nosmelone

On ‎8‎/‎15‎/‎2016 at 9:29 AM, Rajah Manchou said:

This group (Lehkai) I was with in Burma last month has a very strong belief that their younger brother from the west will return one day with a golden book that will complement the truth in their golden book. I'm curious if you know much about the legend among the Hopi about the elder brother who will supposedly bring them a book.

Very interesting about the Lehkai, I am not familiar with this group will be doing some research thanks for the heads up on that!!!!  Here is a link to a blog post I did on the Hopi tablets that Hugh Nibley was able to view on a couple of occasions.  Their myth is that the long lost white brother will return from the east with the missing corner of one of the tablets and instructions for them.  This missing corner is what is supposed to allow them to know if he is the right person.  I have also heard the myth of him just bringing a book with their lost history and teachings.....some think this is the Book of Mormon. 

http://inthecavityofarock.blogspot.com/2011/08/hugh-nibley-and-sacred-hopi-stone.html?m=1

I recall a History Channel video "Quest for the Lost Tribes of Israel"  that spoke about certain tribes that may have ended up in Burma and other locations.  It was pretty interesting if I remember right.  Here is the link for it so you can see if there is any information that may apply in it.

Yeah, I don't see any issues with this. I heard all the stories about him dedicating these temple sites as a kid as well and have no issues with it.  As pointed out above it is easily done within the 36 year timeframe he had.  I have posted a link a blog post showing that the travel distance between the two is attributed.  There are more people who have covered a similar distance in similar timeframe that I didn't include in the blog post.

http://inthecavityofarock.blogspot.com/2011/04/could-moroni-travel-from-central.html

I didn't start taking the Book of Mormon seriously until I was in my early 20's so upon my initial readings I honestly assumed there were others just due to the population sizes that would need to be been in place for the Nephite/Lamanite wars.  I have always held that train of thought since then and still do.  It wasn't until after the mission that I heard the Sherem issue in the book of Jacob.  With him coming among the Nephites and Lamanites it would seem to me that he is from outside their population.  Especially with him seeking an opportunity to speak with Jacob it seems as if Jacob had no knowledge of him until after this meeting between the two.  Another point is that the Mulekites language had become corrupted.  This seems to be something that would take place where there is a mixing with cultures.  These are the main points that I am familiar with that lead me to picture the Americas as a well populated area at the time of arrival.  But with that said I do agree that the general understanding in the church for years was that Nephi and Lehi landed in the Americas and is was devoid of population at that time other than Coriantumr.

I am biased because I am somewhat involved with BMC.  I like the knowhy's ease of access in being able to share them online or on social media.  Great information which is easily accessed and shared and that's a great combination.  We need to continue in this direction....flooding the world with the BOM in all manners, shapes and sizes (formats).

I admit I do not have a highly skeptical mind and maybe that's a blessing.   I see scenarios like these as possibilities that make a breeding ground for faith as something more plausible.  But with that said I understand that there are those who see it exactly opposite of me.

2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Yep- it is definitely a two edged sword.

2 hours ago, CA Steve said:

If we are going to accept Israelite evidence found at this location as supporting the Book of Mormon story, then don't we also have to accept the lack of it in the New World as evidence against?

Yes it can mean a lack of evidence as mfbukowski has stated, but he also stated that it is open to conjecture which is important considering the length that archaeology has been taking place in the middle east compared to the new world (specifically Mesoamerica).  Also take into consideration the way that the civilizations handled their predecessors.  I say that because in Mesoamerica the conquering civilization usually either destroyed or built upon the previous civilizations important places.  These two issues alone cause major concern for the new world archaeological situation......but with that said yes open to conjecture.

wait we must....but there is a bit of progress.  It looks like they have found a pottery shard and small man made bead.  I don't know if these things can be radio carbon dated or not but hopefully they have success in more findings.

@Nevo  I agree that they have their work cut out for them trying to date this structure.  I am assuming that the pit testing they are doing may also be in an attempt find possibly some pottery shards of some sort or relic that would allow a carbon date to be pulled.  I have ordered the Lehi in Arabia DVD to see if it offers any other insights or clarification.  I find the measurement scale comparison to Solomon's temple interesting but I think I would need a little more than that to assume this was a religious structure of the time period.  Hopefully this does lead to more finds  but until then we will have to wait and see.

So Meridian Magazine has been graciously providing articles on the recent digs and archaeological findings taking place in Oman at Khor Kharfot which is one of the prominent places thought to be Nephi's Bountiful.  In this research they have discovered what appears to be a Holy Place of Worship with interesting configurations in this structure when compared with what we know about the measurements of  Solomon's Temple.  This is a recent work in progress with hopefully much more to come out of the expedition and its findings.  I find this very interesting but admit that this hypothesis that an ancient synagogue that may somehow date back to the time of Lehi and Nephi can be verified (at least to the time period not necessarily that it belong to or was used by the family of Lehi) would this be viewed as a legitimate archaeological evidence supporting the Book of Mormon?

http://ldsmag.com/day-2-was-there-a-holy-place-of-worship-at-nephis-bountiful/

I personally feel the archaeological evidence for the Book of Mormon is stronger in the Old World at this time with the alters found at the Temple of Marib making the Nahom connection as well as being a well known burial area for ancient civilizations of the area.  This seems to be to be a pretty nice piece of evidence that can't just be brushed off as a coincidence.  I admit that the New World archaeological evidence isn't quite as forth coming but with linguistic ties being made between Egyptian, Hebrew and Uto-Aztecan by Brian Stubbs and Jerry Grover

http://www.bmaf.org/sites/bmaf.org/files/image/Egyptian-Semitic-in-Uto-Aztecan-by-Brian-Stubbs-Jerry-Grover.pdf

and insights pointed out by John Sorenson in his book Mormon's Codex

http://www.amazon.com/Mormons-Codex-Ancient-American-Book/dp/1609073991/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1453315258&sr=8-1&keywords=Mormons+Codex

and Brant Gardner's Traditions of the Fathers book.

http://www.amazon.com/Traditions-Fathers-Book-Mormon-History/dp/1589586654/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1453315311&sr=8-1&keywords=Brant+Gardner

we could easily have already seen much evidence for the Book of Mormon it is just not recognized as Nephite/Lamanite but rather as Mayan or Mesoamerican.  We have to keep in mind that the Central American civilizations were known for destroying their conquered foes histories/monuments/stelaes and building right on top of their predecessors temples or previous stages of that cities civilizations.  This is evident in many locations one in particular is Copan where  there are 4km of tunnels with two of them open to the public: Rosalila that includes the remains of the temple with the same name and Los Jaguares, which travels through a system of aqueducts, tombs, and former baths.  In the tunnels you can see earlier stages of Copan civilization.

I do believe that as we gain a better understanding of the civilizations of Central America we will begin see more reasonable evidences. Also as pointed out by many others on this board the history of archaeology in Central America is very young.  I also think that a focus for evidence should be focused on the Pueblo of the Southwest not just due to the Uto-Aztecan linguistic ties noted above but the similarities of their traditional stories and migrations to those held in the Book of Mormon. 

There are lots of hints in the Book of Mormon at what may have been on the 116 lost pages.  Royal Skousen speculated that the first three chapters in the Book of Mosiah were contained in it because it is the only book in the BOM that starts out not talking about its author (in this case Mosiah).  If you recall it starts with King Benjamin.  It also is the only Book that doesn't contain a heading and starts already "in the middle of things".  It is assumed that the first three chapters would have started with Benjamins father King Mosiah I.  They would have detailed his fleeing of the Land of Nephi and ending up in Zarahemla.  There are some interesting stories that were told by Joseph Smith Sr. in regards to his telling of the BOM that don't jive with what we have but they do jive with what we have if we had these first three chapters.  I won't go into to much detail but its out their on the internet and I know that Don Bradley is in the middle of writing a book on the subject so I won't give away too much on that but there are other hints as well.

Hey Neal, I have a picture I did of Joseph Smith translating via the seer stone that I did a while back while looking into his hat.  I assume you know who this is I do artwork for BOMCentral just incase you guys would like it for your archive.  I already have quite a bit of my artwork in their archive.  I do like the Joseph digging the well but the critiques are correct he should be a bit dirtier.

Thanks for the heads up on this Robert!

In reviewing some of my notes from Hugh Nibley's "An Approach to the Book of Mormon" he speaks of a group of stories written by a tenth century compiler of legends concerning biblical and non-biblical pre-Islamic prophets. The compilers name was Al- Tha’labi and the compilation of these Jewish stories were called the Qisas al-anbiya or “Stories of the Prophets”. In these "Stories of the Prophets" it speaks about Joseph of Egypt having a remnant of his garment (or coat of many colors). Nibley describes it as saying,

"And when Joseph had made himself known unto them [his brethren] he asked them about his father, saying, "What did my father after [i left]?" They answered, "He lost his eyesight [from weeping]." Then he gave them his garment [qamis, long outer shirt]. According to ad-Dahak that garment was of the weave [pattern, design] of Paradise, and the breath [spirit, odor] of Paradise was in it, so that it never decayed or in any way deteriorated [and that was] a sign [omen]. And Joseph gave them that garment, and it was the very one that had belonged to Abraham, having already had a long history. He said to them, "Go, take this garment of mine

and place it upon the face of my father so he may have sight again . . . and when he brought the garment he laid it upon his face, so that his sight returned to him."

This is interesting because this rare occurrence of a remnant of the coat of Joseph is had in the Book of Mormon when Captain Moroni is proclaiming the "Title of Liberty" he uses the analogy of the undecayed remnant of the garment of Joseph (Alma 46:23,24). I recall Nibley's son in-law Boyd Petersen stating that Nibley's translation of that scenario wasn't correct in the way he stated it.

Does anyone know if there has been more information given on this interpretation or where to get Petersen's explanation on Nibley's translation?

I would think that their lives would be interesting to study too (and to find any of their writings if they left any).  All 3 sisters died in Illinois.  Sophronia at age 73 years (she was 2 years older than Joseph); Catherine died at age 88 (she was 7 years younger than Joseph); and Lucy died when she was 61 years old (she was 16 years younger than Joseph).  I know at least some of them were active in the then RLDS church.

 

Totally off topic, but I find it interesting that Lucy Smith (Joseph's Mother) died in the care of Emma (IIRC).  I think she lived with Emma.

I find it interesting that Lucy Smith lived with her as well but apparently they were very close. It is interesting that even after the whole RLDS vs LDS split took place many LDS leaders visited her in Emma's home on a regular basis when ever stopping through about church duties (such as serving missions)and she enjoyed their visits and vice versa.

The Joseph Smith Papers Podcast has multiple podcasts on the whole family that will clear up most all of this for anyone willing to download it. I have spent countless hours listening to all the JSP Podcasts while riding too and from work...they are excellent. Don Carlos is said to have been the best looking Smith. Emma herself attested to that. Just for the record it was Don Carlos's widow who had contracted typhoid fever and was living in California. Porter Rockwell had ran into her and she was the person who he cut his hair for. It was used to make her a wig. He stayed low for a while until it started to grow back. I love that story because it shows Porters love for all the Smith family (by marriage or not).

On the subject of William his fights with Joseph are legendary...once again check them out on the JSP website.

Usually my scriptures are pretty marked and noted so I keep them incase I need to refer to a note I placed in the margins.  With my ipad I have been transferring these notes over but I will still keep the hard copies on file just incase although I rarely crack them open now.

I found this portion of the BMAF 16 page article to be quite interesting.  Brian seems like a good guy and I am extremely excited for this to come out.  And I will be obtaining the "Historical Linguistics, An Introduction" by Lyle Campbell book here shortly.

"Knowing how unwelcome such a proposal would be in the linguistic community and being a peace-loving recluse by nature, I was in no hurry to invite the avalanche of controversy upon me. However, equally risky is pressing my luck in postponing a presentation that should preferably occur on this side of the mortal divide. So as youth becomes a more distant memory, it is time to share these findings, which, as both a Semiticist and a Uto-Aztecanist, I could not help but notice. Such observations surfaced during a three-decade effort to write the reference book Uto-Aztecan: A Comparative Vocabulary (UACV, Stubbs 2011), favorably received among Uto-Aztecanists, though no two Uto-Aztecan specialists will agree on all aspects and reconstructions, as Kenneth Hill notes in a favorable review in the International Journal of American Linguistics (Hill 2012), and after any linguistic comparative work, adjustments inevitably follow. A case not valid will unravel with scrutiny, while truth is further substantiated with time, accumulating more and more supports.

The book is intended for linguists, Semiticists, and Egyptologists, and therefore includes the linguistic rigor demanded by the comparative method, and for non-specialists it also contains introductions to linguistics (language science), to the Semitic languages, and to UA. This article is a mere handful of highlights—260 examples from 1528—a quick glance in a nutshell.

After Sapir (1913, 1915) established Uto-Aztecan as a viable family of related languages, Voegelin, Voegelin, and Hale (1962) produced the first numbered list of 171 cognate sets (groups of related words). Klar (1977) brought the Chumash languages to clarity with 168 sets. Taylor (1963) established Caddoan (a language family of the central plains), assembling 107 cognate sets. Hale (1962, 1967) did the definitive study for Kiowa-Tanoan with 99 sets. This work’s proposal may better compare to tying two distant language families, as did Haas (1958) by ending four decades of controversy in uniting Algonkian-Ritwan, an eastern U.S. family with a west coast family, by means of 93 sets. Chamberlain (1888) began the union of Catawba with Siouan via 17 comparisons, and Siebert (1945) secured it with mostly morphological correlations, as not enough clear cognate sets were known at the time to establish correspondences (Campbell 1997, 140). Thus, the going rate is between 50 and 200 sets to establish most Native American language families. So this case of 1500-plus sets merits proportionate consideration."

Left on the Mish late at 22 and returned at 24 and married my previous girlfriend three months later.  While I was on my mish she served one as well.  I was in Kentucky while she was in Arkansas.  She already had purchased a California king sized bed for us before I had returned home (I'm 6'3 so I prefer longer beds).  So I basically walked off the plane straight into wedding planning.  Its been the best non-decision I've ever made.  We are going on our 15th year married and have a 4 crazy kids.  although I haven't reached the ripe age of 40 I am already looking forward to the empty nester days!

I recall in a podcast Mark Alan Wright commenting on the Baja theory stating that the population numbers don't even begin to add up.  He stated he has a friend who is an archaeologist in that area who was extremely excited about finding some ruins to excavate that were considered a big deal.  He stated that in size they were considered a few houses or households which was considered a huge finding for that area nothing like the commonly found city sites found in central America that held massive populations.

I have been advised that a review on that book "The Lost City of Zarahemla" that is forth coming by Matthew Roper if I recall that continues in the word analytics study that is quite contrary to what the author was hoping to convey.  It sounds like his research was quite shoddy and his conclusions are a far cry from final and conclusive.  I don't have a timeframe for this but I have been waiting patiently.  Even with that said I think Brant summed it up well when he stated, "I think anyone who tries to support a specific geography based on early statements is missing the eclectic nature of speculation."

As an artist myself I completely understand the freedom of being able to compose your artwork as open and free from interpretation as possible and I appreciate that.  But when I portray historical artwork I try to do my best to follow most correct version of the events in order to help others picture the events the way I do.  Now this isn't always the case, unfortunately sometimes an artists knowledge of how events took place can grow after they have already completed their artwork.  I have done many BOM art pieces that make me cringe when I review them now.  I usually try to do most of my BOM artwork in a desert setting or Jerusalem backdrop or in a Mesoamerican setting based off of my own opinion.  As far as early church history I have composed some artwork that I feel accurately displays Joseph Smith's translation process that includes his head buried in the hat.  I would display it but it may be used for a book that Don Bradley is putting together so I will hold off until he advises if he is planning on using it or not.  I have included my version of Nephi about to slay King Laban.  I could also display many others (including the cringe worthy ones Lol)

Thanks, I thought I had asked this but couldn't find the link!  I knew there was some good feedback that I had not been able to share yet.  I appreciate it.

Is there any difference in the meanings of the phrases "from the loins of" or "from the lineage of"  when dealing with patriarchal blessings and the naming of the tribe lineage?  I overheard my brother in law speaking to my wife about how her blessing is worded. Apparently his says he is from the loins of Joseph through the tribe of Ephraim where as my wives says that she is from the tribe of Ephraim.  I don't see any difference between the meanings myself but he seemed to think there was.