• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

FAIR

Faithful Study Resources for Come, Follow Me

  • Find Answers
  • Blog
  • Media & Apps
  • Conference
  • Bookstore
  • Archive
  • About
  • Get Involved
  • Search

Okay, let’s go over this again…

May 1, 2012 by Mike Parker

An inquiry came to FAIR’s “Ask the Apologist” service this morning, asking for help with the following claim on the Wikipedia article “Linguistics and the Book of Mormon”:

Richard Packham has pointed out that several Biblical Hebrew names, including Aaron, Ephraim, and Levi are listed as Jaredites in the Book of Ether. He argues that these are anachronisms, since the Jaredites are supposed to have originated from the time of the Tower of Babel, and did not speak Hebrew.

Perennial ex-Mormon gadfly Richard Packham apparently fails to understand that the Book of Mormon is a translation, and translations render ancient words — including names — into modern forms that didn’t exist at the time.

For example, in the New Testament, there are several individuals named “James”, including an apostle and a bishop of Jerusalem. However, there was no name “James” in Greek during the first century A.D.; that word is a late-twelfth century Middle English form of the late Latin Jacomus, which itself derives from old Latin Jacobus. All of these are translations of the Koine Greek ιακωβον (Iakobos), which is a Greek version of the Hebrew יעקב (Ya’aqob), which itself is typically rendered in English as “Jacob.”

So Packham could also argue — erroneously — that the presence of “James” in the New Testament is an anachronism, since its Greek-speaking authors did not know Middle English.

When Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon, he naturally would have rendered ancient names into equivalent English forms that modern readers would understand.

Once again, for the record: The Book of Mormon is a translation. The presence of English (or even French) words in it does not mean that its writers knew English; only that Joseph Smith, the translator did.

 


ADDITIONAL:

A possible response to the above could be, “What about Book of Mormon names like Nephi, Abinadi, and Korihor? Those aren’t in the Bible and appear to be Nephite words — or at least examples of Joseph Smith not borrowing from the Bible.”

To that I would answer that translation of a proper name is often left to the discretion of the translator. I have heard Spanish speakers refer to me, in Spanish, as either Mike or Miguel, depending on their preference.

More to the point, there are numerous examples from the Bible where the translators chose to use transliterated versions of the original Greek or Hebrew name, or picked an English equivalent.

For example, the New Testament names Nicodemus (νικοδημος / Nikodemos), Didymus (διδυμος / Didumos), and Andronicus (ανδρονικον / Andronikos) are all pretty close approximations of the Greek original, while names like John (ιωαννην / Ioannes) and even Jesus (ιησους / Iesous) are heavily anglicized.

The King James translators were even inconsistent on rending the same person’s name the same way: The English name Paul in Greek is παυλος (Paulos). In the KJV this is almost always rendered “Paul,” except in Acts 13:7 where it is transliterated “Paulus.”

Likewise the name ιουδας, which is usually transliterated as “Judas” in the New Testament, and is Greek version of the Hebrew Judah. As it so happens, Judas came to be infamously associated with Judas Iscariot, the betrayer of the Lord. Because of this, all other references to ιουδας in the New Testament are rendered in some other fashion, even though they’re the same Greek word: Either “Juda” (8×), “Judah” (1×), or “Jude” (1×). The latter is, of course, the title of the penultimate book in the New Testament; the author’s name is the same as Judas Iscariot’s, but, to avoid confusion, the English rendition in the KJV and virtually all subsequent English translations has been “Jude.”

So, as a translator, Joseph Smith would have been free (or perhaps inspired) to use a transliteration of a name like Amalickiah, or an anglicized equivalent of an ancient name, even one with Greek roots like Timothy.

Filed Under: Anti-Mormon critics, Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, LDS Scriptures

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Vader says

    May 1, 2012 at 12:22 pm

    A good example is the name “Josh” appearing in the Book of Mormon. It strikes the modern skeptic as a good ol’ redneck country boy name, but it’s also a very reasonable Anglicization of the proper name Yaush found in the Lachish Letters.

  2. Mike Parker says

    May 1, 2012 at 1:18 pm

    In 3 Nephi 9:10 and Mormon 6:14. Nice find, Vader.

  3. Greg Smith says

    May 1, 2012 at 1:22 pm

    The most depressing thing about this is that Packham used to teach linguistics or some other language discipline.

    I find it hard to believe that he can be completely unaware of this phenomenon.

    It ain’t rocket science. But it is par for the course.

  4. Mike Parker says

    May 1, 2012 at 4:22 pm

    Great point, Greg. Packham introduced his turgid article “A Linguist Looks at Mormonism” this way:

    My interest in language in general and foreign languages in particular began when I was a child. When I was in high school I took every foreign language the school offered (Latin and Spanish), and when I began college I continued that study, with the intention of becoming a language teacher. I continued with Spanish, and also learned French and German, graduating with a major in German and minors in Spanish and English. My master of arts degree was in German, after which I began to teach (Latin, German and English). During that time I also studied Russian. I then had the opportunity to work toward a doctorate in historical and comparative linguistics, and spent four years in graduate school, learning Anglo-Saxon, Old Icelandic, Gothic, Sanskrit, classical Greek, Old and Middle High German, as well as extensively studying comparative and historical linguistic methodology. In the years since I have also studied Mandarin Chinese, Esperanto and Hebrew, and acquired a reading knowledge of Dutch and Italian. During my teaching career of thirty-five years I used comparative linguistic techniques in the classroom. I have found that my knowledge and experience with the phenomena of language give me a somewhat unusual perspective on Mormonism.

    As a trained linguist who, apparently, has done a fair amount of translating from one language to another, it’s shocking that he doesn’t understand this very rudimentary concept.

    The only explanation I can come up with that his desire to tear down his former faith has taken precedence over his intellectual honesty.

  5. Tobin says

    May 5, 2012 at 5:28 pm

    Please don’t use other people’s false assumptions before addressing them. Moses and Aaron did not speak Hebrew and their names are not Hebrew in origin. They most likely spoke Coptic and the names are Afro-Asiatic in origin. The Afro-Asiatic languages have very old root origins and lead to Hebrew and Coptic. Also, the Jaredites share this Afro-Asiatic base and so finding these names among them is unremarkable.

  6. Mike Parker says

    May 6, 2012 at 9:07 am

    Looking at the Biblical name John:

    Hebrew = Yochannan
    Greek = Ioannes
    Latin = Iohannes
    German = Johann
    Italian = Giovanni
    Russian = Ivan
    French = Jean
    Scottish = Ian
    Spanish = Juan
    English = John

    All the same name. Sometimes translated; sometimes transliterated.

  7. Neal Rappleye says

    May 8, 2012 at 5:44 pm

    “The most depressing thing about this is that Packham used to teach linguistics or some other language discipline.”

    I didn’t realize Packham had a linguistic background until I was reading Brant Gardner’s book “The Gift and Power,” where Gardner quoted from Packham. Mind you this is in the middle of a very through discussion of the complications of translation, and then he quotes Packham regarding the expectation of the translation being “correct”. I immediately thought the same thing – with his background, he really should know better than to make rather naive arguments about anachronisms other matters for which linguistic issues maybe a factor.

  8. Mike Parker says

    May 27, 2012 at 2:31 pm

    For reference, Paul Y. Hoskisson claims that “97 percent of the unique Book of Mormon names [are] given only in transliteration,” which would mean that the remaining 3% are Anglicized renderings.

    (Hoskisson, “What’s in a Name?”, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 11/1 (2002), 90-93; http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/jbms/?vol=11&num=1&id=288)

Primary Sidebar

Subscribe to Blog

Enter your email address:

Subscribe to Podcast

Podcast icon
Subscribe to podcast in iTunes
Subscribe to podcast elsewhere
Listen with FAIR app
Android app on Google Play

Pages

  • Blog Guidelines

FAIR Latest

  • The Joseph Smith Papers, Documents, Volume 14: 1 January–15 May 1844
  • Come, Follow Me with FAIR: Faithful Answers to New Testament Questions – Matthew 26; Mark 14; John 13
  • Come, Follow Me with FAIR: Faithful Answers to New Testament Questions – Joseph Smith—Matthew 1; Matthew 24–25; Mark 12–13; Luke 21
  • A Prophecy Fulfilled: Church finances are a blessing from God
  • Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 17: The Early Church – Polygamy [B]

Blog Categories

Recent Comments

  • Adam on Come, Follow Me with FAIR: Faithful Answers to New Testament Questions – Matthew 19–20; Mark 10; Luke 18
  • Stw on Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 14: The Early Church – The Endowment [A]
  • Sasha Kwapinski on Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 15: The Early Church – The Endowment [B]
  • Dawn Keogh on Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 14: The Early Church – The Endowment [A]
  • JPS on Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 13: The Early Church – The Word of Wisdom [B]

Archives

Footer

FairMormon Logo

FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Our Friends

  • BYU Religious Studies Center
  • BYU Studies
  • Book of Mormon Central
  • TheFamilyProclamation.org
  • Interpreter Foundation
  • Wilford Woodruff Papers Project

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • iTunes
  • YouTube

Donate to FAIR

We are a volunteer organization. We invite you to give back.

Donate Now

Donate to us by shopping at Amazon at no extra cost to you. Learn how →

Site Footer

Copyright © 1997-2023 by The Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

The views and opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of FAIR, its officers, directors or supporters.

No portion of this site may be reproduced without the express written consent of The Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research, Inc.

Any opinions expressed, implied, or included in or with the goods and services offered by FAIR are solely those of FAIR and not those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR) Logo

FAIR is controlled and operated by the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR)