South Arabian Inscriptions

[Johnnie Cake]

10 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The NHM correlation has never been debunked.  I have examined the sources carefully through the years and have never found a legitimate claim against it.  That is not to say that some off-the-wall argument was made which could convince someone who is poorly informed.  That happens all the time in the debate over the credibility of the BofM and other issues.  One needs to step back and ask hard questions not only about this item, but about many other related items.  One needs a deeper sense of perspective, something which MormonVideoGame lacks in his haste to debunk.

Robert with all due respect (and I've avoided calling you out in the past) but you keep using descriptors such as "Anti-Mormon" and "poorly informed" when referring to those who have come to a conclusion that does not sync with your own cherished beliefs.  Perhaps, in the future, you could choose to use words that don't automatically give your posts a air of informed superiority.  We all come to our conclusions through a thoughtful, sincere process.

Edited February 21, 2017 by Johnnie Cake

[Darren10]

7 hours ago, MormonVideoGame said:

 

Alma 27:22 And it came to pass that the voice of the people came, saying: Behold, we will give up the land of Jershon, which is on the east by the sea, which joins the land Bountiful, which is on the south of the land Bountiful; and this land Jershon is the land which we will give unto our brethren for an inheritance.

Really? I was expecting more than that. The word Jershon appears 20 times in the Book of Mormon, but only one verse (verse 22) mentions inheritance. 

CFR that Rabbanah means "powerful or great king" and Rameumptom means "the holy stand" 

Please show me evidence published in academic papers that Nahom means "to mourn". 

 

I think you got it backwards. It's not that "Nahom" means "to mourn" but that Nephi would have recognized NHM as connected to mourning and therefore include his sister-in-laws mourning into the narrative. Mormon, the last narrator of the plates the records were kept would have also recognized this linguistic connection and kept Nephi's writings in tact on the plates.

Also, apologists do not say definitively that NHM is Nahom, just that the coincidences between NHM and Nahom are so high that it is very probable that NHM is the same place of Nahom.

Edited February 21, 2017 by Darren10

[Robert F. Smith]

1 minute ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Robert with all due respect (and I've avoided calling you out in the past) but you keep using descriptors such as Anti-Mormon and poorly informed when referring to those who have come to a conclusion that does not sync with your own cherished beliefs.  Perhaps, in the future, you could choose to use words that don't automatically give your posts a air of informed superiority.  We all come to our conclusions through a thoughtful, sincere process.

I am simply reflecting my experience, which Michael Ash has argued at length (with examples) in his book, that most of the sincere claims that something has been debunked are squarely based on misunderstandings of the facts.  Sometimes it helps to take a more scholarly look at these issues (and there are many of them) in which surface impressions are so often at odds with reality.  We have just seen the typical example of Vernal Holley and the systematic errors he made back in 1983.  They are still being quoted over thirty years later, even though they have been thoroughly debunked.

As I have repeatedly said, there will always be traffic in and out of Mormonism (which does not disturb me at all), but that tells us nothing about what is actually going on in the intellectual arena.  I am suggesting that we focus more effort on those intellectual phenomena which help to disclose to us the actual nature of that traffic.  Most of it is emotional in nature, almost none of it based on actual scholarly inquiry. Should we avoid trying to raise the bar in such discussion?  Or will that hurt too many feelings?  After all, most of those present here are not trolls, and most consider themselves sincere.  In some cases, however, the anti-Mormon bias is overwhelming and needs to be named for what it is. In such cases, after repeated violations of polite behavior, I don't believe in being namby pamby about it.  That's just me, and I apologize for being uncivil when not justified.  Have I been too hard on you, Johnnie?

[Johnnie Cake]

42 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I am simply reflecting my experience, which Michael Ash has argued at length (with examples) in his book, that most of the sincere claims that something has been debunked are squarely based on misunderstandings of the facts.  Sometimes it helps to take a more scholarly look at these issues (and there are many of them) in which surface impressions are so often at odds with reality.  We have just seen the typical example of Vernal Holley and the systematic errors he made back in 1983.  They are still being quoted over thirty years later, even though they have been thoroughly debunked.

I don't want to hijack this thread but Vern Holley Debunked? I don't think so.  I have personally gone through period maps and found a majority of the village sites Holley names in his list.  Which made me more than satisfied that he was onto something.  What I also discovered was that the apologists who claimed to have debunked Holley used slight of hand (in my opinion) and were less than honest.  So If I could do it why couldn't the apologists?  Because they didn't want to?  Had a motivation not to? I don't know...but I was certainly able to find the names in period maps from the 1820's

42 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

As I have repeatedly said, there will always be traffic in and out of Mormonism (which does not disturb me at all), but that tells us nothing about what is actually going on in the intellectual arena.  I am suggesting that we focus more effort on those intellectual phenomena which help to disclose to us the actual nature of that traffic.  Most of it is emotional in nature, almost none of it based on actual scholarly inquiry. Should we avoid trying to raise the bar in such discussion?  Or will that hurt too many feelings?  After all, most of those present here are not trolls, and most consider themselves sincere.  In some cases, however, the anti-Mormon bias is overwhelming and needs to be named for what it is. In such cases, after repeated violations of polite behavior, I don't believe in being namby pamby about it.  That's just me, and I apologize for being uncivil when not justified.  Have I been too hard on you, Johnnie?

Robert, I believe you have always been civil towards myself...however each of us should be open to correction when appropriate and I've just seen an increase in your use of pejoratives recently...which is uncharacteristic of you.

Edited February 21, 2017 by Johnnie Cake

[Darren10]

33 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

I don't want to hijack this thread but Vern Holley Debunked? I don't think so.  I have personally gone through period maps and found a majority of the village sites Holley names in his list.  Which made me more than satisfied that he was onto something.  What I also discovered was that the apologists who claimed to have debunked Holley used slight of hand (in my opinion) and were less than honest.  So If I could do it why couldn't the apologists?  Because they didn't want to?  Had a motivation not to? I don't know...but I was certainly able to find the names in period maps from the 1820's

http://en.fairmormon.org/Question:_How_valid_are_the_names_used_in_the_Holley_Map%3F

[Robert F. Smith]

21 hours ago, MormonVideoGame said:

..............................

It took me seconds to find Corpus of Ḥaḍramitic Inscriptions "includes about 900 inscriptions which date from between the 7th century BC and the end of the 3rd century AD"  Just one example.

That is just my point.  Most of those 900 inscriptions come from after Lehi.  Or are you claiming that during that thousand years they all bunched up in Lehi's day?  Only few later?  Just the opposite of reality.

Quote

Bythway, any non-Mormon sources that NHM inscription really dates to 600 BC? 

J. Gorsdorf and H. Vogt, “Radiocarbon Datings from the AlMaqah Temple of Bar’an, Marib, Republic of Yemen: Approximately 800 Cal B.C. to Cal 600 A.D.,” Radiocarbon, 43/3 (2001):1363-1369, online at https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/radiocarbon/article/view/3879/3304 .

Burkhard Vogt, "Les temples de Ma'rib," in Yemen: au pays de la reine de Saba (Paris: Flammarion, 1997), 144 (photo).

Burkhard Vogt, et al., "Arsh Bilqis"-Der Temple des Almaqah von Baran in Marib (Sana'a, Yemen, 2000). 

W. Seipel, ed., Jemen - Kunst und Archaologie im Land der Konigin von Saba’ (Vienna: Kunsthistorisches Museum, 1998), 325.

Quote

................................................. 

Is Nahom a city? a farm? an empire?  a cemetary? a village? a tribe? Do you agree the Book of Mormon never clarifies that?  Please show me unbiased studies that prove NHM is related to Nahom. 

Do you agree NHM is a tribe? Why would a tribe call itself "to mourn"? 

I already explained to you that no one knows what ancient South Arabic NHM means, but that a Hebrew-speaker would naturally see a meaning in his own language and maybe place a wordplay in the text.  No proof is needed.  It is merely a correlation which fits with all the other data.  Only non-scholars take items out of context.  I put many things in context in my “Book of Mormon Event Structure: The Ancient Near East,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, 5/2 (1996):98-147.  Online at http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1391&index=5 

 

Quote

You seem to be cherry-picking your cases. The Book of Mormon contains 337 proper names and 21 gentilics. 

Yes, and of those 337, only 188 are unique to the Book of Mormon.

There are only a handful of cases in the Book of Mormon in which a name is defined in the text -- I gave two examples which are exactly correct:  Rabbanah, “which is, being interpreted, ‘powerful’ or ‘great king’” (Alma 18:13); Rameumptom, "Holy-Stand; a place of standing which was high above the head" (Alma 31:13,23).  Those are Hebrew etymologies.

Quote

Hebraism doesn't seem to be hard to find 

Hebraism in Solomon Spalding's manuscript

"clothed themselves in cloth" (p. 21) "colored with different colors" (p. 21) "by the hand of Lobaska" (p. 43) "our meat and our fish" (p. 12) "The King and his chiefs and many of his principal subjects" (p. 19) "their armies routed & their warriors bleeding under our swords -- their helpless women and children expiring by thousands & their country in flames" (p. 77) "a defence which will extend to our wives and our children . . . . We must either submit to behold our property torn from us, our houses in flames -- & our dearest friends expiring" (p. 86) "My father . . . and my only brother . . . . my father and my brother . . . . my father and my brother (p. 88) "finish with your spears and your swords" (p. 90)  effaced by the ravages of time" (p.1) "united by the solemn covenant of marriage" (p. 58) "blinded by the sordid advice of a menial junto of Councilors & priests" (p. 65) "surprise occasioned by the story of the flight" (p. 65) "Undaunted by the cruel demand & haughty menace of the Sciotan government" (p. 72) "beloved by the subjects of the empire of Kentuck" (p. 92) "exhausted by the fatigues of a most bloody contest" (p. 94) "prevented by the arrival of Hamboon" (p. 101) "encircled by the walls of a fort" (p. 102) "destroyed by the cruel sword of Sambal" (p. 112)

Hebrew Evidence in Ancient American Records

http://www.strangite.org/Chiasmus.htm 

The only Hebraisms worth discussing are those which could not be culled from the KJV Bible.  Any yokel can insert Hebraisms into a text by copying from the English Bible.  However, it is only those Hebraisms which can not be found that way which are of significance.  The Spalding MS is of no consequence for that purpose.  You might want to read my “Epistolary Form in the Book of Mormon,” FARMS Review, 22/2 (2010):125-135, online at http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=22&num=2&id=807.

In fact, since the Book of Mormon was engraved in Egyptian, we should also be looking for Egyptianisms -- of which we find many, which could not possibly be there if the whole was an invention of Joseph Smith.

Quote

Anyways, it's just a change of goal post. My original point: It is not impressive to find NHM in a area that is rich of ancient inscriptions. 

Of course it is not impressive if you come to the issue with your mind already made up, and without any consideration for the overall context.

I provide a spectrum of evidence in summary form in my “The Preposterous Book of Mormon: A Singular Advantage,” lecture, August 8, 2014, at the annual FAIRMORMON Conference, Provo, Utah, online at http://www.fairmormon.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/PREPOSTEROUS-BOOK-OF-MORMON.pdf ,

Edited February 22, 2017 by Robert F. Smith

[Robert F. Smith]

42 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

I don't want to hijack this thread but Vern Holley Debunked? I don't think so.  I have personally gone through period maps and found a majority of the village sites Holley names in his list.  Which made me more than satisfied that he was onto something.  What I also discovered was that the apologists who claimed to have debunked Holley used slight of hand (in my opinion) and were less than honest.  So If I could do it why couldn't the apologists?  Because they didn't want to?  Had a motivation not to? I don't know...but I was certainly able to find the names in period maps from the 1820's

.....................................................

Of course some of those names appear on early and later maps.  What I thought idiotic was for Holley to simply use later maps, which is atrocious methodology, and which reached very mixed results.  I have no problem with anyone using early maps and drawing whatever conclusion they like from them.  I have written extensively on the subject myself.  Read the reviews of Holley which I cited and you will find that it is not only the maps which are at issue.  His debunking was both timely and accurate.  I have never read a substantive defense of his work and I don't really much care for what is pejoratively termed "apologetics."  I prefer good, sound scholarship.  We see too little of that.

[MormonVideoGame]

 

2 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

J. Gorsdorf and H. Vogt, “Radiocarbon Datings from the AlMaqah Temple of Bar’an, Marib, Republic of Yemen: Approximately 800 Cal B.C. to Cal 600 B.C.,” Radiocarbon, 43/3 (2001):1363-1369.

Your paper says " The temple, of which four building phases could be observed up to now, was used from 9th century BC till the end of the 4th century AD" So CFR that NHM altar was created in 600 BC. 

Please note the Title is "RADIOCARBON DATINGS FROM THE ALMAQAH TEMPLE OF BAR’AN, MA’RIB, REPUBLIC OF YEMEN: APPROXIMATELY 800 CAL BC TO 600 CAL AD"

2 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

That is just my point.  Most of those 900 inscriptions come from after Lehi.  

CFR 

Your paper says, "Ma’rib is the most famous archaeological site in Yemen" So it proves my point that NHM altar was found in a region that has thousands of inscriptions. So please CFR that the altar dates to 600 BC and that few inscriptions were created in that period. 

Quote

Burkhard Vogt, "Les temples de Ma'rib," in Yemen: au pays de la reine de Saba (Paris: Flammarion, 1997), 144 (photo).

What is that? I don't speak Portuguese. 

2 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I already explained to you that no one knows what ancient South Arabic NHM means, but that a Hebrew-speaker would naturally see a meaning in his own language and maybe place a wordplay in the text.  No proof is needed.  It is merely a correlation which fits with all the other data.  Only non-scholars take items out of context.

CFR that Hebrews would understand NHM to mean "to mourn", academic papers please. Still, Book of Mormon never says the meaning of Nahom like it does for Rabbanah and Rameumptom.

Just like Kerry Shirts said (former Hebraism apologist): just because it's possible it doesn't mean it's true. I was paraphrasing.  

2 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

There are only a handful of cases in the Book of Mormon in which a name is defined in the text -- I gave two examples which are exactly correct:  Rabbanah, “which is, being interpreted, ‘powerful’ or ‘great king’” (Alma 18:13); Rameumptom, "Holy-Stand; a place of standing which was high above the head" (Alma 31:13,23).  Those are Hebrew etymologies.

So the rest is simply speculation and possibilities right?

CFR that Rabbanah and Rameumptom really mean that, and CFR that information couldn't possibly be available to Joseph Smith or anyone related to him. Scholarly papers and dictionaries please. 

2 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Of course it is not impressive if you come to the issue with your mind already made up, and without any consideration for the overall context.

I am willing to change my mind, but I can't quickly jump to conclusions. I need to be skeptical first. Down deep in my heart I still want the Book of Mormon to be true, but I won't make the mistake again of jumping quickly to conclusions.  

Edited February 21, 2017 by MormonVideoGame

[Darren10]

2 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

I don't want to hijack this thread but Vern Holley Debunked? I don't think so.  I have personally gone through period maps and found a majority of the village sites Holley names in his list.  Which made me more than satisfied that he was onto something.  What I also discovered was that the apologists who claimed to have debunked Holley used slight of hand (in my opinion) and were less than honest.  So If I could do it why couldn't the apologists?  Because they didn't want to?  Had a motivation not to? I don't know...but I was certainly able to find the names in period maps from the 1820's

" used slight of hand..."

This made me think of Jeff Lindsey who regularly speaks with tongue-in-cheek. It's almost a fingerprint of his.

 

Quote

Let's start with Tecumseh, the supposed origin of Teancum. Hmmm. Oh, I see it now: take off the last sylable, add "an" after the "Te," and there you have it. Tecumseh = Teancum. Kind of like John = Joshua, see? But could Joseph have known about Tecumseh, Ontario? As a prophet of God, yes, but as a plagiarizer, probably not. You see, there's a slight problem with Tecumseh, Ontario in this context: it didn't get that name until 1912. As Wikipedia explains, "Originally known as Ryegate Postal Station when it was first settled in 1792, Tecumseh was renamed in 1912 after the Shawnee tribe leader of the same name. It was officially incorporated as a town in 1921" (as viewed July 30, 2007). I've noticed some anti-Mormon sites speak of Tecumseh, Michigan instead of the Tecumseh, Ontario, replacing a ridiculous candidate with one that is merely silly (and even further from Joseph Smith than its later Canadian cousin). A quick Wiki-check of the history of the Michigan township indicates that this tiny Western suburb of Detroit had just barely been settled by a tiny handful of people in the late 1820s, but at least there was a village of Tecumseh in 1824. Insignificant and remote for those in Joseph Smith's area, it's hard to imagine Joseph being aware of that village and feeling some need to stick it on a mental map of the Book of Mormon. And while he may well have heard of the Indian warrior Tecumseh, it's still quited a stretch to get Teancum from that name.
 

Yup, I could have sworn I remember him taking on the Great Lakes map model. Was this what you were thinking of?

http://mormanity.blogspot.com/2007/07/book-of-mormon-plagiarism-hawaiian.html

Edited February 21, 2017 by Darren10

[Darren10]

41 minutes ago, MormonVideoGame said:

 

Your paper says " The temple, of which four building phases could be observed up to now, was used from 9th century BC till the end of the 4th century AD" So CFR that NHM altar was created in 600 BC. 

Please note the Title is "RADIOCARBON DATINGS FROM THE ALMAQAH TEMPLE OF BAR’AN, MA’RIB, REPUBLIC OF YEMEN: APPROXIMATELY 800 CAL BC TO 600 CAL AD"

CFR 

Your paper says, "Ma’rib is the most famous archaeological site in Yemen" So it proves my point that NHM altar was found in a region that has thousands of inscriptions. So please CFR that the altar dates to 600 BC and that few inscriptions were created in that period. 

What is that? I don't speak Portuguese. 

CFR that Hebrews would understand NHM to mean "to mourn", academic papers please. Still, Book of Mormon never says the meaning of Nahom like it does for Rabbanah and Rameumptom.

Just like Kerry Shirts said (former Hebraism apologist): just because it's possible it doesn't mean it's true. I was paraphrasing.  

So the rest is simply speculation and possibilities right?

CFR that Rabbanah and Rameumptom really mean that, and CFR that information couldn't possibly be available to Joseph Smith or anyone related to him. Scholarly papers and dictionaries please. 

I am willing to change my mind, but I can't quickly jump to conclusions because I am not an apologist. I need to be skeptical first. Down deep in my heart I still want the Book of Mormon to be true, but I won't make the mistake again of jumping quickly to conclusions.  

"What is that? I don't speak Portuguese." - Try French.

"CFR that Hebrews would understand NHM to mean "to mourn"" - http://wrs.edu/Materials_for_Web_Site/Journals/12-1 Feb-2005/Prussic - Divine Repentance.pdf  - 2nd paragraph regarding NHM.

As for why a tribe would name themselves that...who knows but it is commonly known that names were derived from common events such as lots of sorrow which, if you were to run the largest cemetery in a region, you may consider that to be a common event. Lots of people are named Dolores. It's a pretty name  I think but here's the meaning...it might interest you: http://www.behindthename.com/name/dolores.

"CFR that Rabbanah and Rameumptom really mean that, and CFR that information couldn't possibly be available to Joseph Smith or anyone related to him. Scholarly papers and dictionaries please."

Quote

This honorific title, which the Book of Mormon itself glosses with “powerful or great king,” obviously is derived from the common Semitic root rbb, “large, great, many.” For English speakers, the most widely known use of this root might be Rabbi.[1] For the common Semitic ending -ān used as an abstract marker, confer HEBREW words such as šulḥān, “table,” and, with the Canaanite shift, pittārôn, “meaning (of a dream).”[2] The final /ah/ of RABBANAH is probably from the Semitic feminine ending used as an abstract.[3]

The Book of John 20:16 preserves an Aramaic honorific title from the same root, Rabboni, “my master” (applied by Mary Madgalene to JESUS just after His resurrection) that is probably based on the common Aramaic title rabbânâʾ[4] However, that Aramaic may have influenced the Lamanite title RABBANAH is unlikely. Though in general, Aramaic was known by some Jewish officials a hundred years before LEHI's departure (see 2 Kings 18:26, where “Syrian” in the King James represents the HEBREW word for Aramaic), LEHI's departure is probably too early in the history of the HEBREW language for specific Aramaic forms to have directly influenced Book of Mormon common nouns.[5] Nevertheless, because Aramaic and HEBREW are closely related North-west Semitic languages, they share many lexemes.

In addition to the HEBREW and Aramaic use of this lexeme, East Semitic, and particularly Babylonian, also contains examples of rbb in analogical constructions. The word rab-banûtu, “position of rab banî,” is the abstract form of rab banî, meaning “an administrator of temple property,” and its less frequently attested variant rabbānû. An etymologically related word, rabiānu, means “mayor, headman.”[6]

The title cannot be derived from the Aramaic ʾabbaʾ, “father” (as in Reynolds, Story of the Book of Mormon, p. 294).

https://onoma.lib.byu.edu/index.php/RABBANAH

Quote

The name RAMEUMPTOM is defined in the Book of Mormon as “the holy stand” (Alma 31:21&23) and is described as “a place of standing, which was high above the head” (Alma 31:13).[1]

The first element of the name is most likely related to HEBREW rām, “to be high, to be exalted,” and rāmâ, “eminence, high place,” the same root that appears in the biblical geographic name RAMAH, “hill” (cf. Book of Mormon RAMAH). RAMEUMPTOM could be a noun chain with râme as a masculine construct plural, meaning “the elevations of.” The -umptom would then be a nomen rectum, possibly from HEBREW ʿōmed , “place, position, location,” with either a pronominal suffix, analogous to the 3rd person plural possessive pronoun -ām,[2] or with the nominalizing ending –ōm.[3] The latter ending is probably to be preferred because of the analog form in Arabic, ʿumdān “standing.” Given these two HEBREW lexemes, rām and ʿōmed, the meaning of RAMEUMPTOM would then be “the heights/ elevations of (their) stand” (RFS), a definition that accords well with the interpretation that the Book of Mormon writers provided.

The Masoretic pronunciation ʿōmed for “stand” denotes a “qutl” form that would have originally been pronounced with an initial /u/, as in Arabic ʿumdān.[4] This could explain the /u/ vowel rather than the /o/ of ʿōmed. The “qutl” form with affix would also explain why there is no vowel between the m and the t.[5]

The fact that the /p/ is the locus of several scribal corrections in the original and the printer’s manuscripts may indicate an initial question in the dictation process about its presence in this proper name.[6] (Semitic languages in general do not tolerate consonant clusters, such as -mpt-.) However, what might seem like an extraneous /p/ and the unvoicing of voiced /d/ can be explained phonetically. The insertion of a bilabial voiceless plosive between the preceding bilabial /m/ and a following dental is not without precedent. In English, for example, the p in redemption represents a phonetic spelling of redeem plus the nominalizing ending –tion. The phenomenon also occurs in the Semitic languages. The common Semitic word for “sun” is šmš, the vowels varying between šamaš and šamšu. The latter form cannot be pronounced without the insertion of a voiceless bilabial plosive, a /p/. Thus, the HEBREW personal name Šimšōn, which is based on šmš, is sometimes spelled with a /p/ when the name passes into another language, such as Greek, Sampson.[7]

The voiceless /t/ instead of the voiced /d/ can be explained by assimilation. I.e., the bilabial /m/ produces the voiceless /p/ before a dental, and the voiceless /p/ influences the voiced dental /d/, becoming the unvoiced /t/.

https://onoma.lib.byu.edu/index.php/RAMEUMPTOM

If you can cite any Hebrew scholar who has refuted these posts or any portion of them, let me know.

[Johnnie Cake]

2 hours ago, Darren10 said:

http://en.fairmormon.org/Question:_How_valid_are_the_names_used_in_the_Holley_Map%3F

But Alma, West Virginia is there...in 1895 it's name was changed to Centerville, West Virginia

[MormonVideoGame]

49 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

If you can cite any Hebrew scholar who has refuted these posts or any portion of them, let me know.

I don't have time to read them right now, but the debate may be over thanks to Robert Smith for citing an important paper.  

Görsdorf, Jochen, and Burkhardt Vogt. "Radiocarbon Datings from the Almaqah Temple of Bar'an, Ma'rib, Republic of Yemen: Approximately 800 cal BC to 600 cal AD." Radiocarbon 43.03 (2001): 1363-1369.

In other words that NHM altar may date after Lehi times. The Paper says, "The temple, of which four building phases could be observed up to now, was used from 9th century BC till the end of the 4th century AD". The Paper also says ""Ma’rib is the most famous archaeological site in Yemen" 

and Robert Smith didn't present any evidence that NHM altar dates to 600 BC. 

4 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Robert with all due respect 

the debate is probably over now 

Edited February 21, 2017 by MormonVideoGame

[Johnnie Cake]

2 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Of course some of those names appear on early and later maps.  What I thought idiotic was for Holley to simply use later maps, which is atrocious methodology, and which reached very mixed results.  I have no problem with anyone using early maps and drawing whatever conclusion they like from them.  I have written extensively on the subject myself.  Read the reviews of Holley which I cited and you will find that it is not only the maps which are at issue.  His debunking was both timely and accurate.  I have never read a substantive defense of his work and I don't really much care for what is pejoratively termed "apologetics."  I prefer good, sound scholarship.  We see too little of that.

And what I found when I did my search was that apologist only used incorporated dates instead of when a village was first settled...to use a later map or dismiss a village because it was incorporated are both bogus methodologies in my opinion.

[Johnnie Cake]

1 hour ago, Darren10 said:

" used slight of hand..."

This made me think of Jeff Lindsey who regularly speaks with tongue-in-cheek. It's almost a fingerprint of his.

 

Yup, I could have sworn I remember him taking on the Great Lakes map model. Was this what you were thinking of?

http://mormanity.blogspot.com/2007/07/book-of-mormon-plagiarism-hawaiian.html

Tecumseh was the name of a well known Shawnee chief, leader of a First Nations confederacy, military leader in the War of 1812 (born c 1768 in south-central Ohio; died 5 October 1813 near Moraviantown, ON...that his name is associated with Moraviantown is also interesting given Holley's theory

Too easy

[Darren10]

48 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

But Alma, West Virginia is there...in 1895 it's name was changed to Centerville, West Virginia

 

37 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Tecumseh was the name of a well known Shawnee chief, leader of a First Nations confederacy, military leader in the War of 1812 (born c 1768 in south-central Ohio; died 5 October 1813 near Moraviantown, ON...that his name is associated with Moraviantown is also interesting given Holley's theory

Too easy

It is interesting but if it doesn't appear on the map until 1912 it's hard to use the Great Lakes Map Theory to explain how Joseph Smith got that name. Did Joseph Smith know of the Shawnee Chief Tecumesh? Do you have a theory as to how he got to learn that name?

[Darren10]

Here's what FAIRMORMON says of the name Alma:

Quote

In the area indicated on the Holley map, modern maps show that there is a small, unincorporated community called Centerville, also known as Alma, in Tyler County, West Virginia, United States. Coordinates: 39°25′55″N 80°50′24″W. However, when we view the 1822 map of Virginia, we cannot find the name "Alma" anywhere.

If it wasn't on the1822 map, which map does it appear on?

Edited February 21, 2017 by Darren10

[Darren10]

56 minutes ago, MormonVideoGame said:

I don't have time to read them right now, but the debate may be over thanks to Robert Smith for citing an important paper.  

Görsdorf, Jochen, and Burkhardt Vogt. "Radiocarbon Datings from the Almaqah Temple of Bar'an, Ma'rib, Republic of Yemen: Approximately 800 cal BC to 600 cal AD." Radiocarbon 43.03 (2001): 1363-1369.

In other words that NHM altar may date after Lehi times. The Paper says, "The temple, of which four building phases could be observed up to now, was used from 9th century BC till the end of the 4th century AD". The Paper also says ""Ma’rib is the most famous archaeological site in Yemen" 

and Robert Smith didn't present any evidence that NHM altar dates to 600 BC. 

the debate is probably over now 

Huh? I asked you if any Hebrew scholar refutes what the Book of Mormon Onomasticon Project found at BYU Library says regarding Rabbanah or Rameumpton.

[clarkgoble]

15 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

 

It is interesting but if it doesn't appear on the map until 1912 it's hard to use the Great Lakes Map Theory to explain how Joseph Smith got that name. Did Joseph Smith know of the Shawnee Chief Tecumesh? Do you have a theory as to how he got to learn that name?

Tecumseh was a VERY well known figure from the early 19th century and would almost certainly have been known by Joseph.

Edited February 21, 2017 by clarkgoble

[Darren10]

37 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Tecumseh was a VERY well known figure from the early 19th century and would almost certainly have been known by Joseph.

Other than that, is there a theory as to how Joseph Smith came to learn of him? 

[Johnnie Cake]

50 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

 

It is interesting but if it doesn't appear on the map until 1912 it's hard to use the Great Lakes Map Theory to explain how Joseph Smith got that name. Did Joseph Smith know of the Shawnee Chief Tecumesh? Do you have a theory as to how he got to learn that name?

Did you not read what I posted?  Tecumesh was the well known name of an area Indian Chief who had supported the British during the War of 1812.   

[Darren10]

1 hour ago, MormonVideoGame said:

I don't have time to read them right now, but the debate may be over thanks to Robert Smith for citing an important paper.  

Görsdorf, Jochen, and Burkhardt Vogt. "Radiocarbon Datings from the Almaqah Temple of Bar'an, Ma'rib, Republic of Yemen: Approximately 800 cal BC to 600 cal AD." Radiocarbon 43.03 (2001): 1363-1369.

In other words that NHM altar may date after Lehi times. The Paper says, "The temple, of which four building phases could be observed up to now, was used from 9th century BC till the end of the 4th century AD". The Paper also says ""Ma’rib is the most famous archaeological site in Yemen" 

and Robert Smith didn't present any evidence that NHM altar dates to 600 BC. 

the debate is probably over now 

I may be wrong but didn't you just cite that the temple at the location if the altar was used "from 9th century BC..."?

[Darren10]

5 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Did you not read what I posted?  Tecumesh was the well known name of an area Indian Chief who had supported the British during the War of 1812.   

Fine. What theory is there that Joseph Smith learned of him? 

Edited February 21, 2017 by Darren10

[Johnnie Cake]

1 minute ago, Darren10 said:

Other than that, is there a theory as to how Joseph Smith came to learn of him? 

Tecumseh was part of the local folklore...he was killed a mere 280 miles from Joseph's home town of Palmyra

[Johnnie Cake]

6 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

Other than that, is there a theory as to how Joseph Smith came to learn of him? 

Its all speculation and conjecture...

[Darren10]

Well, according to VideoGame, that us not a valid argument. All apologetics. Perhaps you need to be more skeptical.  

Edited February 22, 2017 by Darren10