DCP says
I wasn’t, of course, seeking to deceive anybody. I was speaking honestly, as I routinely do, on the basis of the information that I had at the time.
And
If true, though, it would obviously weaken somewhat — though I don’t think that it wholly obviates — my suggestion that Alma represents minor but genuine evidence for the Book of Mormon’s authentic antiquity. But I would want to know how likely Joseph Smith would have been to know of men named Alma. How common was the name among males in early America? Did certain regions favor it more than others? If so, where? In places with which Joseph Smith was familiar?
But wait
Since that time, though, I’ve been told that, in fact, there were some non-Latter-day Saint American men before and during the period of Joseph Smith who may have borne the name Alma. (The computerization of genealogical and census materials makes searches for such names far easier than they were even just a few years ago.) I haven’t personally investigated this claim, since Alma isn’t a topic that I address much any more. Perhaps I’ll do it, sometime, but my current priorities lie elsewhere.
However
So, in numerous public presentations and perhaps elsewhere, I countered with evidence that Alma is, in fact, a demonstrably ancient Semitic masculine personal name.
So let me summarize. It’s easier now than ever to search the records and see that Alma was in fact a masculine name used in Joseph Smith’s time. But because the evidence is contrary to the public position of DCP, he doesn’t have much time to invest in looking at the latest evidence. So, he’d much rather spend the exact same amount of time it takes to do the research and write a blog post about how he would want to know how common the name was in Joseph Smith’s time.
Simply astounding.
I'm a Ziontologist. I self identify as such.
