You are really doing a great work here, thanks for that

Banger

I freakin love the "KnowWhy" articles and videos so much!!! Neal is a boss!!!

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!

Neal is a gem and we are lucky to have him.

I'm just getting into your videos. What a great resource! Thank you.

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 👍

Love the video length with such good questions & outstanding scholarship. Nice work Murph and Neal!

Another fantastic video! thank you!

Love the content! Keep it up!

Great episode!

Fantastic interview. More of this please.

Great interview!

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.

The 3-10- minutes articles Are The Best For Me 🎯🙏💯% It really works Best For Me 👏👏👏

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.

"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"

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.

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.

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?

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.

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?

Good show. Merry Christmas 🎄🎁

Thanks!

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.

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.

Nahom/Ishmael should be its own episode.

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?

"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.

cool

Is the priesthood and temple ban a revelation from God?

Where can I read more about the “rock”/massebah in 1 Ne 1:6?

Also, Neal should share his PowerPoint.

Don't read the comments...don't read the comments.

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.

South America had to be THE PLACE of the Book of Mormon.

where can I get in touch with Neal , I have some additional on Nahom or Nehem I would like to share. Steve Pratt

This is the strongest evidence? Oh, brother.

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.

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?😂😂😂

🤦

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

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?"

The philosophies of men mingled with Scriptures.

If you'd like to know what it feels like to be lied to for a full hour and half, watch this video.

Lol

Haven't you figured it out yet the Book of Mormon lands are in a parallel universe. 2:22

Repent and seek the real Christ . Time is short and Joseph’s myth will land Mormons in hell

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.

Hope you can leave and return to the true Christ.