Jesus Was Born In Bethlehem, Not Jerusalem....duh!

[Bernard Gui]

Your comments are welcome.......

 

The Bible says Jesus was born in Bethlehem.

The Book of Mormon says Jerusalem.

 

Based on this discrepancy, critics claim either Joseph Smith was ignorant or the Book of Mormon is false. Is this true?

 

Actually, the text says

 

"...he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers..."

(Alma 7:10)

 

In my opinion, this verse is strong evidence that Joseph Smith was not the author of the Book of Mormon for the reasons I set forth below.

 

1. The Lehites never referred to their homeland as Israel or Judea. Israel is used in terms such as "house of Israel," "my people Israel," "children of Israel," "Holy One of Israel," and in passages quoted from Isaiah. Judea appears only as the name of a  Nephite city.

 

2. Whenever Lehites referred to their place of origin they called it Jerusalem

or the land of Jerusalem. There are over 100 references to their homeland as Jerusalem or the land of Jerusalem. This usage is consistent throughout the Book of Mormon.

 

Some examples of this usage:

 

1 Nephi 1:4 "Lehi, having dwelt at Jerusalem in all his days..."

1 Nephi 10:4 "...600 years from the time that my father left Jerusalem..."

2 Nephi 5:28 "30 years had passed away from the time we left Jerusalem..."

Jacob 7:26 "We being...wanderers, cast out from Jerusalem"

Omni 1:15 "the people of Zarahemla came out from Jerusalem..."

Mosiah 1:6 "From the time that they left Jerusalem until now..."

Alma 3:11 "...those records [the brass plates] which were brought out of the land of Jerusalem..."

3 Nephi 4:11 "...there never was known so great a slaughter among all the people of Lehi since he left Jerusalem.

3 Nephi 5:20 “I am Mormon, and a pure descendant of Lehi...[who was] brought out of the land of Jerusalem....”

3 Nephi 16:1 "...I have other sheep, which are not of this land, neither of the land of Jerusalem..."

Mormon 3:18 "I write...unto you, twelve tribes of Israel, who shall be judged...by the twelve whom Jesus chose...in the land of Jerusalem"

 

3. When referring to geographical Israel or the area around Jerusalem, the Book of Mormon writers always refer to it as "the land of Jerusalem."

 

4. The only Lehite references to a specific city or town in their homeland other

than Jerusalem are made by Nephi, who was familiar with them because

he had lived there. The rest are quotes from Isaiah.

 

1 Nephi 10:9 "He should baptize in Bethabary beyond Jordan..."

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02532a.htm

 

1 Nephi 11:13 "and I beheld the city of Nazareth...and I beheld a virgin..."

 

Given the above, it would have been incongruous for Alma to name the

birthplace of the Savior anything other than "at Jerusalem which is the

land of our forefathers." This would be the only location that would be

meaningful to the Lehites 500 years after they left their homeland.

To call the birthplace Bethlehem would have meant nothing to them.

The only way they would have recognized it would be if they had kept

track of the geography of their homeland. The fact that after Nephi they did not make specific reference to place names in Israel shows they did not retain that knowledge.

 

It is reasonable to assume that people moving to a distant land would rapidly loose geographic ties with their homeland and thereafter would refer to it by a generic name. To call them poor geographers misses the point.

 

My grandfather was born in Poland. Family lore says he was born in Warsaw, but indications are that he was born in a village outside of Warsaw whose name no

one except Poles can pronounce. It would be like me telling my children that their Polish great-grandfather came to America from Bydgoszczor or Swietochlowice instead of just Warsaw or Poland. That general reference serves my purposes.

 

Often, when people ask me where I live I will say Tacoma because

few people have heard of the little berg in which I live. It saves time and confusion

having to explain that it is near Tacoma.

 

Had Joseph Smith invented the Book of Mormon he would have called

the birthplace of Jesus Bethelem, because that is the common-knowledge name. Instead, as I have shown what could be reasonably expected, he calls it "the land of Jerusalem."  Thus, citing what might be an obvious blunder actually suggests he was neither incompetent nor stupid , but that he was translating from an actual historical record.

 

“The land of Jerusalem" is a part of the evidence in the text of the Book of

Mormon that supports the role of Joseph Smith as translator of an

ancient record.

Edited August 18, 2014 by Bernard Gui

[Scott Lloyd]

Your comments are welcome.......

 

The Bible says Jesus was born in Bethlehem.

The Book of Mormon says Jerusalem.

 

Based on this discrepancy, critics claim either Joseph Smith was ignorant or the Book of Mormon is false. Is this true?

 

Actually, the text says

 

"...he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers..."

(Alma 7:10)

 

In my opinion, this verse is strong evidence that Joseph Smith was not the author of the Book of Mormon for the reasons I set forth below.

 

1. The Lehites never referred to their homeland as Israel or Judea. Israel is used in terms such as "house of Israel," "my people Israel," "children of Israel," "Holy One of Israel," and in passages quoted from Isaiah. Judea appears only as the name of a  Nephite city.

 

2. Whenever Lehites referred to their place of origin they called it Jerusalem

or the land of Jerusalem. There are over 100 references to their homeland as Jerusalem or the land of Jerusalem. This usage is consistent throughout the Book of Mormon.

 

Some examples of this usage:

 

1 Nephi 1:4 "Lehi, having dwelt at Jerusalem in all his days..."

1 Nephi 10:4 "...600 years from the time that my father left Jerusalem..."

2 Nephi 5:28 "30 years had passed away from the time we left Jerusalem..."

Jacob 7:26 "We being...wanderers, cast out from Jerusalem"

Omni 1:15 "the people of Zarahemla came out from Jerusalem..."

Mosiah 1:6 "From the time that they left Jerusalem until now..."

Alma 3:11 "...those records [the brass plates] which were brought out of the land of Jerusalem..."

3 Nephi 4:11 "...there never was known so great a slaughter among all the people of Lehi since he left Jerusalem.

3 Nephi 5:20 “I am Mormon, and a pure descendant of Lehi...[who was] brought out of the land of Jerusalem....”

3 Nephi 16:1 "...I have other sheep, which are not of this land, neither of the land of Jerusalem..."

Mormon 3:18 "I write...unto you, twelve tribes of Israel, who shall be judged...by the twelve whom Jesus chose...in the land of Jerusalem"

 

3. When referring to geographical Israel or the area around Jerusalem, the Book of Mormon writers always refer to it as "the land of Jerusalem."

 

4. The only Lehite references to a specific city or town in their homeland other

than Jerusalem are made by Nephi, who was familiar with them because

he had lived there. The rest are quotes from Isaiah.

 

1 Nephi 10:9 "He should baptize in Bethabary beyond Jordan..."

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02532a.htm

 

1 Nephi 11:13 "and I beheld the city of Nazareth...and I beheld a virgin..."

 

Given the above, it would have been incongruous for Alma to name the

birthplace of the Savior anything other than "at Jerusalem which is the

land of our forefathers." This would be the only location that would be

meaningful to the Lehites 500 years after they left their homeland.

To call the birthplace Bethlehem would have meant nothing to them.

The only way they would have recognized it would be if they had kept

track of the geography of their homeland. The fact that after Nephi they did not make specific reference to place names in Israel shows they did not retain that knowledge.

 

It is reasonable to assume that people moving to a distant land would rapidly loose geographic ties with their homeland and thereafter would refer to it by a generic name. To call them poor geographers misses the point.

 

My grandfather was born in Poland. Family lore says he was born in Warsaw, but indications are that he was born in a village outside of Warsaw whose name no

one except Poles can pronounce. It would be like me telling my children that their Polish great-grandfather came to America from Bydgoszczor or Swietochlowice instead of just Warsaw or Poland. That general reference serves my purposes.

 

Often, when people ask me where I live I will say Tacoma because

few people have heard of the little berg in which I live. It saves time and confusion

having to explain that it is near Tacoma.

 

Had Joseph Smith invented the Book of Mormon he would have called

the birthplace of Jesus Bethelem, because that is the common-knowledge name. Instead, as I have shown what could be reasonably expected, he calls it "the land of Jerusalem."  Thus, citing what might be an obvious blunder actually suggests he was neither incompetent nor stupid , but that he was translating from an actual historical record.

 

“The land of Jerusalem" is a part of the evidence in the text of the Book of

Mormon that supports the role of Joseph Smith as translator of an

ancient record.

This is a solid refutation of that old chestnut.

 

I'm wondering though: Are there anti-Mormons who still rely on this as an argument against Mormonism? I have previously identified this as one of the very weakest arguments that they use.*

 

*In case anyone is interested, the two other arguments that I identify, with this, as the weakest in the anti-Mormon arsenal are the presence of "adieu" in the Book of Mormon and the citation of the verse in John that curses those who will add to or take away from the record (the record being John's own book of Revelation, not the Bible, which, as a compilation did not even exist at the time John penned those words).

[JAHS]

Saying that Christ would be born in the "Land of Jerusalem"  would have been consistent with how locations of cities were identified in the Book of Mormon. Many times smaller cities were identified as being within the land of another major city:

"And it came to pass that Amalickiah marched with his armies to the land of Nephi, to the city of Nephi, which was the chief city."(Alma 47:20)

Here the armies marched to the city of Nephi which was the chief city within the Land of Nephi.

"And it came to pass that Moroni had thus gained a victory over one of the greatest of the armies of the Lamanites, and had obtained possession of the city of Mulek, which was one of the strongest holds of the Lamanites in the land of Nephi; and thus he had also built a stronghold to retain his prisoners.(Alma 53:6)

Here it talks about the city of Mulek being in the Land of Nephi.

This also happens within the Bible where it says, for example, that "king Solomon gave Hiram twenty cities in the land of Galilee." (1 Kings 9:11,26, See also Gen 33:18, 2 Kings 23:33, 1 Chron. 2:22, 6:55)

Some time ago the so-called Amarna letters were found and in them is a reference to a place that W. F. Albright, probably the greatest American archaeologist of the twentieth century, has identified as Bethlehem. And it's referred to as being in the land of Jerusalem. So here's a reference to Bethlehem as being in the land of Jerusalem, just as the Book of Mormon describes it. (Walter Harrelson, "Shechem in Extra- Biblical References," The Biblical Archaeologist 20 (1957): 4, 6-7)

[cdowis]

"AT Jerusalem" ==>>  look it up in the dictionary."in, on, or near"

 

It does not say "in Jerusalem".

[Scott Lloyd]

When I travel, I frequently tell people I'm from Salt Lake, because I don't expect most people to know where Sandy is.

Note: Sandy is roughly the same distance from Salt Lake (about 15 miles) as Bethlehem is from Jerusalem.

[Robert F. Smith]

The term “Land of Jerusalem” in the Book of Mormon (1 Nephi 2:11, 2 Nephi 1:1, Helaman 5:6, 7:7, 3 Nephi 5:20, Mormon 3:18, Ether 13:7; cf. Alma 7:10 “Jerusalem, which is the land of our forefathers”), and, by implication, once in the Bible (2 Samuel 5:6 “went to Jerusalem unto the Jebusites, the inhabitants of the land”), as well as in the scrolls from Qumran (4Q385b [Pseudo-Jeremiah] 1:2, =ereṣ Yerûšālayîm "land of Jerusalem" = Yehûd "Judah," i.e., “Jerusalem and its immediate environs” in the Persian period).[1]  Note the Assyrian practice of naming a land or region for the name of its capital city.   The “Land of Jerusalem” is termed  ^matURU-sa-lim  "district/land of Jerusa­lem" in the 14th century B.C. Akkadian cuneiform letters from the Canaanite King of Jerusalem to Pharaoh Akhenaten, found at the Egyptian capital Akhetaten (= modern Tell El-Amarna: see El Amarna Tablets 287:25,46,61, 289:14,29, and even URU KUR Ú-ru-sa-lim^KI 290:15-16, which Anson Rainey interpreted as “the Land of the City of Jerusalem”).[2]  Thus the "Land of Jerusalem" as the place where Jesus was born is quite acceptable, since it includes Bethlehem (Joshua 15:59 LXX, Micah 5:1 MT [= KJV 5:2], Matthew 2:1-6, Luke 2:4).[3]

[1] R. Eisenman & M. Wise, The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered, 57-58 (frag. 1, col. 1, line 2).

[2] J. Pritchard, ANET, 3^rd ed., 483-490; A. Rainey, Canaanite in the Amarna Tablets: A Linguistic Analysis of the Mixed Dialect, 4 vols. (Köln, 1996), 29.  The El Amarna Tablets were unearthed in 1887 by William Flinders Petrie.

[3] R. F. Smith, “The Land of Jerusalem,” FARMS Update, May 1984, online at http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=71&chapid=814; H. Nibley, Approach to Book of Mormon, chapt. 8, nn. 16-18; Aharoni, Avi-Yonah, Rainey, and Safrai, Macmillan Bible Atlas, 3^rd ed., maps 34, 140, 170.

[Scott Lloyd]

The term “Land of Jerusalem” in the Book of Mormon (1 Nephi 2:11, 2 Nephi 1:1, Helaman 5:6, 7:7, 3 Nephi 5:20, Mormon 3:18, Ether 13:7; cf. Alma 7:10 “Jerusalem, which is the land of our forefathers”), and, by implication, once in the Bible (2 Samuel 5:6 “went to Jerusalem unto the Jebusites, the inhabitants of the land”), as well as in the scrolls from Qumran (4Q385b [Pseudo-Jeremiah] 1:2, =ereṣ Yerûšālayîm "land of Jerusalem" = Yehûd "Judah," i.e., “Jerusalem and its immediate environs” in the Persian period).[1] Note the Assyrian practice of naming a land or region for the name of its capital city. The “Land of Jerusalem” is termed ^matURU-sa-lim "district/land of Jerusa­lem" in the 14th century B.C. Akkadian cuneiform letters from the Canaanite King of Jerusalem to Pharaoh Akhenaten, found at the Egyptian capital Akhetaten (= modern Tell El-Amarna: see El Amarna Tablets 287:25,46,61, 289:14,29, and even URU KUR Ú-ru-sa-lim^KI 290:15-16, which Anson Rainey interpreted as “the Land of the City of Jerusalem”).[2] Thus the "Land of Jerusalem" as the place where Jesus was born is quite acceptable, since it includes Bethlehem (Joshua 15:59 LXX, Micah 5:1 MT [= KJV 5:2], Matthew 2:1-6, Luke 2:4).[3]

[1] R. Eisenman & M. Wise, The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered, 57-58 (frag. 1, col. 1, line 2).

[2] J. Pritchard, ANET, 3^rd ed., 483-490; A. Rainey, Canaanite in the Amarna Tablets: A Linguistic Analysis of the Mixed Dialect, 4 vols. (Köln, 1996), 29. The El Amarna Tablets were unearthed in 1887 by William Flinders Petrie.

[3] R. F. Smith, “The Land of Jerusalem,” FARMS Update, May 1984, online at http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=71&chapid=814; H. Nibley, Approach to Book of Mormon, chapt. 8, nn. 16-18; Aharoni, Avi-Yonah, Rainey, and Safrai, Macmillan Bible Atlas, 3^rd ed., maps 34, 140, 170.

Not to belabor the point, but the Assyrian practice of naming a land or region after its capital city is not unlike what we do today. Thus, Sandy is located in Salt Lake County, named after the county seat.

Another example: The greater metropolitan Chicago area is called Chicagoland (or if we were to apply Book of Mormon vernacular, Land of Chicago). Some portions of Chicagoland are not even in Illinois.

Edited August 18, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

This is a solid refutation of that old chestnut.

I'm wondering though: Are there anti-Mormons who still rely on this as an argument against Mormonism? I have previously identified this as one of the very weakest arguments that they use.*

*In case anyone is interested, the two other arguments that I identify, with this, as the weakest in the anti-Mormon arsenal are the presence of "adieu" in the Book of Mormon and the citation of the verse in John that curses those who will add to or take away from the record (the record being John's own book of Revelation, not the Bible, which, as a compilation did not even exist at the time John penned those words).

I'm curious whether there are any critics of Mormonism reading this thread right now who still think this Jesus-born-at-Jerusalem quibble is a good argument and, if so, are they willing to own up to it now?

[omni]

Boy, I had to dust off my copy of Mormonism Unvailed to find the last time that argument had been used.  Okay, so I'm exaggerating a little, but when was the last time you heard a critic even bring this up (I would put the "adieu criticism" in the same category)?

[Calm]

On this board actually, but iirc, he was a babe in the woods and we quickly sorted him out.

We haven't had too many just got done with an apologetics class at the local bible college kid show up in a long, long time. Last time I remember was when the GP manual came out and Dr. Streuss and I had such fun....good times...sigh...

[Scott Lloyd]

Boy, I had to dust off my copy of Mormonism Unvailed to find the last time that argument had been used. Okay, so I'm exaggerating a little, but when was the last time you heard a critic even bring this up (I would put the "adieu criticism" in the same category)?

As you can tell from my posts, I had kind of the same thoughts.

Then again, I've learned never to underestimate the propensity of a typical anti-Mormon to use old, hackneyed and long-discredited arguments as though they were fresh and devastating. Witness "Letter to a CES Director."

[Scott Lloyd]

On this board actually, but iirc, he was a babe in the woods and we quickly sorted him out.

We haven't had too many just got done with an apologetics class at the local bible college kid show up in a long, long time. Last time I remember was when the GP manual came out and Dr. Streuss and I had such fun....good times...sigh...

Dr. Streuss -- how I miss him.

Edited to add:

Did your babe in the woods concede defeat, or did he just slink off after one parting shot like some of them do?

Edited further to add:

Can you provide a link to the thread? Sometimes I like to relive memorable moments in apologetics -- for the entertainment, if nothing else.

Edited August 18, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[smac97]

When I travel, I frequently tell people I'm from Salt Lake, because I don't expect most people to know where Sandy is.

Note: Sandy is roughly the same distance from Salt Lake (about 15 miles) as Bethlehem is from Jerusalem.

When I was a missionary in Taiwan, I was frequently asked where I was from. I started out with "I am from Utah, from a town about 30 miles south of Salt Lake City." This proved to be too specific. So then I went with "I am from Utah, near Salt Lake City." Still to specific. Then I tried "I'm from Utah." Still too specific. So I tried "I'm from a state in the western half of the United States, next to the state with Las Vegas in it" (or, occasionally, "north of the state with the Grand Canyon in it"). Some people had heard of Las Vegas and/or the Grand Canyon, but it was very hit and miss. So I ended up with this tried-and-true explanation of my origins:

Taiwanese Dude: "Where are you from in America?"

Me: "Utah. Ever heard of it?"

TD: "No. Where is it?"

Me: "You've heard of Los Angeles?"

TD: "Yes."

Me: "You've heard of New York City?"

TD: "Yes."

Me: "I'm from a place between those two places."

TD: "Ah, I see, I see..."

Worked every time!

Thanks,

-Smac

[Calm]

Dr. Streuss -- how I miss him.

Edited to add:

Did your babe in the woods concede defeat, or did he just slink off after one parting shot like some of them do?

Edited further to add:

Can you provide a link to the thread? Sometimes I like to relive memorable moments in apologetics -- for the entertainment, if nothing else.

I will look for it, but it was several threads all over the board in my memory....which reality probably barely matches, lol.

I can't remember what he did, I don't think we changed his mind about our teachings, just that maybe we weren't so deluded about them, but that might have been another time.

Off to the library...

[Thinking]

When I travel, I frequently tell people I'm from Salt Lake, because I don't expect most people to know where Sandy is.

Note: Sandy is roughly the same distance from Salt Lake (about 15 miles) as Bethlehem is from Jerusalem.

 

I just did a search on Google maps and the stated distance is 143 km, which translates to about 89 miles.

[Bernard Gui]

For those who wonder....the #1hit for a Google search "was jesus born in jerusalem mormon" is Bill NcKeever's article at http://www.mrm.org/jerusalem where he takes on Hamblin and Peterson. Apparently someone is still reading this.

[Bernard Gui]

So, Scott Lloyd mentioned the adieu chestnut, what are some others?

[Bernard Gui]

Thank you all for your comments. Do you think my conclusion is overstated?

[rodheadlee]

I'm from L.A., not really just a town about 45 miles southwest, Westminster, CA , not England. Gosh there is more than one Westminster? Say it ain't so. There can be only one Westminster.

[Scott Lloyd]

I just did a search on Google maps and the stated distance is 143 km, which translates to about 89 miles.

I've never been to either place, but the source I just checked said 8.89 km, or 5.52 miles.

[Scott Lloyd]

Thank you all for your comments. Do you think my conclusion is overstated?

Certainly not.

Just one instance where an intended criticism ends up being evidence in our favor.

I love when that happens!

[Gervin]

I just did a search on Google maps and the stated distance is 143 km, which translates to about 89 miles.

that's Nazareth, not Bethlehem

[ERayR]

I just did a search on Google maps and the stated distance is 143 km, which translates to about 89 miles.

 

Oops you have Nazareth (where he grew up) .  Here is Bethlehem.  Just over 6 miles.  http://www.mapquest.com/#bf00e49cd8d23988b3aad912

 

Oops I see Gerven beat me

Edited August 18, 2014 by ERayR

[mnn727]

Yes I have always liked to use an example from today.

Ask where DisneyWorld is and most people will say Orlando.

A few people, more in the know, will say Kissimmee.

However its in neither, its in Reedy Creek township

 

Are you going to say you're going to Reedy Creek on vacation? or that you're going to Orlando?

 "Orlando" is close enough for me. Everyone has heard of Orlando and instantly knows where you are talking about, even if they've never been there.  

 

Same thing in the BoM, none of those people being spoken to had ever been to Jerusalem or Bethlehem, but they knew their ancestors came from the land of Jerusalem, so wouldn't it make sense for them to be told Jesus was being born at Jerusalem

Edited August 18, 2014 by mnn727

[Scott Lloyd]

When I travel, I frequently tell people I'm from Salt Lake, because I don't expect most people to know where Sandy is.

Note: Sandy is roughly the same distance from Salt Lake (about 15 miles) as Bethlehem is from Jerusalem.

 

 

I just did a search on Google maps and the stated distance is 143 km, which translates to about 89 miles.

 

 

I've never been to either place, but the source I just checked said 8.89 km, or 5.52 miles.

 

 

that's Nazareth, not Bethlehem

 

 

Oops you have Nazareth (where he grew up) .  Here is Bethlehem.  Just over 6 miles.  http://www.mapquest.com/#bf00e49cd8d23988b3aad912

 

Oops I see Gerven beat me

Yeah.

 

If anything, I overstated the distance.

 

Traveling six miles south of Salt Lake would put you in South Salt Lake or Murray. A person unacquainted with the area might not even grasp that he had passed the city limits.

 

Edited to add:

 

If Thinking and I are ever on a road trip together, I'll insist on doing the navigating!

Edited August 18, 2014 by Scott Lloyd