Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

599 Excellent

About webbles

  • Rank
    Seasoned Member: Separates Light & Dark

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. As I pointed out above, if you just take the Bible and try to figure out what happened in between the first siege and the second siege, you'll get facts that don't sync together. One of the more famous "problems" is just a few versus before in 2 Kings 24:8: Compare that with 2 Chronicles 36:9
  2. 2 Kings 24 is the siege before Zedekiah becomes king. 2 Kings 25 is the siege after Zedekiah becomes king. So Fair Dinkum is referencing the siege before Lehi left since Lehi left during the reign of Zedekiah.
  3. Nine years later (see 2 Kings 25), Nebuchadnezzar attacked Jerusalem and it took 2 years to take the besiege city. So if only the "poorest sort of people" were left and "all that were strong and apt for war" were taken nine years earlier, I don't see why it would take 2 years to besiege the city. In addition, 2 Kings 24:13 says they "carried out thence all the treasures of the house of the Lord" but nine years later, in 2 Kings 25:13-15: So, in nine years, they were able to put a lot of treasures back into the temple? I think there's a little hyperbole in those two accounts.
  4. I believe Gethsemane is on the slope of the mount of Olives. So verse 30 has them leaving Jerusalem for the mount of Olives and the place they go to on the mount of Olives is Gethsemane.
  5. I think you are talking about D&C 98. Maybe verse 31-32?
  6. For me, they are the same. And that is because I believe in the God that is taught by the church. I've studied and looked at what other churches (including non-Christian and Christian) teach about God and I just can't accept their version of God. If I ever loose the belief that Joseph Smith is an actual prophet and spoke with God and angels, then I'll also loose the belief in God. There isn't another version of God that I'm willing to believe in.
  7. From https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/october-2020-general-conference-temples Tarawa, Kiribati Port Vila, Vanuatu Lindon Utah Gatemala City, Guatemala Sao Paulo East, Sao Paulo Santa Cruz, Bolivia
  8. Considering that all children under the age of accountability automatically go to the Celestial Kingdom, and considering that in the past, a lot of kids died young, the percentage of those in the Celestial Kingdom is going to be a lot larger than 2%. I, personally, think the number is closer to 50% or higher.
  9. Dr. Ritner had already translated it in his paper 2 years before Dr. Rhodes did his translation. Dr. Ritner wrote it in The 'Breathing Permit of Hor’ Thirty-four Years Later which was published in Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 33, no. 4 (Winter, 2000). See his translation on page 114 of https://dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V33N04_107.pdf.
  10. Thank you. I found it on pages 20-22 of the pdf (page number 45-47 in the document). 10 out of 17 are basically correct. Of those correct, 3 of them (Chaldean, Samaritan, and Hebrew) probably come from primers that Joshua Seixas brought to the Hebrew school. 1 of them (the Western Indian) is from the Lenape tribe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenape) and Phelps probably picked it up because of missionary contact with a group that had been relocated to Fort Leavenworth. The other 6 (Greek, French, German, Spanish, Italian, Latin) have only minor issues. Of the 7 that are incorrec
  11. Do you know if any one has actually figured out how many of these languages make sense? I just did a quick Google translate of the English to the supposed language and it looks like many of the translations are wrong. But I'd love to see if someone has actually tried to match them up. Here's each language with what is in the document and the Google Translate of the English text. Chaldean Keed’nauh ta-meroon le-hoam olauhayauh dey-shemayauh veh aur’kau lau gnaubadoo yabadoo ma-ar’gnau oomeen tehoat shemayauh alah (Thus shall ye say unto them: The gods that have not made the
  12. The 5th century Nephites are basically identical to the 5th century Lamanites and they are basically identical to any other group in the area. 4 Nephi 1:17 has everyone in that area become "one". So they would all have the same language. And then 4 Nephi 1:20 has the Lamanites splitting off because of religious differences (roughly 200AD). So I read that as talking about people that he's never met, such as people from across the sea.
  13. I don't see why Nephi and Moroni would have used the same language. Mormon 9:32 says "called among us the reformed Egyptian, being handed down and altered by us,". I've read that as Mormon saying that it has been altered over the centuries from when they first got it. It doesn't even say when or where they first got it, so it could have come from Lehi, it could have come from the Mulekites, it could have come from those that were already in the Americas. I'm also not exactly sure if Mormon could read the original small plates without the use of the seer stones. Take English. Go back
  14. Where does it say that it in the Book of Mormon? The only verse I know of that uses the term "reformed egyptian" is Mormon 9:32. That is almost 1,000 years from the time of Lehi. The likelihood that Mormon's "reformed egyptian" is anything like a semetic + egyptian language feels really small.
  15. Since we only have a bare minimum of the knowledge of what "reformed egyptian" even looks like, why can't "reformed egyptian" be one of the actual languages that has been found in the Americas?
  • Create New...