Jump to content

I Think Lehi Lived Outside Of Jerusalem


maklelan

Recommended Posts

1) No one is ever said to "go up" to Lehi's residence (you always have to "go up" to Jerusalem), but they do say they have to "go down" to his house (1 Nephi 3:22).

2) To get to Laban's house from outside Jerusalem you have to "go up" (1 Nephi 3:23), but once inside the city, you only have to "go forth" (1 Nephi 4:5). Nephi never says he "went forth" to the land of his inheritance.

3) Lehi's residence is called a "land," which is unlikely for a dwelling inside Jerusalem. Chapter 3 also seems to indicate Nephi considered his residence to be in the "land of Jerusalem," which comprises much more than Jerusalem proper:

1 Nephi 3:17, 18: For he knew that Jerusalem must be destroyed, because of the wickedness of the people. For behold, they have rejected the words of the prophets. Wherefore, if my father should dwell in the land after he hath been commanded to flee out of the land, behold, he would also perish. Wherefore, it must needs be that he flee out of the land.

4) Lehi's residence is said to be "at Jerusalem," which coincides with the Book of Mormon's designation of Bethlehem as "at Jerusalem." A previous thread claimed that early church leaders considered Lehi's house to be within Jerusalem, but I've never seen any kind of revelation or official statements to this effect.

5) 1 Nephi 2:4 says Lehi had tents. How many people who lived inside the city of Jerusalem owned multiple tents? The same verse also, again, calls his residence the "land of his inheritance."

6) When the servant of Laban is trying to flee, Nephi says he was trying to return to "the city of Jerusalem."

7) Traveling from Laban's treasury to the city walls is described as "going forth," not as "going down." The Book of Mormon is perfectly consistent in that the city of Jerusalem is always above everything else, but once in the city, you don't have to further ascend or descend. " When Nephi went from Laban's house to Lehi's house, it was "going down" (1 Nephi 3:16).

What do you think?

Link to comment

I have formed a theory, previously expressed on this board, that Lehi was actually a descendant of northern kingdom Israelites who had fled to Egypt during the period immediately preceding the Assyrian conquest.

And, I agree with you that he was most certainly not a resident of Jerusalem proper. He was definitely, in my considered opinion, an outsider.

Link to comment

I have formed a theory, previously expressed on this board, that Lehi was actually a descendant of northern kingdom Israelites who had fled to Egypt during the period immediately preceding the Assyrian conquest.

And, I agree with you that he was most certainly not a resident of Jerusalem proper. He was definitely, in my considered opinion, an outsider.

I also feel he was a refuge from the north. Immediately following the Assyrian invasions the region of Judea experienced a surge in the number of habitations around the cities, according to the archaeological record.

Link to comment

Jeffrey Chadwick had a paper on this, which is available on the internet. He concluded that Lehi lived in Jerusalem, and that the land of his inheritance was up north. While he had a lot to teach, and some good points, I disagree with many of his conclusions--they seemed to be too strong for the evidence, and some things didn't make much sense to me.

Link to comment

Jeffrey Chadwick had a paper on this, which is available on the internet. He concluded that Lehi lived in Jerusalem, and that the land of his inheritance was up north. While he had a lot to teach, and some good points, I disagree with many of his conclusions--they seemed to be too strong for the evidence, and some things didn't make much sense to me.

I seem to recall reading that article, and I didn't agree with a lot of it also.

Link to comment

1) No one is ever said to "go up" to Lehi's residence (you always have to "go up" to Jerusalem), but they do say they have to "go down" to his house (1 Nephi 3:22).

2) To get to Laban's house from outside Jerusalem you have to "go up" (1 Nephi 3:23), but once inside the city, you only have to "go forth" (1 Nephi 4:5). Nephi never says he "went forth" to the land of his inheritance.

3) Lehi's residence is called a "land," which is unlikely for a dwelling inside Jerusalem. Chapter 3 also seems to indicate Nephi considered his residence to be in the "land of Jerusalem," which comprises much more than Jerusalem proper:

4) Lehi's residence is said to be "at Jerusalem," which coincides with the Book of Mormon's designation of Bethlehem as "at Jerusalem." A previous thread claimed that early church leaders considered Lehi's house to be within Jerusalem, but I've never seen any kind of revelation or official statements to this effect.

5) 1 Nephi 2:4 says Lehi had tents. How many people who lived inside the city of Jerusalem owned multiple tents? The same verse also, again, calls his residence the "land of his inheritance."

6) When the servant of Laban is trying to flee, Nephi says he was trying to return to "the city of Jerusalem."

7) Traveling from Laban's treasury to the city walls is described as "going forth," not as "going down." The Book of Mormon is perfectly consistent in that the city of Jerusalem is always above everything else, but once in the city, you don't have to further ascend or descend. " When Nephi went from Laban's house to Lehi's house, it was "going down" (1 Nephi 3:16).

What do you think?

I'm surpised anyone could ever find his/her way to Lehi's house with directions like , "First you go up , then you go down and then you go forth and you're there.".

Link to comment

I have a problem with your items 5 & 6

5) 1 Nephi 2:4 says Lehi had tents. How many people who lived inside the city of Jerusalem owned multiple tents? The same verse also, again, calls his residence the "land of his inheritance."

I have always thought Lehi must have been a merchant. If he were regularly shipping (or travelling with) goods to Egypt, he would have tents, camels, and provisions ready to go at short notice, which would definitely have made his escape simple and effective (it would also explain his familiarity with a safe route through the desert).

6) When the servant of Laban is trying to flee, Nephi says he was trying to return to "the city of Jerusalem."

When Zoram tried to flee, Nephi had taken him and the plates outside the city to where his brothers were hiding. They were not, according to the text, hiding at their old home, but in a cave outside the city. So Zoram would naturally be trying to return to the city.

Other than that, your conclusions make great sense.

Link to comment

Maklelan, I have assumed the same thing. On my own interests and as a hobby I have studied the geography of both the areas of Jerusalem and what I believe to be the place of the Lamanites and Nephites (namely Central America). I have come to the same conclusion. In fact I reached this while reading some of the posts here and papers here and at FARMS and other sites. For me, it is an interesting thing to bat around in my mind.

Anijen

Link to comment

Jeffrey Chadwick had a paper on this, which is available on the internet. He concluded that Lehi lived in Jerusalem, and that the land of his inheritance was up north. While he had a lot to teach, and some good points, I disagree with many of his conclusions--they seemed to be too strong for the evidence, and some things didn't make much sense to me.

I also consider Chadwick's thesis to be fatally flawed.

Link to comment

I have a problem with your items 5 & 6

I have always thought Lehi must have been a merchant. If he were regularly shipping (or travelling with) goods to Egypt, he would have tents, camels, and provisions ready to go at short notice, which would definitely have made his escape simple and effective (it would also explain his familiarity with a safe route through the desert).

I considered the same thing, and to be honest I think that's probably the case.

When Zoram tried to flee, Nephi had taken him and the plates outside the city to where his brothers were hiding. They were not, according to the text, hiding at their old home, but in a cave outside the city. So Zoram would naturally be trying to return to the city.

But my point is that the text is careful to distinguish between the land of Jerusalem and the city of Jerusalem, and Lehi is never said to have dwelt in the city of Jerusalem.

Other than that, your conclusions make great sense.

Thank you.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...