God probably won't allow us to find Nahom

[Robert F. Smith]

7 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Looking at the maps above Bountiful seems to be north east of Nahom, like Nahom seems to be south east of Jerusalem. So you can argue going "east" doesn't have to be a straight line, but then why would Nephi use south east?    

Jerusalem is not the point from which Nephi is describing his direction of travel.  Go back and read the text again, and try to focus on what is actually being said.  That you don't even have the elementary directions right means that you are not taking any of this seriously.

7 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

What makes a Biblical passage literal and what makes it a metaphor?  Anyway,  you are missing the point Robert, I told Ryan he was cherry picking the predictions.  

What you may or may not have told Ryan is not relevant.  Actual scholarly analysis is relevant.  The difference is crucial, Sam.

[Glenn101]

16 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Looking at the maps above Bountiful seems to be north east of Nahom, like Nahom seems to be south east of Jerusalem. So you can argue going "east" doesn't have to be a straight line, but then why would Nephi use south east?   

But from Nahom/Nehem it much more of a nearly easterly direction than northeast. Northeast is actually 45 degrees between north and east. East by North-east would be 67.5 degrees past North towards the east. From the Nahom area towards Khor Kharfot or Khor Rori is just a few degrees from dead on East. That fits the description Nephi gave very well. These are all points that have been made long ago by several people doing the research. Have you read up on theat research? This is something I have asked before but do not recall you providing an answer.

Glenn

Edited October 23, 2017 by Glenn101
spelling

[Robert F. Smith]

11 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Both Khofot and Khor Rori seem to be north east. 

Even with Ryan's adjustment it still looks north east. 

The cardinal directions are north (N), east (E), south (S), west (W), at 90° angles on the compass. The ordinal (or intercardinal) directions are northeast (NE), southeast (SE), southwest (SW) and northwest (NW)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f8/Compass_Rose_English_North.svg/237px-Compass_Rose_English_North.svg.png .

It may look NE to someone who cannot read a map, Sam, but my question for you would be:  Why aren't you able to admit ordinary facts?  This is typical of evangelical fundamentalist anti-Mormons uninterested in factual discussion.

See https://www.geopolitica.ru/sites/default/files/yemen-map.gif  .

Edited October 22, 2017 by Robert F. Smith

[Okrahomer]

On 10/21/2017 at 6:52 PM, SamuelTheLamanite said:

In all honesty I don't see wordplay for Nahom in the book of Mormon, shouldn't we expect for the daughters of Ishmael to cry for the death of their father?

1 Nephi 16

34 And it came to pass that Ishmael died, and was buried in the place which was called Nahom.

35 And it came to pass that the daughters of Ishmael did mourn exceedingly, because of the loss of their father,

[SamuelTheLamanite]

6 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The cardinal directions are north (N), east (E), south (S), west (W), at 90° angles on the compass. The ordinal (or intercardinal) directions are northeast (NE), southeast (SE), southwest (SW) and northwest (NW)

I used a compass, you are right! Bountiful is closer to East than it is to north east from Nihm. However, using the same compass Nihm is closer to south than it is to south east from the Valley of Lemmuel (Wadi Tayyib al-Ism). I used Google Earth  to use the compass, but here are the maps you find online.  So using "east" and "south-east" won't get us anywhere because we don't know the exact direction. 

 

6 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

  This is typical of evangelical fundamentalist anti-Mormons uninterested in factual discussion.

You think I am evangelical? 

2 hours ago, Okrahomer said:

1 Nephi 16

34 And it came to pass that Ishmael died, and was buried in the place which was called Nahom.

35 And it came to pass that the daughters of Ishmael did mourn exceedingly, because of the loss of their father,

So had Ishmael been buried somewhere else Nephi wouldn't mention the daughters of Ishmael crying exceedingly for their father? 

Edited October 23, 2017 by SamuelTheLamanite

[SamuelTheLamanite]

10 hours ago, Glenn101 said:

But from Nahom/Nehem it much more of a nearly easterly direction than northeast. Northeast is actually 45 degrees between north and east. East by North-east would be 67.5 degrees past North towards the east. From the Nahom area towards Khor Kharfot or Khor Rori is just a few degrees from dead on East. That fits the description Nephi gave very well. These are all points that have been made long ago by several people doing the research. Have you read up on theat research? This is something I have asked before but do not recall you providing an answer.

Glenn

Yes, I told Robert he was right 

Edited October 23, 2017 by SamuelTheLamanite

[SamuelTheLamanite]

23 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

.  Even RT avoided that, and, when I caught him at it, he sometimes admitted his fault. 

Invite RT to the conversation 

23 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Good idea.  However, I already provided plenty of sources on wordplay in Hebrew, Arabic, and the ancient Near East, and that meant nothing to you. 

You did, but none are of ancient Hebrews doing wordplay for an Arabic site. 

 

[Rajah Manchou]

On 10/21/2017 at 11:00 PM, Ryan Dahle said:

The Book of Mormon text itself is what is doing the prediction. It says things about the ancient past, about geography, and in some cases about scientific phenomena that in many cases are unlikely and in some cases nearly impossible for someone in New York in 1829 to know about. Thus it made many predictions about the world and about the past before (not after) history, archeology, or science was developed enough to verify them.

What prediction did the Book of Mormon make in this case?

The Saana/Senna area in Arabia was known as a departure point for Jews to distant lands as early as 1809. 

I'm a believer in Book of Mormon historicity, but it would have taken all but 5 minutes for someone in 1829 to (1) read the mention of Saana/Senna as the source of Jewish migrants with scrolls and brass plates in Claudius Buchanan's Star in the East, (2) look for it on a map, (3) find the word Nehem just above it.

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Invite RT to the conversation 

An honest man admits when he is wrong.  Why aren't you willing to do so, Sam?

3 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

You did, but none are of ancient Hebrews doing wordplay for an Arabic site. 

No scholar would even make that argument.  You clearly have no idea what wordplay is, Sam, and your responses are dedicated only to obfuscation.

[Okrahomer]

5 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

So had Ishmael been buried somewhere else Nephi wouldn't mention the daughters of Ishmael crying exceedingly for their father? 

Not that it will make the slightest difference to you, but it was Mormon actually.  Mormon wrote these words as an abridgement of Nephi’s record, and it was he who made the decision to include the name of Ishmael’s burial place along with a description of his daughters’ exceeding mourning.

Most of the place names included in the Book of Mormon are names the Lehites assigned to those locations themselves (Valley of Lemuel, River of Laman, Land of Lehi); so the fact that this one place—Nahom—is included in the text as a preexistent place name is unique and therefore significant.

Mormon’s abridgement does not tell us where Lehi was buried.  It doesn’t even mention Sariah’s death; nor do we know where Nephi was buried.  We also know nothing about anyone’s reaction.  But for some reason, Mormon opted to include these details in the case of Ishmael.  That seems (at least to me) to be an interesting choice—especially in view of the pivotal role Lehi and Nephi played in the founding of the Lehite nation.

I do not know if we are seeing actual “wordplay” at work here; and it doesn’t much matter to me if the NHM inscriptions at Bar’an have a real connection to the Book of Mormon Nahom.  But your “mere coincidence” arguments have become increasingly unconvincing.

Edited October 23, 2017 by Okrahomer

[Robert F. Smith]

4 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

I used a compass, you are right! Bountiful is closer to East than it is to north east from Nihm. However, using the same compass Nihm is closer to south than it is to south east from the Valley of Lemmuel (Wadi Tayyib al-Ism). I used Google Earth  to use the compass, but here are the maps you find online.  So using "east" and "south-east" won't get us anywhere because we don't know the exact direction.

As I have pointed out to you before, we are not talking about modern land navigation with the magnetic compass.  No scholar would expect an ancient clan moving through that territory to be using "exact" directions.  They are always understood to be general in nature.  Even the simplest facts of life seem to completely escape you, Sam.

4 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

You think I am evangelical? 

You think and talk like one -- see Mark Noll, The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), "The scandal of the evangelical mind is that there is not much of an evangelical mind."  Professor Noll is an evangelical himself.

4 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

So had Ishmael been buried somewhere else Nephi wouldn't mention the daughters of Ishmael crying exceedingly for their father? 

The daughters of Ishmael would always cry and mourn their father -- it is always the women who are the keeners in both Arab and Hebrew culture.  That's not the issue.  Puns are always opportunistic.  Not everything is a pun.  So a writer cannot make a pun on everything.  Only when the opportunity presents itself can a pun be constructed.  If Ishmael had died at Shazer, it would not be possible to use that toponym as a pun on crying and mourning.  You don't understand the principles of wordplay because you haven't bothered to spend time reading the sources I cited for you.  You have made your ignorance the measure of all reality.

[Glenn101]

8 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

I used a compass, you are right! Bountiful is closer to East than it is to north east from Nihm. However, using the same compass Nihm is closer to south than it is to south east from the Valley of Lemmuel (Wadi Tayyib al-Ism). I used Google Earth  to use the compass, but here are the maps you find online.  So using "east" and "south-east" won't get us anywhere because we don't know the exact direction. 

It will get us somewhere. It will get us down the Arabian peninsula because that is the only way that the party could have gone given the starting point and the general directions. The course is bounded by the Red Sea on the western side. The actual directions and turning point, given what we know now are inescapable, for most.

Glenn

[Robert F. Smith]

11 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

What prediction did the Book of Mormon make in this case?

The Saana/Senna area in Arabia was known as a departure point for Jews to distant lands as early as 1809. 

I'm a believer in Book of Mormon historicity, but it would have taken all but 5 minutes for someone in 1829 to (1) read the mention of Saana/Senna as the source of Jewish migrants with scrolls and brass plates in Claudius Buchanan's Star in the East, (2) look for it on a map, (3) find the word Nehem just above it.

I don't know what Ryan's response might be to your question, but the BofM makes a multitude of claims which can be tested (as predictions of what later scholarship would show).  Some of those many claims could conceivably have been garnered from books and journals already published before the BofM was available.  This is an argument which Dan Vogel has frequently made -- following up on some of the sources Fawn Brodie and the Tanners have listed in their discussions.  The problem such a theory poses is that it makes of Joseph Smith an ardent scholar at least by his late teen years.  Yet the available writing by him in those years is awful, and indicates a person incapable of such herculean and scholarly efforts.  His own wife did not believe that he had that capacity.  Bill Hamblin refers to that fictional notion as Joseph's "Harvard years."  However, even if we allow that he found the items claimed to be available to him in contemporary publications (certainly not in "all of 5 minutes"), we still have an enormous number of items which he could not have known at that time, and discoveries would not be made in all too many of them until long after Joseph's death.

[Gervin]

On ‎9‎/‎14‎/‎2017 at 11:19 AM, SamuelTheLamanite said:

 

I don't believe Nehem in Arabia is Book of Mormon's Nahom because Nehem (tribal territory) is located in the mountains, there was no reason for Lehi and his family to enter 150 miles of dangerous mountains without food and water.  

Archaeology and Nihimite tribes notwithstanding, I find the 1 Nephi passages to be wholly without credibility because Nephi and family are sustained by the eating of raw meat and claim (in the following verse) that they were blessed because they kept the commandments of God.  Hardly.  Leviticus 17:

י  וְאִישׁ אִישׁ מִבֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל, וּמִן-הַגֵּר הַגָּר בְּתוֹכָם, אֲשֶׁר יֹאכַל, כָּל-דָּם--וְנָתַתִּי פָנַי, בַּנֶּפֶשׁ הָאֹכֶלֶת אֶת-הַדָּם, וְהִכְרַתִּי אֹתָהּ, מִקֶּרֶב עַמָּהּ.	10 And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among them, that eateth any manner of blood, I will set My face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people.
יא  כִּי נֶפֶשׁ הַבָּשָׂר, בַּדָּם הִוא, וַאֲנִי נְתַתִּיו לָכֶם עַל-הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, לְכַפֵּר עַל-נַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם:  כִּי-הַדָּם הוּא, בַּנֶּפֶשׁ יְכַפֵּר.	11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that maketh atonement by reason of the life.
יב  עַל-כֵּן אָמַרְתִּי לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, כָּל-נֶפֶשׁ מִכֶּם לֹא-תֹאכַל דָּם; וְהַגֵּר הַגָּר בְּתוֹכְכֶם, לֹא-יֹאכַל דָּם.	12 Therefore I said unto the children of Israel: No soul of you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood.
יג  וְאִישׁ אִישׁ מִבְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, וּמִן-הַגֵּר הַגָּר בְּתוֹכָם, אֲשֶׁר יָצוּד צֵיד חַיָּה אוֹ-עוֹף, אֲשֶׁר יֵאָכֵל--וְשָׁפַךְ, אֶת-דָּמוֹ, וְכִסָּהוּ, בֶּעָפָר.	13 And whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among them, that taketh in hunting any beast or fowl that may be eaten, he shall pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust.
יד  כִּי-נֶפֶשׁ כָּל-בָּשָׂר, דָּמוֹ בְנַפְשׁוֹ הוּא, וָאֹמַר לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, דַּם כָּל-בָּשָׂר לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ:  כִּי נֶפֶשׁ כָּל-בָּשָׂר דָּמוֹ הִוא, כָּל-אֹכְלָיו יִכָּרֵת.	14 For as to the life of all flesh, the blood thereof is all one with the life thereof; therefore I said unto the children of Israel: Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh; for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof; whosoever eateth it shall be cut off.

[SamuelTheLamanite]

8 hours ago, Glenn101 said:

It will get us somewhere. It will get us down the Arabian peninsula because that is the only way that the party could have gone given the starting point and the general directions. The course is bounded by the Red Sea on the western side. The actual directions and turning point, given what we know now are inescapable, for most.

I meant the book of Mormon directions are not exact. For example Nihm is not exactly south east from the valley of Lemuel. I used to compass.  

[SamuelTheLamanite]

12 hours ago, Okrahomer said:

Mormon’s abridgement does not tell us where Lehi was buried.  It doesn’t even mention Sariah’s death; nor do we know where Nephi was buried.  We also know nothing about anyone’s reaction.  

There are many things that the book of Mormon mentions only once. For example we  never get a ship again in the book of Mormon.  Book of Mormon did mention the death and burial of Ismael, so it is natural to assume it would also mention the daughters crying. Mosiah 21:9 mentions  "the daughter mourning for their father",  so I honestly don't understand why it is significant. Isn't it a coincidence that Ismael died in or near Nahom anyway?  

12 hours ago, Okrahomer said:

Not that it will make the slightest difference to you, but it was Mormon actually.  Mormon wrote these words as an abridgement of Nephi’s record, and it was he who made the decision to include the name of Ishmael’s burial place along with a description of his daughters’ exceeding mourning

 I am not sure how Mormon (almost 1000 years later) would know ancient Hebrew wordplay,  Nephi language got corrupt.    

 

Edited October 23, 2017 by SamuelTheLamanite

[Benjamin McGuire]

36 minutes ago, Gervin said:

Archaeology and Nihimite tribes notwithstanding, I find the 1 Nephi passages to be wholly without credibility because Nephi and family are sustained by the eating of raw meat and claim (in the following verse) that they were blessed because they kept the commandments of God.  Hardly.  Leviticus 17:

י  וְאִישׁ אִישׁ מִבֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל, וּמִן-הַגֵּר הַגָּר בְּתוֹכָם, אֲשֶׁר יֹאכַל, כָּל-דָּם--וְנָתַתִּי פָנַי, בַּנֶּפֶשׁ הָאֹכֶלֶת אֶת-הַדָּם, וְהִכְרַתִּי אֹתָהּ, מִקֶּרֶב עַמָּהּ.	10 And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among them, that eateth any manner of blood, I will set My face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people.
יא  כִּי נֶפֶשׁ הַבָּשָׂר, בַּדָּם הִוא, וַאֲנִי נְתַתִּיו לָכֶם עַל-הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, לְכַפֵּר עַל-נַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם:  כִּי-הַדָּם הוּא, בַּנֶּפֶשׁ יְכַפֵּר.	11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that maketh atonement by reason of the life.
יב  עַל-כֵּן אָמַרְתִּי לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, כָּל-נֶפֶשׁ מִכֶּם לֹא-תֹאכַל דָּם; וְהַגֵּר הַגָּר בְּתוֹכְכֶם, לֹא-יֹאכַל דָּם.	12 Therefore I said unto the children of Israel: No soul of you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood.
יג  וְאִישׁ אִישׁ מִבְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, וּמִן-הַגֵּר הַגָּר בְּתוֹכָם, אֲשֶׁר יָצוּד צֵיד חַיָּה אוֹ-עוֹף, אֲשֶׁר יֵאָכֵל--וְשָׁפַךְ, אֶת-דָּמוֹ, וְכִסָּהוּ, בֶּעָפָר.	13 And whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among them, that taketh in hunting any beast or fowl that may be eaten, he shall pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust.
יד  כִּי-נֶפֶשׁ כָּל-בָּשָׂר, דָּמוֹ בְנַפְשׁוֹ הוּא, וָאֹמַר לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, דַּם כָּל-בָּשָׂר לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ:  כִּי נֶפֶשׁ כָּל-בָּשָׂר דָּמוֹ הִוא, כָּל-אֹכְלָיו יִכָּרֵת.	14 For as to the life of all flesh, the blood thereof is all one with the life thereof; therefore I said unto the children of Israel: Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh; for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof; whosoever eateth it shall be cut off.

You simply drain the blood from the carcass (as indicated in verse 13). Rabbinic texts suggest that there is a proper way to slaughter an animal to remove as much blood as possible. However, since (as you imply) not cooking the meat results in some blood being left, the same texts mention that you can use salt to draw out the remaining blood. After of course, you cut out the major arteries and veins, and so on. The time that the meat should be salted is the time that it takes to walk a mile (about 18-20 minutes or so). At any rate, once this is done, the meat is considered to be properly prepared, and cooking isn't necessary.

The idea though that you pour the blood out into the dust if you kill the animal while hunting, is of course meant to be a contrast with the earlier verses, where the blood is supposed to be used to make an offering (which you would do with a domesticated animal being butchered).

The fact that the meat is eaten raw doesn't violate Leviticus 17.

Edited October 23, 2017 by Benjamin McGuire

[Okrahomer]

9 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

For example we  never get a ship again in the book of Mormon.

You do damage to your arguments as well as your credibility when you make statements like the one bolded above:

Alma 63

1. [5] And it came to pass that Hagoth, he being an exceedingly curious man, therefore he went forth and built him an exceedingly large ship, on the borders of the land Bountiful, by the land Desolation, and launched it forth into the west sea, by the narrow neck which led into the land northward.
2. [7] And in the thirty and eighth year, this man built other ships.
3. And the first ship did also return, and many more people did enter into it; and they also took much provisions, and set out again to the land northward.
4. [8] And it came to pass that they were never heard of more. And we suppose that they were drowned in the depths of the sea. And it came to pass that one other ship also did sail forth; and whither she did go we know not.
5. [10] And it came to pass in the thirty and ninth year of the reign of the judges, Shiblon died also, and Corianton had gone forth to the land northward in a ship, to carry forth provisions unto the people who had gone forth into that land.

Helaman 3

1. 10] And it came to pass as timber was exceedingly scarce in the land northward, they did send forth much by the way of shipping.
2. [14] But behold, a hundredth part of the proceedings of this people, yea, the account of the Lamanites and of the Nephites, and their wars, and contentions, and dissensions, and their preaching, and their prophecies, and their shipping and their building of ships, and their building of temples, and of synagogues and their sanctuaries, and their righteousness, and their wickedness, and their murders, and their robbings, and their plundering, and all manner of abominations and whoredoms, cannot be contained in this work.

Ether 2 & Ether 6

1. [6] And it came to pass that they did travel in the wilderness, and did build barges, in which they did cross many waters, being directed continually by the hand of the Lord.
2. [16] And the Lord said: Go to work and build, after the manner of barges which ye have hitherto built. And it came to pass that the brother of Jared did go to work, and also his brethren, and built barges after the manner which they had built, according to the instructions of the Lord. And they were small, and they were light upon the water, even like unto the lightness of a fowl upon the water.
3. [18] And it came to pass that the brother of Jared cried unto the Lord, saying: O Lord, I have performed the work which thou hast commanded me, and I have made the barges according as thou hast directed me.

1. [4] And it came to pass that when they had prepared all manner of food, that thereby they might subsist upon the water, and also food for their flocks and herds, and whatsoever beast or animal or fowl that they should carry with them -- and it came to pass that when they had done all these things they got aboard of their vessels or barges, and set forth into the sea, commending themselves unto the Lord their God.

[clarkgoble]

40 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

I am not sure how Mormon (almost 1000 years later) would know ancient Hebrew wordplay,  Nephi language got corrupt.    

He presumably knew Hebrew and was able to read the brass plates along with whatever Nephi wrote in and then later writers.  It doesn't mean he understood all Hebrew wordplay but it's plausible some of it would be obvious in the text. I'm more skeptical about wordplay surviving the translation method which seems pretty loose. 

[clarkgoble]

34 minutes ago, Benjamin McGuire said:

You simply drain the blood from the carcass (as indicated in verse 13). Rabbinic texts suggest that there is a proper way to slaughter an animal to remove as much blood as possible. However, since (as you imply) not cooking the meat results in some blood being left, the same texts mention that you can use salt to draw out the remaining blood. After of course, you cut out the major arteries and veins, and so on. The time that the meat should be salted is the time that it takes to walk a mile (about 18-20 minutes or so). At any rate, once this is done, the meat is considered to be properly prepared, and cooking isn't necessary.

Salting the meat would be necessary for preservation as well.

We should also note that the texts we have are of postexilic development whereas we simply don't know what form of Judaism Nephi practiced. There are some suggestions that Nephi and Lehi practiced a form from the northern tribes that didn't accept all the centralizations that Josiah had engineered. For instance they offer sacrifice outside of the cultic center in Jerusalem. There are other reasons to think they practiced a slightly different form of Judaism than what had evolved by the second temple period let along the talmudic era.

[Glenn101]

58 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

I meant the book of Mormon directions are not exact. For example Nihm is not exactly south east from the valley of Lemuel. I used to compass. 

 

No they are not. But the geography of the land presents us with boundaries and constraints. When they left The Valley of Lemuel they traveled "nearly a south-southeast" direction to the place they named Shazer, then they traveled "following the same direction" for "many days" until they stopped to rest "for the space of a time" (probably a year) at an unnamed place to recuperate, then they again traveled for many days "traveling
nearly the same course" until they again stopped "for the space of a time." It while stopped there that Ishmael was buried "in the place which was called Nahom." And from that point they traveled in that nearly easterly course to Bountiful. We do not know exactly where that point of departure to Bountiful was, but we have been able to make an educated guess or two. I am not going to hold Nephi's feet to the fire on this. He has made a plausible travel narrative.

Glenn

[SamuelTheLamanite]

6 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

He presumably knew Hebrew and was able to read the brass plates along with whatever Nephi wrote in and then later writers.  It doesn't mean he understood all Hebrew wordplay but it's plausible some of it would be obvious in the text. I'm more skeptical about wordplay surviving the translation method which seems pretty loose. 

It is possible. We have to assume Nephi heard the "H" as a soft "h", and we also have to assume some contact with outsiders, something that 1 Ne never mentions. 

On 10/19/2017 at 9:56 PM, Robert F. Smith said:

No one is assuming that Nephi "read" anything.  He and the rest of the Lehi Clan would rather hear the word spoken

Read or said, it is just a minor detail. 

Edited October 24, 2017 by SamuelTheLamanite

[SamuelTheLamanite]

8 hours ago, Okrahomer said:

You do damage to your arguments as well as your credibility when you make statements like the one bolded above:

Why? It is just a minor detail, I could have used another example.  Nobody is perfect right? I tend to ignore minor details.  

Anyway, a relevant fact is that the Book of Mormon makes no mention of outsiders, in order for the wordplay argument to work we have to assume Nephi clan had some contact with the Nhm tribe. We also have to assume Nephi heard the "H" as a soft h. There are a lot of assumptions we have to make, what we know simply doesn't fit nicely without making assumptions. Lastly, we have to assume ancient Hebrews did wordplay for Arabic sites. 

20 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

As I have pointed out to you before, we are not talking about modern land navigation with the magnetic compass.  No scholar would expect an ancient clan moving through that territory to be using "exact" directions.  They are always understood to be general in nature

You told me above, "The cardinal directions are north (N), east (E), south (S), west (W), at 90° angles on the compass. The ordinal (or intercardinal) directions are northeast (NE), southeast (SE), southwest (SW) and northwest (NW). It may look NE to someone who cannot read a map"

So I can argue Bountiful is NE, but not exactly NE.  We don't have enough information Robert, we can't objectively conclude that Nihm is Nahom.  

7 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

 I'm more skeptical about wordplay surviving the translation method which seems pretty loose. 

Me too 

6 hours ago, Glenn101 said:

No they are not. But the geography of the land presents us with boundaries and constraints.

I understand, but that still allows for plenty of ambiguity. 

Edited October 24, 2017 by SamuelTheLamanite

[Okrahomer]

46 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Why? It is just a minor detail, I could have used another example.  Nobody is perfect right? I tend to ignore minor details.  

OK.  I wish you well and hope you find whatever it is you are seeking.

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Why? It is just a minor detail, I could have used another example.  Nobody is perfect right? I tend to ignore minor details.  

Actually you ignore the major details as well, Sam.

3 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Anyway, a relevant fact is that the Book of Mormon makes no mention of outsiders, in order for the wordplay argument to work we have to assume Nephi clan had some contact with the Nhm tribe. We also have to assume Nephi heard the "H" as a soft h. There are a lot of assumptions we have to make, what we know simply doesn't fit nicely without making assumptions. Lastly, we have to assume ancient Hebrews did wordplay for Arabic sites. 

These are the normal assumptions made by non-Mormon biblical scholars everyday.  Since you don't understand scholarship, you automatically reject it.

3 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

You told me above, "The cardinal directions are north (N), east (E), south (S), west (W), at 90° angles on the compass. The ordinal (or intercardinal) directions are northeast (NE), southeast (SE), southwest (SW) and northwest (NW). It may look NE to someone who cannot read a map"

So I can argue Bountiful is NE, but not exactly NE.  We don't have enough information Robert, we can't objectively conclude that Nihm is Nahom.  

I guess that you haven't taken the points of the compass as seriously as any fairminded person.  You insist on strawman readings which would take you to Baghdad instead of Bountiful.  That is the way anti-Mormon evangelicals think, which is one reason why two evangelical scholars, Owen & Mosser concluded that their fellow evangelicals had already lost the debate with the Mormons:  https://www.cometozarahemla.org/others/mosser-owen.html .

3 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

 

Quote

10 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

 I'm more skeptical about wordplay surviving the translation method which seems pretty loose. 

Me too ...............................................

The translator doesn't have to know anything about possible wordplay.  He simply renders it into his language.  A multilingual reader who actually know what wordplay is can then come along and examine the text to see if wordplay has taken place.  If he  knows the meaning of Nahom in Hebrew and can see that the daughters "mourned," he realizes that he has found a plausible instance of wordplay.  He doesn't have to know anything about Arabic in order to draw that conclusion.  This enriches  his understanding of the text, and is merely one instance of such a literary feature -- of which there are many in the BofM, as I show in my “Puns, Paronomasia, and Wordplay in the Book of Mormon,” Oct 3, 2017, online at  https://www.scribd.com/document/360593004/PUNS-PARONOMASIA-AND-WORD-PLAY-IN-THE-BOOK-OF-MORMO .

N