Not quite me Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 And I presume that you are referring to the book of mormon or to some people who have seen plates and angels?Uh, the Book of Mormon, natch.The point that I was trying to make to Ray is that the book of mormon is in a different league because of the story on how it was discovered. If true, then the book is a true work of god for the people who live in these present times. If untrue, then it deserves to be put on the shelf under fine fiction and at times plagarized for a fine sermon (without mentioning the source). The origin claim about the book of mormon cannot be compared to CS Lewis or C.K. Chesterton who wrote fine inspired religious texts. The truth claim either puts the book of mormon in the scripture section or on the fine fiction section as an oddity of 19th century religious fiction.I'm sure these people I know would agree with you. The manner of its discovery, however, does not to them mean that there actually were Nephites roaming the Americas. They see it as God having revealed scripture to Joseph Smith that was purely allegorical. Can inspired fiction be scripture?I'm with you in some ways. I believe that the Book of Mormon's obvious fictitious nature rules it out as scripture. But some people make it work.
AndyOne Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 "There is no significance whatsoever to the vowels in "Nihm"."Do you know how to pronounce Sabean consonants? What possible relevance could that have in aiding a translator to insert the correct vowels?
SolarPowered Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 "There is no significance whatsoever to the vowels in "Nihm"."Do you know how to pronounce Sabean consonants? What possible relevance could that have in aiding a translator to insert the correct vowels?OK, I'm willing to be edumacated. You appear to be implying that you are fluent in Sabean, and know how to accurately derive vowels from the written consonants, when several others who are experts in Semitic languages have explained that it can't be done.Would you please stop hinting, and just explain to us how that is done?And also please explain to us why that doesn't work in the sister Semitic languages of Hebrew and Egyptian, and why they had to develop a sophisticated "pointing" system to represent vowel sounds in Hebrew?
Mordecai Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 "There is no significance whatsoever to the vowels in "Nihm"."Do you know how to pronounce Sabean consonants? What possible relevance could that have in aiding a translator to insert the correct vowels?I've also seen linguistic experts call it NEHEM. Did they get it wrong and ONLY "NIHM" is correct? You're ingnorant of the rules of linguistics with regard to Hebrew. The consanants matter, because we don't know how the ancient Jews pronounced the vowels. How would they?
Zakuska Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 I've also seen linguistic experts call it NEHEM. Did they get it wrong and ONLY "NIHM" is correct? You're ingnorant of the rules of linguistics with regard to Hebrew. The consanants matter, because we don't know how the ancient Jews pronounced the vowels. How would they?I beleive thats how it appears on the map.OK here it is...In the August, 1978, issue of the Ensign, Dr. Ross Christensen, then a BYU professor of archaeology, reported that the name Nehhm appeared on a 1763 map of Arabia, about 25 miles northeast of Sana'a, the modern capital of Yemen. More about this later.... Later ...One day in 1984 Warren read a letter that was destined to give their family vacations a new dimension. Warren took to work, to read during lunch hour, the August 1978 issue of the Ensign. He found Ross Christensen's letter regarding the possible discovery of "a place called Nahom." Warren's curiosity was pricked–what, he wondered, had been done in the intervening years to follow-up on Dr. Christensen's hypothesis? He contacted FARMS and was told that nothing had been done. In Warren's mind "a plan for doing something began to take shape."Through what the Aston's describe as "a series of minor miracles," they very soon found themselves (with Michaela in the seventh month of her fifth pregnancy) in Sana'a, the capital of the Yemen Arab Republic. They described Sana'a as "overflowing with sewage and garbage." A city with "colorful and chaotic" markets, with small bags of frankincense for sale along side machine guns, grenades, and surface to air missiles. Michaela reported that she "once found herself surrounded by dozens of armed men in the city who refused to let her leave." It was with great relief that she came to understand that what they wanted was her picture.It was not until their last day in Yemen that they found their first clue–a recently printed map showing "Nehem." Since vowels are not included in either the Arabic or Hebrew script, both "Nehem" and "Nahom" would be identically scripted, "NHM" in either language. When this is translated into English, the vowels must be supplied by the translator.Over the next ten years this research of Nehem produced strong evidence that Nehem is indeed identical to Lehi's Nahom. They discovered two ancient burial grounds in the hills of Nehem, each clearly predating Lehi. One of these is considered by local archaeologists in the area to be the largest ancient burial site discovered in all of Arabia.http://www.cometozarahemla.org/lehi/lehi.htmlI'd call that about the biggest HIT so far. Even if Joseph Smith had access to this 1763 map. How would he know to coralate it with an ancient burial ground?
Not quite me Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 I beleive thats how it appears on the map.OK here it is...http://www.cometozarahemla.org/lehi/lehi.htmlSo, basically, a 1763 map reference changes this from a "how in the world did he guess this?" moment to a question of how likely it was that Joseph saw a map with the name on it.
Zakuska Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 You missed some details of the story. How did he know to coralte it with the death and Burial of Ismael? Remember... when the Altars where found people thought the area was a stone query, not a burial ground.
Doctor Steuss Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 So, basically, a 1763 map reference changes this from a "how in the world did he guess this?" moment to a question of how likely it was that Joseph saw a map with the name on it.True, although there is still the burial aspect (but if Joseph did know of the location of NHM on a map, the secondary aspect of the â??hitâ? [i.e. that it was a burial ground] loses significant wow-factor in my opinion).Edit: Cross-posted with Zakuska... so you can basically ignore this post of mine. Sorry.
Not quite me Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 You missed some details of the story. How did he know to coralte it with the death and Burial of Ismael?No, I haven't missed that. That link seems rather strained. Say I'm passing through Forest Lawn when someone in my family dies. We bury said family member and go on our way. That Forest Lawn is a place of burial says nothing about the location of the death of my family member.
Pahoran Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 "There is no significance whatsoever to the vowels in "Nihm"."Do you know how to pronounce Sabean consonants? What possible relevance could that have in aiding a translator to insert the correct vowels?Andy, you are barking up the wrong tree entirely.Is "Nihm" an English word? If so, what does it mean?If not, then the NHM inscription has not be "translated." It has been transliterated and vowels shoved in so that people can say it.Now the point you keep missing is that it doesn't matter whether you transliterate NHM as Nihm or Nehem or Nahom or Noham or Nuhem or Nihum or anything else, it is still basically the same word with the same basic meaning: "mourning, consolation."Regards,Pahoran
AndyOne Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 I guess "Alma" as a semitic name is not very impressive then - since the appearance of LM could derive from any number of spellings when vowels are added.
Zakuska Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 Exactly true. However... we could safely say that he died some where in the commute from where you where coming from to Forest Lawn.But the problem there is is the text its self. 33 And it came to pass that we did again take our journey, traveling nearly the same course as in the beginning; and after we had traveled for the space of many days we did pitch our tents again, that we might tarry for the space of a time. 34 And it came to pass that Ishmael died, and was buried in the place which was called Nahom. They're camping when Imsael died. Notice how the place already had a name.
Not quite me Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 Exactly true. However... we could safely say that he died some where in the commute from where you where coming from to Forest Lawn.But the problem there is is the text its self. 33 And it came to pass that we did again take our journey, traveling nearly the same course as in the beginning; and after we had traveled for the space of many days we did pitch our tents again, that we might tarry for the space of a time. 34 And it came to pass that Ishmael died, and was buried in the place which was called Nahom. There camping when Imsael died.I think you meant "they're," but no matter. So, your point is that they carried him from where they were camping to the burial place called Nahom. I'll put that in the realm of slightly plausible, but you have to read it into the text. Here's what the text says.They camped and intended to stay there for a while.Ishmael died.He was buried in the place called Nahom.And then this comes in the first verse of the next chapter: "And it came to pass that we did again take our journey in the wilderness; and we did travel nearly eastward from that time forth."So, an equally plausible reading is that they camped at a place where Ishmael died, which was called Nahom, and then after burying him, they started their journey again.I'd put that down as equally plausible as your explanation.
Pahoran Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 I guess "Alma" as a semitic name is not very impressive then - since the appearance of LM could derive from any number of spellings when vowels are added.Up to a point. The document does not simply say LM but 'LM, where the intial ' represents an aleph. Aleph is a consonant that represents a glottal stop, i.e. a little click in the back of the throat, like an unvoiced grunt. When it appears at the start of a word, it indicates a leading vowel; conventionally an A. There's a reason why aleph became A in our alphabet. It wasn't some Mormon hack apologist who transliterated 'LM as Alma, but Dr. Yigael Yadin. Take it up with him, if you like.Regards,Pahoran
Doctor Steuss Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 I guess "Alma" as a semitic name is not very impressive then - since the appearance of LM could derive from any number of spellings when vowels are added.I love when goalposts moveâ?¦ it always adds interesting aspects to the game.
Zakuska Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 I don't get it... isn't that exactly what i said?I love when goalposts moveâ?¦ it always adds interesting aspects to the game.Ever play the 1980's hit... Ball blaster... where you and your opponent are two chess pieces on a board. theres a ball and the goal is to make it into the goals at the ends of the board. The goal posts move back and forth and... get smaller and large in distance appart.
Not quite me Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 I don't get it... isn't that exactly what i said?Ever play the 1980's hit... Ball blaster... where you and your opponent are two chess pieces on a board. theres a ball and the goal is to make it into the goals at the ends of the board. The goal posts move back and forth and... get smaller and large in distance appart.Well, I'll repeat what I've said before: NHM is potentially very significant and deserves to be researched further. I'm not sure it's quite as strong as Zak believes it to be, but that's OK. I'm stubborn that way.
Zakuska Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 So we have: NHMA burial siteIn true biblical candor it's name means "mourning, consolation."There are Alters there with the inscription.Its due east from the land Bountiful.How many more hurdals do I have to jump over coach?
Not quite me Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 So we have: NHMA burial siteIn true biblical candor it's name means "mourning, consolation."There are Alters there with the inscription.Its due east from the land Bountiful.How many more hurdals do I have to jump over coach?I said it's potentially significant. What else do you want me to say? It seems to me that the "mourning, consolation" thing is interesting but not a direct hit, really, unless you can show from the text that they took Ishmael from the place he died and then buried him there. The sequence in the text makes that possible, I suppose, but it says that they stopped and then later down a few paragraph they started again. To me, this makes it seem like the death and burial both took place at the same place.
AndyOne Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 How is NHM a burial site?We have a known tribe of NihmWe have an altar (actually more than one) found in a populated area dated to approx. 600 BC with the inscription NHM, referring to the name of a tribe - you must infer that this also relates to a placeQuite astoundingly, there are burial grounds near this populated area!!!! WOW!!!!! Who would'a thunk? Burial grounds near a populated area?
Zakuska Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 I said it's potentially significant. What else do you want me to say? It seems to me that the "mourning, consolation" thing is interesting but not a direct hit, really, unless you can show from the text that they took Ishmael from the place he died and then buried him there. The sequence in the text makes that possible, I suppose, but it that they stopped and then later down a few paragraph they started again. To me, this makes it seem like the death and burial both took place at the same place. Thats exactly what Im saying.How is NHM a burial site?We have a known tribe of NihmWe have an altar (actually more than one) found in a populated area dated to approx. 600 BC with the inscription NHM, referring to the name of a tribe - you must infer that this also relates to a placeQuite astoundingly, there are burial grounds near this populated area!!!! WOW!!!!! Who would'a thunk? Burial grounds near a populated area?You must not have did the reading assignment. The area is also one of the Largest Grave sites ever found in Arabia.Here edumacte yourself.It was not until their last day in Yemen that they found their first clue–a recently printed map showing "Nehem." Since vowels are not included in either the Arabic or Hebrew script, both "Nehem" and "Nahom" would be identically scripted, "NHM" in either language. When this is translated into English, the vowels must be supplied by the translator.Over the next ten years this research of Nehem produced strong evidence that Nehem is indeed identical to Lehi's Nahom. They discovered two ancient burial grounds in the hills of Nehem, each clearly predating Lehi. One of these is considered by local archaeologists in the area to be the largest ancient burial site discovered in all of Arabia.http://www.cometozarahemla.org/lehi/lehi.htmlTen years of study have already went into it. Which is alot more than you seem to have invested in anything. Would some one please post a picture of the Bag mummies from the site!Apparently... for Andy he will take nothing less than a Grave stone saying... "Here lies our beloved Father Ismael 640BC - 608BC"
Not quite me Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 Thats exactly what Im saying.You must not have did the reading assignment. The area is also one of the Largest Grave sites ever found in Arabia.Thanks for the sarcasm, Zak. Then maybe we agree that the hit isn't as direct as you think.
Zakuska Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 Sorry if you felt there was sarcasm for you in the post. The Sarcasm after the first line was for Andyone.
SolarPowered Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 Thanks for the sarcasm, Zak. Then maybe we agree that the hit isn't as direct as you think.The BoM describes that they went down the western part of the Arabian peninsula, came to a place called "Nahom", turned east and went straight east to Bountiful.The reality of Arabian geography is that the old Incense Trail runs down the western part of the Arabian peninsula, to a place called "NHM". If you turn east from there, you will run smack into a place that exactly matches the description of the place Lehi & Co. called "Bountiful." (Down to the uniquepresence in Arabia of hematite ore, I might add.)That sounds like a really good "direct hit" to me.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.