Recovery Board  : RfM
Recovery from Mormonism (RfM) discussion forum. 
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In
Posted by: Cold-Dodger ( )
Date: June 17, 2017 11:43PM

"The discovery of Nahom may be one of the strongest pieces of evidence we have for the Book of Mormon, but it is far from being the only one. Time and time again, the Book of Mormon has proven true to its claims."

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: donbagley ( )
Date: June 17, 2017 11:52PM

The marker reads NHM, which may or may not be pronounced as Nahom. How could we know?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: slskipper ( )
Date: June 18, 2017 01:10AM

"Time and time again, the Book of Mormon has proven true to its claims."

I really don't know how anyone can say this and live with themselves.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Dave the Atheist ( )
Date: June 18, 2017 01:49AM

Remember, nahom backwards is mohan.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: cludgie ( )
Date: June 19, 2017 06:07AM

They never say if NHM is what it reads right to left or left to right. And there was a point where the direction of writing (L to R, or R t L) was fluid. If that's all they got, they got nothing.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: slayermegatron ( )
Date: June 18, 2017 01:53AM

That's one little piece of the BOM story, and it may or may not be what is meant there. What about all the rest?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Leaving ( )
Date: June 18, 2017 02:25AM

If I shoot a thousand arrows at a target, it would be nearly impossible for at least one of them to NOT hit the bulls-eye.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Heartless ( )
Date: June 18, 2017 05:29AM

What word am I writing?



without the vowels no real way to tell.

Same applies to the inscription. One possible combination matches the BoM.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: The Invisible Green Potato ( )
Date: June 18, 2017 06:59AM

I think that Nahom is the best evidence for the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon.

In other words, the best evidence for the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon comes from the Arabian peninsula.

I am going to wait for the evidence to firm up a bit before I go back to church ;)

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Babyloncansuckit ( )
Date: June 18, 2017 07:17AM

This just in, petrified rabbit bones have been discovered in the Middle East proving once and for all the existence of Rhosgobel rabbits and their employment by Lehi and his family to cross hundreds of miles of wilderness in a mere three days.

What, you don't believe me? Damn apostates.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Honest TBM ( )
Date: June 18, 2017 08:20PM

Your explanation about the rabbits sure sounds pro Book of Mormon so it must be true. Tears of joy flood my eyes as I remember the sacred words "we believe all things".

Personally I dislike it how people call us Mormons. It would've preferable to call us Nahomites as the word Nahom is the most credible word I have ever heard of.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Honest TBM ( )
Date: June 18, 2017 08:37PM

I have a plan which I feel a burning in my bosom (must be the Spirit) about setting up a MLM in Utah County, Utah to capitalize a corporation to construct and run an amusement park at the site where the Nahom stone was found. I have a vision of tens of thousands of literal descendants of Father Lehi taking family vacations there with their families each week to all see where their ancestors traveled en route to the promised land that was in the meantime getting emptied of people until Shiz lost his head. With the Church being known as the fastest growing religion ever then the MLM investors could make a fortune on the IPO :)

One of the things that surely settles whether Mormonism is true is the fruits we see in how the places where Mormonism is strong is where the MLM business model is so widespread. Shuts seeing how members are so willing to help their fellow members sacrifice their financial well being for the sake of consecration is an amazing phenomenon. Investigative journalists should do more research into how wondrous this is. When they come away from it thinking "the Nahomites are such honest and responsible people so free of getting sucked into scams" then it will help the Church look better :)

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Chicken N. Backpacks ( )
Date: June 19, 2017 10:33AM

The only thing better than that would be finding an altar in Salt Lake City that bears the inscription 'MLM'.

Honest TBM, I have unwavering faith that you will be inspired to lead the expedition which will uncover this amazing proof of MLM, possibly under the foundation of the COB at 76 North Main St.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Eric K ( )
Date: June 18, 2017 07:36AM

It is the one of the most absurd apologetic responses to the Book of Mormon out there. Millions of people supposedly lived, built cities,
had massive wars, had a culture with advanced metallurgy, existed for nearly a 1000 years and yet no evidence in the Americas supports their existence. A rock in the Arabian desert is the proof they existed? It is just plain nuts.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Chicken N. Backpacks ( )
Date: June 18, 2017 09:25AM

Since it *was* on a few maps in JS's era, there is a zillion times more chance that he got "Nahom" from looking at a map than most of the other leaps of faith apologists make in regards to BoM and BoA BS.

What's more logical: JS taking a name from a map that places Nahom right where it's supposed to be, or believing that ancient and heretofore forgotten information is restored the knowledge of man through Joseph Smith, Jr.?

And let's not forget Comoros and Moroni on a map, IIRC.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Nancy Rigdon ( )
Date: June 18, 2017 10:32AM

check out this old post from baura - great point!,539873,588890#msg-588890

A name carved on a stone PROVES the book is from God.

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 hierglyphs 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.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Dead Cat ( )
Date: June 18, 2017 11:26AM

I think we're overlooking the very best evidence.

Lehi started his journey from Jerusalem and Jerusalem is a real city and was inhabited in 600 AD!

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Facsimile 3 ( )
Date: June 18, 2017 12:00PM

The best reason is the BoM text itself. Nahom needs to be read within the context of 1 Nephi 16-17 and then overlaid with historical NHM.

Below is the BoM sequence:

1. Lehi's party is suffering from hunger, thirst, and fatigue in the wilderness

2. Ishmael dies and is buried at a place called Nahom (as indicated earlier, there were maps of Arabia with that name or variations thereof)

3. Ishmael's daughters complain, "Our father is dead; yea, and we have wandered much in the wilderness, and we have suffered much affliction, hunger, thirst, and fatigue; and after all these sufferings we must perish in the wilderness with hunger."

4. They were "desirous to return again to Jerusalem".

5. Laman attempts to persuade Lemuel and the sons of Ishmael to kill Lehi and Nephi

6. The Lord chastens the party and they repent, "insomuch that the Lord did bless us again with food, that we did not perish"

7. In chapter 17 they resume their journey and "did travel and wade through much affliction in the wilderness" as they "did travel nearly eastward from that time forth"

Here is the history:

1. The NHM incription was found in a TEMPLE COMPLEX from the old Sabaean Kingdom--a temple complex built by a large, sophisticated civilization that lived in southern Arabia and even built a dam to create a massive reservoir of water

2. Traveling east from the temple complex, would have kept Lehi's party within the boundaries of the Sabaean Kingdom until they reached the Arabian Sea/Indian Ocean

In other words, the BoM narrative of a thirsty, hungry journey through the wilderness at NHM and then eastward is wholly incompatible with the Sabaean Kingdom circa 600 BC.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/18/2017 12:15PM by Facsimile 3.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Chicken N. Backpacks ( )
Date: June 19, 2017 10:49AM

If the BoM mentioned something about the Sabaeans, then there might be something to the whole NHM thing--there's almost no way they wouldn't have run into them and mentioned such a civilization...

...oh, wait, of *course* they wouldn't have mentioned them--when they got to the New World they didn't mention the millions of people that were already there, because like good mormons they act like they're the only important ones around.

:-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

Options: ReplyQuote
Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Intelligent Donkey ( )
Date: June 18, 2017 04:30PM

I believe NHM stands for No Homers, and is unquestionable proof of the existence of The Ancient Mystic Society of No Homers. The creators of No Homers have given the world much more happiness and wisdom than the creators of Nahom.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Chicken N. Backpacks ( )
Date: June 18, 2017 07:55PM

Ah yes, Steve Guttenberg as Nephi. And Patrick Stewart as Lehi.

It was brilliant.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Brother Of Jerry ( )
Date: June 18, 2017 11:10PM

NHM is one of the best pieces of evidence supporting the BoM, and it is a pathetic piece of evidence. That tells you how piss-poor the rest of their "evidence" is.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: baura ( )
Date: June 19, 2017 01:24AM

THE best reason NHM is b.s. is that it's "the BEST EVIDENCE
yet." If the Book of Mormon were truly historical there would
be TONS of much better evidence.

I like to look at things in terms of probabilities. What is the
probability that a thousand-year civilization that "filled the
land" that built great cities, smelted iron and steel, had
horses and chariots, spoke and wrote a hybrid Hebrew-Egyptian
language and script, practiced Christianity (even before Jesus
was born) cultivated wheat and barley, would vanish so
completely that a couple of centuries of extensive archaeology
from Alaska to Chile would be unable to find a single
recognizable trace of them?

What is the probability that gazillions of Mormon apologists,
scouring the academic journals would be able to find, out of all
the gazillions of things in the Book of Mormon and all the
gazillions of things out in the world, something that would fit
as well as NHM? In all such arguments the null hypothesis,
which must be overcome, is the argument of coincidence. Now it
is the nature of coincidences that they can be very striking.
But the difference between a sporadic coincidence and real
evidence is that real evidence fits a pattern. If they had
found Zarahemla complete with Hebreo-Egyptian carvings, chariots
and horse remains, if they had found slag dumps for the steel
mills and the metal swords and breastplates etc. then there
might be a pattern for HNM to fit into. Then it wouldn't look
so much like a coincidence. If they had been able to carbon-
14-date the spread of the Book-of-Mormon peoples from their
landing place (wherever that was) across the land they'd have
something to place NHM into. Mormon apologists find themselves
unable even to agree on the location of a single new-world Book
of Mormon site. They can't even agree that the Hill Cumorah
that the Plates came out of was the same Hill Cumorah that the
plates went into.

But as it is, NHM has not risen above the "coincidence"
explanation. Mormon apologists unknowingly admit this when they
say "Moroni-Comoro" is just a coincidence. Here we have the
actual name (consonants and vowels) "Moroni" and associated with
it is a place called "Comoro" (spelled "Camorah" originally--one
unaccented vowel away from "Cumorah"). If this can be just an
amazing coincidence (they say it is) then so can NHM.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: unbelievable2 ( )
Date: June 19, 2017 01:35AM

Nahom could only have been a real place in JS's vivid, grandiose imagination. The BoM is plagiarized material. Was the name used in the Bible? JS was an avid reader of the Bible.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: baura ( )
Date: June 19, 2017 02:24AM

unbelievable2 Wrote:
> Was the name used in the Bible? JS was an avid reader
> of the Bible.

One of the books of the Old Testament is "Nahum"

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: ificouldhietokolob ( )
Date: June 19, 2017 09:42AM

"The Bar'an temple in Marib (70 miles (110 km) east of San'a in Yemen) was excavated by a German archaeological team led by Burkhard Vogt. Before excavation began, all that was visible at the Bar'an site were six columns projecting above the sand. The temple structure and many of the altars were found to be well preserved by the sand and desert climate (Aston 2001). One of the artifacts discovered at this location was an inscribed altar which has been dated to the seventh or sixth centuries BC. According to the inscription, the altar was donated to the temple by "Bi‘athtar, son of Sawad, son of Naw‘an, the Nihmite" (Brown 1999). The first altar discovered was removed from the Bar'an site and placed in a traveling exhibit which began touring Europe in October 1997. Since that time, two additional altars bearing the same inscription mentioning NHM have been identified at the same temple site (Aston 2001).

Each of the altars is constructed of solid limestone. All three contain a dedication inscription, which is carved around all four sides of the altars in the South Arabian script of that period, and each bears the name of their donor: Bi'athar (Aston 2001). The first altar was dated to between the seventh and sixth centuries B.C by French researcher Christian Robin (Robin 1997, p. 144). Since Naw'um of the tribe of Nihm was the grandfather of Bi'athar, it is estimated that the Nihm tribal name must be at least two generations older than the altars themselves (Aston 2001)."


The carved limestone altars date to around the supposed time of "Lehi." The BoM says nothing about the wandering Lehi family taking the time to carve limestone altars and place them in existing temple complexes.

There's a known tribe in the region -- the Nihmites. The existence of this tribal group in the region dates from at least 200 years before Lehi's supposed group used the name "Nahom" in 600BCE. The existence of that tribal group, the temples, and the altar inscriptions are all consistent and considered well-established, and none of them make any reference to "Nahom," nor to Lehi or his group, nor to any BoM events.

Finally, the BoM story around "Nahom" goes:

"And it came to pass that Ishmael died, and was buried in the place which was called Nahom.
And it came to pass that the daughters of Ishmael did mourn exceedingly, because of the loss of their father, and because of their afflictions in the wilderness; and they did murmur against my father, because he had brought them out of the land of Jerusalem, saying: Our father is dead; yea, and we have wandered much in the wilderness, and we have suffered much affliction, hunger, thirst, and fatigue; and after all these sufferings we must perish in the wilderness with hunger."

In 600BCE, the area around the temple and altars was populated -- enough for the locals to have built a fairly large temple complex. It wasn't "wilderness." And while the altar inscriptions refer to the Nihmite tribe (using NHM), NOTHING ever found in the area refers to the PLACE ITSELF as "NHM" or Nahom.

Yes, it's BS.


Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/19/2017 09:42AM by ificouldhietokolob.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: valkyriequeen ( )
Date: June 19, 2017 10:08AM

This reminds me that just a few years ago, the scuttlebutt was that all kinds of Book of Mormon artifacts,including treasures had been discovered around the Great Lakes areas and that LDS archeologists were off to find the wizard. There hasn't been a word, not a peep,nothing since then. JS borrowed a lot of names from biblical sources, as well as geographic names, because he was educated and very creative.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: logged out ( )
Date: June 19, 2017 01:55PM

A link to an 1813 map of Arabia with "Nehem" highlighted. Even if Smith didn't know about it, his (better-educated) partner Cowdery could well have.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: el-asherah ( )
Date: June 19, 2017 02:36PM

Just to add a little bit of more information about the Arabian map.

In the late 1700s the Dutch explorer Carsten Niebubr published a book with maps describing his journey through Arabia, one of the maps does contain "Nehem" on it see

The apologists claim that Nehem in Arabia was not known by the world in the 1800s, therefore this proves Joseph was a prophet.

But the information certainly was known in Joseph's day, any book of Arabia would have included Niebubr's work.

The apologists will then argue that Joseph couldn't of known about the map. But a copy was in Dartmouth College where Oliver Cowdrey attended college.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/20/2017 09:17AM by el-asherah.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Ladedah ( )
Date: June 20, 2017 12:31AM

Forgive me if this seems dumb, but if NHM were written in Roman letters, which I think, Nephi and crew weren't even around during Roman times, and didn't read or speak anything like Latin at all, wouldn't that prove nothing but maybe some Roman dudes stopped by there much much later and felt like carving some letters or their initials on something? Shouldn't the rock be in reformed, or unreformed Egyptian or Hebrew or something if it was BofM evidence?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Facsimile 3 ( )
Date: June 20, 2017 08:49AM

The characters are written in some kind of Semitic/Arabic characters appropriate for the time. You can Google for photos of the actual altar/inscription.

Options: ReplyQuote
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In

Screen Name: 
Your Email (optional): 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 **    **  ********   **     **  **     **  **    ** 
 ***   **  **     **  **     **  **     **   **  **  
 ****  **  **     **  **     **  **     **    ****   
 ** ** **  **     **  **     **  *********     **    
 **  ****  **     **   **   **   **     **     **    
 **   ***  **     **    ** **    **     **     **    
 **    **  ********      ***     **     **     **