You are really doing a great work here, thanks for that
@mormonismwiththemurph8 ай бұрын
Thank you!
@BridgerCoburn8 ай бұрын
Banger
@dinocollins72019 күн бұрын
I freakin love the "KnowWhy" articles and videos so much!!! Neal is a boss!!!
@mormonismwiththemurph19 күн бұрын
Yep they're good
@WhiteCleats8 ай бұрын
Quit apologizing (both you and your guests) for providing such fantastic scholarship and dialogue!! The information in this video was mind blowing -- my brain cell needs a nap. 🤪 I'm grateful to you, Murph. My testimony is unaffected by secular research but my inquisitive inner nerd just eats it up with a spoon!
@mormonismwiththemurph8 ай бұрын
Haha thanks!
@Sirach1445 ай бұрын
I think because it’s here hours long.
@LatterDayData8 ай бұрын
Neal is a gem and we are lucky to have him.
@mormonismwiththemurph8 ай бұрын
Indeed we are
@user-gl6xf7fl4r8 ай бұрын
I'm just getting into your videos. What a great resource! Thank you.
@mormonismwiththemurph8 ай бұрын
Glad you like them!
@brocklyncheese8 ай бұрын
Enjoyed the discussion...I don't mind the length...can always pause and pick it back up later. Much rather it be too long than too short. Great work 👍
@mormonismwiththemurph8 ай бұрын
Thanks, I'm the same way with long interviews. You don't have to watch in one go.
@nealljones8 ай бұрын
Love the video length with such good questions & outstanding scholarship. Nice work Murph and Neal!
@mormonismwiththemurph8 ай бұрын
Thank you!
@rkn28008 ай бұрын
Yes, Tr*mp University produces great scholarship like this. Very, very good.
@mormonismwiththemurph8 ай бұрын
@@rkn2800😮
@dinocollins72019 күн бұрын
Another fantastic video! thank you!
@mormonismwiththemurph19 күн бұрын
Thanks for watching
@benjaminhaynes278 ай бұрын
Love the content! Keep it up!
@mormonismwiththemurph8 ай бұрын
Thanks! Will do!
@Irvingdector8 ай бұрын
Great episode!
@mormonismwiththemurph8 ай бұрын
Thanks!
@jwestlu18 ай бұрын
Yea, my favorite episode from the Murph that I’ve seen!
@alejandrovalenzuela3778 ай бұрын
Fantastic interview. More of this please.
@mormonismwiththemurph8 ай бұрын
Glad you enjoyed it!
@danieldunbar29565 ай бұрын
Great interview!
@mormonismwiththemurph5 ай бұрын
Thanks!
@rkn28008 ай бұрын
By ʻstrongest evidence’ do you mean that the BOM is an accurate historical account and that Zarahemla, for example, is a real place that we can actually visit, even if it is now covered under earth or vegetation? Are the native Americans (North, Central, South) actually Jews/Israelites and the race of modern aboriginal Americans provable as semitic by DNA testing? Church prophets have never taken an official stance to the literal locus of the BOM stories and members are divided about whether the events happened in Central or North America, with Church leaders leaving them to debate among themselves. Yet the Church inserted dates at the bottom of each page of the BOM to give the reader the impression that the Church knows when the events happened in actual places (can’t have a timeline with no location). Too many holes in this unlikely story.
@dante04srt8 ай бұрын
I mean, that's because it's 100% fiction. :)
@rkn28008 ай бұрын
@@dante04srt Ok, I guess that works. I feel much less stress now and I suppose Jesus wouldn’t mind if I put the matter to rest. Thx!
@brettmajeske35258 ай бұрын
Why must locations be required to determine dates? All the dates in the Book of Mormon are approximations assuming that Jesus was born at 0 CE. A date even Bruce McConkie thought was questionable.
@rkn28008 ай бұрын
@@brettmajeske3525 Seriously... The Chronicles of Narnia reference time periods and at least they provide a fictional geography. There is absolutely no way to simply provide dates and no location. The denial of a geography to the BOM only suggests the acceptance of a fictional work of literature. The Church has never been in the business of anything other than teaching that it only teaches literal truth and not merely allegory. I require the BOM to support its truth claims not only by pointing within itself as the Chronicles of Narnia do, but with literal truth in archaeology, and DNA testing relative to aboriginal Americans being Israelites (FYI, they are not).
@brettmajeske35258 ай бұрын
@@rkn2800 You have provided no reasoning beyond your assertion that timing require locational geography. I also do not find your assertion that "The Church has never been in the business of anything other than teaching that it only teaches literal truth and not merely allegory. " to be reasonable. Plenty of Prophets and Apostles, not to mention authorized manuals and handbooks teach a blend of both allegory/parable and literal. While there are some leaders who have taught a more fundamental literalist approach, they have done so outside of the official literature of the Church. "Doctrines of Salvation", which likely advocates the most pro-literal stance was published by Bookcraft Press because Deseret Press refused to print it for being too controversial. You seem to be insisting that a few third party books are to be considered more impactful than the authorized manuals and handbooks that accept a blend of literary genres.
@epenesaruth86508 ай бұрын
The 3-10- minutes articles Are The Best For Me 🎯🙏💯% It really works Best For Me 👏👏👏
@perryekimae8 ай бұрын
Very important note: North Carolina is to the north of South Carolina. The directionality of most Book of Mormon geography models seem a bit more challenged on that kind of accuracy. But yeah, pretty easy to have a geography fit a model when you've got very dedicated people fighting tooth and nail to fit a geography into your model, kicking and screaming and ignoring other things you've said if they have to.
@brettmajeske35258 ай бұрын
You should look up the naming of West Virginia, which was almost named North Virginia instead.
@perryekimae8 ай бұрын
@@brettmajeske3525 Just a note there. West Virginia happens to be west of Virginia. North Virginia would have been valid, sure. Some of the BoM geography models are bit more directionally challenged. I'm certain that there are some that are fine, but some are pretty creative with what is north.
@vendingdudes8 ай бұрын
"I saw it with my spiritual eyes" I could easily define that about five different ways and none of them mean "it was a dream"
@perryekimae8 ай бұрын
All right, let's see it. Agreed that the early sixth century BCE Jerusalem content often gets glossed over. Yes, there does appear to be a refugee influx from the demolished Kingdom of Israel into the principal city of YHWHist worship and the capital of Judah after the Assyrian conquest. This is referred to in Chronicles during the reign of Hezekiah. I've found a 2007 article by Nadav Na'aman that contradicts many of the points raised about the wealth of Jerusalem and the likelihood that a wealthy Manassehite would be found in Jerusalem in the first year of the reign of Zedekiah (more likely that they would have returned to Samaria). Yeah, Emma's story about the walls is almost certainly a measure of BS. Walls around Jerusalem feature in Isaiah and plenty of other places surrounding the Exile accounts. Uncritically accepting Emma's account there is bad form. There's a bit of a gish-gallop, so I'm just going to address the Vered Jericho sword. Totally fascinating find of a steel sword, probably ceremonial, found in the right place and time to perhaps be a sibling to a sword of Laban. Fascinating discovery really. What isn't compelling is all the rest of that story, which definitely did not happen as described in the text. If you could somehow prove a historical Nephi, the one and only thing I would be certain about that dude is that he did not kill Laban in the way described in 1 Nephi 4. It's funny to me when the first Google results on a search for a scholarly term yield apologetic resources. Gives a whole straining at gnats and swallowing camels vibe to the claim. In general, I've abandoned criticisms of the reformed Egyptian apologetic because accepting it opens up other issues that are pretty devastating. Now the good stuff! Okay, so monotheism didn't really exist before the Exile. I've seen good content from Dan McClellan, Bart Ehrman, and other scholars on this issue. Essentially, Israel was an inclusivist kingdom that allowed the worship of other deities, but gave preference to YHWH. Judah, on the other hand, was exclusivist, so they acknowledged the existence of other gods, but only YHWH could be worshipped in Judahite holdings. This is the theological split that the author of Kings and the author of proto-Isaiah rail against. Now, Josiah was a bit of an extremist, and so he purges any remnants of other deities, including YHWH's consort, Asherah, from the temple and the land of Judah. Lehi would have been a descendant of people who held more inclusivist views, but he would have lived under the reign of exclusivity. Actually an apt analogy about comparing LDS to Protestants. Now, imagine that a protestant were to come to you with a theological innovation based on the teachings of Joseph Smith in the King Follett discourse. Not strictly impossible, but it would be extremely unusual. That is a very small version of Lehi coming up with Johannian Christology shortly after 597 BCE. That is a level of innovation that would be so miraculous, it would introduce a whole host of new problems for the apologists in narrating a consistent worldview. Like... we go from Lehi frogleaping theological innovations that resulted from Exilic, post-Exilic, and Greco-Roman influences, but the church can't get ahead of saying that maybe racism is bad? Loan-shifting would no longer make any sense... The whole notion of line-upon-line would be DOA. Or, more likely, any historical Lehi did not make that theological leap, and, at best, that was a later interpolation of Mormon or Moroni. Problem with that, of course, is that the text precludes Mormon or Moroni interpolating anything into the small plates... Deuteronomy isn't a "forgery" made at the time of Josiah's reforms. That's a strawman characterization of the scholarship. It would be more accurate to say that it was codifying certain traditions that were useful for those in power to carry out their agenda. There is no data that suggests the text is older than the eight century BCE. Objection: appeal to a translation without the source text. Yes, the Lehite story has literary dependencies on the Exodus account. The Exodus account was a nationalist myth developed as a response to the Exile. A historical Lehi or Nephi would not have considered themselves as a "new Exodus". This is, therefore, an anachronism. Very interesting portraying the Josiah reforms as the "taking away plain and precious things", when the Biblical narrative portrays Josiah as something of a heroic figure. He definitely would not have been from the perspective of someone from Israel, but Isaiah would have loved the dude. YHWH sort of supplants Baal first as the storm deity. Most of the literature I've come across suggests that the time of Elijah and Elisha is critical for YHWH's takeover of that function. Over time, YHWH absorbs more of the roles of additional members of the pantheon, and the Josiah reforms really put YHWH as the sole head of the Canaanite pantheon. It is a Second Temple development, following the Exile, that develops YHWH as the only deity, though it really isn't until about the Maccabean revolt that monotheism as we understand it really starts to rear its ugly head. Dan McClellan has some great materials on the Asherah discourse, some of which touches on the LDS interpretation and why it's problematic. Yes, the idea of a messiah in messianic literature relates to the king. This is why the Romans would have killed a historical Jesus claiming to be a messiah. Such a claim would have been a claim to the Jewish throne, a treasonous act under Roman law at the time. Again, great scholarship is out there for that. It's a bit "pop history" in places, but Reza Aslan's Zealot is a great read on that subject as it relates to Jesus of Nazareth. This notion of the messiah embodying YHWH though seems... sus... I've not seen that in the scholarship, but it may just be overstating the role of the messianic figure. Would be curious about literature on that claim. I really think he's overstating the problem for Lehi with the messianic prophecies. It seems that the people of Jerusalem (and Laman and Lemuel for that matter) might just not be too into being told that they suck, are doing bad things, and are going to get beaten up because they suck and are doing bad things. People, in general, tend to not like that. That is a MUCH safer apologetic position too. The position he's putting forward just opens up too much extra space for critics to play (see my above comments on Lehi's messianic ideas). Not only is it unusual, it's anachronistic. And I don't mean that it in a "prophecies aren't real TM" sort of way. I mean that in a "the literal philosophical and theological framework necessary to arrive at those ideas did not exist yet" sort of way. It's like writing in Swedish before Old Norse was developed. There are some pretty big missing pieces, even if you can spot some early parallels to later developments. I think a separate comment is going to be better for Nahom stuff.
@lrsvalentine8 ай бұрын
The very idea of a literate native American society is a HUGE anachronism (see Mormonish podcast). The book of Mormon is a joke. The DNA evidence is correct. No Hebraic ancestry.
@wendyfoster55798 ай бұрын
I love this episode, it covered so many topics. Ok the fact that the Book of Mormon has the name Ishmael and it is so common. Joseph couldn’t have know that so I am going to call it a win. This is a really good episode.
@kenwick79218 ай бұрын
Believers put a lot of emphasis into "was CALLED Nahom" (1 Ne. 16:34), indicating that it was an already named place by others not of Lehi's group. 1 Ne. 18:7 states: "... my father had begat two sons, in the wilderness: The eldest WAS CALLED Jacob...". Did others name Jacob? No. He was given that name at birth, and Nephi writing years later (or Smith's dictation style), uses the phrasing "was called." Note that 1 Ne. 16:33 (the verse before the Nahom verse) states: "...we did again take our journey, travelling nearly the same course as in the beginning; and after that we had travelled for the space of many days, we did pitch our tents again, that we might tarry for the space of a time." Lehi's group may have spent some time there, so by the time Ishmael died, it had been named and already called Nahom by Lehi's group (just like Jacob in 1 Ne. 18:7). Also note that a detailed word analysis/interpretation of "was called Nahom" by believers requires a tight translation of the original text. It seems most Mormon scholars favor a loose (functional) translation. So how much of Joseph are we seeing in this text? What (academic) tools are you using to determine that?
@perryekimae8 ай бұрын
This is an interesting point. I could see the apologist pointing that we may not have a good reason to think that place names and people names would be handled grammatically in analogous ways. A critic could rightly point out that the variation in the way names are done in varying voices would be expected in a single take, oral dictation and that the idea of an intentional distinction is most probably just read into the text by readers unable to directly interrogate (firsthand) authorial intent. I agree with your point here. Not a smoking gun on the point raised by the apologists, but a pretty good factor to reduce to confidence in an already low probability position. Nice find!
@redfightblue8 ай бұрын
Nahom is the convergence of the White and Blue Niles. The "Eastward" turn is a guide towards Ethiopia on the Blue Nile. This migration has been used for thousands of years by Jews. "Nahom" is an Ethiopian word. Baby boys are named Nahom in Ethiopia every day. Lehi migrated to Egypt where he would have been destroyed according to Jeremiah 44. This destruction is seen in the "Tree of Life Vision" when the "multitudes" fall away into "forbidden paths" in Egypt. Jeremiah 44:15 describes these Jews (that are sinning and falling away, and worshiping false gods) as "multitudes", the same as the vision. The Book of Abraham refers to Egypt as "forbidden". The solution to this destruction in Egypt is in the "Tree of Life Vision". Lehi must follow the Nile River and migrate to the Garden of Eden. This is up the Nile, at the rivers source, in Ethiopia. This is believed by Ethiopian Jews that rely on Genesis 2:13. 1 Nephi 8:14 describes the source of the Nile in the land of Ethiopia as "the head thereof a little way off". This is describing an Ethiopian Jewish belief that the Garden of Eden is at the source of the Nile, in Ethiopia. Most of the Book of Mormon takes place in Ethiopia safe from the destruction in Egypt. It is only after the Nephites migrate back North, to Egypt, that they are destroyed. One migration North to Egypt is clearly defined in Helaman 3. The "treeless" land where they build with "cement" and "ship timber" is obviously Egypt to the North of Ethiopia. This is where shipping of Lebanon cedar was happening and stone buildings were being built. The Land South is Africa and the Narrow Neck is the Isthmus of Suez. Lehi and Alma both cross the Isthmus of Suez in 3 days. This journey from the Nile river to the Red Sea is confirmed to be 3 days by Carsten Niebuhr who did the journey between Aug. 28th and 30th 1762. He declared "Suez is 3 days distant from Cairo". Lehi took the journey South into Africa and Alma took the journey North into the Middle East. This is why Alma arrives at Ammonihah and Midian. These are Biblical Lands of Ammon and Midian. Compare Zeezrom from Ammonihah to the Biblical Zamzummim from Ammon Deuteronomy 2:20. This connection is possible when you recognize the 3 day journey is the same journey and the Book of Mormon is an Old World text. It has nothing to do with America. Alma also speaks about "The Land of Ishmael". This is the Biblical Land of Ishmael in Northern Arabia. On the other side of the day journey. Google "Land of Ishmael". The Land of Nephi is in Ethiopia. Zarahemla is North of there which places it in the Zahara desert. There's a "Sidon" in Sudan on the Black Nile. Bountiful is the fertile Nile River Delta in Egypt. The Hill Cumorah in the Land North is most likely Mount Moriah although Hugh Nibley makes a strong connection to Qumran. When Moroni return the record to the North after the Nephites are destroyed, he is fulfilling Jeremiah 44:28. The Nephites were safe in Ethiopia, they migrated back to Egypt and were destroyed, just like Jeremiah 44 prophesized would happen. The Book of Ether is nothing but the Ethiopian Jews perspective on Genesis. The Jaredites started in Ethiopia and migrated down the Nile River. They outfitted their river barges with cabins to survive the open ocean. They then sailed to Israel. They are the ones responsible for populating Israel and brining the Milk and Honey from Ethiopia (Garden of Eden). Once you place the Jaredites in Israel you can start to see the connections to Lehi's journey. Especially when you read about Omer. Omer's journey is identical to Lehi's. He was cast out of Israel and migrated into Africa and then Ethiopia. There's many reasons to believe this. Moroni uses the same language like "Come unto the fountain of righteousness" just like Lehi did. The river flowing out of Eden is referred to as the "River of Righteousness" in Non-Biblical sources and this appears to be a reference to the Nile River in Africa that flows out of Ethiopia. When Nephi said the "prophets of old" were stoned murdered and cast out of Israel, he is talking about Omer in the Book of Ether. Moroni reiterates this language and claims Omer was stoned, murdered, and cast out.
@perryekimae8 ай бұрын
@@redfightblue I think this is an interesting reading of the text. It is a bullet point for the notion that one can pretty well fit a Book of Mormon geography just about anywhere they want to. It does appear to me that this model merely replaces the Mound Builder Myth with the Ethiopian Jew origin myth. I also think that most of 1 Nephi is a problem for this model. For instance, if Nahom is the convergence of the White Nile and Blue Nile, why does Nephi end up building a ship at Bountiful? How do you account for the going southsoutheast along the borders of the Red Sea before making the left turn at Nahom? If the setting is Ethiopian, why does Nahom not appear again in the text? Maybe there are answers to those challenges. Just a few that came to mind as I read your claims. First time that I've heard this argument, so I'd have to digest it a bit.
@redfightblue8 ай бұрын
Thanks for reading what I wrote. You're not wrong. In order to see what I see you have to make some assumptions that the text is "out of order" in places. The timeline is not as literal as it would seem. I find this to be common in texts of this time period. But consider this concerning Lehi's sailing. I found that "Herodotus the Histories" Book 4, Chapter 40-42 speaks of a sailor in 600 BC that was sent by Pharaoh Necho to sail around Africa and return to Egypt. Herodotus says the sailor discovered that "Asia is Desolation" (except India) "Egypt is Narrow" "Our Sea to the Red Sea" The "Distance" across the "narrow" place (in miles). Africa is "bounded by the sea". Compare that to what we read in Alma 22:32 about the geography of Book of Mormon Lands. There's a line between Bountiful and Desolation. There's a "small neck". The "distance" is defined (days not miles). There's a "sea to sea" feature (at the small neck). The Land South is "surrounded by water". So it becomes logical that both texts, Herodotus and BOM, are speaking about the same sailor. Lehi/Nephi family was the sailor the Pharaoh of Egypt hired to explore and map Africa to see if it could be sailed around. This means the journey ended where it started, in Africa, NOT America. The Geography of Africa was reported to the Pharaoh and of course, Lehi's descendants continued to talk about the sailing and the geography of Africa in similar terms, Alma 22:32. Bountiful is either all of Africa or just Egypt depending on the context. The "line Bountiful Desolation" is at the Isthmus of Suez and separates Africa from Asia. Herodotus said "Asia is Desolation". If Nephi built a ship at Bountiful. I can easily see it referring to Egypt and the ship the Pharaoh built for the sailor to circumnavigate Africa. That's where ships were being built at the time, not Yemen where's there timber and no industry to support building a ship. Look at the internal map of BOM lands. You can easily see how Bountiful is Egypt, Zarahemla is in the Zahara desert. The Land of Nephi is in Ethiopia. You can make out the Nile River in the Land South (Africa). You can easily see Africa is "bounded by the sea" and Eurasia is less defined. This is what was known of these lands at the time. The Herodotus map of the world says Eurasia is "assumed" to have a sea above it but it's not known. This is the "hourglass" map we read about. It's the entire known world at the time. Africa and Eurasia. @@perryekimae
@kenwick79218 ай бұрын
@@redfightblue An interesting theory. Nephi reports building a ship and crossing Irreantum ("many waters", 1 Ne. 17:5) which took "many days" (1 Ne. 18:23). So what body of water did they cross? Further, how did Moroni get the plates to upstate New York?
@perryekimae8 ай бұрын
Might as well finish out. Hume. That's all I feel the need to say on the witnesses. Hume. A whole bunch of poor evidence supported by friendly witnesses a strong case does not make.
@mormonismwiththemurph8 ай бұрын
You have the three witnesses who claim a visionary experience, which on its own could be a mass hallucination. The eight naturally see and hold the plates, nothing supernatural about it. They all reaffirm their testimonies even after leaving the church. The Book of Mormon and doctrine and covenants prophesies the 3 will have a vision of the plates which is a pretty unlikely thing to priphesy and pull off. Then all of the other unofficial witnesses. Hume or skepticism is applied because the combination of their testimonies corroborates there were gold plates.
@perryekimae8 ай бұрын
@@mormonismwiththemurph All things being equal, which is more likely, that the witnesses were lying or sincerely mistaken, or that a resurrected white-skinned, Hebrew-descended indigenous American delivered a codex of golden plates that were inscribed with a reformed Egyptian which contained Deutero-Isaiah, the Long Ending of Mark, theological anachronisms, etc. to an upstate New York farm boy who could accurately translate this reformed Egyptian but not the Egyptian found on known papyrus? There are plenty of miracle stories supported by witness testimonies, some of which are even better accounted for than any of the BoM witnesses. Like the Miracle of the Sun, for instance. Hence, Hume.
@rodneyjamesmcguire8 ай бұрын
@@mormonismwiththemurph It truly doesn't, is the real problem.
@carterbrown96958 ай бұрын
Neal, is this king messiah conception what was going on with Samuel and Saul? They are rejecting the actual god for a representation of god in the king?
@nealrappleye95008 ай бұрын
I honestly do not know. Its not something I've specifically researched, and I don't recall seeing that suggested anywhere in the academic literature I have read. As I mentioned in the interview, I'm really only in the early stages of research on this topic my thoughts are all very preliminary. But the earliest hint of this kind of thinking/ideology in Israelite history is really 2 Sam. 7:14, the Lord speaking to David about Solomon and obviously a generation or so after the Samuel and Saul narratives. That does not mean the notion wasn't present in earlier Israelite thinking (many of the ideas certainly go back much earlier in the ancient near east in general), but I just don't know enough to really comment.
@shireecox1228 ай бұрын
Good show. Merry Christmas 🎄🎁
@mormonismwiththemurph8 ай бұрын
Thanks, merry Christmas!
@karena_j_paez8 ай бұрын
Thanks!
@perryekimae8 ай бұрын
I think you're overstating the Arabia Felix case as well. You make it sound like a small corner when it's actually a sizable chunk of modern Yemen. I'm not like latching onto this idea or anything, but if it was, known at all to Joseph Smith, it's actually kinda rough for the case made in this video.
@perryekimae8 ай бұрын
I'll start with my olive branch. I absolutely agree that the NHM find at a candidate site for Nahom is the single best piece of physical, testable evidence for the Book of Mormon. No other evidentiary claim comes close. It's also not great evidence for the Book of Mormon. As I mentioned, it's a candidate site for Nahom, but the text is so thin on details that there are many, many more. Like, the Lehi Travels document which places Nahom at the 19th latitude, which is WAY north of NHM. As long as you can turn east and hit water, which is true pretty much everywhere along the Arabian peninsula (turn east too far north and you'll end up in China before you hit water, but hey, it did take them 8 years), you have a valid candidate site. Compare that to the discovery of Troy. The Iliad gave details that were useful for discovering the city of Troy. The guy that found the city was apparently a bit of a racist and an idiot, but he was able to use the text of the Iliad to narrow down candidate sites and arrive at a site. You can't do that with the Nahom/NHM connection. If the NHM altar was never discovered, the current NHM site would still be a candidate site, but it would be one of many. The pseudoscholar accusation is not unfounded. Take Kerry Muhlstein's point about fitting the data into his previously derived conclusion that the Book of Abraham is true. That's bad scholarship. Fine apologetics. Bad scholarship. I'd argue that the loan shifting argument is much the same thing. And when it comes to Arabian geography and Nahom, I see a lot of fitting the data to the conclusion, forcing NHM into the Book of Mormon, not finding Nahom in the real world. Also, 1769 KJVs appear to have had maps of the Holy Land that included the Arabian peninsula. Seems a probable source for the development of the L-shape of the Lehite exodus. Just an aside. Okay, so the place was called Nahom, but the scholarship says NHM was called some variation of Nihm. The argument is that there are no vowels, and I've heard that Nephi may be making a pun, but if that's the case, then he's the one who called it Nahom, not the people. Seems like a distinction without a difference at that point. Nephi gives a direction, sure. Giving GPS coordinates would have been wildly anachronistic, but do you know what wouldn't have been anachronistic? Time. So if Nephi said something like, "And we did journey from the valley of Lemuel even four days until we came to the place we called Shazer", we could start to get a sense of the distances between these places. With direction and distance, we could narrow the candidate sites and maybe build a case for where each site should be, then do the work at those sites to see if we find evidence for that hypothesis. But again, we don't have that. The only time that Nephi gives a sense of time is when he says they "sojourned" in the wilderness for 8 years. I believe that is something of a misuse of the word, and that their journey is supposed to have taken 8 years overall, but it could read as they made the left turn at Nahom and stopped for 8 years with a temporary residence before moving on to Bountiful. I don't know what that gains necessarily, but I hope it does point out how imprecise the account is establishing the itinerary of the Lehite company. Yeah, makes sense that a trading trail would be near the coasts of the Arabian peninsula. Would have been my guess if I knew nothing about it. Stretching that "nearly" eastward to "directly" eastward is a move... If people live in a place, you can probably find a burial site nearby. Just saying. Boy, I love the admission that the NHM inscription is not in a burial ground. Wonderful. That weakens the link with the supposed pun of Nephi. And, as I noted, where people live, they also... stop doing that, and that means burial sites will be found in the area. If a lot of people lived in a place, those sites might be extensive. Marib is the entry point to the Red Sea and connects to the Indian Ocean, plus it's located on the frankincense trail. Hard to imagine that place wouldn't be good real estate for setting up a mercantile city. Seems a recipe for getting lots of people who will make their Pokémon evolution into skeletons, as it were. I'll grant that if the surrounding context of the Book of Mormon were more historically tenable, the NHM find as it stands would be fascinating and a bit compelling. But given that we're about to smelt iron ore, build a transoceanic vessel, and quote Deutero-Isaiah... Benefit of the doubt is not warranted here for the variations in the find from the textual claims. What would realistically expect to find? Well, we would expect to find evidence of the ability to smelt iron ore in the region and time. We would expect to find transoceanic shipbuilding capabilities. We would expect to find Egyptian writings in the New World. We would expect to find very pre-Exilic Deutero-Isaiah. We would expect to find the theological framework for Johannian Christology. We would expect to find evidence of populations of millions experiencing at least three periods of sudden, massive decline. We would expect to find cows, oxes, goats, wild goats, asses, horses, etc. We would expect to find linguistic evidence of a semitic origin of indigenous American languages. We would expect to find 6th century BCE Canaanite DNA evidence in indigenous American populations. And if the evidence were actually good, we would expect to find the source text and see that the translation is accurate. But NHM is the kind of evidence archeologists would love to find within a context that resembles the above. And even then, they (strive to) hold all of that evidence with appropriate skepticism. Apologists leap to calling this great evidence absent a foundation of contextual that supports the claims. If it's true that that's the only evidence of the Roman march, then we should be very skeptical in accepting that account. Very, very skeptical. I would call it a "thing that may have happened, but boy is it hard to say when there isn't any evidence to support it otherwise". If it is claimed as a factual historical march, then someone is overreaching here. There would be a ton of doubt under those conditions of scholars independently finding the 1 Nephi account. Lots of doubt. All the doubt. Especially since the text contains other anachronistic information. Scholars would probably think it was a forgery of some kind. Already addressed maps. Don't overstate the case on either end. Recognize the role that motivated reasoning has played in reconstructing the Lehite trail. I doubt Joseph was thinking or cared about any of that, and I hold him as the sole author.
@DiffQ_Bro8 ай бұрын
"The argument is that there are no vowels, and I've heard that Nephi may be making a pun, but if that's the case, then he's the one who called it Nahom, not the people. Seems like a distinction without a difference at that point." He made a pun on what it's already called. Don't be deliberately obtuse. If you look at Biblical wordplays, the words are usually not exactly the same.
@perryekimae8 ай бұрын
@@DiffQ_Bro I made like 30 other points, but if we're putting stock in the passive voice, then maybe there should be some meat there. I've got no issue with the idea in principle (other than appealing to the translation without the source text), but the apologetic seems to put more weight on the passive voice than is maybe earned. So pony up.
@DiffQ_Bro8 ай бұрын
All of your points either make no sense, or are complete red herrings. Kerry Muhlstein, DAFUQ? The burial place where someone named Ishmael was buried is within the NIHM region. The altars are just for dating the existence of the place name to Lehi's period, doesn't matter if they're above or under ground.@@perryekimae
@perryekimae8 ай бұрын
@@DiffQ_Bro Kerry Muhlstein: an example of apologists fitting data the conclusion, not the conclusion to the data. Seeing as to how he was explicit about that, a good example to point out. Nahom/NHM is the same. Even presenter agrees that whether or not an Ishmael was buried at NHM is not necessarily all that relevant. And none of my points were all that concerned about that either. And I don't know what in Zeus's green earth that last point has anything to do with anything that I said.
@DiffQ_Bro8 ай бұрын
I'll be charitable and assume you're deliberately being obtuse and a lot smarter than you come across.
@DiffQ_Bro8 ай бұрын
Nahom/Ishmael should be its own episode.
@mormonismwiththemurph8 ай бұрын
I know there's so much to discuss
@mcable2178 ай бұрын
If Neal reads these comments, I'm curious as to why scholars became convinced that Lehi's family was following a trail. Is there any internal evidence that they were on a well traveled trail?
@nealrappleye95008 ай бұрын
For essentially the same reason you would probably assume a person who says they went to Vegas (from, say, the Salt Lake area) for the weekend drove on roads (and more specifically, took I-15 Southbound) to get there: its simply the way people traveled in the ancient world. The journey Lehi is going on passes through vast stretches of desert wilderness. For Lehi to travel certain directions and distances, there has to be traversable terrain and access to essential resources such as food and water in place in order for him to do so. Access to essential resources such as food and water are going to be hard to come by away from population centers and water holes at caravan stops. Furthermore, the easiest way to document where traversable terrain and essential resources were available is through known pre-modern trail systems. And since pretty much all known traversable terrain & water holes would have been part of some kind of trail system (whether the large trail networks used for the caravan trade or more regional and local trail networks used by nomads or villagers traveling to regional population centers), I don't really see how Lehi could have NOT used a trail. I would personally be highly skeptical of any proposed route for Lehi (or any other ancient account) for which there was no evidence for pre-modern, non-motorized travel demonstrating that you actually could travel by that route and survive.
@nealrappleye95008 ай бұрын
To perhaps illustrate the point with an example. I mentioned the Roman army that traveled essentially through the same area (for at least the SSE portion) mentioned in Strabo. Nothing in the account by Strabo says they traveled along an established trail (in fact, one might get the impression of just the opposite based on Strabo's account), and like I said in the interview there are essentially no toponyms (at least known that we can confidently locate) mentioned in the account until they get to Najran and then the city-states of the Wadi Jawf area. But scholars such as Nigel Groom typically assume the army must have been led along the main route of the frankincense trail--despite Strabo making it seem like they did not travel a well-established trail--because how else are you going to effectively supply an army with food, water, and provisions across the length of Arabia?
@mcable2178 ай бұрын
@@nealrappleye9500 Thanks for the reply. I haven't looked into this very much. That makes sense that they would take a known route. 1 Nephi 16:16 suggests that they were following the liahona to the more fertile parts of the wilderness. Would the trail have been hard to follow here or were they going off route to more fertile areas? Why was the liahona needed on a trail? Was the trail well traveled and populated? When nephi broke his bow and they couldn't obtain food would they have been able to trade for food? Is the general consensus that Lehi's party would have been interacting with the local peoples and didn't mention them in the account? Were any of the known stops besides Nahom populated? For example did the proposed bountiful sites have anyone who could help nephi build a ship? Sorry for the question overload, If these are all addressed in a paper of book can you point me in that direction?
@mcable2178 ай бұрын
@@nealrappleye9500 Neal, these are authentic questions, I wasn’t trying to do a gotcha. If you have a good up to date resource on Lehi’s journey I’d like to look into it more in depth.
@brettmajeske35258 ай бұрын
@@mcable217 Well I know from various High Adeventure outings, as both a youth and Scoutmaster, that even when clear trails exist, maps and compasses are still important. Trails cross one another, as do roads. Think more country backs roads than major highways. I used to require Scouts to turn off their phones so that they had to rely only on maps and compass. Even with clear trails, we got lost many times.
@heberfrank86648 ай бұрын
"to be lifted up, according to the words of Zenock, and to be crucified, according to the words of Neum, and to be buried in a sepulchre, according to the words of Zenos, " --1 Nephi 19:10 This somehow was lost in the records the Jews had.
@QuickCanon8 ай бұрын
cool
@mormonismwiththemurph8 ай бұрын
Thanks
@jephthahgatei884124 күн бұрын
Is the priesthood and temple ban a revelation from God?
@MH-bt6de8 ай бұрын
Where can I read more about the “rock”/massebah in 1 Ne 1:6?
@nealrappleye95008 ай бұрын
Alas, it is not something I (or anyone else, to my knowledge) have published on. It is just something that came to me once while reading Andre Lemaire's book The Birth of Monotheism: The Rise and Disappearance of Yahwism (Society of Biblical Archaeology, 2007). Lemaire talks about how wilderness shrines with a massebah, unhewn stone altar, and a (sacred) tree were common in early Israelite religion (as reflected in the stories of the Patriarchs and Exodus/Conquest generation) but rejected by later reformers (.e.g., Hezekiah and Josiah) trying to centralize religious practice to the temple in Jerusalem. Lehi's camp in the wilderness has the unhewn altar of stones and it is there he dreams of the tree of life. If the "rock" in 1 Ne. 1:6 is a messebah, then Lehi's worship practices would connect to all three elements of early wilderness shrines.
@MH-bt6de8 ай бұрын
@@nealrappleye9500 Sounds like a fascinating book! Thanks for getting back to me!
@DiffQ_Bro8 ай бұрын
Also, Neal should share his PowerPoint.
@DiffQ_Bro8 ай бұрын
Don't read the comments...don't read the comments.
@tedsmith83698 ай бұрын
No coins? Your not reading the churches official stance. They say there were two coins, found, one in Florida, and one in Georgia. Conveniently, though they can’t find them. Finding one horse that is carbonated to 10,000 years ago is not evidence as far as I’m concerned. Furthermore, the church apologist are now saying that Joseph Smith called a tapir a horse. Look up a tapir and tell me if you think you could ride one and have it pull chariots. Also, chariots? The wheel wasn’t in the Americas either and since the beginning of time technology has never been lost. So what happened to the wheel? Lastly, the battles, the book of Mormon speaks of where epic the cat paths you speak of would no way support this. As I described before you would need roads something on the order that the Romans built that still exist today. When I was going to church I never really cared if it was true or not as long as the organization was good. Now after the church getting a $5 million fine for miss using its tithing money? They hoard over $150, billion, and throw a few pennies to the needy. If every church behaved like this one the ones that really do good would lose their tax exempt status for people that are less fortunate. Please stop the smoke and mirror show and speak the truth. I don’t do this for a living but I’m sorry to say the answers you gave are shameful.
@jamesmuir87478 ай бұрын
South America had to be THE PLACE of the Book of Mormon.
@robertpratt63916 ай бұрын
where can I get in touch with Neal , I have some additional on Nahom or Nehem I would like to share. Steve Pratt
@whizwhitney8 ай бұрын
This is the strongest evidence? Oh, brother.
@tedsmith83698 ай бұрын
One more thing about the coins, because it really doesn’t matter if the gold and silver was in coin form or not. The fact is is there was gold and silver and that doesn’t just disappear. The book of Mormon speaks of hundreds of thousands of people, which would equate to millions of bits of gold and silver. If you believe that cat path or road as you say is real, then I would invest in a metal detector. If the LDS church which is hiding well over $100 billion, thought for a minute any of this was true, they would certainly be researching it. They don’t because they know it’s false. I’m sorry I really don’t mean to be rude because I certainly do love the LDS people it’s the church and its leaders I find offensive.
@brettmajeske35258 ай бұрын
I do not understand your connection of hundreds of thousands of people to millions of bits of gold and silver. During the lifetime of Jesus gold and silver were the monetary standard for the Jews. Still, the average Jews would never see a gold Talent in their life. They could talk about a silver talent worth of wheat without having any actual coins. Gold and silver coins did exist in Jerusalem, but not enough for everyone in the city to have one each let alone multiple. The majority of commerce was still barter. If your assumptions would not hold true for a community that did use coinage, why think they would for a community that did not?
@lrsvalentine8 ай бұрын
This is evidence?😂😂😂😂. So weak! The lack of evidence of a literate society anywhere in the Americas - Check and Mate. DNA - Check and Mate. Deutero Isaiah - Check and Mate. Jesus talking to Native Americans about traveling a mile?😂😂😂 Golden plates to etched on carefully and then not used in the translation?😂😂😂
@3thingsfishing4278 ай бұрын
🤦
@DiffQ_Bro8 ай бұрын
Dan Vogel's argument about Ishmael being the most common name in actually works against him. First of all, why would you name a Jewish person Ishmael if you believed that to be true. Second of all, it's incorrect. Muhammad is the most common name. Furthermore, the fact that it wasn't common in the pre -Islamic era attests to the Book of Mormon's accuracy. That Is
@boydx46878 ай бұрын
I see problems with your interpretation. 2nd Kings 24 and 1st Nephi 1-2 have two very different, even conflicting settings. The author of 1st Nephi gives us a context that can't be reconciled with the Nebuchadnezzar Chronicles, 2nd Kings 24, 2nd Chronicles 36, or even unbiased interpretation of archaeology. When LDS people read 2nd Kings more carefully they will notice that Nebuchadnezzar II had already besieged Jerusalem, plundered the temple, taken 10,000 captives, and deposed Jeconiah, after which he appointed Zedekiah as a puppet king of Judah, all BEFORE the 1st Nephi account. This took place in in 597 BC (see Wikipedia: Siege of Jerusalem) not 600 BC as the 1st Nephi account claims.. Supposedly, Lehi and family and their riches were left behind by Nebuchadnezzar II, as were Jeremiah, and Laban and his sword, but 2nd Kings chap. 24:14 tells us "he [Nebuchadnezzar] caried away all Jerusalem, and all the princes, and all the mighty men of valor, even ten thousand captives, and all the craftsmen, and smiths: none remained save the poorest sort of the people of the land." This does not sound like the secure Jerusalem described in 1st Nephi 1-2. If we read Jeremiah 13:14-16 we also learn from Jeremiah that all the other prophets predicted peace and prosperity for Jerusalem during Zedekiah's reign. Jeremiah was the ONLY prophet who prophesized future bad times for Zedekiah. Why would Jeremiah say this in light of 1st Nephi 1:4, which says "many prophets..." predicted "Jerusalem would be destroyed?"
@thechandlers30898 ай бұрын
The philosophies of men mingled with Scriptures.
@brianfisher55258 ай бұрын
If you'd like to know what it feels like to be lied to for a full hour and half, watch this video.
@bobocomments8 ай бұрын
Which was the biggest lie?
@mormonismwiththemurph8 ай бұрын
🤔 it was 2 hours 50 and what lies?
@brettmajeske35258 ай бұрын
That is quite an assertion. Even if Rappleye made mistakes in his honest interpretation, that would not be a lie. Just because someone disagrees with you does not mean that they are lying.
@brianfisher55258 ай бұрын
@brettmajeske3525 the book of mormon was written by a CONVICTED con artist. Joseph Smith asserted hundreds of falsehoods and lies, from the language of the "magical plates" being pseudo-egyptian text, asserting first Americans were Jews that got here by boat thousands of years ago, that he was a prophet, that black folks couldn't preach, etc. This entire false religion is based upon several stacking lifetimes of lies and politics of self-aggrandizing cult leaders. There's no more truth to mormonism than there is to scientology.
@RichardHolmes-ll8ii4 ай бұрын
If you'd like to know what it feels like to be lied to for over a century see the lies the Egyptologists spread about the Book of Abraham translation. Paul Gregersen clearly debunked the idiot Egyptologist opinions against Joseph Smith by presenting proper interpretational understanding on translation. Paul Gregersen clearly demonstrates how the arrogant Egyptologists were wrong on his pro Book of Abraham videos. Do the anti-Mormons admit that Paul Gregersen debunked the arrogant Egyptologists? No.
@johncunningham7398 ай бұрын
Lol
@smaug30457 ай бұрын
Haven't you figured it out yet the Book of Mormon lands are in a parallel universe. 2:22
@jamesrexsannatracy83188 ай бұрын
Repent and seek the real Christ . Time is short and Joseph’s myth will land Mormons in hell
@mormonismwiththemurph8 ай бұрын
Oh wow
@ddbrosnahan4 ай бұрын
Matt 12:32
@redfightblue8 ай бұрын
Nahom is the convergence of the White and Blue Niles. The "Eastward" turn is a guide towards Ethiopia on the Blue Nile. This migration has been used for thousands of years by Jews. "Nahom" is an Ethiopian word. Baby boys are named Nahom in Ethiopia every day. Lehi migrated to Egypt where he would have been destroyed according to Jeremiah 44. This destruction is seen in the "Tree of Life Vision" when the "multitudes" fall away into "forbidden paths" in Egypt. Jeremiah 44:15 describes these Jews (that are sinning and falling away, and worshiping false gods) as "multitudes", the same as the vision. The Book of Abraham refers to Egypt as "forbidden". The solution to this destruction in Egypt is in the "Tree of Life Vision". Lehi must follow the Nile River and migrate to the Garden of Eden. This is up the Nile, at the rivers source, in Ethiopia. This is believed by Ethiopian Jews that rely on Genesis 2:13. 1 Nephi 8:14 describes the source of the Nile in the land of Ethiopia as "the head thereof a little way off". This is describing an Ethiopian Jewish belief that the Garden of Eden is at the source of the Nile, in Ethiopia. Most of the Book of Mormon takes place in Ethiopia safe from the destruction in Egypt. It is only after the Nephites migrate back North, to Egypt, that they are destroyed. One migration North to Egypt is clearly defined in Helaman 3. The "treeless" land where they build with "cement" and "ship timber" is obviously Egypt to the North of Ethiopia. This is where shipping of Lebanon cedar was happening and stone buildings were being built. The Land South is Africa and the Narrow Neck is the Isthmus of Suez. Lehi and Alma both cross the Isthmus of Suez in 3 days. This journey from the Nile river to the Red Sea is confirmed to be 3 days by Carsten Niebuhr who did the journey between Aug. 28th and 30th 1762. He declared "Suez is 3 days distant from Cairo". Lehi took the journey South into Africa and Alma took the journey North into the Middle East. This is why Alma arrives at Ammonihah and Midian. These are Biblical Lands of Ammon and Midian. Compare Zeezrom from Ammonihah to the Biblical Zamzummim from Ammon Deuteronomy 2:20. This connection is possible when you recognize the 3 day journey is the same journey and the Book of Mormon is an Old World text. It has nothing to do with America. Alma also speaks about "The Land of Ishmael". This is the Biblical Land of Ishmael in Northern Arabia. On the other side of the day journey. Google "Land of Ishmael". The Land of Nephi is in Ethiopia. Zarahemla is North of there which places it in the Zahara desert. There's a "Sidon" in Sudan on the Black Nile. Bountiful is the fertile Nile River Delta in Egypt. The Hill Cumorah in the Land North is most likely Mount Moriah although Hugh Nibley makes a strong connection to Qumran. When Moroni return the record to the North after the Nephites are destroyed, he is fulfilling Jeremiah 44:28. The Nephites were safe in Ethiopia, they migrated back to Egypt and were destroyed, just like Jeremiah 44 prophesized would happen. The Book of Ether is nothing but the Ethiopian Jews perspective on Genesis. The Jaredites started in Ethiopia and migrated down the Nile River. They outfitted their river barges with cabins to survive the open ocean. They then sailed to Israel. They are the ones responsible for populating Israel and brining the Milk and Honey from Ethiopia (Garden of Eden). Once you place the Jaredites in Israel you can start to see the connections to Lehi's journey. Especially when you read about Omer. Omer's journey is identical to Lehi's. He was cast out of Israel and migrated into Africa and then Ethiopia. There's many reasons to believe this. Moroni uses the same language like "Come unto the fountain of righteousness" just like Lehi did. The river flowing out of Eden is referred to as the "River of Righteousness" in Non-Biblical sources and this appears to be a reference to the Nile River in Africa that flows out of Ethiopia. When Nephi said the "prophets of old" were stoned murdered and cast out of Israel, he is talking about Omer in the Book of Ether. Moroni reiterates this language and claims Omer was stoned, murdered, and cast out.