If Joseph Smith was copying from the Bible, why would he use patristic names in the Book of Mormon?

If Joseph Smith was trying to make the Book of Mormon appear ancient, why would he use patristic names? Wouldn’t he use the Old Testament as a guide?

Tvedtnes, Gee, and Roper explain:

A feature of the Book of Mormon that is unknown from the Old Testament is the naming of a son after his father. Thus, we have Alma son of Alma, Helaman son of Helaman, Nephi son of Nephi, and Pahoran son of Pahoran. Until recently, patristic names of this sort were unknown from epigraphic sources. But an ostracon from the late seventh or early sixth century b.c. in the Moussaeiff collection lists one <lkn bn <lkn, “Elikon [or Elkanah] son of Elikon.”

– John A. Tvedtnes, John Gee, and Matthew Roper – Book of Mormon Names Attested in Ancient Hebrew Inscriptions

To be more specific, “the younger” is even attested in Mesoamerica. Why would Joseph have included patristic names if they would have seen out of place at the time?

See:

• John A. Tvedtnes, John Gee, and Matthew Roper – Book of Mormon Names Attested in Ancient Hebrew Inscriptions

© 2024 Showyourshelf.com

Show Your Shelf is not in any way sponsored or endorsed by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. For official information from the Church please see churchofjesuschrist.org or comeuntochrist.org