Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Noah's Ark and The Book of Mormon


Recommended Posts

Posted

http://lds.net/blog/faith/jew-reads-book-mormon/

"If you will now turn to Genesis 6:16 and read the verse and the footnote. “A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it.” Notice that the word “window” has been mistranslated, and the footnote says, “HEB tsohar; some rabbis believed it was a precious stone that shone in the ark” (Ether 2:23 (23–24).

The Hebrew word Zohar, means “light” or “brilliance” and that light was connected with magical stones. The Brother of Jared logically thought that if it worked for Noah, it could work for his eight dark ships. Hence, sixteen stones presented to the Savior to be set aglow by His touch."

----------

This simple explanation about the Brother of Jared getting the idea of asking the Lord to touch the sixteen stones he molted out of rock (glass) from his knowledge of Noah and his ark and the Zohar, indicate that Noah, his ark and the flood were actual, not fictional.

Posted
1 minute ago, PeterPear said:

http://lds.net/blog/faith/jew-reads-book-mormon/

"If you will now turn to Genesis 6:16 and read the verse and the footnote. “A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it.” Notice that the word “window” has been mistranslated, and the footnote says, “HEB tsohar; some rabbis believed it was a precious stone that shone in the ark” (Ether 2:23 (23–24).

The Hebrew word Zohar, means “light” or “brilliance” and that light was connected with magical stones. The Brother of Jared logically thought that if it worked for Noah, it could work for his eight dark ships. Hence, sixteen stones presented to the Savior to be set aglow by His touch."

----------

This simple explanation about the Brother of Jared getting the idea of asking the Lord to touch the sixteen stones he molted out of rock (glass) from his knowledge of Noah and his ark and the Zohar, indicate that Noah, his ark and the flood were actual, not fictional.

So they asked an invisible being to touch them and make them glow, and they never stopped glowing as long as they were needed

Oh yeah.  Pure science!  It really happened!  Proof right there!

Methinks you are mixing metaphors

Posted
1 hour ago, PeterPear said:

http://lds.net/blog/faith/jew-reads-book-mormon/

"If you will now turn to Genesis 6:16 and read the verse and the footnote. “A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it.” Notice that the word “window” has been mistranslated, and the footnote says, “HEB tsohar; some rabbis believed it was a precious stone that shone in the ark” (Ether 2:23 (23–24).

The Hebrew word Zohar, means “light” or “brilliance” and that light was connected with magical stones. The Brother of Jared logically thought that if it worked for Noah, it could work for his eight dark ships. Hence, sixteen stones presented to the Savior to be set aglow by His touch."

----------

This simple explanation about the Brother of Jared getting the idea of asking the Lord to touch the sixteen stones he molted out of rock (glass) from his knowledge of Noah and his ark and the Zohar, indicate that Noah, his ark and the flood were actual, not fictional.

A thread you might be interested in:

 

Posted
3 hours ago, PeterPear said:

http://lds.net/blog/faith/jew-reads-book-mormon/

"If you will now turn to Genesis 6:16 and read the verse and the footnote. “A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it.” Notice that the word “window” has been mistranslated, and the footnote says, “HEB tsohar; some rabbis believed it was a precious stone that shone in the ark” (Ether 2:23 (23–24).

The Hebrew word Zohar, means “light” or “brilliance” and that light was connected with magical stones. The Brother of Jared logically thought that if it worked for Noah, it could work for his eight dark ships. Hence, sixteen stones presented to the Savior to be set aglow by His touch."

----------

This simple explanation about the Brother of Jared getting the idea of asking the Lord to touch the sixteen stones he molted out of rock (glass) from his knowledge of Noah and his ark and the Zohar, indicate that Noah, his ark and the flood were actual, not fictional.  

 

Tvedtnes has a great paper on this and other related items.
 
Glowing Stones in Ancient and Medieval Lore
John A. Tvedtnes
 
 
 
Posted
28 minutes ago, volgadon said:

Tsohar and zohar are different words.

Thanks.  It didn't make sense the way it was written given what the Zohar is.

Posted
13 hours ago, PeterPear said:

http://lds.net/blog/faith/jew-reads-book-mormon/

"If you will now turn to Genesis 6:16 and read the verse and the footnote. “A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it.” Notice that the word “window” has been mistranslated, and the footnote says, “HEB tsohar; some rabbis believed it was a precious stone that shone in the ark” (Ether 2:23 (23–24).

The Hebrew word Zohar, means “light” or “brilliance” and that light was connected with magical stones. The Brother of Jared logically thought that if it worked for Noah, it could work for his eight dark ships. Hence, sixteen stones presented to the Savior to be set aglow by His touch."

----------

This simple explanation about the Brother of Jared getting the idea of asking the Lord to touch the sixteen stones he molted out of rock (glass) from his knowledge of Noah and his ark and the Zohar, indicate that Noah, his ark and the flood were actual, not fictional.

Not arguing whether or not the story of Noah is real or not, but I'm not sure your reasoning makes sense.  If I were to read the story of the Three Little Pigs and conclude that what I needed was a brick house, that wouldn't change the fact the story is fictional.  In the same way, I'm not sure the Brother of Jared's familiarity with the story of Noah or his being inspired by the story lends and authenticity to Noah. 

As I said I'm not arguing whether there was or was not a Noah (I believe there was), just the reasoning you are using to arrive at that conclusion by way of the Book of Mormon.

Posted
22 hours ago, volgadon said:

Tsohar and zohar are different words.

Good point, but zohar means splendor or radiance - per Wiki anyway - which would be a variation of or taken from Tsohar?

Posted
On March 7, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Calm said:

Are you saying Jared read the Zohar and thus knew of such?

No. The Prophet Moroni stated the plates of Ether contained an account of the creation of Adam until the great tower - which would have included the account of Noah. https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/ether/1.3-4?lang=eng#2

This was a completely separate record from the Old Testament...or the record from the Jews..which start with the Books of Moses - who of course the Jaredites never had contact with - as the Jaredites were not of the house of Israel.

Thus if the Brother of Jared knew of Noah's glowing Tsohar, exemplified by his asking the Lord to do similar for him by touching the sixteen stones - and this knowledge of the Tsohar was also known among the Jews as recorded in the Bible...

...then the Book of Mormon in a sense is a second witness to the Bible ....of Noah. 

This should help counter the claim that Noah, his Ark, flood, etc, were fictional; As on of the purposes of the Book of Mormon is "the confounding of false doctrines and laying down of contentions..  2 Nephi 3:12.

Posted
On March 7, 2016 at 6:51 PM, mfbukowski said:

So they asked an invisible being to touch them and make them glow, and they never stopped glowing as long as they were needed

Oh yeah.  Pure science!  It really happened!  Proof right there!

Methinks you are mixing metaphors

.? Mixed methaphors aside, you don't believe this? Odd.

Posted (edited)
On 3/7/2016 at 5:47 PM, PeterPear said:

http://lds.net/blog/faith/jew-reads-book-mormon/

"If you will now turn to Genesis 6:16 and read the verse and the footnote. “A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it.” Notice that the word “window” has been mistranslated, and the footnote says, “HEB tsohar; some rabbis believed it was a precious stone that shone in the ark” (Ether 2:23 (23–24).

The Hebrew word Zohar, means “light” or “brilliance” and that light was connected with magical stones. The Brother of Jared logically thought that if it worked for Noah, it could work for his eight dark ships. Hence, sixteen stones presented to the Savior to be set aglow by His touch."

----------

This simple explanation about the Brother of Jared getting the idea of asking the Lord to touch the sixteen stones he molted out of rock (glass) from his knowledge of Noah and his ark and the Zohar, indicate that Noah, his ark and the flood were actual, not fictional.

My beef was with the last sentence, that a supernatural explanation for creating illumination somehow could make the story of Noah's ark "actual"

Not a great argument. 

Yes I believe the scriptures but I also have no problem with both those stories being allegorical.  Or literal, it doesn't matter to me.  It is unknowable and therefore irrelevant to my life.  The stories themselves make a difference in my life and it is a waste of time to worry about what is unknowable.

Edited by mfbukowski
Posted
35 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

My beef was with the last sentence, that a supernatural explanation for creating illumination somehow could make the story of Noah's ark "actual"

Not a great argument. 

Yes I believe the scriptures but I also have no problem with both those stories being allegorical.  Or literal, it doesn't matter to me.  It is unknowable and therefore irrelevant to my life.  The stories themselves make a difference in my life and it is a waste of time to worry about what is unknowable.

Are you upset that Moroni didn't include from Ether's 24 plates - into the Book of Ether - its account of the creation of the world, Adam and the history up to the Tower? Moroni wasn't going to waste space on the plates because he correctly stated that that history was had among the Jews, and the Gentiles would know of it by way of the Bible. 

So there you have a second witness of the accuracy of the story of Noah. It being literal. And knowable. And relevant to your life.

Or did you miss that gem in the Book of Mormon?

 

Posted
31 minutes ago, PeterPear said:

Are you upset that Moroni didn't include from Ether's 24 plates - into the Book of Ether - its account of the creation of the world, Adam and the history up to the Tower? Moroni wasn't going to waste space on the plates because he correctly stated that that history was had among the Jews, and the Gentiles would know of it by way of the Bible. 

So there you have a second witness of the accuracy of the story of Noah. It being literal. And knowable. And relevant to your life.

Or did you miss that gem in the Book of Mormon?

 

Not knowable, not relevant.  Just another story.

We still have stories which cannot be verified independently.  All we have is a writer expressing his opinion, or perhaps total fiction unless the Lord confirms it.

But the Lord has already confirmed it to my heart that the BOM is true, and that adds nothing.  Once you know you know.  It could prove quantum mechanics and it would not be more "true"

I know you cannot understand that- but please do understand that there are different perspectives to these questions than yours.  Just because you do not understand that perspective does not invalidate it

Posted
1 hour ago, PeterPear said:

Good point, but zohar means splendor or radiance - per Wiki anyway - which would be a variation of or taken from Tsohar?

Not the same word. Hebrew is based on roots, Zohar being zayin-heh-reish, while tzohar is saddiq-heh-reish. Similar, but different. The etymology of tzohar is unclear, but is assumed to have something to do with the sun, like the word for noon.

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

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