the film and soundtrack!!!!  I told him I would love to blog about it!  He hasn’t finished the film yet (but he said it is more finished than it was in January), and hopes to distribute it on public television and further distribution in the future.  So, I’ll give a more detailed review in the next few weeks, but my brief summary is a definite thumbs up!

In the audience was Community of Christ Apostle Andrew Bolton, and some other professional historians.  It was interesting to hear their perspectives on the film, and they gave Ken some interesting advice.  The film covers the 1838 Missouri War between the Mormons and the Missourians.  I’m familiar with the conflict from Richard Bushman’s book Rough Stone Rolling, but I often get events confused.  Ballentine put together this film, and I think it will be an excellent reference.  (I was also surprised when he said he had heard of my blog—I get amazed to learn of all the people that read without commenting.)

I also bought a couple new books and had them autographed.  John Hamer autographed my copy of Scattering of the Saints: Schism within Mormonism.  Brother Rick Turley, assistant LDS Church Historian autographed his book Massacre at Mountain Meadows.  He has a new book called sdfhksjh with material unavailable to Jaunita Brooks (she wrote The Mountain Meadows Massacre, that I blogged about previously).

The morning plenary session was from Laurel Thatcher Ulrich.  She is a 5th generation Mormon that teaches at Harvard.  She gave an interesting presentation on the Wilford Woodruff diaries.  The afternoon session included a great session about polygamy.  Newell Bringhurst was great!  Following the session, I asked him if he agreed with Michael Quinn’s assertion that theocracy was a bigger problem than polygamy from the Nauvoo Expositor.  He disagreed with Quinn.  He felt that polygamy was an explosive topic.  He agreed that theocracy was a potential problem, but believed the polygamy was the bigger problem.  (I blogged about this previously–The Nauvoo Expositor, a Different Perspective.)

The evening session was a real treat.  Sally Gordon, Jan Shipps, and Richard Bushman put together a great presentation on the Mountain Meadows Massacre.  Gordon called the 1999 dedication of the marker by President Hinckley a “political disaster.”  She also said that Richard Turley’s new book, Massacre at Mountain Meadows was not considered a “definitive history” of the event because of the sponsorship of the LDS church.  She said that it has not resolved the issue, not because of scholarship–which she implied was good, and noted they had studied some previously undiscussed documents, but simply because of sponsorship.

She also reviewed many books on Mormonism.  She said that Jan Shipps 1985 book on Mormonism: The Story of a New Religious Tradition was the first cross-over book for both Mormons and non-Mormons since Great Basin Kingdom, by LDS Church Historian Leonard Arrington.

She also referred to books hostile to religion, such as Will Bagley’s Blood of the Prophets.  She even quoted Bagley as saying religion in frightening: “God save us all from men doing God’s work.”  She also referred to Da Vinci Code:  Dan Brown said that everything was “accurate.”  John Krakauer’s book Under the Banner of Heaven linked the MMM and the Lafferty murders.  In reality, she said that both books made leaps and were fast and loose with the facts.  Gordon and Shipps felt that most histories of the MMM were incomplete because they felt the event was best understood in a religious context.

Richard Bushman responded that he agreed with Shipps and Gordon that this event should be interpreted in a religious context.  He also agreed that we are currently living in an anti-fanatical movement, in light of the 9/11 terrorist attack.  He said that it is a sad commentary that Walker and Turley’s book was doomed from the start because of the LDS church’s support.  However, he believes the book will have influence over time because the battle will turn to documents and evidence–the realm that historians are comfortable discussing.

Bushman said he was attracted to Shipps and Gordon’s point of view, but he hopes that Mormon problems are not unique.  He concluded that it is better to be chastened by the past, rather than to sanitize the past.  I was able to speak with Richard Bushman following the lecture, and I told him I appreciated his book Rough Stone Rolling.

I told him that I had heard him say to another, “I think I got into trouble because I was too candid”, and I wondered what he was talking about.  He said that is something he often says, and didn’t recall exactly what that was referring to.  I told him that I often feel like I have to keep quiet in church.  He said that he does too, but when he teaches Sunday School, he does bring up some tougher questions.  I told him I tried to do that too, but that I had been pulled into the bishop’s office because a member of the stake presidency objected to my use of  a non-KJV Bible to explain some passages of Isaiah.  He said he was sorry to hear that, but he knew many Mormons that read non-KJV Bibles, and encouraged me to keep “plugging away.”

Finally, here is the big announcement I was talking about yesterday.  The awards banquet was last night.

At the awards banquet last night, the association gave Senator Bond the Thomas L. Kane Award for Outstanding Service to the Mormon Community by a non-Mormon. They specifically referenced his courage in ending what amounted to almost a century and a half of animosity and suspicion between Latter-day Saint communities and their Missouri neighbors.

The association issued several other awards for articles and books on Mormon history published the previous year. These included:

• Best Undergraduate Student Paper Award, Joseph T. Antley’s “Early America’s Treasure Quest: The Effort to Recapture the Supernatural in the American Northeast.”

• Best Graduate Student Paper, Matthew Bowman’s “Matthew Philip Gill and Joseph Smith: The Dynamics of Mormon Schism.”

• Best Thesis Award (two winners), Debra Marsh’s “Respectable Assassins: A Collective Biography and Social Economic Study of the Carthage Mob” and Caye Wycoff’s “Markets and the Mormon Conflict in Nauvoo, Illinois, 1839 – 1846.”
• Best Dissertation, Jonathan Moyer’s “Dancing with the Devil: The Making of the Mormon Republican Pact.”
• Best Article Award, Samuel Brown’s “Joseph Smith in Egypt: Babel, Hieroglyphics, and the Pure Language of Eden.”
• Best International Book, In Harm’s Way: East German Latter-day Saints in WWII by Roger P. Minert.
• Best Documentary (two winners), Eliza R. Snow: The Complete Poetry , edited by Jill Mulvay Derr and Karen Lyn Davidson, and Mountain Meadows Massacre: The Andrew Jenson and David H. Morris Collection , Richard E. Turley and Ronald W. Walker, editors.
• Best Biography, Mormon Convert, Mormon Defector: A Scottish Immigrant in the American West, 1848 – 1861 by Polly Aird.
• Best First Book, Performing American Identity in Anti-Mormon Melodrama by Megan Sanborn Jones.
• Best Book Award, “Liberty to the Downtrodden”: Thomas L. Kane, Romantic Reformer by Matthew J. Grow.

It was a fascinating conference, and I look forward to Day 3.

She pointed out John Hamer to me.  John was part of the evening plenary session last night; he gave a fascinating presentation called “Latter-Day Saint Churches and the New Jerusalem in Missouri.”  I spoke with John after his presentation, and thanked him for participating on my blog here with the Interview with the Community of Christ.  He said that he blogs over at By Common Consent, and said he has had a request to comment on differences between LDS and RLDS.  He said that Mormon Heretic has already compiled a wonderful interview, and encouraged others to review that.  It was a pretty cool compliment.

I also spoke to Community of Christ prophet/president Stephen Veazey.  He discussed the recent revelation.  I told him I really admired the Community of Christ’s push to encourage a “prophetic people”, and I liked how the members contributed to the canonization of the recent section 164 of their version of the D&C.  I am really looking forward to attending the devotional on Sunday at the Community of Christ Temple in Independence.  I even asked him if he knew FireTag, and he said he did!  I am amazed at how intimate the membership seems to be in the CoC.

Jon Taylor gave an interesting presentation on the Harry Truman neighborhood, and the religious churches of the area.  The CoC and Baptist churches have received exemptions to tear down and expand in the neighborhood that was originally designated a historic district.  There have been some hard feelings by residents of the area that these 2 churches received exemptions.

I told Kathy Daines that I really enjoyed her book, More Wives than One.  Apparently she is working with Sarah Gordon on a new book that I am sure will be interesting.  I also have received a press release from Signature Books, but I promised not to say anything about it until tomorrow, so you’ll have to see my breaking news!  It’s been a fun conference so far, but I’m still suffering from lack of sleep due to my early morning flight yesterday.

This morning, I ate breakfast with Adam Jortner, a professor from Auburn University.  He is presenting “Families in Ancient America: Or, What the Spaulding Story Really Tells Us.”  I learned he is not a Mormon, but really has studied the Spaulding Theory; I told him Dale Broadhurst stopped by my blog when I discussed it earlier.  He told me he appreciated that Mormons don’t whitewash their history, like many other churches (such as Baptists) do.  I was surprised, because so many on the bloggernacle claim the opposite.

I have no idea how they came up with this list, but all three of us are on it!  (and I like the descriptions of the blogs, which means someone actually has read them closely enough to describe them)

Ray

Known as the “Bloggernacle,” members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints have banded together to discuss every imaginable element of their faith. Whether addressing one another, curious potential converts, nonbelievers, or individuals and institutions interested in comparative religion, they bring their belief system to a worldwide audience and shed light on their theology, culture, and customs. Mormon lifestyles – as with all others on the planet, of course – encompass everything from family connections to spirituality to business and everything in between. The following list tries to offer up a little bit of everything when it comes to Mormon living, hopefully allowing for the practitioners and non-practitioners alike to learn a little something along the way.

15. Things of My Soul : Blog entries at Things of My Soul may read as brief, but their messages of inspiration and motivation assist their readers in boosting their spiritual lives.

36. Clean Cut : Follow the life and philosophies of a Mormon history teacher as he reflects upon faith, family, and other victories and trials that crop up along the way.

50. Mormon Heretic : An incredibly challenging read suitable for any LDS members who stick with their faith, but still crave alternate perspectives and overlooked nuances.

28. Mormon Matters : As the title suggests, this blog concerns itself with a wonderfully eclectic range of Mormon topics that appeal to a wide range of visitors.

Well, you don’t exactly write short, concise, fluffy posts!  “Challenging read” is a pretty good description of your blog quite often.  lol

So, in the interest of a short, fluffy post, I’ll stop here.    Comments?

What I found interesting was the fact that there were many similarities.  The same experts and evidence often appeared in multiple videos, yet often different conclusions were provided.  It reminds me of the debate concerning Book of Mormon evidence.

During Passover celebrations in 2001, Rabbi David Wolpe created international headlines in Israel by proclaiming to his Jewish congregation in Los Angeles, “the way the Bible describes the Exodus is not the way it happened, if it happened at all.”

For more than 1700 years, Christians have been looking for Mount Sinai, the place where Moses received the 10 Commandments.  Constantine’s mother, Helena was probably the first Christian in search of Christian artifacts in the 4^th century.  When Christians came across a strange-looking bush at the base of a mountain on the Sinai Peninsula, they erected a monastery claiming that they had found Mount Sinai.  The monastery still exists today, and you can walk the steps that these early Christians have claimed as the real Mount Sinai.

Prof Philip Davies, University of Sheffield, “When it comes to the Exodus, we have no evidence that it happened, and a good deal of evidence that it didn’t.  They made it up.”

Professor Eric Cline, George Washington University, “We do not have a single shred of evidence to date.  There is nothing archeologically to attest to anything from the biblical story: no plagues, no parting of the Red Sea, no manna from heaven, no wandering for 40 years.”

Dr. Kathlyn M. Cooney, Egyptologist, Stanford University,, “the most likely reason that we’re not finding any evidence for the Exodus in Egypt is that it didn’t happen the way that the Bible said it did, or that it didn’t happen at all.”

Since that famous (infamous) sermon in 2001, Wolpe has gone on to soften his words a bit.  In March 2010, he said it was possible that a small group of people left Egypt, came to Canaan, and influenced the native Canaanites.  Even skeptics admit there could be something to the story.

Cline, “I think there’s a very good chance that what actually took place was a series of migrations waves or migrations if you will, over three or 400 years of people leaving Egypt and making their way up to Egypt in ones, twos, threes, maybe even tens, hundreds at the most.”

So, let’s talk about some of the biggest questions concerning the Exodus.

The Burning Bush.

The Bible says that God spoke to Moses in the form of a burning bush that was not consumed.  As mentioned previously, a strange bush was found at the base of the traditional Mount Sinai.  Is there another explanation for this burning bush?  Colin Humphreys has an explanation for a burning bush, involving real fire.  As we all know, oil and natural gas are prevalent in the Middle East.  Humphreys believes the Acacia Bush is an ideal candidate for the Burning Bush.

“The most common bush in the desert is the acacia bush, and we know that if you burn an acacia bush you get charcoal.”

The Acacia Bush maintains it’s shape and turns to charcoal.  He gives a demonstration using a natural gas barbecue grill and an acacia bush.  The bush maintains it’s shape, even though flames shoot through the bush.

When did the Exodus Happen?

There are two main theories:  the Early Exodus Period, and the Late Exodus Period.  Supporters of the Early Period point to 1 Kings 6:1, ““Now it came about in the four hundred and eightieth year after the sons of Israel came out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel…that he began to build the house of the Lord.”  Most historians put the Temple of Solomon at 965 BC.  This would put the Exodus at approximately 1445 BC.

Pharoah Thutmoses I reigned from 1525-1512 BC.  Scholars have speculated that his daughter Hatshepsut may have rescued Moses from the Nile.  She served as Pharoah from 1503-1482 BC, and battled with her stepson Thutmoses III (1504-1450 BC) for control of Egypt.  Thutmoses III eventually removed nearly all traces of Hatshepsut’s monuments.  Thutmoses III death in 1450 coincides well with the date of this Early Exodus time period.

Supporters of the late period refer to Exodus 1:11, “And they built for Pharoah store cities, Pithom and Ramses.”  Ramses II seems to be the most likely Pharaoh.  He lived 1290-1224 BC.  He moved the capital from Thebes to the Nile Delta, and built a new city called Pi-Ramses.  Some archaeologists have linked this city built on top of an ancient Israelite city.

Simcha Jacobovici believes the date of Exodus may be earlier.  He believes the eruption of the Santorini Volcano in 1500 BC may explain many of the Biblical plagues.  The Egyptian name Ahmose means “brother of Moses” in Hebrew—an interesting play on words.    At this time, Egypt was ruled by a Semitic people called the Hyksos, people who were hated by the Egyptians.  Since Joseph was of Semitic origins, this may have helped him join the ranks of the Hyksos ruling class.  The Bible refers to a pharaoh that “knew not Joseph.”

Egyptians have recorded and event called “the Hyksos Expulsion” around 1500 BC.  Could it be the Israelites were expelled, rather than left freely?  Perhaps it depends on who writes the history.

Is there an Israelite presence in Egypt?

In 1967 Professor Manfred Bietak, Chair of Egyptology at the University of Vienna, discovered the ancient Egyptian capital of Avaris.  It was the home to many ancient Egyptian pharaohs.  Some believe the architecture of this city bears resemblance to later Israelite/Canaanite architecture.

Jacobovici attributes Avaris to the Hyksos, while Dr Bryant Wood refers to the ruins as “Asiatic”, similar to later Canaanite   Let me quote from the Exodus Revealed video.

Dr Bryant G Wood, Director of the Associates for Biblical Research, “In this small village, there is stratum D2 dating to the time of Joseph.  All the remains are Asiatic in nature, material culture is Asiatic—there is nothing Egyptian.”

A map of the excavation site confirms its distinctive Israelite origins.  Archaeologists immediately recognized that the design of this horseshoe shaped dwelling was identical to structures built in Israel centuries later.  It was a prototype of Hebrew architecture constructed near the time Joseph was believed to have lived in Egypt.

…

There should be evidence of Israel’s arrival in Canaan, the Promised Land sometime between the 14^th and 12^th centuries BC.  Such evidence does exist.  More than 3200 years ago, the Pharaoh Mernepteh, ventured out of Egypt on a military campaign to the Land of Canaan.  Later, in a poem proclaiming his victory, he boasted that “…Israel is laid waste.”  This inscription dates from about 1210 BC, and establishes that the Israelites had arrived and settled in Canaan, well before the Mernepteh’s conquest at the end of the 13th century.

Additionally at Telamarna in Egypt, archaeologists have uncovered a series of letters on cuneiform plates.  Many were authored by Canaanite rulers early in the 14^th century BC.  These letters contain desperate pleas to the Egyptian Pharaoh Akhenaten for military assistance to defend Canaan from nomadic invaders.  One of them warned that if pharaoh does not act, “…all Canaan will be lost.”  The invaders were identified by the term “apiru”.

Wood, “This is kind of a generic term for stateless individuals who weren’t connected with any particular urban center and so the Israelites undoubtedly would have been referred to as either Apiru, or Asiatics by the Egyptians.”

Dr Frank Moore Cross of Harvard University, “I do think that the term Apiru is the origin of the term Hebrew.”

If the name Apiru referred to the name of the Hebrew people, then the Telhermana inscriptions provide strong evidence for the presence of Israel in Canaan.  They also suggest Israel may have entered the country earlier than scholars had previously thought, at the beginning of the 14^th century BC.  Recent excavations of the Canaanite city of Hazor also support a 14^th century Israelite invasion.  Evidence has been uncovered that the city was destroyed at least twice during the period described in the biblical books of Joshua and Judges.

Scattered among the remains of a large palace were Egyptian and Canaanite idols—their heads and hands intentionally chiseled off.  Archaeologist Amnen ben Tour, has concluded by process of elimination that the invading Israelite army must have ravaged Hazor.  For neither the Egyptians, nor the indigenous Canaanite would have purposely destroyed their own gods.

How can we explain the Plagues?

I presented Jacobovici’s position on the plagues in my previous post.  National Geographic (NG) had similar explanations for plagues 2-6 dealing with insects and frogs.  NG even interviewed several entomologists and epidemiologists to further pin down the actual types of bugs most likely in these infestations.

The first plague, turning the Nile to blood has a few different explanations.  Jacobovici believes an underground natural gas into the Nile may have caused caused the waters to turn red and kill all the fish.  Two lakes in Cameroon turned blood red in 1984 and 1986.  Epidemiologist John Marr believes microscopic algae may have turned the Nile blood red.  In 1995, a coastal river in North Carolina turned bright red due to an algae bloom.

Marr, “Wisteria was labeled the cell from hell because it killed millions if not billions of fish.  If that occurred in North Carolina in the 1990’s, why couldn’t it have occurred in Egypt 3000 years ago?”

The last plague has some interesting interpretations too.  Moses prophesied that the firstborn of Egypt would all die, and the Israelites would be spared if they put lamb’s blood on their doorposts.  The Destroying Angel would “pass over” homes with lamb’s blood.  So, how can scientists explain such a selective mode of death?  Some believe the Firstborn is metaphorical.

Epidemiologist Martin Blaser of NYU, “There is no disease that we know of that just affects the firstborns, so I take that it’s a metaphor for a disease that kills one out of every 3 or 4 people.”

Blaser thinks bubonic plague may have been the culprit, because it affects both animals and humans.  Eric Cline of George Washington believes the plagues could refer to a “Sea People” that attacked Egypt.

Cline, “The attack of the Sea Peoples was probably the Egyptians worst nightmare.  They are the fiercest warriors that the Egyptians have faced, and the Egyptians tell us that everybody went down in the face of these sea peoples.  Only the Egyptians were able to stand, and even that was a Pyrrhic victory because the Egyptians were so weakened that they were never the same again.”

Although the Egyptians never mentioned the plagues, they did document these attacks in pictographs on the mortuary Temple of Ramses III.  Archaeological finds match these writings.

Cline, “I see no need to use divine intervention when human intervention can explain it just as well, if not better.”

Others believe the death of the firstborn may have been more literal.  Epidemiologist John Marr recently investigated the mysterious death of children that was due to a mold.  He postulated that following the plagues of locusts and hail, much of the grain in Egypt would have been moist and in short supply.

Rare molds can wreak havoc on human health, and can even cause internal hemorrhaging.  With little else to eat, the Egyptians may have resorted to moldy toxin laced grain.  Death would come suddenly, with no visible cause, as if the victims were touched by an angel of death.  Still, why the first born?  Marr found his answer, the final piece to the puzzle in an Egyptian tradition.

Marr, “During the times of famine, the eldest, the oldest Egyptian child would be given a double portion of food in order to stave off starvation.  Instead of saving them, it killed them.”

Jacobovici has another theory for the selective deaths during this final plague.

SJ, “The final plague took place at midnight, after Moses ordered the Israelites to sit down to what became known as the first Passover meal.  While the Israelites were involved in the Passover ritual, the Egyptians slept, and then it happened: every firstborn male Egyptian died.  Every house was affected.  No one has ever been able to offer up a plausible scientific explanation for the death of the firstborn until now.  According to our scenario, at this point in the sequence of events that began some 6 months earlier, the gas leaks that set the chain of plates in motion would have finally erupted.  Carbon dioxide would have seeped to the surface, and being heavier than air, would have killed animals and sleeping people before it dissipated harmlessly into the atmosphere.

In case you think all this is conjecture, consider this.  It happened in exactly the same way in 1986 at Lake Nyos, Cameroon.  On the fateful night of August 21, the villagers at Nyos went to sleep.  They couldn’t have known that the carbon dioxide gas which had turned the lake blood red, was now reaching a critical point.  As the people of Lake Nyos slept, the top of the lake was keeping the carbon down like a cap in a pop bottle.  But then the earth rumbled, and a landslide took place sending rock into the water, disturbing the surface pressure and releasing the gas.  The gas then rose to the surface, and like some alien monster, emerged from the water, droplets forming on it, turning the invisible gas into a visible fog.  The fog then rolled across the water, and across the land, suffocating everything in its path.  And as suddenly as it appeared, it disappeared, dissolving harmlessly into the atmosphere.

The next day those who had been sleeping on higher ground woke up to find some 1800 people dead, hundreds of cattle and small animals also dead, all around there was deadly silence.

SJ, “After the death of the First born, Pharaoh finally relented, letting Moses take his people out of Egypt.  According to the Bible, what made pharaoh give up was the selectivity of the deaths: the fact that it was only male, firstborn who died.  It was this selectivity that demonstrated to him that God himself was involved.  How can we account for this?

Well, Egyptian firstborn males had the privileged position.  They were the heirs to the throne, to property, title, and more.  They slept on Egyptian beds low to the ground, while their brothers and sisters slept on rooftops, sheds, and wagons.  The Israelites sitting up at their first Passover meal did not feel a thing, while the low traveling gas suffocated the privileged Egyptian males sleeping in their beds.

How many people participated in the Exodus?

The Bible says that 600,000 men left Egypt.  Adding women and children would have increased the total number to 2.5 million people, the size of modern-day Brooklyn, NY.  If the group were that large, there should be some evidence somewhere in the wilderness.

Cline, “if the Biblical numbers are correct, and you’ve got two and a half million people wandering around for 40 years, I would want to find entire landscapes denuded.  I’d want to find hundreds of sheep and goat carcasses, the bones.  Even if they didn’t ask for directions wandering for 40 years, there would be something.”

However, archaeologist Jim Hoffmeier of the Trinity Evangelical Divinity School says the number is probably far fewer, due to a mistranslation dating thousands of years.  The original Hebrew says there were 600 elith.

Hoffmeier, “The word elith can be translated 3 different ways:  it can be translated thousand.  Elith can also be translated to the clan.  The third option is that it’s a military unit, which I think is a more plausible scenario.”

According to Hoffmeier’s interpretation, instead of 600,000 men and their families, there were as few as 5000.

Hoffmeier, “we’re talking about a few tens of thousands, certainly not hundreds of thousands, adding women and children making it millions.”

How did the Red Sea part?  Where did the Israelites cross?

There are 3 main theories for the crossing of the Red Sea: a northern, central, and southern route.  Those supporting a northern route point to volcanic activity to explain the parting of the Red Sea.

Geo-archaeologist Floyd McCoy researches tsunamis at the University of Hawaii.  He says a tsunami might have created a land passage for the Israelites across a lagoon.  Although we think of a tsunami as a lot of water, what comes before is the disappearance of water.

Floyd, “Sometimes you get a warning that a tsunami is coming.  Sometimes that ocean disappears, and that’s called draw down.  Remember what a wave looks like; it’s sinusoidal:  bottom, top; trough, crest.  If the trough comes in first, that’s draw down; the ocean disappears.

The Israelites would have crossed on the northern edge of the Mediterranean ocean according to this theory.  However, several Egyptian military outposts have been found along a northern route into Israel dating to the Exodus period.  Many believe the Israelites would have avoided these military outposts when trying to leave Egypt.

In addition to the Biblical mistranslation of elith, Hoffmeier believes the Red Sea is a mistranslation, and the parting of the sea may have occurred closer to home.

Hoffmeier, “The Hebrew Yam Suf literally means sea of reeds.  When the Greek translators took the Hebrew Yam Suf and translated it into Greek, they translated it as Red Sea instead of Reed Sea.  So we’ve been stuck with a faulty translation for over 2000 years.”

Hoffmeier has been working with Prof Stephen O. Moshier, Geologist of Wheaton College.  Together they have pieces together satellite photos and ancient maps to identify a sea of reeds.  They’ve come up with Lake El Balah, on the eastern border of Egypt.  Jacobovici paints another picture of this scenario.

Hoffmeier, “It’s an ancient lake that survived until the 1850’s.  When the Suez Canal was put in, this ancient lake finally died.  Professor Manfred Biatek after conducting a thorough study of this area, proposed that this lake was known to the Egyptians as Ha Tufi, meaning the marshland, the marshy sea.  And the word tuf, the Egyptian word for reeds is the same word as suf in Hebrew.  So Yam Suf, he suggested, was a name derived from this body of water.  Now it is called the El Balah Lake.”  [In Hebrew it means the lake where God devoured.]

…

SJ, “Identifying the precise location of Yam Suf means that we can finally explain the miracle of the parting of the sea. This satellite photo clearly demonstrates that Lake El Balah is close to the edge of the Nile Delta, where soil accumulates and collapses from time to time.  As Pharaoh chased the Israelites to the shores Lake El Balah, the extreme seismic activity that caused the two plates and the Santorini eruption would have now caused the delta to start sliding into the eastern Mediterranean.  As this millions of tons of soil moved forward, the edge of the African plate, which had now released from its burden must have risen between one to one and a half meters.  In other words, the sea parted.

Water would have cascaded from higher ground to lower ground and drained from pools and sinkholes creating dry land for the Israelites to cross.  At this point, further seismic activity, or another collapse of the delta would have sent a major tsunami crashing against the coasts.

Pellegrino, “We get some glimpse of these tidal waves in Turkey where they carved out channel scablands 30 miles inland.  In order to do that at the shore, these waves would have had to have been more than half as high as the Empire State Building, and that’s exactly the description that we do have in the Bible.”

SJ, “If the tsunami went a mere 12 km inland, it would have reached Lake El Balah and engulfed the Egyptian army.  By this point, according to the Bible, the Israelites had advanced beyond the reach of the waves.

Those who support a central route believe Moses and his followers crossed an ancient frankincense trail across the central Sinai Peninsula.  In his younger days, Moses killed an Egyptian while defending a Hebrew slave.  The Bible says he fled to the land of Midian, in Modern Day Saudi Arabia.  It is likely that Moses would have followed the frankincense trail to Midian.  It is the shortest, most direct route to Midian.  If Moses had made the trek before, it is likely he would have followed it again.  Dr Lennart Moller of the Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden notes that the Bible says that

In the Book of First Kings, In approximately 950 BC, King Solomon’s is said to have built his navy at Ezion Geber near Elath, an ancient city on the northern coast of the Gulf of Aqaba.  According to the Hebrew text, this gulf where Solomon’s ships were said to harbor, was call yam suf.

He believes Newieva Beach is large enough to hold a large Israelite party, and it has some unusual features that make crossing there more likely than other places.

The geography of the Gulf of Aqaba also resembles descriptions of the Yam Suf God once parted for Israel.  Aqaba is extremely deep, plunging more than a mile in some spots.  It is adjacent to a dense wilderness of rugged mountains.  It is located clearly outside the borders of ancient Egypt, as recognized during the time of Moses.  These similarities to the scriptures have led Lennart Moller and others to theorize the Gulf of Aqaba is the Red Sea of the Exodus story.  If they are correct, then 2 distinct possibilities for a crossing point exist:  the first is located on the bottom of the Sinai Peninsula, on the Straits of Tyron.  This channel 5 miles across is one of the most popular recreation areas on earth, as spectacular reefs and marine life attract divers from throughout the world, but the topography of the sea floor here would have made crossing highly unlikely.

For less than a mile offshore, a subterranean canyon plunges nearly 1000 feet at a grade so steep, passage on foot through jagged coral beds would have been virtually impossible, even if the waters were miraculously removed.  70 miles north of the straits, near the center o the Aqaba coast, another potential crossing site extends into the sea.  It is called the Newieva Peninsula.

Moller was attracted to Newieva Beach because of some interesting coral formations.

Moller, “The first time I was diving there, of course we were then looking for possible artifacts, and I had seen some pictures of what we could look for.  I was skeptical and excited because if this is the place for the crossing, then of course, that’s a big thing, so I was excited about that.  But I was also skeptical because 3500 years—that’s a long time.  But if Newieva is the crossing site, then of course you would expect to find remains of the Egyptian army.”

Like others who had explored Newiva before him, Moller immediately recognized the difficulty of this search.

Moller, “If we assume a number of artifacts were spread out on the sea bed, sooner or later corals would start to grow on them, and of course if you have an array of some coral all growing on something, it’s very hard to distinguish the structure that was there in the very beginning.”

Though the coral complicates any search here, it may have been instrumental in preserving the shapes of artifacts, for coral is a living organism that will not begin to grow on a foundation of sand or silt.  Instead, it must first attach itself to a solid object where it will sometimes conform to the shape of its host.

Moller, “So for instance if it were to grow on a wooden artifact, the wood would normally disappear in the sea waters after a time.  But if you have corals growing on the wooden artifact, the corals could have the shape of the wooden artifact and then the coral would consume the wood and material over a periods of time, but still keep the shape of the wooden artifacts.”

During the course of his exploration, Moller observed the pattern of coral growth at Neweiva differed from other parts of the gulf.  Unlike the coral at the northern and southern ends of Aqaba which often forms large dense reefs, sometimes covering acres, the formations at Nuweiva beach are generally smaller, and scattered randomly across the bottom of the sea floor.  Divers familiar with the area have compared the distribution of coral here to a junkyard, and the aftermath of a disaster.  This description is fitting, and among the strange formations in these waters, many display features indicative of human engineering.

Moller, “When we dive, and when we film, at the Neweiva location, we look for certain structures, and you try to look for 90 degree angles, or circular objects, wheel like structures, so that is what you scan for when you dive.  There are situations where you see something that looks like an axle, a hub, some that looks like a wheel, and you say to yourself, this is a coral reef.  This coral grew on an artifact, and that is what’s different to me when I compare corals at other locations around the world.”

Since the earliest explorations at Newieva, one distinctive type of formation has often been identified on the sea floor, a slender table-like structure, sometimes standing on end with a coral encrusted base, a straight shaft, and a circular top.

Moller, “It’s a 90 degree angle, and right angle between something that looks like an axle and a wheel.  You can see this in different varieties, and it looks very different from normal coral.  It is like a man-made structure with a coral roof on it.

While most of the possible artifacts found on the coast of Newieva are covered with coral, one significant discovery was not.

Moller, “There is one find at the Neweiva location that is of great interest, and this is the gilded wheel.  It is a wooden basic structure of the wheel, and it is covered with gold or electrum, a mixture of silver gold, and corals have not been able to grow on it.  It’s been fairly well preserved, although it’s very fragile.  It seems the wooden content has been dissolved.  You could break it if you try to remove it.”

After its discovery, the fragile wheel-shaped veneer was photographed and left in place on the sea floor.

Later analysis revealed that its dimensions and design resembled four-spoked chariot wheels painted on a 18^th Dynasty tomb wall near the Biblical date of the Exodus.

Moller referenced a southern crossing point as well, but dismissed it because of the steep cliffs and jagged coral.  Proponents of a southern route believe a volcanic land bridge may have appeared at this area.

Stephen J. O’Meara, Volcanologist, Volcano Watch International flies over an active volcano.  “Imagine the Jews, reaching this massive land bridge, formed by lava.  Here we have earth being created before our eyes.  You can see the lava flow going into the ocean on a new bench of land.  This is a very highly unstable platform of land.  The bench will not last for long.  This whole area can fall in just a matter of minutes.  Massive collapses have occurred here in Hawaii almost in the blink of an eye.”

The Red Sea forms part of the Great African Rift System.  The entire region has an explosive volcanic history.

O’Meara, “Although we see a very small lava flow, you have to in your mind scale this up to a massive volcanic eruption 3200 years ago.  It enters the water, the water boils, it disappears.  It’s enough to choke valleys and cause land bridges.”

In O’Meara’s scenario, an underwater eruption could have created a temporary unstable lava bridge.  The surface layer of lava cools quickly when it hits the water.  The Israelites could have crossed over this new land.

O’Meara walking on lava, near bright red lava flow, “But what’s amazing about this lava, even though it’s so hot that I have to keep walking right at this moment, that if I had to, to save my life, I could wait, walk over this lava in 10 minutes.”

This new unsupported land could have quickly disintegrated.

O’Meera, “and then when the Egyptians were on their chariots, [hops around because of the heat] and they tried to cross this same bed, the lava gave way.”

The collapse of this land bridge would have plunged pharaoh’s army into the sea.

O’Meara, “It makes sense.  Volcanoes are the only thing that makes sense.  The Bible is just filled with volcanic references and especially in Exodus out from the plagues to the parting of the Red Sea, and seeing pillars of fire, and mountains quaking, and burning bushes, all of them just in Exodus.  You imagine, you come up here and see this and you are not a scientist.  There were no scientists back then.  Listen to it!  [lava crackling]  It’s talking to you!  It’s written in the Bible, God says, ‘I am the rock.’  There you are!”

Where is Mount Sinai?

As I mentioned at the beginning of this post, there are several proposed locations for Mount Sinai.  The traditional location is at the southern tip of the Sinai Peninsula.  Tradition for this site goes back to the 4^th Century.  After Moses escaped to Midian, he found the Burning Bush.

Many scholars believe that Mount Sinai is in the Land of Midian in modern day Saudi Arabia.

Separated by the Red Sea and the Egyptian army in the Sinai Peninsula, Moses married a Midianite woman, tended the flocks of his father-in-law Jethro, and lived in obscurity for years, until the day he wandered to the base of Mount Sinai.  There God spoke through a burning bush and revealed his plan to free Israel from bondage.  Given the Biblical record, some believe that Mount Sinai must be in Midian, but is there any other evidence to support this theory?

Several Jewish documents, some written several hundred years before Christian traditions, locate the mountain of God in Midianite territory.  In 250 BC, a council of 70 Hebrew scholars translated the Hebrew Bible into Greek for the first time.  Their translation of the Exodus account presupposed that Mount Sinai stood in the Arabian Peninsula.  Three centuries later, the Jewish philosopher Philo placed the mountain “east of the Sinai Peninsula” and south of Palestine.  At the same time, the apostle Paul, who was educated under the Rabbi Gamaliel, also located Mount Sinai in Arabia (Galatians 4:25).

Kerkeslager, “So Paul and Philo, when they used the word Arabia, they’re not thinking of the Sinai Peninsula.  Once again, I think that point needs to be emphasized very clearly.  In terminology, Arabia in the 1^st century, Greek geographers usually had in mind the Arabian Peninsula.  That’s how that term is used.”

Perhaps that most specific description of Mount Sinai’s location can be traced to the first century historian Josephus, who wrote “it was the highest of mountains…” near “…the city of Madian.”  Shortly after this account, Madian was identified in the Arabian Peninsula by the Greek geographer Ptolemy.  1900 years later, archaeologists excavated this city that according to ancient records had once stood near Mount Sinai.  The ruins of Madian lie just outside the modern day town of El-bod near Saudi Arabia’s northwest coast.

…

Viveka Ponten of Stockholm, Sweden said, “I have always been interested in archaeological finds that could confirm the truths of the Bible.  I have wanted come to Saudi Arabia to see for myself—I want to be able to say ‘I have seen this place’.”

In 1996, Vivika Ponten entered Saudi Arabia on a work permit.  During the following years, she made several trips to Jebel Elboz.

Ponten, “It was very difficult to find the mountain.  I think I had been there for 7 months before I came to the mountain the first time.  We went around looking for it in the desert.  I did 5 long day trips—5 different locations, just looking and looking for this place.”

Throughout her search, Ponten encountered a strong local tradition that Moses had once lived in Arabia.

Ponten, “It seems to be a tradition among the locals there that this mountain range is called Jebel-Musa.  They call it that, and many places have the name of Moses, like their wells, that they call Adien-Musa, or Bijan-Musa, which means ‘the well of Moses’.”

When Ponten finally reached Jebel Alboz, her attention was drawn to specific features of the mountain that resembled the Biblical description.  Most prominent was a jagged peak, more than 8000 feet in elevation, and blackened, as if scorched by fire.  [Deuteronomy 9:18, the Lord descended on it in fire.)

At its base, an enormous pile of boulders, at least 15 feet high and 60 feet across (Exodus 32:5, he built an altar in front of the calf.)  The flattened top of this structure had the appearance of being man-made, and etched into its rock faces were petro glyphs of bovine creatures, cattle and bulls.  The distinctive horns and some of the inscriptions resemble pictures of ancient Egyptian Apis bulls.  Could these stones be the remains of an Israelite altar, once built at the base of a holy mountain?  Conclusive investigation is not possible at this time, for Saudi law severely limits all foreign research.

Ponten, “They have put up archaeological signs that tell this is an archaeological area, and you’re not supposed to trespass here.  It’s evident that the Arabs themselves consider this to be some old site of archaeological interest.

Satellite photos of the area have revealed another geographical feature that parallels the Biblical account: a sprawling plain more than 10,000 acres.  Flat, surrounded by mountains, and adjacent to the dried bed of an ancient river, it could have provided an ideal place for the Israelite encampment 3500 years ago.

Just west of the mountain stands another link to the possible Exodus account: a towering rock, 60 feet high.  It is split from top to bottom, and evidence of water erosion is etched into its base.  Many features of Jebel Alboz reflect the Biblical account of Mount Sinai.  As the highest mountain of northwest Arabia, it matches ancient Jewish historical records.

Kerkeslager, “Based on the textual evidence, Jebel Alboz is as good of a guess as any; it might even be the best guess.  It’s definitely better than anything in the Sinai Peninsula, and probably better than any other guess that we have.  It would be nice to have some excavation, and that’s really [why] we need excavations.  We need somebody who is competent, trained archeologist to go in and record the material carefully, submit it for dispute and debate among other scholars, because there are too many gaps in our knowledge.”

The intriguing similarities between Jebel Alboz, and the Biblical record may indeed stimulate new investigation here. Yet whether or not future excavations confirm this site as the actual mountain of God, a considerable body of documentary evidence indicates that Mount Sinai is located somewhere in northwestern Arabia.

Others believe Mount Sinai is somewhere on the Sinai Peninsula.  Jacobovici discusses another possible location discovered by Prof Uzi Avner.

Holy mountains in the desert are marked by ancient, open-air, rock sanctuaries.  In this area there is only 1 mountain surrounded by sanctuaries.  Today that mountain is called Jebel-Hashem el-Tarif.

Although this entire are is in the middle of a military zone, we got to it.  This mountain perfectly fits all the criteria for Mount Sinai.  It is surrounded by a huge plateau that could have accommodated hundreds of thousands of Israelites.  It is easily accessible.  It literally sits on the main trans-Sinai highway, which follows the topography of the ancient route.

Prof. Uzi Avner, Arava Environmental Institute, Israel, “The Mountain is not very high, only about 200 meters above the plateau, but it is very conspicuous.  You can see it from a distance.  The unique point is that it is surrounded by actually the largest concentration of open air sanctuaries that we now today in the desert.”

Conclusions?

So, do we need to believe that any of these scenarios?  Both skeptics and believers seem to agree that faith and science are two different animals.

Hoffmeier, “For people that have religious convictions, they don’t need proof.”

Cornuke, “it all boils down to, this is a supernatural event, and you can’t explain it in any other way.”

Ultimately, the power of Exodus lies more in faith than in science.

Cooney, “There’s no real scientific proof that the Exodus took place, but as a Christian or as a Jew, you shouldn’t need scientific proof to be a person of faith.  Faith doesn’t need to be scientifically proven, nor should it be; it’s faith.”

Cameron, “It seems that the Bible, geology, and archaeology, are all telling the same story.  But skeptics, who would like to regard the Exodus as myth, might resist the idea that it actually happened, because this would imply that God does indeed exist.  Believers on the other hand may feel that a scientific explanation of the Biblical story takes God out of the equation. “

SJ, “But in the Book of Exodus, God does not suspend nature, he manipulates it.  In other words, according to the Bible, we should be able to understand the science behind the miracles.  The greatest miracle of them all was the parting of the sea.

Rabbi David Wolpe believes that the historicity of the events in the Bible should not matter; faith is not determined by the same criteria as empirical truth.

So, what do you think?  Does any of this convince you of the historicity of the Exodus?  Do you think the Exodus is myth?

No one in the history of Mormon scholarship has done more to establish rational grounds for belief in the Book of Mormon than Hugh Nibley.  Acquiring impressive scholarly credentials (summa cum laude from UCLA and a Berkeley Ph.D. dissertation written in three weeks in 1938) before heading off to war….

[page 119]  the first forty pages of the Book of Mormon engender under Nibley’s analysis a rich tapestry of linguistic, political, geographic, religious, and historical threads that are convincingly sixth century B.C. Middle Eastern.  Palestine’s cultural and economic ties to Egypt at this time are reflected in Nephi’s instruction in “the language of the Egyptians” (1 Nephi 1:2).  The “reformed Egyptian and Hebrew in a process of fusion for which a great deal of evidence now exists⁷.  Nibley compares the Book of Mormon “Hermounts” (the wild country of the borderlands) with Egyptian “Hermonthis” (a land of Month, god of wild places and things),  and points out the “bulls-eyes” of the Book of Mormon characters Paanchi, Korihor, and Pahoran.  Paankhi turns out to be an Egyptian name in the seventh century B.C., and Korihor turns up in both Egyptian and Asiastic derivatives.⁸  In this regard, it is well worth nothing that William Foxwell Albright, doyen of American ancient Near East studies, wrote to a critic seeking to debunk Smith’s writings that “when the Book of Mormon was written, Egyptian had just begun to be deciphered and it is all the more surprising that there are two Egyptian names, Paanchi[i] and Pahor[an] which appear together in the Book of Mormon in close connection with a reference to the original language being ‘Reformed Egyptian.’”⁹

Many critics of the Book of Mormon take issue with this idea of “Reformed Egyptian.”  Givens quotes Moroni on page 132,

“we have written this record according to our knowledge, in the characters which are called among us the reformed Egyptian, being handed down and altered by us, according to our manner of speech” (Morm. 9:32)

Mormon scholars take this to suggest the possibility that the writers used modified Egyptian symbols to represent Hebrew words (“Hebrew words, idioms, and syntax written in Egyptian cursive script”⁵³), certainly a bizarre idea for a nineteenth-century audience.  Now as John Tvedtnes points out, “the use of Egyptian symbols to transliterate Hebrew words and vice versa, is known from the sixth century B.C. text discovered at Arad and Kadesh-Barnea,”⁵⁴  Papyrus Amherst 63, for example, “contains a scriptural text in Northwest Semitic tongue written in an Egyptian script.”⁵⁵

Physical evidence for the unique script is limited to the purported transcription of characters taken from the plates and shown by Martin Harris in 1828 to Professor Charles Anthon.⁵⁶  They consist of seven horizontal rows of unusual markings, that have been variously described as everything from Phoenician writing to Mayan script to occult symbols, from “a Nubian corruption of Egyptian” to secret Masonic code.

Though the expression “reformed Egyptian” garnered no small amount of ridicule at the time and since (“deformed English” rather than “reformed Egyptian,” sniffed Charles Shook in 1910, after looking at the Anthon transcript⁵⁷), scholars now generally recognize that “Demotic Egyptian, of origin not long before Lehi’s Exodus, is certainly a ‘reformed Egyptian’ as are other well-known and less-known variations.”⁵⁸  Nibley points out that Meroitic, “a baffling and still largely undeciphered Egyptian script which developed out of Demotic under circumstances remarkably paralleling the purported development of the Nephite writing, has the most striking affinities to the characters on the so-called Anthon Transcript.”⁵⁹

Givens shows other parallels in the chapter, including:

• Lehi’s travel through the desert,
• his poetic structure,
• the golden plates parallel with the Copper Scroll found with the Dead Sea Scrolls (and other writings on ancient metal plates),
• similarities between Moroni’s Title of Liberty and the Quran,
• King Benjamin’s coronation was similar to Bablyonian rituals, and
• important plates buried in stone boxes by Darius, king of Persia.

From page 124,

Nibley’s legendary erudition, fluency across a spectrum of languages, and prodigious output (appearing in a wide range of scholarly publications from the Classical Journal and Encyclopedia Judaica to Church History and Revue de Qumran) have lent his work a weight that is unprecedented in Mormon studies.

Praised by the likes of non-LDS scholars Raphael Patai, Jacob Neusner, James Charlesworth, Cyrus Gordon, Jacob Milgrom, and former Harvard Divinity School dean George McRae (“it is obscene for a man to know that much,” he grumbled, hearing him lecture), Nibley has done more than any Mormon of his era to further the intellectual credibility of the Book of Mormon.²³  Inspired by his work, a more recent generation of LDS researchers brings a range of impressive scholarly credentials to serious Book of Mormon scholarship.²⁴

Givens goes on to talk about John Welch.  As a missionary in Germany in 1967, Welch attended a lecture on chiasmus, a Hebrew literary device.  Welch soon discovered chiasmus in Mosiah 5:10-12, a form of inverted parallel poetry.  Welch went on to work with FARMS, the Foundation of Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (formed in 1979.)  The group looks at Old World parallels in the Book of Mormon.  Givens addresses John Sorenson, the most recognized archaeologist advocating a Central American setting for the Book of Mormon.  (I plan a future post exclusively to Sorenson and his theory.)

Givens says that Mormon Scholarship is causing alarm among Evangelical critics.  From page 143,

Under the burden of Mormon scholarship that is increasingly well credentialed, and in the face of Mormon growth that is alarming to evangelicals,¹¹⁰ the polemics of nineteenth-century preachers are no longer an adequate response.  Until recently, for example, criticisms of barley or pre-Columbian horses in the Book of Mormon would come from writers of anti-Mormon books–not from botanists or archaeologists.  The latter have not, for the most part, taken the Book of Mormon seriously enough as a text to analyze its historical credibility.  A recent paper by two evangelical scholars suggests that a realignment of the Book of Mormon wars may be coming.

The 1997 address of Carl Mosser and Paul Owen at a regional meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society was remarkable for a number of reasons.  First, it accorded high praise to the state of Mormon scholarship.  They summarized a number of recent publications to illustrate their assertion that “in recent years the sophistication and erudition of LDS apologetics has risen considerably…[and] is clearly seen in their approach to the Book of Mormon.”  As difficult as it may be to accept the fact, “LDS academicians are producing serious research which desperately needs to be critically examined,” they insisted.¹¹¹

In addition, Mosser and Owen are adamant that evangelical resposes to Mormon scholarship have been, almost universally, “uninformed, misleading, or otherwise inadequate….At the academic level evangelicals are losing the debate.”¹¹²  Actually, it hardly resembles a debate, because Mormon scholars, they acknowledge, “have…answered most of the usual evangelical criticisms.”  And, as of 1997, there were “no books from an evangelical perspective that responsibly interact with contemporary LDS scholarly and apologetic writings.”¹¹³

As a consequence, anti-Mormons continue to invoke long-discredited banalities, many of which actually turn to Mormon advantage upon inspection.  For example, literature found in any cult section of Christian bookstores still criticizes Alma for writing that Jesus will be “born at Jerusalem, which is the land of our forefathers” (Alma 7:10) a seeming blooper.  Actually, of course, such usage is consistent with Middle Eastern practice of naming areas for their principal cities.¹¹⁴  Or they mock Alma’s name itself, an apparent Latin feminine.  But in 1960-61, the Israeli scholar Yigael Yadin found a land deed near the western shore of the Dead Sea dating from the early second century.  One of the names on the deed was “Alma, son of Yehudah,” demonstrating Alma was to be “an authentically ancient Semitic masculine personal name.”¹¹⁵

…[page 144]  The major force in anti-Mormon polemics has long been Jerald and Sandra Tanner…It is no wonder that non-Mormon historian Lawrence Foster has faulted these critics, the most prolific of all anti-Mormon writers, for “twisting” scholarship, resorting to “debaters’ ploys,” and, in general, demonstrating “lack of balance and perspective.”¹¹⁷

So, what do you think of the state of Mormon Scholarship?

LDS president Thomas S. Monson and his two counselors permitted Standing Together, an alliance of 90 Utah evangelical churches, to use the historic Salt Lake City Tabernacle for a September 13 revival meeting. Throngs of evangelicals and Mormons enjoyed gospel songs and prayed together.

This is pretty remarkable.  While I know that church leaders allowed non-Mormon leaders to preach in the Tabernacle in the 1800’s, it has been quite a while since that has ever happened.

Vujicic’s appearance was preceded in 2004 by LDS officialdom’s remarkable go-ahead for an address in the Tabernacle by well-known apologist Ravi Zacharias. His theologically orthodox presentation of Christianity, which some Mormons attended, was overshadowed by Mouw’s introduction. He declared that “we evangelicals have often seriously misrepresented” Mormon beliefs and practices. “We have sinned against you,” he said.

Wow.  Of course other evangelicals disagreed.  Even still, that quote deserves a big WOW.

Here is an interesting poll.  (I’ve changed formatting.)

Are Mormons Christian? How Christian groups answer the question?

All Americans

Yes 52%
Don’t know 17%
No 31%

Mainline Protestants

Yes 62%
Don’t know 15%
No 23%

Catholics

Yes 52%
Don’t know 19%
No 29%

Black Protestants

Yes 43%
Don’t know 27%
No 30%

Evangelical Protestants

No 45%
Yes 40%
Don’t know 15%

Hmmm, there certainly is a divide between Mormons and Evangelicals.  Does any of this surprise you?

Here are some other articles concerning Mormons at Christianity Today.  What do you think specifically about this article about Richard Dutcher’s movie, “States of Grace“?

Here’s the original Press Release.

In his book, Wright demonstrates that the Ten Commandments and related covenants in Exodus 20-23 were plagiarized from the Laws of Hammurabi, an ancient Babylonian text, and were copied much later than the time of Moses–rather from the time of the Babylonian exile in 740-640 BCE. “The study offers significant new evidence demonstrating that a model of literary dependence is the only viable explanation for the work. … This analysis shows that the Covenant Code is primarily a creative academic work rather than a repository of laws practiced by Israelites or Judeans over the course of their history … and explores how this may relate to the development of the Pentateuch as a whole.”

Now, here is the corrected release,

In his book, Wright demonstrates that the Covenant Code of Exodus 20-23, which is part of the revelation of Mt. Sinai , was in effect borrowed from the Laws of Hammurabi, an ancient Babylonian text. From literary clues, Wright has been able to determine that the code was copied into Israelite records during the Babylonian exile of 740-640 BCE, long after the time of Moses. “The study offers significant new evidence demonstrating that a model of literary dependence is the only viable explanation for the work. … This analysis shows that the Covenant Code is primarily a creative academic work rather than a repository of laws practiced by Israelites or Judeans over the course of their history … and explores how this may relate to the development of the Pentateuch as a whole.”

So some of you may dismiss Wright–certainly he doesn’t represent Mormon thought, right?  Well, let’s check his credentials.

1. Wright formerly taught at Brigham Young University.  He was an Assistant Professor of Asian and Near Eastern Languages.
2. Wright is a Professor of Bible and Ancient Near East Studies at Brandeis University.
3. Wright is also a contributor to American Apocrypha: Essays on the Book of Mormon and New Approaches to the Book of Mormon .

I haven’t read the book, but what are your initials reactions?