*Omitting the middle section with the 146 parallels*Introduction wrote:Numerous parallels between the Book of Mormon and the Book of Moses have been identified that are consistent with Noel Reynolds’s original 1990 proposal that a version of Genesis on the brass plates may have contained some of the non-King James Version language and concepts found in the Book of Moses.1 These parallels [Page 322]generally exclude those that can be readily explained as mere incorporation of King James Version language. In many cases, they cannot be explained as Joseph simply borrowing Book of Mormon language and concepts to compose the Book of Moses. Some of the parallels reflect a one-way direction of influence from the Book of Moses to the Book of Mormon, as if Book of Mormon authors were often alluding to a backstory or to well-developed concepts that the Book of Moses provides. Examples of how these new-found parallels enrich our appreciation of familiar accounts will be offered below.
Given that the Book of Moses translation began well after the Book of Mormon translation was complete, these parallels may cast doubt on common assumptions about how Joseph produced the Book of Moses. Indeed, they can be viewed as evidence that both books have ancient origins, with something like the Book of Moses possibly having been on the brass plates, where it could have influenced Book of Mormon authors—especially those most familiar with the brass plates. Indeed, a recently published companion article, Part 1 of this two-part series, examines the distribution of the parallels in the Book of Mormon, arguing that the hypothesis of brass plates influence on ancient Book of Mormon authors has significant explanatory power with respect to the details of the distribution and reduces the likelihood that the distribution arises from random word choices by Joseph.2
[Page 323] In total, there are 146 proposed parallels.
An interesting argument. This isn't just parallelomania, because look how many weak parallels we found! There must be something to them.Conclusion wrote:The new and updated parallels presented here were part of the data used in examination of the distribution of parallels in a recently published companion article,15 Part 1 of this series. That article also examined the issue of translator intent in preserving or highlighting potential parallels. Findings were consistent with a generally “tight” translation of the Book of Mormon, with translator intent or cooperation spanning both the Book of Mormon and the Book of Moses, with the result that parallels could be detected largely on the basis of common language.
The details of the distribution, the multiple parallels pointing to a one-way direction of influence from the Book of Moses or something like it to the Book of Mormon, the explanatory power (including enhanced meaning offered by considering the Book of Moses as a source of influence), and the general absence of similar phenomena involving the Book of Abraham suggest that there may be something besides obsessive parallelomania behind the findings of this study. Indeed, there may be something highly unexpected and unique about the Book of Moses and its relationship to the Book of Mormon. Though some of the parallels are admittedly weak and could be due to chance or other textual influences, the cumulative effect of the evidence both reinforces the surprising findings first reported by Reynolds in 1990 and suggests that a noteworthy phenomenon may be found in the data presented here. An argument can be made that the relationship is best explained by both the Book of Mormon’s and the Book of Moses’s roots in ancient texts that were translated with apparent translator intent (recognizing that multiple translators may have been involved) to make allusions and connections readily discoverable for modern readers.
Folks, you can't make this shoddy scholarship up.
https://interpreterfoundation.org/journ ... -parallels
