Abstract: During the Second-Temple Period, Jews remembered and reimagined the story of Abraham to address their own immediate historical and cultural concerns. By exploring these reimaginations, we learn more about the faith and interests of later Jews who looked to their forefather for inspiration and guidance on how to live in a world of change, opportunity, and challenge. Second Temple Jewish writers included in this article are Artapanus, the author of Jubilees; Pseudo-Eupolemus, the author of Genesis Apocryphon; Philo, and Josephus. Abraham was resurrected in these texts, but with the body and soul of the later author, Josephus; these authors live on in the guise of Abraham.

Abraham is one of the prime characters in the book of Genesis. His faith, piety, righteousness, and hospitality are well known. But he was of course a multifaceted character, as attested by episodes of duplicity, military fortitude, and familial concessions. Centuries later, the character of Abraham gained new life during the Hellenistic/Roman age1 as the Jewish and Greek worlds came into greater contact with each other.

Methodology

This paper highlights samples of the diversity of Jewish thought and cultural experience throughout the Hellenistic/Roman age by following several “lives of Abraham” over the course of three hundred years, while I explore the manifestations of the figure of Abraham in various texts, [Page 254]geographical locales, and at various times.2 Each group infused new life into Abraham as they manipulated his character to suit their own purposes, thus telling us more about the creators of this new life than truly representing the historical Abraham. This methodological approach is inspired by the book Lives of Indian Images by Richard Davis.3 In his work he argues that cultural contours of Indian history and experience could be accessed by examining the lives of cult images across time and space. What is the rationale for using a methodology originally applied to immutable cult images and statues of India to investigate the complex world of Judaism in the Hellenistic/Roman period through the figure of Abraham? Like sacred images set in stone that are not easily defaced or changed without a necessary change that affects the significance of that image, the figure of Abraham was laid down near immutably in the biblical text. Thus the stories of Abraham in the Bible share many of the features and characteristics of sacred images. It was fashioned by an original sculptor and endued with meaning by the originators or the receivers of the image. However, the original is not to be tampered with, amended, diminished, or changed, even though new images based on the original can be produced, and they in turn can be endued with meaning, thus reinvigorating the original cycle. The original image is not easily defaced or changed without seriously undermining its significance or authority. Hence the best option for adapting the original image is to create new images or to reinterpret the meaning of the original image, in either case on the basis of present circumstances.

By analogy, the Abraham stories as found in Genesis 12‒25 play t...

You can listen to or download the May 12 broadcast of the Interpreter Radio Show below. It will also be included in our podcast feed (https://interpreterfoundation.org/feeds/podcast). The hosts were Terry Hutchinson, and Kevin Christensen who discussed the influence of mothers and new books, as well as Come Follow Me lesson #21. The Interpreter Radio Show can be heard Sunday evenings from 7 to 9 PM (MDT), on K-TALK, AM 1640, or you can listen live on the Internet at ktalkmedia.com. Call in to 801-254-1640 with your questions and comments during the live show.

Original air date: May 12, 2019. This recording has been edited to remove commercial breaks.

The Interpreter Radio Show is a weekly discussion of matters of interest to the hosts, guests, and callers of the show. The views expressed on the Interpreter Radio Show are those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Interpreter Foundation, nor should statements made on the show be construed as official doctrinal statements of the Church.

 

This is an Interpreter Radio (audio) Roundtable for Come, Follow Me New Testament Lesson 21, “The Son of Man Shall Come,” covering Joseph Smith-Matthew 1, Matthew 25, Mark 12-13 and Luke 21. Panelists for this roundtable were Terry Hutchinson, and Kevin Christensen. This roundtable was extracted from the May 12, 2019 broadcast of Interpreter Radio. The complete show may be heard at https://interpreterfoundation.org/interpreter-radio-show-may-12-2019/. The Interpreter Radio Show can be heard Sunday evenings from 7 to 9 PM (MDT), on K-TALK, AM 1640, or you can listen live on the Internet at ktalkmedia.com. Call in to 801-254-1640 with your questions and comments during the live show.

The Interpreter Radio Show is a weekly discussion of matters of interest to the hosts, guests, and callers of the show. The views expressed on the Interpreter Radio Show are those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Interpreter Foundation, nor should statements made on the show be construed as official doctrinal statements of the Church.

 

Abstract. When discussions arise about the relationship between Church members and the prophets who lead them, certain episodes in Church history often appear. These include the Lord’s words about “all patience and faith” in Doctrine and Covenants 21:4–5, as well as incidents involving George Albert Smith and Hugh B. Brown. On the surface, such episodes might seem to raise doubts about the reliability of the presiding Brethren in representing the Lord or to minimize the importance of Church orthodoxy itself. A closer look shows such interpretations to be a mistake, however. When we clarify the record, we see that these episodes do not support the conclusions that are sometimes drawn from them. Examining these incidents also permits making a point about so-called “blind obedience.”

There are a number of dots to connect in trying to reach a thoughtful perspective on the relationship between members of the Church and the prophets who have been called to lead them. It is only natural that members do this in different ways and therefore reach disparate conclusions on the matter.

One way to try to reduce this disparity, at least to some degree, is to make sure we are thoughtful about the dots themselves. Some items of evidence might be so widely understood in a particular way or to have been part of the conversation for so long that we haven’t actually examined them in a while. When that is the case, it can pay to step back and take a fresh look.

Three incidents in Church history seem ripe for such reinspection. One of these is the Lord’s 1830 instruction that we are to follow prophets “in [Page 230]all patience and faith” (D&C 21:4–5). A second is George Albert Smith’s famous disavowal of the claim that “when our leaders speak, the thinking has been done” in 1945. And a third is Hugh B. Brown’s remarks about “heterodox” thoughts to a BYU audience in 1969.

It is not unusual for these episodes to arise in discussions about the relationship between the presiding authorities of the Church and the members they lead. The episodes regarding D&C 21 and George Albert Smith come up (at least in conversations I am involved in) because both the Lord and a prophet are thought to urge caution about the trustworthiness of the presiding councils in representing the Lord. And the episode with Hugh B. Brown comes up because he is thought to minimize the actual importance of Church orthodoxy and to believe that thinking per se is what really matters. Since these incidents have taken on such importance over the years (decades even), it seems worthwhile, as I said, to pause, reexamine them, and see if they actually have such meanings. To this end I will revisit each of the episodes, taking them up in historical order.1

“In All Patience and Faith” — The Lord in D&C 21:4–5

On April 6, 1830, at the organization of the Church, the Lord said this regarding Joseph Smith in Doctrine and Covenants Section 21: “Wherefore, meaning the church, thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me (v. 4); for his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith” (v. 5).

You can listen to or download the May 5 broadcast of the Interpreter Radio Show below. It will also be included in our podcast feed (https://interpreterfoundation.org/feeds/podcast). The hosts were Neal Rappleye, Jasmin Rappleye, Stephen Smoot and Hales Swift where they discussed the Interpreter article on Joseph Smith as the World’s Greatest Guesser and a new volume on the New Testament as well as Come Follow Me lesson #20. The Interpreter Radio Show can be heard Sunday evenings from 7 to 9 PM (MDT), on K-TALK, AM 1640, or you can listen live on the Internet at ktalkmedia.com. Call in to 801-254-1640 with your questions and comments during the live show.

Original air date: May 5, 2019. This recording has been edited to remove commercial breaks.

The Interpreter Radio Show is a weekly discussion of matters of interest to the hosts, guests, and callers of the show. The views expressed on the Interpreter Radio Show are those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Interpreter Foundation, nor should statements made on the show be construed as official doctrinal statements of the Church.

 

This is an Interpreter Radio (audio) Roundtable for Come, Follow Me New Testament Lesson 20, “Behold, Thy King Cometh,” covering Matthew 21-23, Mark 11, Luke 19-20 and John 12. Panelists for this roundtable were Neal Rappleye, Jasmin Rappleye, Stephen Smoot and Hales Swift. This roundtable was extracted from the May 5, 2019 broadcast of Interpreter Radio. The complete show may be heard at https://interpreterfoundation.org/interpreter-radio-show-may-5-2019/. The Interpreter Radio Show can be heard Sunday evenings from 7 to 9 PM (MDT), on K-TALK, AM 1640, or you can listen live on the Internet at ktalkmedia.com. Call in to 801-254-1640 with your questions and comments during the live show.

The Interpreter Radio Show is a weekly discussion of matters of interest to the hosts, guests, and callers of the show. The views expressed on the Interpreter Radio Show are those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Interpreter Foundation, nor should statements made on the show be construed as official doctrinal statements of the Church.

 

Abstract: Selwyn Kātene has again assembled twelve essays written by the descendants of famous Māori Latter-day Saints. This volume flows from a revival of interest in the ground and content of the faith of early Māori Saints that began in the late 1990s. In various ways the essays in this volume add to and amend what has previously been known about what began unexpectedly on Christmas Day in 1882, when the first group of Māori joined the Church of Jesus Christ. Not only did the Māori have Seers who opened the way, some of those elite Māori men, who had been initiated into Māori esoteric knowledge of divine things, also found that their temple endowment fit rather snugly with their previous initiation ceremonies. Unlike other Christian missionaries, Latter-day Saint missionaries did not see the Māori as primitive heathens, and Māori saw in the restored gospel crucial elements of their own deeper understanding of divine things. Latter-day Saint missionaries were seeking to liberate Māori from the soul-destroying vices brought to them or enhanced by British colonization, while relishing the most noble elements in the Māori world.

Review of Selwyn Kātene, ed., By Their Fruits You Will Know Them: Early Maori Leaders in the Mormon Church, vol. 2 (Wellington, New Zealand: Steele Roberts Publishers, 2017). 295 pp. N.Z. $39.99 (hardback).

Like Turning the Hearts,1 which was the first volume in this series, By Their Fruits consists of twelve essays written by the descendants of early Māori Latter-day Saints who set out what can now be known [Page 200]about each on their own journey of faith. There is a fine “Foreword” to this anthology by Whatarangi Winiata, a distinguished Anglican2 scholar. He begins by acknowledging that

In 1881 the prophet Paora Potangaroa told a gathering at Te Ore Ore marae in the Wairarapa that a new and great power would come from the direction of the rising sun. Later that year, the first Mormon missionaries arrived from the United States of America in the east; within two years, hundreds of Maori in the region were converted to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Within ten years, one in twelve Maori, or roughly 3000, belonged to the Mormon Church. Five years later approximately 4000 Maori had committed themselves to the Book of Mormon. (p. 7.)

He then explains that, beginning in 1882, Latter-day Saint missionaries

moved humbly through [Māori] communities, conversing in te reo Maori with little concern for land or colonization but with an intense interest in whakapapa [genealogy], a concept fundamental to all Maori. Rather than judging Maori as faithless heathens,...

Abstract: After about 1500 years of slumber, ancient Egyptian was brought back to life in the early 19th century, when scholars deciphered hieroglyphs. This revolutionary success opened the door to a reevaluation of history from the viewpoint of ancient Egypt. In the wake of this new knowledge, the first scholar posited the idea in 1849 that the name of Moses stemmed from the Egyptian word for child. Subsequently, this idea was refined, and currently the majority of scholars believe Moses’s name comes from the Egyptian verb “to beget,” which is also the root for the Egyptian word for child, or in the case of a male child, a “son.” Before this discovery and certainly before a scholarly consensus formed on the Egyptian etymology of the name of Moses, Joseph Smith restored a prophecy from the patriarch Joseph that played upon the name of Moses and its yet to be discovered Egyptian meaning of “son.” This article explores the implications of this overt Egyptian pun and its role as a key thematic element in the restored narratives in the Book of Moses.

In 1849, shortly after the decryption of hieroglyphs, Richard Lepsius published the first known theory that the name of Moses, the famed Hebrew deliverer, might have originated from the Egyptian word for child.1 This theory is now the prevailing theory for the etymology of the name Moses. Even before the academic community posited this idea, however, a pun on this Egyptian etymology for Moses appeared in Joseph Smith’s restored translation of Genesis 50. In 1832, Smith dictated a prophecy about Moses from the patriarch Joseph that [Page 188]contained a wordplay on Moses’s name and its Egyptian etymology. Smith also restored an extra-biblical account of Moses’s life that further plays on this hypothesized Egyptian etymology for Moses’s name. Taken together, these plays on Moses’s Egyptian name, which predate the academic community’s discovery of this possibility, provide circumstantial evidence of the authenticity of the texts Joseph restored.

This paper reviews the account of Moses’s naming in Exodus chapter 2 from a literary perspective informed by the Egyptian etymology of child or son for the name Moses, before discussing Smith’s restored Moses-related texts in the context of the rediscovery of Moses’s Egyptian etiology. Finally, this paper presents a discussion of this etiology as a key element to the restored dialogue between God and Moses and Moses’s confrontation with Satan, which presents Moses as a type of Christ by virtue of his being a son of God.

Naming Moses

The Bible seems intended by its mostly anonymous authors to reward a close reading with a complex array of literary devices, which evinces the artistry of its narrative.2 The Bible’s palette of poetics includes puns upon the names of its personae dramatis. These puns are not merely ornamental but are designed to contribute to the substance of the dramatic ta...

This is an Interpreter Radio (audio) Roundtable for Come, Follow Me New Testament Lesson 19, “What Lack I Yet?,” covering Matthew 19-20, Mark 10 and Luke 18. Panelists for this roundtable were Martin Tanner and Matthew Bowen. This roundtable was extracted from the April 28, 2019 broadcast of Interpreter Radio. The complete show may be heard at https://interpreterfoundation.org/interpreter-radio-show-april-28-2019/. The Interpreter Radio Show can be heard Sunday evenings from 7 to 9 PM (MDT), on K-TALK, AM 1640, or you can listen live on the Internet at ktalkmedia.com. Call in to 801-254-1640 with your questions and comments during the live show.

The Interpreter Radio Show is a weekly discussion of matters of interest to the hosts, guests, and callers of the show. The views expressed on the Interpreter Radio Show are those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Interpreter Foundation, nor should statements made on the show be construed as official doctrinal statements of the Church.

 

You can listen to or download the April 28 broadcast of the Interpreter Radio Show below. It will also be included in our podcast feed (https://interpreterfoundation.org/feeds/podcast). The hosts were Martin Tanner and Matthew Bowen where they discuss Islamic extremism and conducted a Come, Follow Me roundtable for lesson 19. The Interpreter Radio Show can be heard Sunday evenings from 7 to 9 PM (MDT), on K-TALK, AM 1640, or you can listen live on the Internet at ktalkmedia.com. Call in to 801-254-1640 with your questions and comments during the live show.

Original air date: April 28, 2019. This recording has been edited to remove commercial breaks.

The Interpreter Radio Show is a weekly discussion of matters of interest to the hosts, guests, and callers of the show. The views expressed on the Interpreter Radio Show are those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Interpreter Foundation, nor should statements made on the show be construed as official doctrinal statements of the Church.