The Father of Joshua/Jesus by Saul Levin Part 3

This is the third part of my book review of Saul Levin's The Father of Joshua/Jesus in which I summarize the concluding chapter.

Chapter VI

Although the names of Jesus and Joshua are different in English translations, they  are both the same name in Greek and Hebrew. In fact, Jesus seems to have been named after Joshua. While the Gospels of Matthew and Luke have completely different nativity stories from one another, one thing they both agree on is that Jesus was named by an angel. In Luke, the angel Gabriel appears to Mary and says "You shall bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus" (Luke 1:31). In Matthew, the angel appears to Joseph, so the wording only differs by a pronoun: "She shall bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus." (Matthew 1:21) Luke goes on to call Jesus "son of the Highest" (Luke 1:32), perhaps with Joshua son of the Lord in mind.

In the apocryphal Protevangelium of James, the parents of Mary were sterile. So Mary's father Joakim  goes to the desert to fast for forty days, while Mary's mother Anne prays to get pregnant in a fertility rite setting - sitting under a tree, wearing a headband, and looking at a nest of sparrows. Angels appear to both of them promising a miraculous birth. Mary's mother Anne (based on Anne, the mother of the prophet Samuel in the Old Testament, also compare 1 Samuel 2:1 with Luke 1:46) vowed to give her child to serve the Lord. Accordingly, when Mary was three years old, she was given to the temple where she was fed by an angel. Perhaps her being given to the temple is an echo of the "hallowed ones" or temple prostitutes of the Hebrew Bible. When she turned twelve, the priests were worried she would pollute the temple (by menstruating) so they gave her to the elderly widow Joseph. While spinning thread to make a curtain for the temple, Mary is visited by an angel and becomes pregnant with Jesus.

In a footnote, Levin points out that the Gospels (Mark 11:8-11, Matthew 21:8-10, John 12:12-13)  confuse the autumn festival of Tabernacles where palms were waved and people cry "please save" with the spring festival of Passover. He explains their ignorance of Jewish customs by supposing the authors of the Gospels wrote after the Temple was destroyed (70 CE) and they did not attend synagogues either. I think a better explanation for why the Gospels are ignorant of Jewish customs is that they were not written by Jews, but hey, that's just me.

While Jesus recreates most of the miracles performed by Elisha and Elijah in the book of Kings, one miracle is conspicuously absent: making a sterile woman fertile (although Luke has John the Baptist born to aged parents similar to Abraham and Sarah, this happens before the birth of Jesus). Levin supposes that Jesus's miracle of turning water into wine at a wedding (John 2:1-11) could be thought of as a fertility miracle since having plenty of wine at a wedding makes the occasion more joyous which in turn makes it more likely that the marriage will produce children, but I think this is stretching it a bit.

In another footnote, Levin points out that the name of Jesus's mother is never given in the Gospel of John, and in fact her name being Mary as it is in the other Gospels is unlikely since her sister is named Mary. While it wouldn't be unusual in Roman families to have two sisters both named Mary, this wasn't done amongst Jews. Does this indicate that John had a different name in mind for the mother of Jesus, perhaps edited out later to conform with the other Gospels, or is it an indication that the Gospel writer was Roman?

Jesus is called the "son of David" when he heals the blind or performs exorcisms (Matthew 9:27, 15:22,  20:30-31, Mark 10:47-48, Luke 18:38-39), which implies that David was known for performing such miracles himself. David does cure Saul of an evil spirit (1 Samuel 16:14) and the Talmud tells us he was a gynecologist (Tractate Berakoth 4a). However, David did not heal the crippled Mephibosheth, although he did provide for him (2 Samuel 9:1-9). Perhaps with this in mind, Jesus is not called the "son of David" when he heals the lame (Luke 5:17-26, John 5:1-15). The only other time Jesus is called the "son of David" is during his triumphal entry into Jerusalem during Passover (Matthew 21:9-16). 

Although Jesus is called "the Anointed One" (i.e. Christ), there is no depiction of him actually being anointed. The closest the Gospels come is when a woman pours perfume on him (Matthew 26:7, Mark 14:3, John 12:3, Luke 7:36-50) although Jesus himself says this is for his burial (Matthew 26:12, Mark 14:8), not for anointing. Acts 10:38 is the most explicit reference to an act of anointing, although this refers to being anointed by spirit. Levin muses that the anointing had to be kept secret since when the disciples of Jesus say he is the anointed one, he instructs them to tell no one (Matthew 16:16-20, Mark 8:29-30, Luke 9:20-21). Calling himself the anointed one was tantamount to calling himself King of the Jews, which is what ended up getting him into trouble. Jesus not being officially anointed like King David makes him more like Joshua who wasn't anointed either. This is because Joshua was from an earlier time when leadership was bestowed by the laying on of hands rather than anointing (Numbers 27:18-23).

Just as Joshua's spies in Jericho stay at the house of Rahab the prostitute (Joshua 2:1), Jesus kept the company of prostitutes. Joshua's miracle of destroying the walls of Jericho (Joshua 6:1-20) finds a possible correspondence in Jesus's claim that he will destroy the temple and in three days build another ( Mark 14:57-59, Matthew 26:60-61, John 2:19). Although Levin doesn't mention it, Joshua's miracle of making the sun stand still (Joshua 10:12-13) may correspond to the darkening of the sun at the death of Jesus (Matthew 27:45, Mark 15:33, Luke 23:44-45). Levin claims Jesus was meant to be a military leader like Joshua and plays up the militant aspect of Jesus, pointing out that the followers of Jesus were armed (Luke 22:49), one of Jesus's followers cut off a servant's ear (Mark 14:47, Matthew 26:51, Luke 22:50, John 18:10), Jesus tells his disciples to sell all they have to buy swords (Luke 22:35-36), and Jesus says he came not to bring peace, but a sword (Matthew 10:34-36).  I must admit that all these similarities seem more like parallelomania than actual evidence of a correspondence to me.

In direct contradiction to his own introduction, Levin uncritically accepts the Gospel accounts as history rather than literature and cherry picks out passages that match his view of Jesus as a guerilla leader. He ends his book by telling us that Jesus being called the son of God was originally due to his being a great man, not due to being thought of as God's literal offspring.

The Father of Joshua/Jesus by Saul Levin Part 2

This is the second part of my review of Saul Levin's book The Father of Joshua/Jesus covering chapters 4 and 5.

Chapter IV

Rabbinical literature and Bible codices record that scribes changed the text of the Bible. This chapter lists numerous changes made in the text, proving that the Bible has indeed been revised. Levin notes that in public readings, the divine name was never spoken, being too holy. Also certain phrases that were too obscene were replaced by euphemisms. However, the only time the written text was altered was to avoid blasphemy. 

One of these "corrections" was made to remove a reference to polytheism. The word "god" was nonsensically changed to "tents" in the follow passage:

We have no part in David, and we have no heritage in Jesse's son; everyone to his own god, O Israel. (2 Samuel 20:1)

Levin uncovers another reference to polytheism using one of the Dead Sea Scrolls that was available when his book was written. In the following passage the word "God" found in the Dead Sea Scrolls was nonsensically changed to "Israel" in the Massoretic text.

When the Most High parceled out nations,

when he split up the sons of man,

he fixed the boundaries of peoples

to the number of the sons of God

For the Lord's portion is his people,

Jacob the lot of his heritage. (Deuteronomy 32: 8-9)

Originally, YHWH, or the Lord, was one of several gods. Each god was given a nation of men and YHWH got Israel. Later on, YHWH merged with his father, the Most High and became the only god there was. As this idea was considered blasphemous later on, it was changed in the Massoretic text, but the Dead Sea Scrolls preserve the original.

By comparing the Septuagint with the Massoretic text, Levin finds many unattested changes in the text. For example, the hero named Jerub-Baal or "The Master Strives" in the Septuagint gets his name changed to "Shame Strives" in the Massoretic (Judges 6:32-9:57, 1 Samuel 12:11) This is because The Lord went to war with a rival god called The Master (not to be confused with the Dr. Who villain) in 1 Kings 18 and 2 Kings 10. Other Hebrew names which contain a reference to The Master were also changed. A Jewish hero just couldn't be named after a rival god.

More relevant to the topic of whether or not Joshua's original patronymic was son of the Lord, there's an early king of Judah (Abijah) whose name in the Septuagint translates to "The Lord is My Father", but whose name was changed in the Massoretic text to "The Sea is My Father"! It came to be considered blasphemous for a mortal to be fathered by god, so the name had to be changed. This was certainly the case with Joshua son of the Lord being changed to Joshua son of Nun (which means fish). Not only did the scribes have motive to remove this blasphemy from the text, but, as Levin demonstrates, they could make the change easily with only minor changes to the letters.

Chapter V

The tribe of Judah far exceeded the number of any other tribe in every census of the Bible. A possible explanation for Judah's fertility is found in Genesis 38. Judah had three sons, Er, Onan, and Shelah. Judah got a wife for Er named Tamar. Tamar is the Hebrew word for palm, which was a sign of fertility since the palm tree is green throughout the year and produces dates for months on end. However, Er was wicked and the Lord put him to death. Tamar then married Onan, but he was also wicked and the Lord killed him as well. Not wanting his last son to die also, Judah refused to let Tamar marry Shelah, so she dressed up as a hallowed one (temple prostitute) and slept with Judah at twin springs where she got pregnant and later gave birth to twins, replacing the two sons Judah had lost.

The tribe of Judah settled in the south in a land that was famous for its palm trees. Levin points out that Tamar's father is never named, even when the text calls for it, which is very strange. She originally must have been a literal palm tree and Judah's impregnating her was a metaphor for the tribe of Judah's cultivation of the palm, which made a more sedentary life possible and led to them being more numerous than the other tribes of Israel. Trees and May-poles are linked with fertility in many places in the Bible. For example, the place where Sarah and Abraham overcome their sterility is called "the great trees of Mamre" (Genesis 18:1).

Ruth is another woman whose parentage is strangely lacking in the text. Like Tamar, she is not from the tribe of Israel. Both Ruth and Tamar have in-laws who are reluctant to provide a male relative for them to marry after having two sons die without producing children. However both Ruth and Tamar end up seducing the male head of the clan and becoming pregnant with sons.

Foreskins were a symbol of vitality and virility. When Moses was near death, his wife cut off their son's foreskin and touched it to his feet, which restored him to health (Exodus 4:24-26) and they later had another son (Exodus 18:2-4). King David, who had numerous wives and sons perhaps obtained his superhuman virility from cutting off the foreskins of two hundred Philistines (1 Samuel 18:25-27). David's expertise when it came to getting woman pregnant extended into the medical realm since according to the Talmud, he was also a gynecologist.

The prophet Elisha somehow gets a childless woman pregnant in 2 Kings 4:9-17. Apparently her husband was old (i.e. impotent) so Elisha lives with them for awhile, and then the woman gets pregnant. The most obvious way for him to accomplish this would be to have sex with her, although medical knowledge may also have played a role.

The Father of Joshua/Jesus by Saul Levin Part 1

This post is a review of the first three chapters of The Father of Joshua/Jesus by Saul Levin. In case you're wondering about the title, both Joshua and Jesus are the same name in Hebrew. Joshua is the English translation of Yehoshua, while Jesus is based on Iesous which is the Greek version of Yehoshua (Yeshua in Aramiac). The first part of this book sticks to the Hebrew Bible, but he does discuss the New Testament Jesus later on.

Chapter I

The first chapter is really just an introduction in which Levin explains his methodology and gives a summary of the book to come.

"The whole subject, as I approach it, belongs to philology rather than history or theology. In dealing with accounts of divine procreation, it would be chimerical to play the historian, as though I knew what actually happened to certain persons at such-and-such a time in such-and-such a place. [...] The primary evidence consists of texts, mostly but not altogether literary; and I look upon them less as sources of information about the material life of the past than as artifacts of importance and interest in their own right."

Chapter II

The Biblical hero Joshua, who became the leader of the Israelites after the death of Moses, is said to be the son of Nun. However, Joshua's patronymic is kind of strange. Hebrew usually uses "ben" to indicate "the son of" (for example Joseph ben Mattathias). However, in Joshua's name, "bin" is used instead. Also, his father's name, Nun, is simply one of the letters of the Hebrew alphabet. It's equivalent to saying he is the son of N. As Joshua's patronymic is used more than any other in the Pentateuch, it was the most liable to be simplied due to frequent use, but being simplified to a single letter is a bit too much.

Also, while the Hebrew versions of the Bible, the Massoretic and Samaritan texts, present Joshua as the son of Nun, the Septuagint, which is written in Greek, presents him as the son of Naue. Josephus, also writing in Greek, renders Joshua's patronymic in a curious way (Antiquities 3.2.3 and 3.14.4), although since I don't know Greek I can't explain why it's curious. Scholars usually just chalk this up to a corruption of the text, but in his book The Father of Joshua/Jesus, Saul Levin uses philology to argue against this. He demonstrates that Naue cannot be the Aramaic form of Nun, it can only be an Aramaism of the divine name. Joshua wasn't originally the son of Nun, but rather the son of the Lord.

Since I don't know Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic, I can't vouch for how persuasive his arguments are. While they were a recent discovery when Levin wrote this book (1978) and he therefor does not reference them in detail, the Dead Sea Scrolls do prove that the Septuagint is often closer to the original Hebrew than the Massoretic or Samaritan texts. I don't know whether the DSS strengthen Levin's argument or not.

Chapter III

So if Joshua is the son of the Lord, what does this mean? Was he literally YHWH's son, or was "son of the Lord" simply an honorific title applied to a great man? Odysseus, for example, was called the son of Zeus in an honorific, not a literal, sense (Iliad 2.173). Calling someone the son of a god doesn't fit Jewish culture very well, so its origins are most likely Pagan, although there are vestiges of proof that Samson was originally the son of a sun god.

Sterile couples miraculously having children with the help of God or an angel is a common theme in the Bible. Samson's mother seems to have gotten pregnant by having sex with a stranger who was possibly an angel since the Hebrew phrase for "a man comes to a woman" is most often used euphemistically for sexual intercourse.

A man of God has come to me [had sex with me], and his looks were like the looks of God's messenger [an angel], very awesome; I did not ask him where he was from, and he did not tell me his name. (Judges 13:6)

The prophet Samuel also had a miraculous birth. Reading between the lines, Levin suggests that it may have been the priests at the temple who got Samuel's mother pregnant.

Now Eli was very old, and heard all that his sons did unto all Israel; and how they lay with the women that assembled at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. (1 Samuel 2:22)

When a childless woman goes to the temple to pray for offspring and comes back pregnant, is this what's happening? In the ancient world, if you got impregnated by a temple worker, or "hallowed one", the pregnancy was considered a gift from God and the child produced would be called a son of god. Temple prostitution was a common fertility rite in the ancient world, but was it practiced in Israel?

There shall be no hallowed woman from the daughters of Israel; and there shall be no hallowed man from the sons of Israel. You shall not bring a prostitute's hire or the price of a dog (male prostitute?) to the house of the Lord your God for any vow; for both of them are an abomination to the Lord your God. (Deuteronomy 23:17-18)

Notice how the above passage doesn't condemn temple prostitution outright, it only forbids Israelites from being temple prostitutes. As long as the "hallowed ones" are strangers, the practice seems to have been acceptable.

The three kings of Judah (Asa, Jehoshaphat, and Josiah) all dedicated themselves to eradicating the hallowed ones from the temple.

And he demolished the houses of the hallowed ones [temple prostitutes] that were in the house of the Lord where the women wove coverings [literally "houses"] for the May-pole. (2 Kings 23:7)

So it appears that temple prostitution did occur in Israel, although it became unpopular in later times.

Turning back to Joshua,  we find that it was Moses who gave him his current name in the Massoretic text: "And Moses called Hoshea the son of Nun, Joshua" (Numbers 13:16) The Samaritan Pentateuch, on the other hand, does not contain the name Hoshea at all, rendering the passage ridiculous: "And Moses called Joshua the son of Nun, Joshua." This can't just be a scribal error because the Samaritan text removes the name Hoshea everywhere it appears. What's going on here?

Most of the great men in the Bible have miraculous birth narratives, but the Bible tells us nothing about Joshua's parents. In the Babylonian Talmud (Tractate Sotah 35a), Joshua is called "the one with the lopped off head." An eighteenth century rabbinic writing by Abraham ben Elijah, which appears to originate from a much earlier date, explains why.

In a cento (a story mainly constructed from different Biblical passages cobbled together), we are told that Joshua's mother was sterile and miraculously got pregnant. However, Joshua's father learned from heaven that his son would one day cut off his head, so they put him in an ark and sent him down the Nile a la Moses where he was swallowed by a fish a la Jonah. Someone caught the fish and brought it before the king. When they opened up the fish and found a child inside, the king decided to make Joshua an executioner. Joshua ends up chopping off his father's head and sleeping with his mother. However, their marriage bed fills up with milk from her breasts. Joshua is about to kill her for being a witch when she reveals that she's his mother. Joshua is called the son of Nun (which means fish) because he came out of a fish.

This story helps explain why Joshua was called the son of the Lord. Not only is his birth due to divine intervention, but his patronymic "son of a fish" indicates that his human father is either non-existant or utterly insignificant.

In the thirteenth century document called the Zohar, Rabbi Abba and Rabbi Eleazar encounter a divine stranger and ask him the name of his father, to which he replies that his father was a great and ancient fish who swallowed all the other fish in the sea and spit them out again alive. Even though his father is not YHWH, his father is still a god. When pressed for his own name, the stranger says it's Benajahu (The Lord Builds or Son of the Lord) son of Jehoiada (The Lord Knows). If the Zohar intends Jehoiada to be the name of his mother, then "know" could be intended in a sexual sense. She knew the Lord and the stranger is the son of the Lord. Although he isn't named outright, this stranger is most likely meant to be Joshua.

Was Mary Magdalene a prostitute?

The Bible doesn't tell us much about Mary Magdalene, although she was apparently an important figure to early Christianity since she was the first person to see Jesus after he was raised from the dead (Mark 16, John 20). She is also the only person who was present at all three major events of the crucifixion (Mark 15:40, Matthew 27:56, John 19:25), the burial ( Mark 15:47, Matthew 27:61), and the empty tomb (John 20:1, Mark 16:1, Matthew 28:1,  Luke 24:10). Besides this, all the Bible tells us about her for sure is that Jesus cured her of seven demons (Mark 16:9,  Luke 8:2). She is not mentioned in Acts or the epistles.

Some scholars such as Elaine Pagels and Raymond E. Brown suggest it's possible Mary Magdalene was originally the unnamed Beloved Disciple in the Gospel of John since whenever the Beloved Disciple and Mary Magdalene appear at the same time, there are inconsistencies indicating the text may have been tampered with.

In the Gnostic Gospels such as the Pistis Sophia and the Gospel of Mary, it's said that Jesus loved Mary more than his male disciples. The Gospel of Philip tells us that Jesus used to kiss her often. (Philip 63:34-36) Some take this as an indication that Mary was the wife of Jesus, however, kissing was a common greeting, so it's not necessarily romantic. Consider the famous scene of betrayal where Judas greets Jesus with a kiss.

The tradition that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute seems to come from combining her with the unnamed sinful woman of Luke 7:36-50 who washes the feet of Jesus with her hair and tears. Luke 7 doesn't tell us what the sin of the sinful woman was, but tradition has a way of filling in missing details.

John 11-12 tells us Mary of Bethany, the sister of Lazarus, was the one who anointed the Lord's feet. It's possible Mary Magdalene is the same person as Mary of Bethany since both are often referred to as simply Mary and they never appear at the same time. If they are the same person, that doesn't mean Mary was a prostitute, unless you also combine her with the unnamed woman caught committing adultery in John 8:2-11 who Jesus saves by telling her accusers that he who is without sin should cast the first stone. However, this pericope does not appear until later versions of John, so it's obviously a later addition. It's possible Mary was a prostitute, but it's not stated outright by the text. Or is it?

Do we know anything else about Mary Magdalene? Based on the name Magdalene, many think she came from a town called Magdala. However, there's no evidence that a town called Magdala existed. No such town is mentioned in the Hebrew scriptures or in the writings of Josephus, although some think Magdala was the city Josephus calls Taricheae. Also, Magdalene is wrong grammatically speaking. The -ene ending is not the correct one to indicate a person from a particular town, it should use the -aia ending. If Mary came from a town called Magdala, her name would be Mary Magdalaia.

In Aramaic, Magdala can mean tower, elevated, great, or magnificent. So maybe her name means Mary the Magnificent. However, there's no evidence the New Testament was written in Aramaic. All available evidence points to the original language of the New Testament being Greek. What else could "Magdalene" mean?

In his Pre-Nicene New Testament, Robert M. Price translates Mary Magdalene as "Maria the hair dresser." Maria is the way the name Mary appears in the original Greek and "medgaddlela" is a Talmudic expression referring to the curling of women's hair. This actually brings us full circle since the Talmud uses the term "hair curler" euphemistically to refer to a prostitute, so it appears Mary Magdalene (or more literally, "Maria the prostitute") was a prostitute after all.

It wouldn't necessarily have been scandalous for Mary to be a prostitute given the historical context. In his Panarion, Epiphanius tells us that Simon Magus considered himself God. He descended down to earth to rescue the prostitute Helen of Tyre, who was really the latest incarnation of the Divine Thought which had been imprisoned on earth by evil angels. Much like Jesus does in the Ascension of Isaiah, Simon Magus changed his form as he descended down through the seven heavens so the Principalities and Powers would not recognize him. (Panarion 56) Is is possible the historical Mary Magdalene was Helen of Tyre and the seven demons Jesus cast out of her correspond to the seven heavens he descended down to get to earth?

1 Thessalonians vs. 2 Thessalonians

Let's face it. There's a lot of epistles out there claiming to have been written by Paul. How do we know which ones were really written by Paul and which ones are forgeries?

Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and by our gathering together unto Him, that ye be not soon shaken in mind or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as if from us that the Day of Christ is at hand. (2 Thessalonians 2:1-2)

OK, so if an epistle says that the Day of Christ is at hand, it isn't really from Paul.

Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so shall we ever be with the Lord. Therefore comfort one another with these words. But as to the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. For you yourselves know perfectly that the Day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.

(1 Thessalonians 4:17-18, 5:1-2)

Whoa! 1 Thessalonians just said that the end will come suddenly during Paul's lifetime. So, if 2 Thessalonians is telling us the truth, that makes 1 Thessalonians a liar!

Do the Dead Sea Scrolls prove the Book of Mormon is true?

The Dead Sea Scrolls contain the earliest known copy of the Hebrew Bible (which Christians refer to as the Old Testament). Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the earliest copy of the Old Testament written in Hebrew were the Masoretic texts (c. 1000 AD). The Dead Sea Scrolls predate the Masoretic texts by over a thousand years, with some of the scrolls dating to as early as 100 BC.

Although there are copies of the Hebrew Bible known as the Septuagint dated to as early as the 4th century, this was written in Greek, not Hebrew. The King James Version of the Bible is based on the 10th century Masoretic texts since it was thought that the  Septuagint mistranslated the original language in several places.

The Dead Sea Scrolls contain the entire book of Isaiah as well as parts of every canonical book in the Hebrew Bible except for Esther, along with several Apocryphal writings. While there are numerous spelling and grammatical differences, the Dead Sea Scrolls are essentially the same as the Masoretic texts for the most part. However, there are a few major differences.

For example, Psalm 145 is an acrostic poem. The first verse begins with aleph, the second verse begins with beth, and so forth all the way through the Hebrew alphabet. However, the Masoretic text is missing the verse that should begin with nun. This lost verse was found again in the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Growing up as a Mormon, I heard the claim that the Dead Sea Scrolls proved that Joseph Smith's Translation of the Bible was correct and that the King James Version of the Bible was translated incorrectly. There's no question that the KJV contains numerous translation errors, however, do the Dead Sea Scrolls validate Joseph Smith's Translation?

The short answer is no. Joseph Smith's version of Psalm 145 is exactly the same as the King James Version (specifically Blayney's 1769 revision of the KJV). He didn't notice that a verse was missing.

The Dead Sea Scrolls give us an extra verse before verse 1 of 1 Samuel 11, which I will call "verse 0":

Nahash king of the Ammonites oppressed the Gadites and the Reubenites viciously. He put out the right eye of all of them and brought fear and trembling on Israel. Not one of the Israelites in the region beyond the Jordan remained whose right eye Nahash king of the Ammonites did not put out, except seven thousand men who escaped from the Ammonites and went  to Jabesh-gilea" (1 Samuel 11:0)

This verse is missing from both the King James Version and the Joseph Smith Translation. Reading the following passage in the KJV or the JST makes it seems like Samuel ripped his own mantle:

And as Samuel turned about to go away, he laid hold upon the skirt of his mantle, and it rent. (1 Samuel 15:27, KJV & JST)

However, the Dead Sea Scrolls reveal that it was actually Saul who did the ripping:

And as Samuel turned about to go away, Saul laid hold upon the skirt of his mantle, and it rent. (1 Samuel 15:27, DSS)

In 1 Samuel 17:4, the DSS give the height of Goliath as "four cubits and a span" which is over 7 feet tall. The Masoretic text, which was written a millennium later, gives his height as "six cubits and a span" which would make him over 9 feet tall. It's only natural that some stories grow with the telling. Again, the JST is exactly the same as the Masoretic-based KJV.

As an aside for fans of Antiquities of the Jews, (Go Team Josephus!), Josephus' account of first and second Samuel matches the Dead Sea Scrolls version more closely than either the Masoretic text (MT) or the Septuagint (which is commonly abbreviated as LXX for some reason). This provides some evidence that the writings of Josephus are indeed based on an earlier version of the Hebrew Bible than we currently possess.

Next, let's go back to where it all began:

And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. (Genesis 1:9 KJV & JST)

The Dead Sea Scrolls add an extra sentence:

And God said, let the waters underneath the heavens be gathered together in one gathering, and let the dry land appear. And it was so.  And the waters under the heavens gathered to their gatherings and the dry land appeared. (Genesis 1:9 DSS)

Joseph Smith didn't get this one right either, however the LXX does give the longer version of the verse, making it more accurate than the Masoretic in this case. Another instance where the LXX matches the DSS, but the Masoretic does not is Psalm 22:16 where the DSS has "they have pierced my hands and feet" while the Masoretic has "like a lion are my hands and feet" which is just crazy talk.

Another example of this can be found in Deuteronomy 32:8 where both the DSS and the LXX have "according to the number of the sons of God" while the Masoretic (and therefor the KJV and JST) have it as "according to the number of the sons of Israel" which actually doesn't make sense when put into context:

When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel. (Deuteronomy 32:8)

This verse, as the KJV and JST have it, tells us that all the nations of the world are children of Israel. The original Dead Sea Scrolls version implies the older Jewish theology that the world was divided up into different nations each with its own god who was the son of the most high God.

The paragraph where Joshua constructs an altar is located at Joshua 8:30-35 in the KJV and JST. The LXX puts the paragraph a little bit later (Joshua 9:7-8), but in the DSS, the paragraph is located at the beginning of Joshua 5. The only source that agrees with the Dead Sea Scrolls in this case is Josephus. (Go Josephus!)

Exodus 1:3 has "Joseph and Benjamin" in the DSS, but the KJV and JST both leave out Joseph. Judges 6:7-10 are not found in the DSS and are therefor a later insertion, but again the JST blindly follows the KJV.

The DSS version of Psalms is radically different from the version we have today with the psalms appearing in a different order, some psalms missing, and 15 new psalms. The JST actually differs from the KJV when it comes to Psalm 32:

Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. (Psalm 32:1 KJV)

Blessed are they whose transgressions are forgiven, and who have no sins to be covered. (Psalm 32:1 JST)

Unfortunately, it doesn't match with the DSS version, because Psalm 32 is missing from the DSS entirely, as are psalms 70 and 90 (Joseph Smith copies the KJV exactly for these two). Joseph Smith does completely rewrite Psalms 11, 14, and 24, unfortunately, the DSS versions of these psalms are basically the same as the KJV.

There are a few minor differences between the DSS and the Masoretic text in Psalm 138:

To David, I will praise you with all my heart, before God I will make your music. (Psalm 138:1 Masoretic text)

To David, I will praise Yahweh with all my heart, before Yahweh God I will make your music. (Psalm 138:1 DSS)

If I walk in among trouble you will revive me, over the anger of my enemies you will send your hand you will rescue me, your right hand. (Psalm 138:7 Masoretic text)

If I walk in the middle of trouble you will revive me, over the anger of my enemies you will send your hand you will rescue me, your right hand. (Psalm 138:7 DSS)

Joseph Smith didn't notice these small differences, but he does rewrite the next verse.

Yahweh will end on behalf of me, Yahweh, your mercy is for eternity, the works of your hands will not sink. (Psalm 138:8, the same in both Masoretic and DSS)

The Lord will perfect me in knowledge, concerning his kingdom. I will praise thee O Lord, for ever; for thou art merciful, and wilt not forsake the works of thine own hands. (Psalm 138:8 JST)

Perhaps the most major difference between the JST and the KJV is that the JST completely removes the Song of  Solomon. However, it is included in the DSS. The DSS lack Esther, however the JST includes it.

At the risk of beating a dead horse, I'll give a few more examples from the book of Isaiah. The Book of Mormon quotes from Isaiah quite extensively so it was obviously a very important book to Joseph Smith.

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. (Isaiah 7:14 KJV & JST, also 2 Nephi 17:14)

You can't tell from the KJV, but in the Masoretic text, the final verb in this verse is "she will call" indicating that the virgin (or young woman as it's more correctly translated) is the one who names the son. In the DSS, the verb "he will call" is used instead.

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. (Isaiah 9:6 KJV & JST, also 2 Nephi 19:6)

Instead of "The mighty God, The everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace" the DSS has "Elgibor, the father of Ad, ruler of Hashalom." The reason this is so different is due to minor manuscript differences. The name Elgibor in the DSS gets changed to "mighty God" in the Masoretic text simply by inserting a space ("el gibor" means "God is a warrior"). Similar minor differences change "father of Ad" into "everlasting Father" and "ruler of Hashalom" into "ruler of peace".

The Masoretic text translates Isaiah 53:11 as "from the labor of his soul, he will see, he will be satisfied". The Dead Sea Scroll text translates to "from the labor of his soul, he will see light and he will be satisfied". The JST again follows the KJV.

Joseph Smith and Josephus

Antiquities of the Jews by Flavius Josephus relates the history of the Jewish people from the creation of the world up to the intertestamental period. Josephus' version of events is mainly based on the Old Testament and Apocrypha, however he departs from them often. Interestingly, Joseph Smith seems to have borrowed from Josephus in his own version of the Bible since he differs from the Bible in many of the same ways Josephus does.


1. In Genesis 5:4, Adam and Eve don't have daughters until after the birth of Seth. However, in both Josephus and the Josephs Smith Translation of the Bible (JST), Adam and Eve have daughters at the same time Cain and Able are born.

Adam and Eve had two sons...they had also daughters. (Antiquities of the Jews 1:2:1)

And Adam knew his wife, and she bare unto him sons and daughters...and from that time forth, the sons and daughters of Adam began to divide, two and two, in the land. (Gen. 4:2-3 Joseph Smith Translation)

2. Although there's no mention of it in the Bible, both Josephus and Joseph Smith tell us that Cain became the leader of a wicked organization.

But Cain was not only very wicked in other respects, but was wholly intent upon getting...He augmented his household substance with much wealth, by rapine and violence; he excited his acquaintance to procure pleasures and spoils by robbery, and became a great leader of men in wicked courses. (Antiquities of the Jews 1:2:1-2)

And Cain said: Truly I am Mahan, the master of this great secret, that I may murder and get gain. Wherefore Cain was called Master Mahan, and he gloried in his wickedness. And Cain went into the field, and Cain talked with Abel, his brother. And it came to pass that while they were in the field, Cain rose up against Abel, his brother, and slew him. (Genesis 5:16 Joseph Smith Translation, also Moses 5:31-32)

As an aside, this passage of Mormon scripture is quoted in the video game Assassin's Creed II. A later passage in the Mormon scripture called The Book of Moses makes it clear that this was the founding of a secret Satanic society:

For Lamech having entered into a covenant with Satan, after the manner of Cain, wherein he became Master Mahan, Master of that great secret which was administered unto Cain by Satan; and Irad, the son of Enoch having known their secret, began to reveal it unto the sons of Adam. Wherefore Lamech, being angry, slew him, not like unto Cain, his brother Abel, for the sake of getting gain, but slew him for the oath’s sake. For, from the days of Cain, there was a secret combination, and their works were in the dark, and they knew every man his brother. (Moses 5:49-51)

3. The Bible makes no mention of Noah's life being in danger, but both Josephus and Joseph do.

For the tradition is that these men did what resembled the acts of those whom the Grecians call giants. But Noah was very uneasy at what they did; and being displeased at their conduct, persuaded them to change their dispositions and their acts for the better: and seeing they did not yield to him, but were slaves to their wicked pleasures, he was afraid they would kill him, together with his wife and children. (Antiquities of the Jews 1:3:1)

And in those days there were giants in the earth, and they sought Noah to take away his life...For it repenteth Noah that I have created them; and he hath called upon me, for they have sought his life. (Genesis 8:6,15 Joseph Smith Translation)

4. The Bible doesn't tell us that Abraham had astronomical knowledge, but again, both Josephus and Joseph do.

In the tenth generation after the Flood there was among the Chaldeans a man [Abraham] righteous and great, and skillful in Celestial Science. (Antiquities of the Jews 1:7:2)

And it is given unto thee [Abraham] to know the set time of all the stars that are set to give light, until thou come near unto the throne of God. (Abraham 3:10)

Also, Fascimile 3 in the Pearl of Great Price depicts Abraham instructing the king of Egypt in the "principles of astronomy".


5. In Genesis, Jacob gives a blessing to his son Joseph upon his deathbed dealing with his descendants. He does not praise Joseph himself in the Bible, but he does in Josephus' version:

Now when Jacob had lived seventeen years in Egypt, he fell into a disease, and died in the presence of his sons; but not till he made his prayers for their enjoying prosperity, and till he had foretold to them prophetically how every one of them was to dwell in the land of Canaan. But this happened many years afterward. He also enlarged upon the praises of Joseph, how he had not remembered the evil doings of his brethren to their disadvantage. (Antiquities of the Jews 2:8:1)

The Joseph Smith Translation also has Jacob praise Joseph:

And Jacob said unto Joseph when the God of my fathers appeared unto me in Luz, in the land of Canaan; he sware unto me, that he would give unto me, and unto my seed, the land for an everlasting possession. Therefore, O my son, he hath blessed me in raising thee up to be a servant unto me, in saving my house from death; In delivering my people, thy brethren, from famine which was sore in the land; wherefore the God of thy fathers shall bless thee, and the fruit of thy loins, that they shall be blessed above thy brethren, and above thy father’s house; For thou hast prevailed, and thy father’s house hath bowed down unto thee, even as it was shown unto thee, before thou wast sold into Egypt by the hands of thy brethren; wherefore thy brethren shall bow down unto thee from generation to generation, unto the fruit of thy loins forever; For thou shalt be a light unto my people, to deliver them in the days of their captivity, from bondage; and to bring salvation unto them, when they are altogether bowed down in sin. (Joseph Smith Translation of Genesis 48:5-11)

6. According to the Bible, Moses died a natural death. According to Josephus, he did not die, but was taken up to God.

As he was going to embrace Eleazar and Joshua, and was still discoursing with them, a cloud stood over him on the sudden, and he disappeared in a certain valley, although he wrote in the holy books that he died, which was done out of fear, lest they should venture to say that, because of his extraordinary virtue, he went to God. (Antiquities 4:8:48)

The Joseph Smith Translation of Deuteronmy 34 leaves the account of Moses's death as is, however, the Book of Alma tells us Moses was taken up to God. 

And when Alma had done this he departed out of the land of Zarahemla, as if to go into the land of Melek. And it came to pass that he was never heard of more; as to his death and burial we know not of. Behold this we know, that he was a righteous man; and the saying went abroad in the church that he was taken up by the Spirit, or buried by the hand of the Lord, even as Moses. But behold, the scriptures saith the Lord took Moses unto himself, therefore, for this cause we know nothing concerning his death and burial. (Alma 45:18-19)

7. In the Bible, Abraham's wife Sarai was his half-sister. In the writings of Josephus and Joseph Smith, Sarai is his niece.

Now Abraham had two brethren, Nahor and Haran; of these Haran left a son, Lot; as also Sarai and Milcha his daughters, and died among the Chaldeans, in a city of the Chaldeans, called Ur; and his monument is shown to this day. These married their nieces. Nahor married Milcha, and Abram married Sarai. (Antiquities 1:6:5)

And it came to pass that I, Abraham, took Sarai to wife, and Nahor, my brother, took Milcah to wife, who were the daughters of Haran. (Abraham 2:2, note: this scipture was changed in 1981 so current Mormon scripture does not have Abraham marry his niece.)

D. Michael Quinn tells us in Early Mormonism and the Magic World View that the Palmyra bookstore and library had copies of Josephus during Joseph Smith's time. We also know Joseph Smith read Josephus while he was in jail the night he was murdered. It's likely that Joseph Smith was influenced by the writings of Josephus, however many of the places where he diverges from the Bible could have come from other sources as well.


Main source for this post:
http://bycommonconsent.com/2010/01/06/bcc-papers-51-cranney-josephus/