USU78 Posted January 28, 2010 Posted January 28, 2010 Meet my daughter, Gasolina All kidding aside, Pete, here is some more context for 2 Macc 1:36:30 And the priests sung hymns till the sacrifice was consumed. 31 And when the sacrifice was consumed, Nehemias commanded the water that was left to be poured out upon the great stones. 32 Which being done, there was kindled a flame from them: but it was consumed by the light that shined from the altar. 33 And when this matter became public, it was told to the king of Persia, that in the place where the priests that were led away, had hid the fire, there appeared water, with which Nehemias and they that were with him had purified the sacrifices. 34 And the king considering, and diligently examining the matter, made a temple for it, that he might prove what had happened. 35 And when he had proved it, he gave the priests many goods, and divers presents, and he took and distributed them to them with his own hand. 36 And Nehemias called this place Nephthar, which is interpreted purification. But many call it Nephi.The antecedent for the impersonal pronoun "it" is "this place." Thus it is the "place" that is called Nephi . . . as well as Nephthar (Naphtha). There is no reason for us to assume Nephi = Nephthar. "Nephi" is just another name for the place of sacrifice where the miraculous light appeared and the water burst forth.Now, sure, it's quite late in time, but not so late during Nehemiah's time that it's impossible that the toponym Nephi didn't predate Nephi ben Lehi.
cinepro Posted January 28, 2010 Posted January 28, 2010 I can hazard several guesses. Genealogical lists seems the most obvious. These were just as likely to be oral as written down. As good a source for baby names as any. We don't know the names of any of Lehi's or Saraiah's relatives and ancestors, nor do we know the same for Ishamel's family, we don't even know his sons' names. Of the entire Mulekite group, we know the names of only two.These names could also be in the records brought over by Lehi, or they could be names of figures in songs or folktales preserved orally.The possibilities are there.With enough imagination, all things are possible.
volgadon Posted January 29, 2010 Posted January 29, 2010 With enough imagination, all things are possible.My solutions are reasonable and plausible. I guess the glib response is because they show just how silly your book of baby names objection is.
cinepro Posted January 29, 2010 Posted January 29, 2010 My solutions are reasonable and plausible. I guess the glib response is because they show just how silly your book of baby names objection is.No, they are not reasonable and plausible. Each is equally silly when considering the journey from Jerusalem to the New World, the integration with the indigenous cultures, and the 500 and 1,000 year time spans.The oddest thing is that you find it so easy to believe such a thing could have happened, but it never occurs to you that even after 5 or 10 centuries, there is a distinct lack of native names in the book.
cinepro Posted January 29, 2010 Posted January 29, 2010 Haha. No, silly. That would be as stupid as finding a "Florida cracker" with a 2000+yearold Hebrew name.....wait a minute .What are you referring to?
Olavarria Posted January 29, 2010 Author Posted January 29, 2010 Hagoth is the name of an Nephite who constructed ships for colonizers who went to the land northword, see Alma 63:5. This man's name is attested on an Ammonite seal inscribed sometime in the eighth through the sixth centuries BC. The name is rendered Hgt(see here).Zenephi is the name of a Nephite warrior, who was contemporary to Mormon, see Moroni 9:16. His name might be a form of Sneferu(see here). As I've noted in a previous post, K3-nfr.w, in Aramaic, is transliterated as Knufi(?????). So, Sneferu might be "Semetic-ized" as Snufi, which is close to Zenephi. Who knows?still haven't seen a good rebuttal to the OP on etymylogical grounds. not trying to be cocky....but.
Olavarria Posted January 29, 2010 Author Posted January 29, 2010 All kidding aside, Pete, here is some more context for 2 Macc 1:36:The antecedent for the impersonal pronoun "it" is "this place." Thus it is the "place" that is called Nephi . . . as well as Nephthar (Naphtha). There is no reason for us to assume Nephi = Nephthar. "Nephi" is just another name for the place of sacrifice where the miraculous light appeared and the water burst forth.Now, sure, it's quite late in time, but not so late during Nehemiah's time that it's impossible that the toponym Nephi didn't predate Nephi ben Lehi.I also prefer the Egyption etymology because of the possible wordplay it provides in the BoM.
USU78 Posted January 29, 2010 Posted January 29, 2010 I also prefer the Egyption etymology because of the possible wordplay it provides in the BoM.I know it's compelling and I really want it to be Egyptian, but sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.Simplest answers are best."Lehi" is a toponym in the Bible."Nephi" is a toponym in the Catholic Bible.Stands to reason that toponym for Dad would lead to toponym for Son.
volgadon Posted January 29, 2010 Posted January 29, 2010 No, they are not reasonable and plausible. Each is equally silly when considering the journey from Jerusalem to the New World, the integration with the indigenous cultures, and the 500 and 1,000 year time spans.Why would the journey have any negative effect on oral genealogical lists? As for the time span, I personally know people whose lists go back that many years if not more. And as for them being written down somewhere say in the brass plates why would the passage of time rule them out?The oddest thing is that you find it so easy to believe such a thing could have happened, but it never occurs to you that even after 5 or 10 centuries, there is a distinct lack of native names in the book.Two different issues. A lack of New World names has little bearing on the preservation of Old World names.
Olavarria Posted January 29, 2010 Author Posted January 29, 2010 With enough imagination, all things are possible.The gold plates had Lehi's geneology. So, it's not an issue of imagination but possibility. The NW Nephites had access to name lists from the OW.
Olavarria Posted January 29, 2010 Author Posted January 29, 2010 The oddest thing is that you find it so easy to believe such a thing could have happened, but it never occurs to you that even after 5 or 10 centuries, there is a distinct lack of native names in the book.What Native names should the BoM have? Please limit your list to names used 600bc-430AD.
Olavarria Posted January 29, 2010 Author Posted January 29, 2010 I know it's compelling and I really want it to be Egyptian, but sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.Simplest answers are best."Lehi" is a toponym in the Bible."Nephi" is a toponym in the Catholic Bible.Stands to reason that toponym for Dad would lead to toponym for Son.Good points. I will agree that when it comes to the etymology of Nephite names NW Semetic>Egyptian.Both are possibilities.
Sevenbak Posted January 29, 2010 Posted January 29, 2010 What Native names should the BoM have? Please limit your list to names used 600bc-430AD.I don't think one can limit it to 600 B.C. After the Mulekites found Corinatumr and the Zeniff's party found the Jaredite record, there are plenty of Jaredite names that then start to show up in the Nephite record.
cinepro Posted January 29, 2010 Posted January 29, 2010 Why would the journey have any negative effect on oral genealogical lists? As for the time span, I personally know people whose lists go back that many years if not more. And as for them being written down somewhere say in the brass plates why would the passage of time rule them out?There is a point where such theories start to sound like the theories of "Joseph Smith's Giant Library", where any idea that was known in 1829, anywhere in the world, could possibly have informed Joseph Smith's creation of the Book of Mormon.
cinepro Posted January 29, 2010 Posted January 29, 2010 What Native names should the BoM have? Please limit your list to names used 600bc-430AD.Any names would be fine. Obviously, it's not required, but theorizing a mixing of the populations (and being cut off from their old-world origins), it would be super cool if they started using some names of native origin after a couple of centuries or so.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.