Hebrew DNA found in South America? [OPEN]

Mormon Times ^ | Monday, May. 12, 2008 | By Michael De Groote

[restornu]

Was Hebrew DNA recently found in American Indian populations in South America? According to Scott R. Woodward, executive director of Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation, a DNA marker, called the "Cohen modal haplotype," sometimes associated with Hebrew people, has been found in Colombia, Brazil and Bolivia.

But it probably has nothing to do with the Book of Mormon -- at least not directly.

For years several critics of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and of the Book of Mormon have claimed that the lack of Hebrew DNA markers in living Native American populations is evidence the book can't be true. They say the book's description of ancient immigrations of Israelites is fictional.

"But," said Woodward, "as Hugh Nibley used to say, 'Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.' "

Critic Thomas Murphy, for example, wrote in one article about how the Cohen modal haplotype had been found in the Lemba clan in Africa. The Lemba clan's oral tradition claims it has Jewish ancestors.

Murphy then complained, "If the (Book of Mormon) documented actual Israelite migrations to the New World, then one would expect to find similar evidence to that found in a Lemba clan in one or more Native American populations. Such evidence, however, has not been forthcoming."

Until now.

So will Murphy and other critics use this new evidence of Hebrew DNA markers to prove the Book of Mormon is correct? Probably not. But neither should anyone else.

Why?

According to Woodward, the way critics have used DNA studies to attack the Book of Mormon is "clearly wrong." And it would be equally wrong to use similar DNA evidence to try to prove it.

This is because "not all DNA (evidence) is created equal," Woodward said.

According to Woodward, while forensic DNA (popularized in TV shows like "CSI") looks for the sections of DNA that vary greatly from individual to individual, the sections of DNA used for studying large groups are much smaller and do not change from individual to individual.

Studies using this second type of DNA yield differing levels of reliability or, as Woodward calls it, "resolution."

At a lower resolution the confidence in the results goes down. At higher resolution confidence goes up in the results.

Guess which level of resolution critics of the Book of Mormon use?

The critics' problem now is what they do with the low-resolution discovery of Hebrew DNA in American Indian populations.

For people who believe that the Book of Mormon is a true account, the problem is to resist the temptation to misuse this new discovery.

Woodward says that most likely, when higher-resolution tests are used, we will learn that the Hebrew DNA in native populations can be traced to conquistadors whose ancestors intermarried with Jewish people in Spain or even more modern migrations.

Ironically, it is the misuse of evidence that gave critics fuel to make their DNA arguments in the first place. According to Woodward, the critics are attacking the straw man that all American Indians are only descendants of the migrations described in the Book of Mormon and from no other source.

Although some Latter-day Saints have assumed this was the case, this is not a claim the Book of Mormon itself actually makes. Scholars have argued for more than 50 years that the book allows for the migrations meeting an existing population.

This completely undermines the critics' conclusions. They argue with evangelic zeal that the Book of Mormon demands that no other DNA came to America but from Book of Mormon groups.

Yet, one critic admitted to Woodward that he had never read the Book of Mormon.

Woodward also sees that it is essential to read the Book of Mormon story closely to understand what type of DNA the Book of Mormon people would have had. The Book of Mormon describes different migrations to the New World. The most prominent account is the 600-B.C. departure from Jerusalem of a small group led by a prophet named Lehi. But determining Lehi's DNA is difficult because the book claims he is not even Jewish, but a descendant of the biblical Joseph.

According to Woodward, even if you assume we knew what DNA to look for, finding DNA evidence of Book of Mormon people may be very difficult. When a small group of people intermarry into a large population, the DNA markers that might identify their descendants could entirely disappear -- even though their genealogical descendants could number in the millions.

This means it is possible that almost every American Indian alive today could be genealogically related to Lehi's family but still retain no identifiable DNA marker to prove it. In other words, you could be related genealogically to and perhaps even feel a spiritual kinship with an ancestor but still not have any vestige of his DNA.

Such are the vagaries, ambiguities and mysteries of the study of DNA.

So will we ever find DNA from Lehi's people? Woodward hopes so.

"I don't dismiss the possibility," said Woodward, "but the probability is pretty low."

Woodward speculated about it, imagining he were able to identify pieces of DNA that would be part of Lehi's gene pool. Then, imagine if a match was found in the Native American population.

But even then, Woodward would be cautious. "It could have been other people who share the same (DNA) markers," said Woodward about the imaginary scenario.

"It's an amazingly complex picture. To think that you can prove (group relationships) like you can use DNA to identify a (criminal) is not on the same scale of scientific inquiry."

Like the Book of Mormon itself, from records buried for centuries in the Hill Cumorah, genetic "proof" may remain hid up unto the Lord.

[greyfoxx39]

There are four of us who are ex-mormons who regularly post on these threads. The rest of those who tried to escape have been killed (at least that is what a glowing light in my bedroom told me) < grin>

Actually, I have it on good authority that the rest of the exmormons have already been taken up to Heaven in a Pre-Rapture, and are rehearsing as the Heavenly choir that will appear with Adam when he makes his return trip to Adam-ondi-Ahman, after which they will attend a High Tea in the Honor of our Savior.

LDS Church leader Joseph Fielding Smith, Jr. has stated that before the Second Coming Adam will convene another meeting there to turn the government of the human family officially to Jesus Christ.

The hymn, "Praise to the Man" is not on the program.

This is the place where Adam shall come to visit his people, or the Ancient of Days shall sit, as spoken of by Daniel the prophet.

Revelation given to Joseph Smith the Prophet, near Wight’s Ferry, at a place called Spring Hill, Daviess County, Missouri, May 19, 1838. HC 3: 35.

[Elsie]

It wasn’t a typo...

[Tennessee Nana]

MormonDude sells the unwafering quackers door to door...

They’s quite a bit stale...

Will give you a tummy ache...

MD calls it a burning-in-the-bosum...

:)

[Tennessee Nana]

Sorry ...

PING for MD to # 223 ...

[DelphiUser]

Nahhhh

We have NAUGHT to repent of and we are all quite happy in attacking and dissassembling the plagiarism and fiction, the anaethema and blasphemous joke that is the bom/pogp/d and c...in short ALMOST ALL that is mormon doctrine.

WOW! Wat a compelling um... oratory; Do you write for Mr. Obama?

As for the rest of your , speech, it's all been discussed before, and refuted before, but it's off topic. I'll tell you what, start a thread with a topic that is defined (like DNA evidence) and I'll be right over when the Anti Mormons here get tired of me punting them over the goal posts. Otherwise you off topic person you, get on topic, so do you agree with Godzilla that Moroni was saying he was a descendant of Nephi when saying he was a pure descendant of Lehi (no Lamanite blood) even though Laman was Nephi's brother or do you accept the (obvious) conclusion that there were many who were not "pure descendants of Lehi" which means there was no pure sample for DNA analysis to look for.

Why don't you watch some video's and learn some about the Topic!

part 1 The Book of Mormon and New World DNA
part 2 The Book of Mormon and New World DNA
Part 3 The Book of Mormon and New World DNA
I should probably warn people coming to this thread:

After you learn a bit about DNA evidence, maybe we can come to a Compromise:

[Tennessee Nana]

Joseph smith did not chose to a be a prophet,
_______________________________________

Well, why did he pretend to be one then ????

And the answer is...

For money, sex and power...

[DelphiUser]

How is LAMANITE blood different from human blood??

Typical... Lamanites are humans the same way Jewish or Irish people are human but I can speak of Irish Blood and no one but an anti Mormon will get confused.

Clear?

No?

Good! :-)

[DelphiUser]

DU: BTW, you really should ping people you talk about...

LC: When most of the time they IGNORE you?

Piffle...

Then say something worth replying to...

Besides, Good manners is about you, not them. For me it's a matter of self respect.

[DelphiUser]

Only the MORMON Organization comes up with this idiotic 'interpretation' of these verses

Really, well, I guess since we are the "True church", and God is of course a member, you are correct.

'Literal fulfillment' is a nice turn of words to convince the shallow thinkers; but that's about all MORMONism will snare.

You mean like the people who get on here and make like an unarmed man sword fighting, by debating a topic they only know third hand?

This thread is turning out to be a lot of fun... for me.

[DelphiUser]

DU: Joseph smith did not chose to a be a prophet, God chose him.

LC: GOD 'chose' a talking ass; too.

This explains a lot about your postings!

(I just could not resist, Sorry!)

Flames gleefully ignored!

[DelphiUser]

Worth a re-post!
             

 

 

 

"This is my beloved son: hear him."

I would that we would all just hear him...

[DelphiUser]

Actually, I love the Bible Isaiah is my favorite book from the old testament Gospel of John from the New Testament...

You know, If you guys wanted to actually talk about stuff instead of just having bash fests, we might actually learn something... Nah it'll never work...

[Tennessee Nana]

“This is my beloved son: hear him.”

I would that we would all just hear him...
_________________________________________

Yes hear Him...

Jesus said to DelphiUser, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Way. No man comes to the Father except by ME” John 14:6

Deu 18:21 And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken?

Deu 18:22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

Rom 10:2 For I bear them record that the mormons have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.

Rom 10:3 For the mormons being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. Romans 10:2, 3

2Pe 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

2Pe 2:2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.

2Pe 2:3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not. 1 Peter 2:1-3

And Joey Smith fullfilled this verse...”shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.” 2 Peter 2:1

God destroyed Joey Smith...

[Tennessee Nana]

we might actually learn something... Nah it’ll never work...
__________________________________________________

Yes, the Bible only works for those of us who believe it...

[DelphiUser]

What make it superior over this one

The official JOSEPH SMITH—HISTORY is the only version Joseph felt was right, he said so. All the others, by him and people who heard him speak, he was never really happy with. So, this is the one. All of these are directly composed by Smith, yours was written by a scribe much later.

Dictated by Joseph, maybe that was why he liked it better. Maybe he was a better speaker than a writer, that would not be surprising in someone who had a formal education of third grade.

DU: (Say it with me now, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence")

GZ: I try to put myself in your shoes, but am unable to do it. Must be kinda hard being the last flat earther shouting absence of evidence is not evidence of absence to a world in the 21st century.

Since You are the one trying to critique a book you have never read through I can understand your analogy, and I sympathize.

GZ: Or perhaps you might be more like the 911 truthers who claim that it was a cruise missile that hit the Pentegon and not a jet liner.

Well, If you ant to believe that, Go ahead. I lost friends, so I don't joke about it. Do me one favor, Never forget.

GZ: But then you would know all about the logical fallacy of negative proof and argumentum ad ignorantiam. So keep chanting DUh!

Actually you are the one trying to derive a meaningful result form a corrupted sample of DNA.

GZ: “You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe” Carl Sagen

"You cannot change a mind with logic that was made up without the use there of." -- My Dad.

Godzilla, Keith Crandall is the only Source of credible opinion that has been put forth on this thread, and he is on our side having left yours after observing the evidence. Give up a losing battle or resign yourself to being that last flat earther, the believer who in opposition to all evidence just has to believe that Mormons and Mormonism is bad. We are not, and all the belief anti Mormons can muster will not change that.

Normal people look at anti's of any stripe as a little deranged. You see to "normal" people anyone who spends the amount of time you do on this board trying to tear something down is a lot depressing and more than a little deranged.

JFTR, I am not claiming to be "Normal", as an autistic, I study "Normal People" I am not one of them, and since I have no choice, I'm OK with that.

Godzila, have a good day, spend some time with the family if you can, I am planning to.

God Bless

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Why debate a known swindler?

Joseph Smith, Peepstone Prophet, approx age 36

DON'T look into his eyes!

 

Here, then, we have his [Joseph Smith's] own confession, that he was a vile, dishonest impostor.

 

Josiah Stowell, a Mormonite, being sworn, testified that he positively knew that said Smith never had lied to, or deceived him, and did not believe he ever tried to deceive any body else. The following questions were then asked him, to which he made the replies annexed.

"Did Smith ever tell you there was money hid in a certain glass which he mentioned? Yes. Did he tell you, you could find it by digging? Yes. Did you dig? Yes. Did you find any money? No. Did he not lie to you then, and deceive you? No! the money was there, but we did not get quite to it! How do you know it was there? Smith said it was!"

[some things never change...]

 

Addison Austin was next called upon, who testified, that at the very same time that Stowell was digging for money, he, Austin, was in company with said Smith alone, and asked him to tell him honestly whether he could see this money or not...

 

Smith hesitated some time, but finally replied, "to be candid, between you and me, I cannot, any more than you or any body else; but any way to get a living."

 

- from the Evangelical Magazine and Gospel Advocate Utica NY April 9, 1831

Start with a lousy foundation, you end up with a lousy building, or temple, in this case.

[Godzilla]

The scandal surrounding Hibben – the official ‘discover’ of the LLS Nice try, but Hibben didn't get there until the 1930's but the rock was discovered in the 1850's (oops)

There is no ooops about it, the first to document the stone was Hibben, all preceding is hearsay. If not, name the individual who told Hibben?

long before Hibben went there, there are rubbings that predate hibben's visit stored at the Smithsonian. Those rubbings are important because the bumbler Hibben actually used a wire brush and a chisel to clean the stone and sharpen the characters before he took photographs of it (what an idiot!) Luckily a comparison with the rubbbings have authenticated that he did not actually change any of the characters.

Interesting, citation for who took the rubbing? And further thank you for further confirming that Hibblen’s abilities as an archaeologist were “challenged”. Indeed, some local native American Indians, as a result of his work, have been refering to this rock as the Phoenician Inscription Rock.

I thought you stated this was suppose to be a proto Hebrew, can’t you keep your stories straight?

So, in your fanciful universe, the stone discovered by hibbens was altered or even carved by him to look like Hebrew and thus lend support to the LDS church?

Where did I explicitly state that. . . (crickets). What I did say, and your own words confirm is that he had some challenges as a archaeologist. Now until you can prove that there is a rubbing of the stone that pre-dates Hibbens, any alteration by him would be questionable.

Now let's address Nibley's remarks. The LDS Church is not interested in proving the Book of Mormon "true" by archaeological means, because then people would not need faith and would not need to ask God to testify of it to them. This would in the church's eyes be a significant loss in that people would not exercise their faith in learning of it, and therefore the people would be weaker.

First off, if the mormon church wasn’t concerned about proving the bom true, then they have been wasting a lot of money funding BYU’s support of the Maxwell Inst. AFA your people not needing faith, tell that to the tour operators who advertise excursions to the lands of Nephi, etc.

That said, all Hugh Nibely was aware of when he made those statements was Hibben's work and no scholar wants to go near him which is understandable.

That is an absolute bogus statement and you well know it. Nibley’s statement was made in 1957, Hibben’s scandal broke much later in 1971. Nibley evaluated it on its own standards, and remember, one of your website links clearly states that mormon investigators visited the site and rejected it – two rejections by mormons. Now that is just the one rock, what else is lying around out there near los lunas? Indian Petroglyphs at the Los Lunas site

Interesting, tried to find some real scientific journals and research on this subject and turned up nothing but weekend archaeologists. Even the ‘theories’ in your link were challenged by others.
From your windwalker site -

However, a simple research on Mormon Web sites reveals absolutely nothing about this rock inscription. It is not used by their church as a proof for the existence of ancient Nephites in America. For a certainty it is not written in so-called "reformed Egyptian" language.

You continue to swim against the flow of your own church DUh. Did you forget to read the memo?

Nice try, luckily, we have information going back about a hundred years, and other stones he did not find in the area with other inscriptions dating back to before Christ.

Based upon what DU – give me the evidence of quantative dating? Yes I know of the “geologist’s” estimate, but that is only a WAG and not anything I would bet my professional credential on. The hearsay evidence goes back to 1850.

Unless it's now your contention that Hibben carved those stones accurately (which it is doubtful he could have done) and then failed to report them to the new yorker along with everything else.

Building a strawman, I never made the assertion. I pointed out that his reputation was tarnished so his interpretations of the site are questionable. FWIW you yourself even said he was not careful with the stone. And why is it doubtful that he couldn’t have forged the material?

The Tel Dan interpretation

The issue goes beyond that, but since it is apparent you don’t know the specifics, I’ll let you be blissful in your ignorance.

You really should read the Book of Mormon, if you had, you'd not have asked the question.
First Nephi 1:1-2:
1 I, Nephi, having been born of goodly parents, therefore I was taught somewhat in all the learning of my father; and having seen many afflictions in the course of my days, nevertheless, having been highly favored of the Lord in all my days; yea, having had a great knowledge of the goodness and the mysteries of God, therefore I make a record of my proceedings in my days.

Nephi would not have been in Jerusalem at this time
2Kings 24: 15 And he carried away Jehoiachin to Babylon, and the king's mother, and the king's wives, and his officers, and the mighty of the land, those carried he into captivity from Jerusalem to Babylon.
16 And all the men of might, even seven thousand, and the craftsmen and smiths a thousand, all that were strong and apt for war, even them the king of Babylon brought captive to Babylon.

That describes Nephi and Lehi to a t-ee.

Lehi was a trader, he spoke many languages, and read and wrote in them. The children were taught all these languages too. You really should not ask questions you don't want answered.

Lehi would have been well to do as well, then consider what the Bible says about those who remained in Jerusalem at the time-
2 Kings 24: 14 “ . . . none remained, save the poorest sort of the people of the land.”

Nephi and Lehi cannot have written 1st and 2nd Nephi because they who have never existed cannot tell the truth!

But then you want to obfuscate the issue – the words were in a mixture of Greek and Phoenician with modern ‘caret’ not known in Hebrew writings until the middle ages.

The first three verses of First Nephi make up what is known as a colophon, which is a formal introductory section found in many ancient documents. Again, this is something no 18XX's farm boy would know about...

Colophons are present in the bible and is even used in contemporary writings of the era – infact the bom starts off with one on the title page until it gets to 1 Nephi.

Next you ask why the church is not using these artifacts. Why should they?

I guess if ignorance is bliss – they want to be the most blissful people in the world.

The fact that Joseph rendered it Nahom, and there is a place pronounced Nahom in the right place inside Arabia,

They found NHM, which can be a number of things, depending on which vowels you choose to insert. The mormons who discovered the markings decided it must be N-A-H-O-M because that's what they wanted to find.

Add to Nahom the fact that it's the right distance south, and due east of Nahom happens to be the only place in Arabia that matches Nephi's description of "Bountiful". Again, to you it's all chicanery of some sort. (I could do the knock knock thing here, but why? Is anyone really impressed with schoolyard antics here?)

Several locations with names somewhat like "Nahom" are to be found in the Arabian Peninsula. Given the fact that Arabia is a Semitic-language area bordering the lands of the Bible, this should come as no surprise. The simple fact of the matter is, the bom description is general enough to be worthless. The location of Nahom is nothing more than shooting arrows, then drawing the target.

JFTR, Nephi's Bountiful is not an oasis, it is on the sea and they built the ships there to sail to the Americas.

Yawn, go look up the definition of an oasis, they are not constrained to be inland

So on the basis of some teeth, we have unimpeachable evidence of horses in bom times? Actually, they have found entire skeletons, but until recently, they just tossed them aside. we now have carbon dated skeletons of horses from before Christ in the Americas. I just offered evidence of a positive, go prove your negative if you have to (this will be funny)

Ahem, oh you who demands sources – where is your source of full skeletons and from there we can evaluate if these were modern horses or extinct horses (>10K years). You have not offered any evidence – just your say-so at this point.

Do you remember this "Hello (knock, knock), anyone home DU? " you have been insulting me the whole way, I question your relationship with reality and suddenly "that's a bad thing to do."

And now DU feigns innocence and shows thin skin.

Your argument that Keith Crandall misrepresented data because of his faith -- Before he joined the church, holds no water, it barely holds space.

No, he produced the youtube/DVD after he became a member.

Oh, so you have mormon’s able to explain the gastrobacterlogical DNA studies that show an asian origin for the native Americans?
What a load of ----... Wait actually that is what they were analyzing huh?
The Book of Mormon (if you'd finished it you'd know this) talks about others they met here, the gastrobacterlogical DNA could easily have come from them, so?

Helicobacter pylori, a chronic gastric pathogen of human beings, can be found in virtually every human population group. Variations of the bacteria can be divided into seven populations and subpopulations with distinct geographical distributions. Analysis of these bacteria within native populations worldwide reveals that the East Asian strain of Helicobacter pylori can be isolated from Native Americans, indicating that East Asians are the likely ancestor of Native Americans.( Falush D, Wirth T, Linz B, Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Kidd M, Blaser MJ, Graham DY, Vacher S, Perez-Perez GI, Yamaoka Y, Megraud F, Otto K, Reichard U, Katzowitsch E, Wang X, Achtman M, Suerbaum S. 2003. Traces of human migrations in Helicobacter pylori populations. Science 299: 1528-1529.) So that makes -
1. Y-chromosome studies
2. mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA) studies
3. Polymorphic Alu insertions studies (we haven’t even begun to discuss this area)
4. Retroviral DNA elements studies (we haven’t discussed this either
5. Domesticated animals (dogs) (I’ve mentioned it, you ignored it)

This is not to mention the abundance of archaeological materials that pre-date the bom time by thousands of years and sites traced southward from Alaska to the tip of S. America. Smith said Nephi landed in Chile, which would have generated a northward pattern. All data points south, absent data points north – Occams razor time again.

Hey book of mormon guy – Laman was a son of Lehi even as Nephi was, therefore the genetics were not wiped out. This view has been carried forward to this very day by mormom missionaries to the native Americans, central and south Americans.

The Book of Mormon, if you had read it, would have told you that the genetic claims you guys keep making just are not supported by the book you claim makes the claims, ergo you look pretty foolish proving the unprovable.

The bom claims that the lamanites are known now as the native Americans. As proven by the Lemba tribe over the same period of time given by the bom, these same genetic techniques can identify these people groups. The one who looks foolish is the one trying to prove that which never existed in the first place.

Then you claim based on no evidence that I can see, that Keith Crandall was being influenced to make false statements on tape or be punished by the church.

Oh, that is first and foremost on the minds of mormon intellectuals outside of the GA. Just ask D.Michael Quinn, Historian, and Former B.Y.U. Professor.

[Tennessee Nana]

AAARRGGHHHHH AMPU...

Must you post that pic of that wimpy poufter ???

That is one unattractive ignorant, boy...

Is it any wonder he had to threaten young girls into having sex with him ???

YUCK...

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Yes, it is a good reminder of who this fraudulent prophet was...

Joseph Smith, False Prophet

 

"Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times

some will depart from the faith, giving heed to

deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons."

1 Timothy 4:1

[Tennessee Nana]

(8) Evidence of Mexican Indians anciently in contact with “Egyptian Hieroglyphics:” (View of the Hebrews on Authority of Humbolt)
“On the northwest coast between Nootka and Cook river- - -the natives display a decided taste for hieroglyphical paintings A harp (says Humbolt) represented in the hieroglyphical paintings of the northwest coast of America, is an object at least as remarkable, as the famous harp on the tombs of the kings of Thebes.” Humbolt is cited as giving it as his opinion “that these more improved tribes in New Mexico came from the north west coast and left some of their half civilized brethren there. Among the hieroglyphical paintings of the latter, it seems, the harp was found. Was not this a noted Israelitish musical instrument? How should the American Indians be led to paint the Jewish harp? The Jews in Babylon “hung their harps upon willows.” And it is as natural an event that their brethren, in the wilds of America should place them in their silent hieroglyphical paintings.
Whence could have been derived the knowledge of the accurate hieroglyphical paintings, which this most learned author (meaning Humbolt) exhibits as found among some of the Indians unless they had learned them from people to whom the knowledge of hieroglyphics had been transmitted from Egypt, its original source.” (View of the Hebrews pp 184-5)

Was this sufficient to suggest the strange manner of writing the Book of Mormon in the “learning of the Jews, and the language of the Egyptian? But in an altered Egyptian. See Mormon cited above, left.

(Ethan Smith, View of the Hebrews, 1823-25)

8) Characters in Which Book of Mormon was Engraved on Gold Plates:
“These records were engraven on plates which had the appearance of Gold- - -they were filled with engravings, in Egyptian characters, and bound together in a volume as the leaves of a book, with three rings running through the whole. - - -The characters on the unsealed part were small and beautifully engraved. The whole book exhibited many marks of antiquity in its construction and much skill in the art of engraving.” (Jos. Smith Wentworth Letter, Church History Vol. 4 p. 537)
The first Nephi speaking of the record he was making of events of his times says: “Yea, I make a record in the learning of the Jews and the language of the Egyptians. And I know that the record which I make is true; And I make it with mine own hand; and I make it according to my knowledge.” (6th Cent. B.C. I Nephi, ch. 1)

This strange manner of making record continued through the whole Nephite period: for Mormon in the 4th Century A.D. says: And now behold we have written this record [meaning the whole abridgment of the Book of Mormon] according to our knowledge in the characters, which are called among us the reformed Egyptian, being handed down and altered by us according to our manner of speech.

(Joseph Smith, Book of Mormom, 1830)

From “Studies of the Book of Mormon” by Brigham H Roberts)