1 Nephi 17:21 - remaining in the land of inheritance

[theplains]

I had a question about this verse.

1 Nephi 17:21 - "Behold, these many years we have suffered in the wilderness, which time we 
might have enjoyed our possessions and the land of our inheritance; yea, and we might have 
been happy."

Why did Nephi's brethren [descended from Manasseh] believe Jerusalem was the land of their
inheritance?  Did they believe the lands allotted to each tribe was revoked?

Thanks,
Jim

[ksfisher]

I don't have it in front of me, but I believe Gardner and others have written about the "land of inheritance" being located in Manasseh's tradition area.  1 Nephi 3:22 refers to Nephi and his brothers, who were in the area of Jerusalem after failing in their first attemp to obtain the plates, going down to the lands of their inheritance to gather up gold, silver, and stuff in order to bargain with Laban.  A house in Jerusalem as well as lands elsewhere seem to be indicated.  

Edited January 29, 2016 by ksfisher
Spelling

[The Nehor]

42 minutes ago, theplains said:

I had a question about this verse.

1 Nephi 17:21 - "Behold, these many years we have suffered in the wilderness, which time we 
might have enjoyed our possessions and the land of our inheritance; yea, and we might have 
been happy."

Why did Nephi's brethren [descended from Manasseh] believe Jerusalem was the land of their
inheritance?  Did they believe the lands allotted to each tribe was revoked?

Thanks,
Jim

Probably had a house in a suburb of the city. City inheritances worked differently then land inheritances.

The tribes were a mishmash by this time and the migration south of the faithful of the lost tribes undoubtedly confused it more. Also, it appears that Lehi did not even know for sure what tribe he was in. The text suggests that when his sons brought him the brass plates he found his genealogy and the way I read it he found out he was a descendant of Joseph and Manassseh:

"And it came to pass that my father, Lehi, also found upon the plates of brass a genealogy of his fathers; wherefore he knew that he was a descendant of Joseph; yea, even that Joseph who was the son of Jacob, who was sold into Egypt, and who was preserved by the hand of the Lord, that he might preserve his father, Jacob, and all his household from perishing with famine."

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

Probably had a house in a suburb of the city. City inheritances worked differently then land inheritances.

The tribes were a mishmash by this time and the migration south of the faithful of the lost tribes undoubtedly confused it more. Also, it appears that Lehi did not even know for sure what tribe he was in. The text suggests that when his sons brought him the brass plates he found his genealogy and the way I read it he found out he was a descendant of Joseph and Manassseh:

"And it came to pass that my father, Lehi, also found upon the plates of brass a genealogy of his fathers; wherefore he knew that he was a descendant of Joseph; yea, even that Joseph who was the son of Jacob, who was sold into Egypt, and who was preserved by the hand of the Lord, that he might preserve his father, Jacob, and all his household from perishing with famine."

Archeologists such as Larry Stager and Bryant Wood believe (based on the Samaria Ostraca and other sources) that tribal identity survived intact well into the late period.  The Bronze Plates likely merely gave specificity and certainty to the tribal inheritance which Lehi already knew about.  The same sort of ethnic and clan identity survived in the New World as well -- at Teotihuacan, as well as in Nephite and Lamanite cities, since the Book of Mormon continues to distinguish the separate clans and tribes for centuries.

[Bobbieaware]

5 hours ago, theplains said:

I had a question about this verse.

1 Nephi 17:21 - "Behold, these many years we have suffered in the wilderness, which time we 
might have enjoyed our possessions and the land of our inheritance; yea, and we might have 
been happy."

Why did Nephi's brethren [descended from Manasseh] believe Jerusalem was the land of their
inheritance?  Did they believe the lands allotted to each tribe was revoked?

Thanks,
Jim

Laman and Lemuel were consistently wicked and rebellious, and that very tendency to be wicked and rebellious is plainly demonstrated in the verses you quote. So it's much more likely these two recalcitrants were belly aching about losing all the prestige, power and wealth they enjoyed in Jerudalem (please note Lehi was very wealthy and his two eldest sons were positioned to inherit much of that wealth), rather than engaging in an argument about the finer points of the Old Testament's declaration of land allotments to the tribes of Israel.

And remember that by the time of Lehi and his family were situated in Jerusalem the Nothern Kimgdom -- the land from which Lehi's ancestors hailed -- had been conquered and annexed by Assyria. Therefore Lehi's forefathers most likely fled to Jeusalem as refugees at the time of the Assyrian invasion of the Nothern Kingdom of Israel. So if Laman and Lemuel were speaking of the lands of their inheritance in the more formal Biblical sense, they were speaking of the Holy Land in general and not the lands promised to the descendents of Joseph because those lands were then under the control of a heathen power.

 

 

[ksfisher]

23 minutes ago, Bobbieaware said:

 

And remember that by the time of Lehi and his family were situated in Jerusalem the Nothern Kimgdom -- the land from which Lehi's ancestors hailed -- had been conquered and annexed by Assyria. Therefore Lehi's forefathers most likely fled to Jeusalem as refugees at the time of the Assyrian invasion of the Nothern Kingdom of Israel. So if Laman and Lemuel were speaking of the lands of their inheritance in the more formal Biblical sense, they were speaking of the Holy Land in general and not the lands promised to the descendents of Joseph because those lands were then under the control of a heathen power.

 

 

This is not correct.  By the time of Josiah Judah had retaken control over much of northern Israel, including lands belonging to the tribe of Mannaseh (2 Chronicles 34:1-7).  

Chapter 4 of Glimpses of Lehi's Jerusalem is a good starting point for learning about this period in Israelite history.

http://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1081&index=3

Available to read, for free, online.

Edited January 29, 2016 by ksfisher

[Bobbieaware]

1 hour ago, ksfisher said:

This is not correct.  By the time of Josiah Judah had retaken control over much of northern Israel, including lands belonging to the tribe of Mannaseh (2 Chronicles 34:1-7).  

Chapter 4 of Glimpses of Lehi's Jerusalem is a good starting point for learning about this period in Israelite history.

http://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1081&index=3

Available to read, for free, online.

Funny because before I posted I did some research to be sure I was correct. But perhaps I didn't research enough. So was the area of the former Nothern Kingdom regained by means of military conquest, or was the area simply let go of because of neglect and indifference on the part of the Assyrians?

Thanks for the correction.

Edited January 29, 2016 by Bobbieaware

[ksfisher]

3 minutes ago, Bobbieaware said:

Funny because before I posted I did some research to be sure I was correct. But perhaps I didn't research enough. So was the area of the former Nothern Kingdom regained by means of military conquest, or was the area simply let of go because of neglect and indifference on the part of the Assyrians?

Thanks for the correction.

"When Josiah was twenty-one (627 BC), the emperor Assurbanipal died, and the Assyrians completely withdrew from the western part of their former empire in order to concentrate on defending the east."

http://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1081&index=3

 

And I should have said "this is not correct" in a nicer way, I just couldn't think of one at the moment.  It's too late at night.

[Bobbieaware]

9 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

"When Josiah was twenty-one (627 BC), the emperor Assurbanipal died, and the Assyrians completely withdrew from the western part of their former empire in order to concentrate on defending the east."

http://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1081&index=3

 

And I should have said "this is not correct" in a nicer way, I just couldn't think of one at the moment.  It's too late at night.

Just as I thought. 

Don't worry about telling me that something I said is incorrect. What you said is true, so why should there be any offence taken? Thank you for teaching me something that's good to know. Of course I knew the Assyrians did depart eventually because at the a time of the Lord's ministry the area was inhabited by the Samaritans. 

Edited January 29, 2016 by Bobbieaware