© 2024 The Interpreter Foundation. A 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.
All content by The Interpreter Foundation, unless otherwise specified, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available here.
Interpreter Foundation is not owned, controlled by or affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. All research and opinions provided on this site are the sole responsibility of their respective authors, and should not be interpreted as the opinions of the Board, nor as official statements of LDS doctrine, belief or practice.
The Book of Mormon was written in Egyptian or a form thereof, and with a Mesoamerican form of corrupt Hebrew as the alternative language to the reformed Egyptian. Both Egyptian and Maya have chiasmus. Has anyone evaluated chiasmus in the Book of Mormon from this aspect? This would be consistent with what the Book of Mormon plate text would have represented. It is also possible that the Hebrew forms may just be part of the target translation language, has that been looked at?
Thanks so much for this article. As you explain, your painstaking analysis is built on a foundation of work shared by Jack Welch and many other scholars in recent decades. This growing foundation of knowledge, enriched daily by you and others, makes the thought that “someone had to write it” all the more interesting. This article provides further evidence that the Book of Mormon fits much better with “the rhetorical assumptions and expectations of” “Hebrew writing in Lehi’s day” than with the grammar and syntax of a poor, twenty something New England farmer in 1829. It suggests that every word in Alma 36 is, indeed, the word of God. I thank God for the miraculous Book of Mormon, for men like you who share its intricacies with the rest of us, and for the Holy Ghost, which bears witness of its precepts to my soul.
That was great! Thank you. Having read Chiasmi in Antiquity several years ago, I have had a fascination with Chiasmi in the Book of Mormon. Those critics of the historicity of the Book of Mormon should feel uncomfortable reading this. The minimalist approach to the Bible hasn’t work out so good, nor has that approach worked when applied to the Book of Mormon. Someone ought to write a history on that.