Nehem, The Return

[Olavarria]

Here are some things, that I think are relevant when talking about Lehi's trail. They are taken from Kent Brown's paper: "New Light from Arabia on Lehi's Trail" from Echoes and Evidences of the Book of Mormon and Journey of Faith

Because I don't feel like typing so much, I will only describe what is written instead of cut and pasting.

1) The libraries that Joseph Smith could have visited during his New England years are :Dartmouth College in Hanover , New Hampshire which was close to where the Smiths lived when Joseph was between the ages of 5-7 years old, and John H. Pratt's Manchester lending library, near Palmyra where Joseph spent his teenage years from 1816 on up.

2) Contemporary maps that deal with the Nehem tribal area do not appear in those libraries during the times that Joseph lived near their vicinities.

3) It took 10,000 Roman soldiers 6 months to venture down the west side of Arabia, from Luece Come(probably modern Aynunah) to the city of Marisaba(perhaps ancient Marib). It took roughly the same time for Lehi's people to travel from "the valley of Lemuel'(Wadi Tayyib al ism) to Nahom(the Nehem tribal area).

We know this because shortly after Ishmael's buriel the birth of the first children are mentioned, marrieges occuring in the Valley of Lemuel. The roman army lost soldiers due to unhealthy water and food; the Lehites lost Ishmael and complaned of starving in the wilderness.

4) Nahom.......Nehem, comes from the south arabic Nahama, to cut stone. The Nehem tribal area existed during the time of Lehi, were it exists today as revealed by 3 Marib temple alter inscriptions. In other owrds, NHM was the right name, in the right place, at the right time.

5) After the Lehites stay at Nahom, "they did travel nearly eastward from that time forth". Such a path from Nehem will lead you to the Dofar Region of Oman. Satelite imagery from this region shows that it is a little sliver of green on the east coast of the Arabian peninsula. The region contains:lush, green vegetation, fruit, honey, timbers and ever so small ore deposits.

6) The Dhofar region also has an ancient ship building tradition, dating to as far back as 500BCE.

Hmmmmm,

What does it mean?

[Marmonboy]

Haven't you figured it out yet? It means we're all a bunch of stupid yokels, marching in lockstep to the tune called out by the Morgbot Collective.

Either that, or else, JS was right.

[Zakuska]

There are two Maps I know of... One is the Danish Map of 1761. It spells it Nehhm. And the 1970 Map that spells it Nehem.

Intresting also is the word Shazer. "Place of hunting", the hunting for wild goats etc. is very good. Right where Nephi places it on the trail.

[Mordecai]

4) Nahom.......Nehem, comes from the south arabic Nahama, to cut stone. The Nehem tribal area existed during the time of Lehi, were it exists today as revealed by 3 Marib temple alter inscriptions. In other owrds, NHM was the right name, in the right place, at the right time.

This proves Joseph Smith was a bad speller. It's NEHEM!!!

[Zakuska]

You mean JS couldn't look through his rock and get the correct spelling?

Oh... My testimony of the BOM is just shatered now! Joseph couldn't spell worth snot. (Kind of like me :blush:)

[Sargon]

Intresting also is the word Shazer. "Place of hunting", the hunting for wild goats etc. is very good. Right where Nephi places it on the trail.

Where do we learn the interpretation of Shazer? I thougt that was unknown.

Sargon

[Zakuska]

It was at this location that Lehi's group stopped to hunt "in the wilderness."[2] According to the narrative, this location was named by Lehi. The practice of naming locations after family members is a known Semitic practice.[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shazer

it also appears on the modern maps Potter has from the Arabian Library.

[Olavarria]

This proves Joseph Smith was a bad speller. It's NEHEM!!!

...and I suppose that Musa(arabic) is not Moshe(hebrew), Isa(arabic) is not Yeshua(aramaic) and Yosef(hebrew) is not Yusuf(arabic). My muslim brothers have alot of splaining to do.

Where do we learn the interpretation of Shazer? I thougt that was unknown.

Sargon

I think Nibley wrote something about it in Lehi in the Desert.

...and I suppose that Musa(arabic) is not Moshe(hebrew), Isa(arabic) is not Yeshua(aramaic) and Yosef(hebrew) is not Yusuf(arabic)

I think Nibley wrote something about it in Lehi in the Desert.

You have to admit, this is more interesting than talking about prophetic sex lives and 3+ Adam-god theories.

[Zakuska]

You guys REALLY need to check out all this information. We've nearly got the entire Lehi trail from Jerusalem to bountiful figured out... Beyond plausibility IMHO.

You have to admit, this is more interesting than talking about prophetic sex lives and 3+ Adam-god theories.

It's always funner to talk about dirt you can really see.

[Chris Smith]

Here's a question posed by the NMC that may or may not have been answered on this board before: how does one travel southeast from Jerusalem and arrive at the Gulf of Aqaba? The Gulf is pretty much directly south of Jerusalem, even a little bit southwest. Not a really big deal, but maybe an indication that the Arabian geography isn't as "right on" as its defenders suppose?

[Zakuska]

They didn't travel "south-east"... theres and adjective.... "Nearly"

Also I think it says... south-south-easterly. So its not quite south maybe a few degrees east.

[maklelan]

Here's a question posed by the NMC that may or may not have been answered on this board before: how does one travel southeast from Jerusalem and arrive at the Gulf of Aqaba? The Gulf is pretty much directly south of Jerusalem, even a little bit southwest. Not a really big deal, but maybe an indication that the Arabian geography isn't as "right on" as its defenders suppose?

Actually it doesn't say that at all. It says this:

I Nephi 2: 4 -6:

4 And it came to pass that he departed into the wilderness. And he left his house, and the land of his inheritance, and his gold, and his silver, and his precious things, and took nothing with him, save it were his family, and provisions, and tents, and departed into the wilderness.

5 And he came down by the borders near the shore of the Red Sea; and he traveled in the wilderness in the borders which are nearer the Red Sea; and he did travel in the wilderness with his family, which consisted of my mother, Sariah, and my elder brothers, who were Laman, Lemuel, and Sam.

6 And it came to pass that when he had traveled three days in the wilderness, he pitched his tent in a valley by the side of a river of water.

As you can plainly see, he doesn't mention anything about south, southeast, or any other indication of direction except for "down," which is any place outside of Jerusalem.

This proves Joseph Smith was a bad speller. It's NEHEM!!!

Actually, as has been mentioned a dozen times on this board (but continues to fall on deaf ears), modern vowelization of Sabaean is arbitrary. The script contained no vowels, and we have absolutely no idea what the vowels for the word should be. The "Nehem" spelling contains arbitrarily assigned vowels. The fact that this argument shows up in absolutely every single discussion of NHM testifies of the utter ignorance of the subject upon which detractors build their arguments. Research something for yourself and stop reading the filth that other people regurgitate.

[Zakuska]

I think the poster was being sarcastic.

[Mordecai]

Actually, as has been mentioned a dozen times on this board (but continues to fall on deaf ears), modern vowelization of Sabaean is arbitrary. The script contained no vowels, and we have absolutely no idea what the vowels for the word should be. The "Nehem" spelling contains arbitrarily assigned vowels. The fact that this argument shows up in absolutely every single discussion of NHM testifies of the utter ignorance of the subject upon which detractors build their arguments. Research something for yourself and stop reading the filth that other people regurgitate.

I was in fact, being sarcastic.

[maklelan]

I was in fact, being sarcastic.

My apologies.

[Fortigurn]

Where do we learn the interpretation of Shazer? I thougt that was unknown.

Good to see you here Sargon. Thanks for the recommendation.

[AndyOne]

"The fact that this argument shows up in absolutely every single discussion of NHM testifies of the utter ignorance of the subject upon which detractors build their arguments."

I, for one, don't think that those who render it "Nihm" are merely picking a vowel for no reason. Neither, apparently, does Kent Brown. This spelling comes from the theory that the H in NHM in South Arabia would have been a soft H, as opposed to a hard H in Hebrew. Some have theorized that the Lehites would have associated "Nihm" (soft H) with a word more familiar to them "Nahom" (with hard H). I'm not sure about this theory. Did they see the written name of the town on their way in ("Wlcm t NHM")? If they were told the name of the town, why would they apply a different name to it?

[Zakuska]

"The fact that this argument shows up in absolutely every single discussion of NHM testifies of the utter ignorance of the subject upon which detractors build their arguments."

I, for one, don't think that those who render it "Nihm" are merely picking a vowel for no reason. Neither, apparently, does Kent Brown. This spelling comes from the theory that the H in NHM in South Arabia would have been a soft H, as opposed to a hard H in Hebrew. Some have theorized that the Lehites would have associated "Nihm" (soft H) with a word more familiar to them "Nahom" (with hard H). I'm not sure about this theory. Did they see the written name of the town on their way in ("Wlcm t NHM")? If they were told the name of the town, why would they apply a different name to it?

Whats more important to your question is the translation process. Why would we expect an hard or a soft H to flow through into the English rendering of the word. More importantly Did Joseph Smith, Sidney Rigdon, Oliver Cowdery or any others ever provide a pronunciation key for it?

Ive heard members from the east coast and the west coast pronounce the BOM names with such varying Emphesis that sometimes I have to stop and think exactly what it is they are saying.

[maklelan]

I, for one, don't think that those who render it "Nihm" are merely picking a vowel for no reason. Neither, apparently, does Kent Brown. This spelling comes from the theory that the H in NHM in South Arabia would have been a soft H, as opposed to a hard H in Hebrew. Some have theorized that the Lehites would have associated "Nihm" (soft H) with a word more familiar to them "Nahom" (with hard H). I'm not sure about this theory. Did they see the written name of the town on their way in ("Wlcm t NHM")? If they were told the name of the town, why would they apply a different name to it?

1. You misinterpret me and Brown. The "H" is not a vowel.

2. The word Nephi heard would have been unfamiliar to him (because it's another language), and writing down an unfamiliar word would have been pointless, so substituting a more familiar Hebrew word would have been appropriate (and it was very common). The situations surrounding their visit to the location make the substitution even more appropriate.

3. Imagine you don't know French, and in passing through a French town they pronounce the name, but you can't read their writing, so you spell it on your own. How's it gonna turn out? Example: Egyptian king Sheshonk is spelled spelled sheeshahk by the Hebrews, Shishak by us, susiq by the Assyrians and Shashak by Josephus.

[AndyOne]

Here's the problem for me.

- You want an inscription naming a person of the tribe of NHM in a plausible location for the BoM Nahom to mean that a place called Nahom existed - notwithstanding that, despite having the same consonants, NHM may not refer to Nahom at all.

- You see the name Nahom as being significant because its Hebrew root has to do with consolotation and mourning - notwithstanding that NHM in south Arabia at the appropriate time would not likely have carried the same meaning.

- That meaning makes the existence of a nearby burial ground all the more significant to you - notwithstanding that burial grounds are common features of populated areas - and even though it is unlikely that the locals would have named the place after the Hebrew NHM. Kent Brown and others have asserted that the Lehites associated the place name NHM with an appropriate word from their own language. Do you disagree?

While I find NHM to be one of the most fascinating finds in BoM archaeology, I think it's unwise to assert that plausibilities are facts simply because it supports one's view. That is what you seem to be doing. Same thing with your Potter/Wellington obsession, notwithstanding all the shortcomings in their theories that even your friends at FARMS recognize.

[AndyOne]

"You misinterpret me and Brown. The 'H' is not a vowel."

Who in the world said H was a vowel?

In Brown's own words: The exact equivalency of the root letters cannot be assured. It is probable that the term Nahom was spelled with the rasped or fricative Hebrew letter for "h" (�het or chet) whereas the name Nihm, both in modern Arabic and in the ancient Sabaean dialect, is spelled with a softer, less audible h sound. See G. Lankester Harding, An Index and Concordance of Pre-Islamic Arabian Names and Inscriptions (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1971), 81, 602; and Joan Copeland Biella, Dictionary of Old South Arabic: Sabaean Dialect (Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1982), 296. One has to assume, it seems to me, that when the members of Lehi's party heard the local name for "the place that was called Nahom" they associated the sound of that local name with the term Nahom, a Hebrew word that was familiar to and had meaning for them.

If the H was "softer or less audible", why would the Lehites hear it and interpret it with a hard H? Doesn't make sense to me.

[Zakuska]

Uh... Potter and wellington also recognize the problems. Thats why in all their writtings they present it as a "proposition" and then show the evidence they have found to support that. Personally, I feel the evidence that Farms has for the location of the Hebronite [sp] Ore is much more probable than the evidence Potter and Wellington present, (Magnet in the sand) of course the two proposed locations are on opposite ends of the same beachfront within less than a days journey of each other. (Something Like Salt Lake City and Provo)

You do have to admit that going from No rivers at all in all of Arabia to a river/stream found in Arabia 3 days journey from Jerusalem is quite a spectacular hit. Something one would not expect to find if it was a fairy tale.

[Zakuska]

Intresting...

Nahum 1

14 And the LORD hath given a commandment concerning thee, that no more of thy name be sown: out of the house of thy gods will I cut off the graven image and the molten image: I will make thy grave; for thou art vile.

[Chris Smith]

You do have to admit that going from No rivers at all in all of Arabia to a river/stream found in Arabia 3 days journey from Jerusalem is quite a spectacular hit. Something one would not expect to find if it was a fairy tale.

The no rivers in Arabia bit came from an overzealous interpretation of the CIA World Factbook on the part of some critics. The Factbook mentions a "lack of perennial rivers," but does not actually state that there are no perennial rivers in the whole country. I suspect that the CIA didn't intend their statement to be taken in such an absolute sense.

[Zakuska]

I agree completely. Thus... Sandra Tanner as of 2003 was still repeating it. She seems to be of the "absolutist" bent.