Dancing for decapitation -- stop me if you've heard this one

Gustave Moreau, La fille de Jared dansant devant Akish (1876)

1. The dancing daughter of Jared

Here's a tale of Jaredite devilry from the Book of Ether. See if it reminds you of anything:

And it came to pass that he begat Omer, and Omer reigned in his stead. And Omer begat Jared; and Jared begat sons and daughters.

And Jared rebelled against his father, and came and dwelt in the land of Heth. And it came to pass that he did flatter many people, because of his cunning words, until he had gained the half of the kingdom. And when he had gained the half of the kingdom he gave battle unto his father, and he did carry away his father into captivity, and did make him serve in captivity;

And now, in the days of the reigns of Omer he was in captivity the half of his days. And it came to pass that he begat sons and daughters among whom were Esrom and Coriantumr; and they were exceedingly angry because of the doings of Jared their brother, insomuch that they did raise an army and gave battle unto Jared. And it came to pass that they did give battle unto him by night. And it came to pass that when they had slain the army of Jared they were about to slay him also; and he plead with them that they would not slay him, and he would give up the kingdom unto his father. And it came to pass that they did grant unto him his life.

And now Jared became exceedingly sorrowful because of the loss of the kingdom, for he had set his heart upon the kingdom and upon the glory of the world.

Now the daughter of Jared being exceedingly expert, and seeing the sorrows of her father, thought to devise a plan whereby she could redeem the kingdom unto her father. Now the daughter of Jared was exceedingly fair. And it came to pass that she did talk with her father, and said unto him: 

Whereby hath my father so much sorrow? Hath he not read the record which our fathers brought across the great deep? Behold, is there not an account concerning them of old, that they by their secret plans did obtain kingdoms and great glory?

And now, therefore, let my father send for Akish, the son of Kimnor; and behold, I am fair, and I will dance before him, and I will please him, that he will desire me to wife; wherefore if he shall desire of thee that ye shall give unto him me to wife, then shall ye say: 

I will give her if ye will bring unto me the head of my father, the king.

And now Omer was a friend to Akish; wherefore, when Jared had sent for Akish, the daughter of Jared danced before him that she pleased him, insomuch that he desired her to wife. And it came to pass that he said unto Jared: 

Give her unto me to wife.

And Jared said unto him: 

I will give her unto you, if ye will bring unto me the head of my father, the king.

And it came to pass that Akish gathered in unto the house of Jared all his kinsfolk, and said unto them: 

Will ye swear unto me that ye will be faithful unto me in the thing which I shall desire of you?

And it came to pass that they all sware unto him, by the God of heaven, and also by the heavens, and also by the earth, and by their heads, that whoso should vary from the assistance which Akish desired should lose his head; and whoso should divulge whatsoever thing Akish made known unto them, the same should lose his life. And it came to pass that thus they did agree with Akish. And Akish did administer unto them the oaths which were given by them of old who also sought power, which had been handed down even from Cain, who was a murderer from the beginning. And they were kept up by the power of the devil to administer these oaths unto the people, to keep them in darkness, to help such as sought power to gain power, and to murder, and to plunder, and to lie, and to commit all manner of wickedness and whoredoms.

And it was the daughter of Jared who put it into his heart to search up these things of old; and Jared put it into the heart of Akish; wherefore, Akish administered it unto his kindred and friends, leading them away by fair promises to do whatsoever thing he desired (Ether 8:1-17).

2. The dancing daughter of Herodias

I assume anyone with even a passing familiarity with the New Testament will immediately recognize the dancing-for-decapitation plot point in Ether as being strangely similar to one found  in the Gospels:

This obviously calls to mind the story of the daughter of Herodias, as told in Mark 6 (and Matthew 14):

And when a convenient day was come, that Herod on his birthday made a supper to his lords, high captains, and chief estates of Galilee; and when the daughter of the said Herodias came in, and danced, and pleased Herod and them that sat with him, the king said unto the damsel, 

Ask of me whatsoever thou wilt, and I will give it thee.

And he sware unto her, 

Whatsoever thou shalt ask of me, I will give it thee, unto the half of my kingdom.

And she went forth, and said unto her mother, 

What shall I ask? 

And she said, 

The head of John the Baptist.

And she came in straightway with haste unto the king, and asked, saying, 

I will that thou give me by and by in a charger the head of John the Baptist.

And the king was exceeding sorry; yet for his oath's sake, and for their sakes which sat with him, he would not reject her (Mark 6:21-26).

Essentially the same story is told in Matthew 14, but I have quoted the Mark version because it has more in common with the story in Ether. (Matthew omits the reference to "the half of my kingdom" and does not say Herod is "exceeding" sorry.)

3. Two different types of parallels

I think it's important to recognize that the story in Ether parallels that in Mark in two very different ways.

First, and most obviously, there is the core similarity of the plot itself: Someone wishes to be rid of an enemy but does not have the power to do so themselves, so they have their daughter ingratiate a powerful person by dancing for him, which leads to that person agreeing to bring them the enemy's head. This core parallel is reinforced by some incidental similarities in the way the story is told. For example, in both stories "the daughter" is unnamed (only in extrabiblical tradition is the daughter of Herodias called Salome), is said to have "pleased" the man she danced for, and so on.

The other parallels are of the type discussed in this blog's inaugural post, "Lehi, Nephi, and the pillar of fire that 'dwelt upon a rock': A case study of hard-to-define biblical parallels." I have yet to coin a suitable term to refer to parallels of this kind, and so they remain as "hard to define" as ever.

As you will recall if you've read that post, the Book of Mormon's opening verses introduce two characters, Nephi and Lehi, and relate Lehi's vision in which "a pillar of fire . . . dwelt upon a rock" (1 Ne. 1:6). Searching for Nephi and Lehi in the King James Bible, you will find that Nephi (i.e., naphtha) was the name given to a liquid that was "poured on the great stones" and "kindled a flame" (2 Macc. 1:31-32), while Lehi is a place name, introduced one verse after we are told that Samson "dwelt in the top of the rock" (Judg. 15:8). So in both the Bible and the Book of Mormon, Lehi is connected with someone or something that "dwelt" on a "rock," and Nephi is connected with a fire burning on a rock -- but the stories incorporate these elements in entirely different ways, so that the stories themselves are not similar at all.

The two dancing-daughter stories are similar, but in addition there are parallels of this Lehi-Nephi type (for lack of anything better to call them), where biblical elements appear in the Book of Mormon story but fit into that story in a completely different way:

• Herod promises up to "the half of my kingdom" to the dancing daughter. Jared first gains "the half of the kingdom" before being removed from power; it is the desire to regain this lost half-kingdom that motivates the decapitation scheme.
• Herod is "exceeding sorry" because he has to kill John, whom he fears and respects. Jared is "exceeding sorrowful" (unnecessarily "corrected" to exceedingly in later editions) because he has lost his kingdom. 
• The dancing daughter of Herodias requests the decapitation at the prompting of her mother. Jared requests the decapitation at the prompting of his dancing daughter.
• Herod swears an oath to give the dancing daughter ""whatsoever thou shalt ask," which turns out to be the decapitation of John. Akish has all his family and friends swear an oath to assist him and keep his secrets; this is to facilitate his plan to decapitate Omer, and it results in their doing "whatsoever thing he desired."

One major difference between the two stories is that only one of the decapitation plots is successful: John is in fact beheaded, while Omer escapes that fate. Even in this difference there is a biblical parallel, though, when you consider how Omer is saved: "the Lord warned Omer in a dream that he should depart out of the land; wherefore Omer departed out of the land with his family" (Ether 9:3). After the deaths of Jared and Akish, who had plotted to kill him, Omer returns (Ether 9:6, 12-13).

Compare this passage from Matthew:

And being warned of God in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they [the wise men] departed into their own country another way.

And when they were departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word: for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him. When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt:

And was there until the death of Herod: . . . But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel: for they are dead which sought the young child's life. (Matt. 2:12-15, 19-20).

This is not part of the Bible's dancing-daughter story -- it's not even the same king Herod -- but it's another story about a murderous "Herod," and it, too, has echoes in Ether 8. The link seems to be the name Herod (which is also phonetically similar to Jared). The expression "warned . . . in a dream" appear only in Ether 8 and Matthew 2, and nowhere else in the Bible or Book of Mormon.

4. Skeptical explanations

Obviously, skeptics are going to explain any biblical parallels in the Book of Mormon as plagiarism or "borrowing" on the part of Joseph Smith: Smith took the main theme from the story of the daughter of Herodias and adapted it for his story about Jared and Omer. It's puzzling that Smith would plagiarize so heavily from the Bible, though -- the one text that he knew most of the potential readers of the Book of Mormon would be intimately familiar with, making his plagiarism extremely easy to detect. If Smith wanted to lift material from the Bible, we would expect him to at least try to disguise it. Instead, we have lots of very obvious Bible plagiarism -- including, in other parts of the book, extensive copy-and-pastes from famous passages in the epistles of Paul. Why would a fraudulent Joseph Smith -- who was obviously neither stupid nor lacking in creativity -- have done that?

And the Lehi-Nephi type parallels can't easily be explained as conscious plagiarism. If Smith made a conscious decision to plagiarize the main story of Salome, it would make no sense to add in other elements from that story -- half the kingdom, exceeding sorrow, oaths to do whatever is requested -- but to work them into the story in a completely different way. This would obviously be more difficult than either straightforward plagiarism or original storytelling, and what purpose would it serve but to make the plagiarism more obvious? What does the "half the kingdom" reference add to the Jared story, except as another telltale sign of the biblical source?

I think the only explanation is that the Lehi-Nephi parallels were added subconsciously: Thinking of the daughter of Herodias story primed Smith's mind, by subconscious free-association, to think of other themes and expressions from that story, and also from another murderous-Herod story. He put these into his text because they just appeared in his mind, without being consciously aware that they had their source in the New Testament.

5. Believing explanations

Coincidence is always a possibility. One need only peruse one of those lists of Lincoln-Kennedy coincidences to be persuaded that two very real events can be connected in multiple ways be sheer coincidence. Some of the similarities are straightforward (each president was shot in the head on a Friday and succeeded by a Southerner named Johnson who was born in '08) and others are more of the "Lehi-Nephi" variety (Lincoln was shot in Ford's Theatre; Kennedy was shot in a Ford automobile, a Lincoln). Other explanations are obviously to be preferred, though.

The beginnings of an explanation for the basic story similarity can be found in the fact that the daughter of Jared's dance-for-decapitation scheme was inspired by "an account concerning them of old, that they by their secret plans did obtain kingdoms and great glory" (Ether 8:9), and of these secret plans Moroni writes, "it hath been made known unto me that they are had among all people" (Ether 8:20). Based on this, we should positively expect to see similar schemes being carried out among other people. It is hardly a stretch to suggest that the wicked Herods might have been involved in Gadianton-style secret combinations. The story of Esther might be a (partially disguised) account of another such scheme. Although she does not dance, Esther is "fair and beautiful" (Esther 2:7) and with that beauty extracts from Ahasuerus the very promise -- "even to the half of the kingdom" (Esther 5:6, 7:2) -- that Salome extracted from Herod. Like Salome and Jared, Esther uses that promise for murderous ends, getting the king to execute Haman and declare open season on the Jews' enemies. Is Esther -- whose book contains not a single reference to God or prayer -- less of a heroine than popularly believed? "For I, Nephi, have not taught them many things concerning the manner of the Jews; for their works were works of darkness, and their doings were doings of abominations" (2 Ne. 25:2). The daughterly dance of death could well be some established ritual among the workers in darkness.

Could the "unto the half of my kingdom" wording also be part of an established secret-combination oath? If so, the inclusion of similar wording may be not a coincidence but an allusion. We know that Moroni is unwilling to "write the manner of their oaths and combinations" (Ether 8:20) directly, so perhaps he is deliberately saying "the half of the kingdom" as a hint to those with ears to hear.

That would leave only "exceeding sorrowful" and "warned in a dream" as seemingly coincidental parallels. They could be just that, coincidences, or they could be instances the sort of "biblical contamination" I proposed in my first post here.

Did Mormon have the New Testament?

The Book of Mormon contains several lengthy quotations from the New Testament. For example, Moroni 7 quotes extensively from 1 Corinthians 13; and Moroni 10, from 1 Corinthians 12. These are generally seen as problematic, since it is assumed that the Book of Mormon peoples had no contact with the Old World after the 6th century BC and would therefore not have had any of the biblical books written after that time.

The one known exception to this is the second half of the Book of Malachi, which was written long after Lehi left Jerusalem, but which Jesus recited to the Nephites when he visited them (3 Ne. 24-25), explaining, "These scriptures, which ye had not with you, the Father commanded that I should give unto you" (3 Ne. 26:2). So we have at least once instance of Old World scripture being brought to the Nephites -- not by "contact" in the ordinary sense, but by a resurrected being for whom travel between continents is presumably not a problem.

Mormon lived in the 4th century AD, well after all the books of the Bible had been written. (In fact, the Council of Rome, which formally defined the Catholic canon and created "The Bible," occurred during Mormon's lifetime.) Is it possible that he had the New Testament, or at least parts of it, brought to him by resurrected or translated messengers?

I think the probability is high.

Just a few chapters after Jesus gives part of Malachi to the Nephites, Mormon has this to say about the Three Nephites -- the three disciples who were "transfigured" by Jesus so that they would not die.

[25] Behold, I was about to write the names of those who were never to taste of death, but the Lord forbade; therefore I write them not, for they are hid from the world.

[26] But behold, I have seen them, and they have ministered unto me.

[27] And behold they will be among the Gentiles, and the Gentiles shall know them not.

[28] They will also be among the Jews, and the Jews shall know them not.

[29] And it shall come to pass, when the Lord seeth fit in his wisdom that they shall minister unto all the scattered tribes of Israel, and unto all nations, kindreds, tongues and people, and shall bring out of them unto Jesus many souls, that their desire may be fulfilled, and also because of the convincing power of God which is in them.

[30] And they are as the angels of God, and if they shall pray unto the Father in the name of Jesus they can show themselves unto whatsoever man it seemeth them good.

Here we learn that the Three Nephites are apparently able to travel around the world at will (just like the resurrected Jesus?). They visit both Jews and Gentiles incognito -- but to Mormon they have "ministered" more openly, since he has seen them and knows their names.

In what did this "ministering" consist? In Webster's 1828 dictionary, one definition of the verb minister is "to afford supplies; to give things needful." Is it possible that one of the things they supplied Mormon with was scriptures? As we continue reading, I think Mormon drops a broad hint to that effect.

[31] Therefore, great and marvelous works shall be wrought by them, before the great and coming day when all people must surely stand before the judgment-seat of Christ;

[32] Yea even among the Gentiles shall there be a great and marvelous work wrought by them, before that judgment day.

[33] And if ye had all the scriptures which give an account of all the marvelous works of Christ, ye would, according to the words of Christ, know that these things must surely come.

[34] And wo be unto him that will not hearken unto the words of Jesus, and also to them whom he hath chosen and sent among them; for whoso receiveth not the words of Jesus and the words of those whom he hath sent receiveth not him; and therefore he will not receive them at the last day;

Verse 33 strongly implies that Mormon believes he has special access to "all the scriptures which give an account of all the marvelous works of Christ" and "the words of Christ." This would surely include the New Testament. In context, the reference in v. 34 to "them whom [Jesus] hath chosen and sent among them" likely refers to the Three Nephites, and one of their roles is to deliver "the words of Jesus." If you put all the pieces together, I think Mormon is telling us that the Three Nephites, who travel freely among Jew and Gentile, have given him Christian scriptures to which he would not otherwise have access.

As if to underscore the connection, Mormon seems to draw on the New Testament in his account of the transfiguration of the Three Nephites earlier in 2 Ne. 28:

[12] And it came to pass that when Jesus had spoken these words, he touched every one of them with his finger save it were the three who were to tarry, and then he departed.

[13] And behold, the heavens were opened, and they were caught up into heaven, and saw and heard unspeakable things.

[14] And it was forbidden them that they should utter; neither was it given unto them power that they could utter the things which they saw and heard;

[15] And whether they were in the body or out of the body, they could not tell; for it did seem unto them like a transfiguration of them, that they were changed from this body of flesh into an immortal state, that they could behold the things of God.

[16] But it came to pass that they did again minister upon the face of the earth; nevertheless they did not minister of the things which they had heard and seen, because of the commandment which was given them in heaven.

[17] And now, whether they were mortal or immortal, from the day of their transfiguration, I know not;

Compare this to Paul's language in 2 Corinthians 12:

[2] I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.

[3] And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;)

[4] How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.

Is this deliberate -- telling the story of the Three Nephites using language delivered to him by the Three Nephites themselves?

The parallelism in Mosiah 9-10

Mosiah 10 repeats a large number of elements from Mosiah 9, mostly in the same order and often in nearly the same language. This was discovered by Ganesh Cherian, who discusses it on YouTube here, here, and here.

This is presented, particularly in the last video, as evidence against the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. The idea is that Joseph Smith had memorized "Mad Libs" style templates that he would use in dictating the text, and that in this case he used the same template twice in a row.

Of course, if only Mosiah 10 had repeated the elements in reverse order rather than in the same order as Mosiah 9, it would be an extended chiasmus, one of the apologists' favorite evidences for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. So I don't see why the repetition Cherian has found couldn't also be a form of literary parallelism used by the Nephites. In my mind, the fact the repeated series of elements comes immediately after the original makes the parallelism theory more plausible; if the two parallel series were in entirely different parts of the book, that would be more consistent with the Mad Libs theory.

Anyway, however you interpret them, the parallels are indisputably there in the text. The purpose of this post is to document them in text form for ease of reference, since it appears Cherian's own work is all in video format. (I also identify the specific parallels somewhat differently from Cherian, though he deserves 100% of the credit for noticing them.)

[9:7] And he also commanded that his people should depart out of the land, and (A) I and my people went into the land that we might possess it.

[9:8] And we began to build buildings, and to repair the walls of the city, yea, even the walls of the city of Lehi-Nephi, and the city of Shilom.

[9:9] And we began to (B) till the ground, yea, even with (C) all manner of seeds, with seeds of corn, and of wheat, and of barley, and with neas, and with sheum, and with seeds of (D) all manner of fruits; and (E) we did begin to multiply and prosper in the land.

[9:10] Now it was the cunning and the craftiness of king Laman, to bring my people into bondage, that he yielded up the land that we might possess it.

[9:11] Therefore it came to pass, that after we had dwelt in the land for the space of twelve years that king Laman began to grow uneasy, lest by any means my people should wax strong in the land, and that they could not overpower them and bring them into bondage.

[9:12] Now they were a lazy and an idolatrous people; therefore they were desirous to bring us into bondage, that they might glut themselves with the labors of our hands; yea, that they might feast themselves upon the flocks of our fields.

[9:13] Therefore (F) it came to pass that king Laman (G) began to stir up his people that they should contend with my people; therefore there (H) began to be wars and contentions in the land.

[9:14] For, in the thirteenth year of my reign in the land of Nephi, away (I) on the south of the land of Shilom, when my people were watering and feeding their flocks, and tilling their lands, a numerous host of Lamanites (J) came upon them and began to slay them, and to take off their flocks, and the corn of their fields.

[9:15] Yea, and it came to pass that they fled, all that were not overtaken, even into the city of Nephi, and did call upon me for protection.

[9:16] And it came to pass that I did (K) arm them with bows, (L) and with arrows, (M) with swords, (N) and with cimeters, and with clubs, (O) and with slings, and with all manner of weapons which we could invent, and I and my people did (P1) go forth against the Lamanites to battle.

[9:17] Yea, (Q) in the strength of the Lord did we (P2) go forth to battle against the Lamanites; for I and my people did cry mightily to the Lord that he would deliver us out of the hands of our enemies, for we were awakened to a remembrance of the deliverance of our fathers.

[9:18] And God did hear our cries and did answer our prayers; and we did go forth in his might; yea, we did (P3) go forth against the Lamanites, and in one day and a night we did slay three thousand and forty-three; we did slay them even until we had driven them out of our land. [. . .]

[9:19] And I, myself, with mine own hands, did help to bury their dead. And behold, to our great sorrow and lamentation, two hundred and seventy-nine of our brethren were slain.

[10:1] And it came to pass that we again began to establish the kingdom and (A′) we again began to possess the land in peace. And I caused that there should be weapons of war made of every kind, that thereby I might have weapons for my people against the time the Lamanites should come up again to war against my people.

[10:2] And I set guards round about the land, that the Lamanites might not come upon us again unawares and destroy us; and thus I did guard my people and my flocks, and keep them from falling into the hands of our enemies.

[10:3] And it came to pass that we did inherit the land of our fathers for many years, yea, for the space of twenty and two years. 

[10:4] And I did cause that the men should (B′) till the ground, and raise (C′) all manner of grain and (D′) all manner of fruit of every kind.

[10:5] And I did cause that the women should spin, and toil, and work, and work all manner of fine linen, yea, and cloth of every kind, that we might clothe our nakedness; and thus (E′) we did prosper in the land—thus we did have continual peace in the land for the space of twenty and two years.

[10:6] And (F′) it came to pass that king Laman died, and his son began to reign in his stead. And he (G′) began to stir his people up in rebellion against my people; therefore they (H′) began to prepare for war, and to come up to battle against my people.

[10:7] But I had sent my spies out round about the land of Shemlon, that I might discover their preparations, that I might guard against them, that they might not (J′) come upon my people and destroy them.

[10:8] And it came to pass that they came up (I′) upon the north of the land of Shilom, with their numerous hosts, men (K′) armed with bows, (L′) and with arrows, (M′) and with swords, (N′) and with cimeters, and with stones, (O′) and with slings; and they had their heads shaved that they were naked; and they were girded with a leathern girdle about their loins.

[10:9] And it came to pass that I caused that the women and children of my people should be hid in the wilderness; and I also caused that all my old men that could bear arms, and also all my young men that were able to bear arms, should gather themselves together to (P1′) go to battle against the Lamanites; and I did place them in their ranks, every man according to his age.

[10:10] And it came to pass that we did (P2′) go up to battle against the Lamanites; and I, even I, in my old age, did (P3′) go up to battle against the Lamanites. And it came to pass that we did go up (Q′) in the strength of the Lord to battle.

That's a series of 17 elements repeated in precisely the same order, with two additional elements (I and Q) only slightly out of order. The chance that this is a coincidence is, I think, negligible. And, as I have said, I think the theory that this is a Nephite literary form is more plausible than the Mad Libs theory. I think having to repeat so many elements in the same order, while at the same time moving the story forward rather than just repeating it, would have made the dictation harder for Smith, not easier. And the fact that the repetition comes immediately after the original makes this look more like a single coherent structure than like a case of self-plagiarism.

This is unlikely to be a one-off. I predict that other long repeated series can be found elsewhere in the book -- and that, as here, the repeated series will come immediately after the original. (If once can be found that is not immediately after the original, that would lend more credence to the Mad Libs theory.)

"I say unto you" in the Bible and the Book of Mormon

It may not be as notorious as "it came to pass," but "I say unto you" is nearly as distinctive a feature of Book of Mormon language, occurring about 6.3 times as frequently there as in the King James Bible. I touched on this a bit in my 2013 post "Behold, I say unto you, Nay," but that post was more narrowly focused on the use of the formula in answering one's own rhetorical yes/no question, a pattern that is common in the Book of Mormon but entirely absent from the Bible. Not until recently did I notice that "I say unto you" was itself noteworthy.

"I say unto you" may sound to us -- and, apparently, to Joseph Smith -- like generic biblical language, but it's actually a characteristic turn of phrase favored by one specific figure. In the King James Version, this phrase is used once by Absalom (2 Sam. 13:28), once by Gamaliel (Acts 5:38), and 121 times by Jesus. In the Book of Mormon, virtually everyone uses it:

As with "it came to pass," this pattern of usage is evidence that the language of the Book of Mormon reflects Joseph Smith's imperfect attempts to sound "biblical" and is unlikely to correspond to any specific feature of Nephite language.

"It came to pass" in the Book of Mormon does NOT match biblical usage

Despite its members, flawed and frail,

The human species as a mass

Came not upon this earth to fail

The test divine. It came to pass.

-- Yes and No (spoken by the Joseph Smith character)

You can't really write about the Book of Mormon without talking about "it came to pass," which occurs approximately once every 200 words, 8.7 times as frequently as in the King James Bible. Mark Twain famously called the phrase Joseph Smith's "pet" and said, "If he had left that out, his Bible would have been only a pamphlet."

From the apologetic point of view, the prevalence of "it came to pass" is consistent with the Book of Mormon's being an ancient text written by Bible-reading Hebrews, and the greater frequency of the phrase in the Book of Mormon can perhaps be explained by the fact that it is typically used in narrative passages, and the Book of Mormon is more consistently narrative in nature than the Bible. For example, the biblical books of Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, and Lamentations contain not a single instance of "it came to pass"; but no comparable books of poetry or "wisdom literature" exist in the Book of Mormon. 

From a more skeptical point of view, "it came to pass" is just Joseph Smith trying to make his book sound biblical and going a bit overboard with it -- just as someone trying to imitate King James language today might do so by sticking -eth on the end of all sorts of words, even where it would never have been used in authentic 17th-century English.

From the former perspective, "it came to pass" in the Book of Mormon is a Hebraism, a sign that it was written by the same sort of people who wrote the Bible. From the latter, it is a pseudo-Hebraism, a clumsy attempt by a non-Hebrew to imitate a Hebrew stylistic feature.

I come down firmly on the pseudo-Hebraism side of the argument. Here's why.

"It came to pass" essentially means "it happened," and you will find that in the Bible its function is almost always (96% of the time) to indicate when something happened. That is, it is almost always used together with a time expression. Here are the first few occurrences of "it came to pass" in the Bible, with the time expressions underlined:

And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord (Gen. 4:3).

And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him (Gen. 4:8).

And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose (Gen. 6:1-2).

And it came to pass after seven days, that the waters of the flood were upon the earth (Gen. 7:10).

And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made (Gen. 8:6).

Does the Book of Mormon show a similar pattern of usage? In a word, no.

For the purposes of the above chart, "with a time expression" means that immediately before or after the words "it came to pass (that)" is an adjunct phrase indicating when the event in question came to pass. I was quite generous about what I counted as a time expression; even the common BoM phrase "now it came to pass" made the grade, since now is, at least literally and etymologically, a time adverb. However, instances like the following were categorized as "with no time expression":

And it came to pass that the three hundred and sixty and sixth year had passed away (Morm. 4:10).

And it came to pass that the days of Ether were in the days of Coriantumr (Ether 12:1).

In the Mormon reference above, the passing of the 366th year is what came to pass, not an expression of when it came to pass. In the Ether reference, nothing at all comes to pass (i.e., happens), and the use of the phrase must be considered a solecism. Grammatically speaking, in each of these sentences, the time reference after "it came to pass that" is the subject and is thus not a syntactic adjunct.

Anyway, regardless of the linguistic details of how I classified "it came to pass" sentences, the main point is that the same classification method was used for the King James Bible and the Book of Mormon, with extremely different results.

My conclusion is that the majority of the instances of "it came to pass" in the Book of Mormon do not reflect any stylistic feature of the original records but rather come from Joseph Smith and his conscious or subconscious efforts to "sound biblical."

It's plausible that Joel quoted (and inverted) Zenos

In "Zenos was quoted by Joel, Nephi, Alma, Malachi, and Paul," I proposed that Joel 2:28-32 paraphrases or alludes to Zenos. (See that post for the evidence behind this assertion.) However one of these links seemed a little dubious at first. Joel writes, "I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh" (Joel 2:28), while Nephi, in a passage we had identified as containing Zenosian material writes, "the fulness of the wrath of God shall be poured out upon all the children of men" (1 Ne. 22:16). The expression "pour[ed] out . . . upon all" is unique to these two passages, but the meaning is obviously completely different. Furthermore, nothing in Joel suggests that he is quoting or paraphrasing anyone else -- no "thus saith the prophet" or anything like that.

Since reading Jonathan Neal Atkinson's 2002 Southern Baptist Theological Seminary dissertation "New Exodus, New Covenant, New Creation: The Reuse of the Old Testament in Joel," I no longer have these misgivings. As Atkinson documents, the Book of Joel is extremely allusive, almost on the level of the Book of Revelation. Of its 73 verses, Atkinson reckons that 58 of them -- 79% -- quote, paraphrase, or allude to other books of the Old Testament, including Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, 1 Kings, Psalms, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Zephaniah, and Malachi. There is some disagreement among scholars over the direction of these influences -- whether Joel is a very early prophet quoted by all these other books or a very late prophet who quotes them all -- but Atkinson makes a convincing case that it is the latter. In no case does Joel ever explicitly cite his sources. Given that background knowledge about Joel, we can assume that of course he would have alluded to Zenos, too, if he had access to that prophet's writings, but would not have mentioned his name.

But is it plausible that he would completely invert the meaning of his source, alluding to Zenos's negative outpouring of wrath but changing it to a positive outpouring of God's spirit? Yes. We have an example of just that, where Joel alludes to Micah and/or Isaiah but inverts their meaning:

. . . they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore (Isa. 2:4 = Micah 4:3).

Beat your plowshares into swords and your pruninghooks into spears: let the weak say, I am strong (Joel 3:10).

Joel clearly alludes to these earlier prophets (see Atkinson's dissertation for evidence regarding the direction of dependence) but turns their meaning on its head, making Isaiah's prophecy of peace into a call to war. It is therefore highly plausible that he could have given Zenosian material a similar treatment.

Yes, the Book of Mormon does quote Joshua -- but the Church is covering it up!

I've been reading Jonah Barnes's new book The Key to the Keystone: How Apocryphal Texts Unlock the Book of Mormon's Brass Plates. Barnes's basic thesis is that the content of the Brass Plates differs significantly from that of the Old Testament as we have it, and that various apocryphal and pseudepigraphal texts preserve some of these alternative traditions that were lost from the Bible but preserved, via the Brass Plates, in the Book of Mormon. Since I've also explored the question of how the Brass Plates may have differed from the Bible (see "Moses and the Exodus: Where the Book of Mormon parts ways with the Torah"), I'm reading his arguments with interest, though some of the links are more convincing than others.

Barnes is part of the small but growing Mormon "anti-Deuteronomist" movement, which sees Josiah as a bad guy, rejects the Book of Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomistic History (meaning the books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings), and casts Laman and Lemuel as Deuteronomists. He makes the bold claim that the Book of Mormon never quotes from or alludes to any of these rejected books.

The Book of Mormon very obviously does contain material that echoes Deuteronomy -- namely, the prophecy of the prophet like unto Moses, and the account of the Lord's "burial" of Moses. However (as I also pointed out in my Moses post), the Book of Mormon versions of these passages differ significantly from Deuteronomy as we have it, so Barnes concludes that they aren't from Deuteronomy itself but from some older tradition which the Deuteronomists later incorporated. This seems to me to be special pleading, motivated by his anti-Deuteronomist agenda. When the Book of Mormon contains alternate versions of Genesis stories, Barnes says the Nephites must have had an "expanded" version of Genesis; when it contains alternate versions of Deuteronomy material, he concludes that they didn't have Deuteronomy at all.

As a clear example of this bias, Barnes asserts that the Nephites had Leviticus (doubt), based mostly on vague references to the "law of Moses." The only specific links he provides are a reference to drinking blood ("something prohibited by Leviticus 17:14") and the phrase "statues, and judgements, and commandments," which "appears in Leviticus 26:15." In fact, all three of these could with equal justice be adduced as evidence that the Nephites had Deuteronomy, a.k.a. "the book of the law," which also prohibits blood-drinking (Deut. 15:23; see also Gen. 9:4), and which has seven references to statutes and judgments and commandments, including one (Deut 11:1) which matches the Book of Mormon wording much more closely than does Leviticus.

The Book of Mormon also prominently quotes Joshua -- "Choose ye this day whom ye will serve" -- so I was anticipating some similar argument from Barnes about how it wasn't actually from Joshua after all. Astonishingly, what I found instead was a flat denial that the passage in question even exists. Attempting to make the case that the Book of Mormon writers surely would have quoted the Deuteronomistic History if they had had it, Barnes writes:

Surely the Book of Mormon writers will tell the famous stories from Joshua, Samuel, and Kings again and again, as they so often tell and retell the story of Adam and Eve... right?

It turns out that they don't. Nephi said, "I did liken all scriptures unto us, that it might be for our profit and learning." So why did the Nephite prophets not:

1) Quote Joshua's adage to "choose ye this day whom ye will serve" when the Lamanites and Nephites parted ways in 2 Nephi 5?

2) Recite the Lord's promise in Joshua 1:8 . . .

He goes on to list a total of 11 things from the Deuteronomistic History that the Nephites might have been expected to quote if they had had access to it -- but very first on the list is a passage from Joshua which the Nephites absolutely do quote, word for word, though not in the chapter Barnes mentions. Barnes even gives it in its Book of Mormon form (the KJV has "Choose you this day"):

For thus saith the scripture: Choose ye this day, whom ye will serve (Alma 30:8).

How could Barnes possibly have missed that? It's one thing to overlook it; it's another to say, "If the Nephites had Joshua, how come they never quote this specific sentence?" -- and then give a sentence which does in fact appear word for word in the Book of Mormon!

My theory, based on my own experience trying to look up the Alma reference above, is that Barnes was led astray by the church's Great and Abominable Search Function, the awfulness of which it is impossible to overstate. I normally use Ctrl-F on a text file from Gutenberg if I need to search the Book of Mormon, but when I read Barnes, I only had my phone handy, so I had to run the search on the church's Gospel Library app. Here are the results of my initial search:

As you can see, it returns whole chapters rather than verses as search results. It turns out that Alma 30 is in fact the chapter I was looking for, but you'd never guess that from looking at the search results. Instead of highlighting the verse that includes all four of the words in my search prompt, it offers instead as an excerpt the first occurrence of one of them, in this case "day." If Jonah Barnes had run a similar search to check if the Book of Mormon quotes this line from Joshua, it's easy to see how he could have wrongly concluded that it does not.

I was still sure that it does, though, so I tried a different search term. Remembering that Joshua was quoted in the context of explaining that Nephite law did not regulate beliefs, I searched for that instead:

Most of these looked like they were "law of Moses" references, but Alma 1 looked like it might be about the actual legal system, so I clicked that one. I thought I had found what I was looking for:

Nevertheless, this did not put an end to the spreading of priestcraft through the land; for there were many who loved the vain things of the world, and they went forth preaching false doctrines; and this they did for the sake of riches and honor. Nevertheless, they durst not lie, if it were known, for fear of the law, for liars were punished; therefore they pretended to preach according to their belief; and now the law could have no power on any man for his belief. And they durst not steal, for fear of the law, for such were punished; neither durst they rob, nor murder, for he that murdered was punished unto death (Alma 1:16-18).

That was the expression I had remembered -- but the Joshua quote was nowhere to be found! Was Jonah Barnes right? Had I somehow misremembered? I was so certain of my memory that I was beginning to consider Mandela Effect type explanations, but then I gave the Great and Abominable Search Function one more go and finally found the passage I'd had in mind:

Now there was no law against a man’s belief; for it was strictly contrary to the commands of God that there should be a law which should bring men on to unequal grounds. For thus saith the scripture: Choose ye this day, whom ye will serve. Now if a man desired to serve God, it was his privilege; or rather, if he believed in God it was his privilege to serve him; but if he did not believe in him there was no law to punish him. But if he murdered he was punished unto death; and if he robbed he was also punished; and if he stole he was also punished; and if he committed adultery he was also punished; yea, for all this wickedness they were punished. For there was a law that men should be judged according to their crimes. Nevertheless, there was no law against a man’s belief; therefore, a man was punished only for the crimes which he had done; therefore all men were on equal grounds (Alma 30:7-11).

If anyone knows of a digital Book of Mormon with a less abominable search function, do let me know. I've even tried downloading the Bickertonites' Bible & BOM app, but it treats all search prompts as if they were in quotation marks -- so the prompt choose day serve returns zero results -- and so is no better than a Ctrl-F. The Community of Christ no longer appears to offer any scripture search function, and even if they did there would be the inconvenience of their different chapter-and-verse scheme.

UPDATE: The University of Michigan has a fairly decent BoM search. I'm putting it in the sidebar.