In Egyptianisms in the Book of Mormon and Other Studies (Provo, Utah: Deep Forest Green Books, 2020), 93, Robert F. Smith noted that
In the Book of Mormon quotation of
Isaiah 10:29, the KJV place-name Ramah (following the Hebrew Massoretic text)
reads instead at 2 Nephi 20:29 Ramath, thus exhibiting an earlier
reading with an archaic ending in -at, [21] perhaps reflecting
the Bronze Plates of Laban – wherein Ramath better represents the original
chiastic Hebrew couplet with Isaiah 10:29,
hordâ hāRāma[t]
Ramat trembled,
Gibˁat-Šāʼûl nāsâ Gibat-Shaul
fled
[21] Cf.
P. Bennett, Comparative Semitic Linguistics (Winona Lake, IN:
Eisenbrauns, 1998), 35; S. Moscati, Introduction to the Comparative Grammar
of the Semitic Languages (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1964), § 12.32-33.
Tvedtnes notes that
This would be the more ancient
form of the name, with the old feminine -ath suffix which, in later
(even Biblical, usually) Hebrew disappeared in the pausal form of the noun. Cf.
vs. 28, where both KJV and BM have the name "Aiath", with the same
old feminine ending. This is particularly interesting, since it is cyt
in MT but was written cyth in IQIsa, with the -t suffix
apparently added as an afterthought (it is in superscription), following a
writing which shows later pronunciation. I.e., IQIsa originally wrote it as
"Aiah" - as in MT wrote Ramah" - and later added a superscript
letter to show the older form "Aiath". This provides evidence that BP
is from an older source than MT. (John
A. Tvedtnes, The Isaiah Variants in the Book of Mormon [Provo, Utah:
Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1981], 50)
While agreeing that "The appearance of "Ramath" (a
-t form) appears thus to display this linguistic fact," David P. Wright,
in a (frankly, desperate) attempt to not event give any credit to Joseph Smith
(who he believes is the author of the Book of Mormon) writes that
Yet it is not impossible that
other occurrences of "Ramath" in the KJV influenced the BM (Josh
13:26; 19:8; Judg 15:17). It is also possible that this is a dictation or
copying error. The evidence is not
conclusive. (David P. Wright,
"Appendix:
Supposed Evidence from Ancient Manuscripts and Hebrew Language and Style”)
And that
The insertion of a -t at
the end of 'yh (Aiah) in v. 28 of
1QIsaa may not be to show and older form or conform to an earlier
text but simply to correct a mistake, contra Tvedtnes. In any case, it provides
no proof that the BM reading "Ramath" comes from an ancient text.
(note 153)
In note 152, Wright argued the following:
"Ramath" occurs in Judg
15:17 in the compound place name Ramath-lehi. The term "Lehi" occurs
independently in this chapter as a place name in vv. 9, 14, 19. This is the
only place in the Bible where this latter term occurs. This term caught Smith's
imagination and he used it as the name of the leading patriarch in the BM story
(1 Nephi, etc.). One wonders, quite speculatively, if the compound place name
Ramath-lehi made an impression upon him such that he readily converted
"Ramah" into "Ramath." Note, however, the place name Ramah
in Ether 15:11.
