I'm still quite troubled by Nahom. It was found in the right spot and near a burial. They wen to Nahom and buried Ishmael. It dates back to the right time too.

1) It was a well traveled road by merchants and spice traders. So there would of been many, many people coming and going on the Nahom trail. It wouldn't have been some top secret place. Especially for a murderer and thieves of a well known rich man like Laban. It took them how long to walk this trail? It sure wouldn't seem like a road to be traveled if you were leaving secretly.

2) This means that the Nephites/Mulekites sailed the Pacific and probably landed in South America. Fine, then how did all of the cities, lands, geography of the BoM end up in the great lakes/NE United States?

Yes, NHM trumps the science of genetics, archaeology, anachronisms, plagiarisms, and all the dumb-ass utterances of every counterfeit prophet since Joseph the adulterer.

^ This one gets my vote. ^

Variations of the name were on maps available prior to the Book of Mormon.

http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1413&index=6


In addition, compare the BoM text before and after the mention of Nahom. The hungry and thirsty wilderness journey described therein does not comport with what would have been the Sabaean kingdom during 600 BC, back when they had a dam and a reservoir to support a large civilization.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/04/2015 09:49PM by Facsimile 3.

If Joseph Smith did indeed have access to those names than why didn't he put the name Nehem in it? If Joseph Smith was using those maps we would expect the names of the maps not some weird variation.

Three options:

1) Assuming that James Gee is telling the truth, and the pronunciation of "Nehem" is the same as "Nahom", then perhaps Joseph Smith or Oliver Cowdery had access to material that included the pronunciation and they elected to "translate" it into the English spelling.

2) Since these were "modern" maps, it would not be surprising for Joseph Smith to alter the spelling. One of the prevailing themes in the BoM is that languages are corrupted over time, therefore we should not be surprised that the modern "Nehem" was similar but not identical to the ancient "Nahom".

3) Joseph Smith may have been attempting to change "Nehem" into a more Hebrew-looking form. This is similar to what he did with the name of Captain Kidd's "Camora" or "Comoro" island (the one with "Moroni" as the capital) that he shifted to "Cumorah" to look more Hebrew.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/04/2015 10:12PM by Facsimile 3.

When is the theme of corrupting languages shown in the BofM?

Omni 1:17 And at the time that Mosiah discovered them, they had become exceedingly numerous. Nevertheless, they had had many wars and serious contentions, and had fallen by the sword from time to time; and their language had become corrupted; and they had brought no records with them; and they denied the being of their Creator; and Mosiah, nor the people of Mosiah, could understand them.


Mormon 9:32 And now, behold, we have written this record according to our knowledge, in the characters which are called among us the reformed Egyptian, being handed down and altered by us, according to our manner of speech.

33 And if our plates had been sufficiently large we should have written in Hebrew; but the Hebrew hath been altered by us also; and if we could have written in Hebrew, behold, ye would have had no imperfection in our record.

34 But the Lord knoweth the things which we have written, and also that none other people knoweth our language; and because that none other people knoweth our language, therefore he hath prepared means for the interpretation thereof.

Another example where Joseph Smith creatively reverse-corrupted a word: Master Mason.

Moses 5:31 And Cain said: Truly I am Mahan, the master of this great secret, that I may murder and get gain. Wherefore Cain was called Master Mahan, and he gloried in his wickedness.


The Book of Moses was written shortly after the Book of Mormon, with the latter clearly being very anti-Masonic (Gadianton Robber oaths and secret combinations) due to the William Morgan murder in 1826.

What about Nahom looks more Hebrew. It seems as though Nehem was already Hebrew. Furthermore, why would they elect to translate it into an English spelling? Wouldn't they want to keep it more Hebrew?

"It seems as though Nehem was already Hebrew."

Why would a non-Hebrew place name in Arabia already be Hebrew?


"...why would they elect to translate it into an English spelling?"

I was referring to the English pronunciation (sorry I was not more clear).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/04/2015 11:17PM by Facsimile 3.

I see how it could have been changed but I don't see a motivation for changes Nehem to Nahom.

No need to identify a motive. The presence of a similar word in a similar location on existing maps is enough to explain how it got there.

The reality is that Nahom is closer to Nehem than it is to the *real* NHM, which likely translates to Nihmite. As I mentioned above, Joseph Smith's idea of the region was 100% incorrect for 600 BC Arabia, though not so incorrect for 19th Century Arabia. The Sabaean kingdom that existed during 600 BC could not have been mistaken for a hungry and thirsty wilderness.

"What about Nahom looks more Hebrew."

I am not a linguist, but was relying on the word of Hugh Nibley (probably a mistake), that nahom was a Hebrew word for mourning or consolation or something like that.

Ok I guess that works although you really shouldn't rely on Hugh Nibley

Could you send me links about this that don't have Mormon bias?

Seriously?

They have been straining for 100 years to find any shred of evidence. And what do they have? A stone with the makings (maybe) of a name. Millions of markers spread over millions of square miles. And one sorta kinda fits.

Zero evidence of contemporaneous cities in Central America. Not one shard of pottery. No coins. No swords. No nothing. And a ton of problems.

I have no idea if you believe in a god or grand creator. But if you do, don't you think it would be sadistic to hang someone's "salvation" on whether they could buy all that?

Nabobs
Hoaxing
Marks

What's troubling about NHM? It doesn't say Nahom. It says NHM.

Remember this thread:

"How could a book produced a couple of thousand years after an event, and without the help of modern archaeology, get something right about a detail of an ancient time? The only conclusion is that the author (or translator) of the book had Divine help--the book MUST be from God.

For years a certain passage in the book was ignored but only under the light of modern scholarship has a connection going back thousands of years been established. A name carved on a stone PROVES that the Book MUST be exactly what it claims to be--divine.

Of course the book I'm talking about is the Quran. In the Quran the battle of wits between Pharaoh and Moses is discussed. In a few of the passages the Quran has the Pharaoh telling his minister, Haman, to do something.

Only in modern times after the deciphering of ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs has it been found that there actually WAS an official in ancient Egypt named Haman. In Vienna there is a stone with a funeral inscription for a governor named "Haman."

Of course, since ancient Egyptian didn't use vowels the name is written "Hmn," but this is a small thing to quibble about.

So if Mormons claim that three consonants on a stone in Yemen PROVE the Book of Mormon then they must accept that three consonants on an ancient Egyptian funeral inscription currently residing in a museum in Vienna PROVES the Quran also."

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,539873,588890#msg-588890

it's the classic case of shooting an arrow into the side of a barn and then drawing a bullseye around it.

It is meaningless.

If one piece of evidence indicates that the Book of Mormon could possibly be true, and 100 pieces of evidence prove that the Book of Mormon can't possibly be true, then I guess that means we believe the one piece of evidence rather than the 100 so that the Book of Mormon will be true?

How come god didn't hide this bit of "proof" after hiding Zarahemla, steel mills, DNA, coins, and etc?

That Elohim, such a capricious god. Always changing his mind...

If an amateur shoots enough arrows at a target, some of them will hit the bulls-eye.

So what happened? Some rock was founded with the characters "NHM" written on them or what?

An inscription on an ancient altar, that I believe was part of a much larger complex.

http://www.mormonhandbook.com/home/nahom.html


The inscription translates to: "son of Naw'an the Nihmite".



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/04/2015 11:30PM by Facsimile 3.

This topic (NHM as Nehhem) has been covered before on RFM, most recently here.

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,967565,967648#msg-967648

If you're half as anxious to understand the subject as you purport to be, KWR, you'll find it illuminating.

Given that the NHM stone was found in the Arabian Peninsula, the word Nehhem is probably Arabic. Arabic and Hebrew are both Semitic languages. Their close relationship removes your objection to the word appearing Hebrew in your 10:59 post.

As to JS changing Nehhem to Nahom, no surprise there. That was his MO. He also changed many place names in New York State to come up with BOM names. See the CES letter for documentation.

I notice you've only been posting for four days. In that time you've cherry-picked specific items (Alma, Paanchi, Pahoran, NHM) that don't meet your claimed standard for solid BOM criticism, and at times mounted a thinly-veiled effort to defend JS.* You sound just like a TBM who's desperately looking for a way to shore up your faltering testimony by probing for possible areas where evidence against the BOM may not be absolutely overwhelming. Or you're searching for a reason to go back to church, prepared to return and report that those antis couldn't answer your questions after all. In any event, your posts have sent my T-meter into the red zone.

[*See, for example, your earlier post from 9:51 PM: "If Joseph Smith did indeed have access to those names than why didn't he put the name Nehem in it? If Joseph Smith was using those maps we would expect the names of the maps not some weird variation."]

Nine Hinch Mails. Ancient teen carves the initials of his fave hard rock band on a rock.

I suggest DNA. For most of the apologists, that one gets translated as "Does Not Apply."

Here you go...

http://simonsoutherton.blogspot.com/2011/12/native-americans-are-descended-from.html

Hmmm, I know Simon is busy with his new undertaking, and it's hard for him to tackle the Internet Danites at times, but I think I'll let him know they're holding a LiarsRUs convention in the comments section on this one.

For those who may think there's some validity in those claims, I invite you to review actual Native American genetics. What Brandon Cruise is claiming is actually validating Brigham Young's statement that Mormonism has some of the best and smoothest liars in the world.

See for yourself. It may appear forthright and authoritative, but it's also pure horse manure.

korihorwasright Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm still quite troubled by Nahom. It was found
> in the right spot and near a burial. They wen to
> Nahom and buried Ishmael. It dates back to the
> right time too.

What's the "right spot?" No evidence of "Lehi" has ever been found anywhere in the middle east, and the descriptions of the "journey" in the BoM don't match up to ANY correct geography of the middle east.

"Nahom" has never been found. Period. What has been found is a tribe in the area that may have had their tribal name since about the 8th century BCE, but they're "Nehem(ites) (or Nihim[ites])," not Nahom. And no *place name* was associated with the tribe of Nehemites until at least 800 CE -- and it was called Nehem, not Nahom.

Finally, the one inscription (from later than BoM times) from the area that includes "NHM" clearly refers to a member of the Nehemite (or Nihimite) tribe -- it doesn't refer to a place at all.

So out of, oh, 3,000 or so place names in the BoM, the mormons found ONE that they could dishonestly "fit" into an inscription that doesn't refer to a place, that is known to NOT be "Nahom," and that has a known name (Nehem). And that troubles you? What about the 2,999 other place names in the BoM for which there isn't any evidence of any kind, not even the ridiculous stretch the mormons make about NHM? Don't those trouble you?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/05/2015 11:03AM by ificouldhietokolob.

I just don't have the same energy to engage in pointless debates with people who aren't interested in a real discussion, let alone people who aren't upfront about their intentions.

If you really are interested in finding out about the subject, Mormon Think has a decent article on it.