Bokovoy Challenge

[_Gadianton]

That's what I thought I read at one point. I don't remember any details though.

[_Kevin Graham]

As much as I could. I kept looking for a reference with chapter and verse and I got frustrated because nobody was laying out on the table, the citation that was under debate. They were just debating for the sake of debating. From what I recall, David said he was preparing a presentation for some Symposium, so I assumed he had many more examples to put forward.

David's presentation will deal with the celestial ascent in general, I believe (hopefully he can come and correct that if need be). The parallel between 1 Enoch was only a small part of it.

I'd still like to see an explanation for the dating of 1 Enoch. How could Nephi be quoting Enoch centuries beforehand?

1 Enoch is typically dated to the second or third century B.C., based on partial manuscripts found among the Dead Sea scrolls. Some sections of it may date to the first century A.D. The relevant portion (the Book of the Watchers) is the earliest.

David wasn't suggesting that Nephi quotes 1 Enoch, but rather that the authors of both texts were familiar with the ancient Near Eastern motif of the celestial ascent. As I mentioned in the thread, it appears in other works as well, including the Testament of Levi. I believe David has likely identified similar motifs in earlier, non-Israelite-derived texts.

OK that makes more sense.

However it has been a popular apologetic, starting with Nibley, to argue that the Book of Mormon actually "quotes" Enoch. If David disagrees, then good for him.

[_Enuma Elish]

Hey Kevin,

Just to clarify, I never intended to present a summary of my research in the thread, hence the brevity of the connection, etc. The topic was simply whether or not there exists evidence that Joseph could have accessed 1 Enoch prior to the publication of the Book of Mormon. I was mainly interested in reading what critics thought.

I do not doubt that 1 Enoch is falsely attributed to the biblical patriarch and was written in stages, the earliest of which dates to approximately 300 BCE and the latest towards the end of the 1st century BCE. So I'm not suggesting that the Book of Mormon quotes 1 Enoch. I'm writing a paper that explores traditional divine council and heavenly ascent imagery in Nephi's interaction with the Spirit of the Lord.

In the process, I'm also relying upon the Mesopotamian myth of Adapa which describes the heavenly ascent of the famous priestly sage into the presence of Anu, the head god of the assembly.

Best

[_Enuma Elish]

Kevin,

I'll be the first to admit that I'm not qualified to critique David's work. Since he defends his dissertation soon and as I understand it, his dissertation deals with the links between the Book of Mormon and Biblical writings, I guess we'll shortly be able to infer what those who are qualified think.

Holy Cow! Please tell me you are joking, I can't believe that's the topic of his dissertation.

It's not. My dissertation has nothing whatsoever to do with the Book of Mormon and in fact, ex-LDS scholar David P. Wright is my primary reader/supervisor.

[_Gadianton]

Whoah, hold on here a minute. I'm just not getting it. On the one hand, we have a set of topics that have no doubt been picked over pretty good in Bible studies in the last 100+ years, and on the other this huge expanse of subject matter no one has hardly touched concerning the Book of Mormon, Book of Abraham, Mormon scripture in general, and the links to the old world. Given David's expertise on the latter, I'm very surprised he's so adamant about sticking with the former for his dissertation. Why not plow new ground?

[_Enuma Elish]

Whoah, hold on here a minute. I'm just not getting it. On the one hand, we have a set of topics that have no doubt been picked over pretty good in Bible studies in the last 100+ years, and on the other this huge expanse of subject matter no one has hardly touched concerning the Book of Mormon, Book of Abraham, Mormon scripture in general, and the links to the old world. Given David's expertise on the latter, I'm very surprised he's so adamant about sticking with the former for his dissertation. Why not plow new ground?

It's really quite simple. My PhD is not in Book of Mormon, Book of Abraham, or even LDS interpretations of the Bible. My PhD is in Hebrew Bible and the Ancient Near East. And actually, I do believe that my dissertation will plow new ground in the field. My topic has been narrowed down to a very specific area in terms of divine council studies, namely the early historical view held by some biblical authors that Yahweh was a sexual deity.

[_Trevor]

It's really quite simple. My PhD is not in Book of Mormon, Book of Abraham, or even LDS interpretations of the Bible. My PhD is in Hebrew Bible and the Ancient Near East. And actually, I do believe that my dissertation will plow new ground in the field. My topic has been narrowed down to a very specific area in terms of divine council studies, namely the early historical view held by some biblical authors that Yahweh was a sexual deity.

I'm super excited for you, David. It is a huge thing to finish your dissertation. Best wishes to you and congratulations!

[_Gadianton]

Whoah, hold on here a minute. I'm just not getting it. On the one hand, we have a set of topics that have no doubt been picked over pretty good in Bible studies in the last 100+ years, and on the other this huge expanse of subject matter no one has hardly touched concerning the Book of Mormon, Book of Abraham, Mormon scripture in general, and the links to the old world. Given David's expertise on the latter, I'm very surprised he's so adamant about sticking with the former for his dissertation. Why not plow new ground?

It's really quite simple. My PhD is not in Book of Mormon, Book of Abraham, or even LDS interpretations of the Bible. My PhD is in Hebrew Bible and the Ancient Near East. And actually, I do believe that my dissertation will plow new ground in the field. My topic has been narrowed down to a very specific area in terms of divine council studies, namely the early historical view held by some biblical authors that Yahweh was a sexual deity.

David, I think we all have to admire your accomplishments here, getting to where you're at isn't just a lot of work but requires talent that few people have. I have no doubts you will plow new ground with your dissertation. However, your very suggestion that your topic has been "narrowed" to this very specific point confirms my suspicion that the grounds for Biblical Scholarship have been picked over very well already and that while there might still be new soil to turn, how much more is there to do with the Book of Mormon and Book of Abraham which are also Near Eastern texts? Well, I'm sure your dissertation could have been a study of the Book of Mormon as a Near Eastern text and the choice for one over the other no more interesting than choosing to do a thesis on the Krebs cycle vs. photosynthesis.

[_Nimrod]

The topic was simply whether or not there exists evidence that Joseph could have accessed 1 Enoch prior to the publication of the Book of Mormon. * * *

I do not doubt that 1 Enoch is falsely attributed to the biblical patriarch and was written in stages, the earliest of which dates to approximately 300 BCE and the latest towards the end of the 1st century BCE. So I'm not suggesting that the Book of Mormon quotes 1 Enoch. * * *

Do any scholars suggest that 1 Enoch text appears in the Book of Mormon?

Is there non-textual evidence that Joseph Smith had 1 Enoch prior to Book of Mormon's publication?

[_Joseph Antley]

Do any scholars suggest that 1 Enoch text appears in the Book of Mormon?

Apparently Nibley did.

Is there non-textual evidence that Joseph Smith had 1 Enoch prior to Book of Mormon's publication?

No, there's not. There'a also no textual evidence. We discussed this in the thread that Kevin based this one on, you might read it for an overview.