Origins of the Book of Mormon

[_charity]

Well, my hope is that we can both be here peaceably. I will not return the favor of inviting you to leave. Why?

I am sorry if you thought I was inviting you to leave. This isn't my house. I don't invite or disinvite. I was merely referring to what I thought was your statement you would not longer respond to anything I said.

There are lots of folks here who like you and want you to hang around. Frankly, I often don't understand where they are coming from, other than the fact that outside of your apologetics you seem like a nice person. In fact, I would bet that I would rather socialize with you than some other folks on this board. Don't worry, I am not fishing for a reciprocal statement.

You are probably a nice guy. I have lots of friends who are not LDS. We get along fine. I suppose what you find offensive about my apologetics is my lack of patience with what I see as falsehood, but you see as important contributions.

The thing is, they are careful in their methodology. I invite you to actually read the C/D/V book carefully and not dismiss it out of hand. You don't have to of course. I only object to you bashing to others what you have not read carefully yourself.

The book won't get more correct with a more painstaking reading. That is what I don't understand about your request. If I read a statement "Dogs are really just larger, uglier cats," I am bound for form the conclusion the person knows enough about the subject to be persuasive. If they later give a really correct description of collie dogs, based on years of research on collie dogs, I really couldn't care less, because I am not interested in collie dogs. Another person, though, might find that section of the book valuable. Did I make my point?

And finally, I apologize for dismissing you. I would not dismiss you, only things you write that are not based on any careful study and reflection.

Thanks for the apology. I think your objections here are based on a difference of opinion on the subject, not on whether or not I poured over every word.

[_charity]

Charity, if, as you say, NHM was already there when Lehi arrived, and was not named by Lehi as "to be sorry," then why do apologists accentuate the Hebrew "origin" of the place-name?

Just curious as to your answer.

I have never heard an apologist accentuate the Hebrew origin of the place-name. Can you quote me one, or point me to the source of your information?

[_cosmo junction]

Charity, if, as you say, NHM was already there when Lehi arrived, and was not named by Lehi as "to be sorry," then why do apologists accentuate the Hebrew "origin" of the place-name?

Just curious as to your answer.

I have never heard an apologist accentuate the Hebrew origin of the place-name. Can you quote me one, or point me to the source of your information?

Kent Brown, Kevin Barney, Warren P. Aston, et al.

Are you serious?

[_charity]

Charity, if, as you say, NHM was already there when Lehi arrived, and was not named by Lehi as "to be sorry," then why do apologists accentuate the Hebrew "origin" of the place-name?

Just curious as to your answer.

I have never heard an apologist accentuate the Hebrew origin of the place-name. Can you quote me one, or point me to the source of your information?

Kent Brown, Kevin Barney, Warren P. Aston, et al.

Are you serious?

I've read most of what they have written on the subject.. I've talked to Kevin in person. Accentuate is not a word I would use. Mention in passing, as an afterthought, maybe. What they have spent their time on is the location of the place, the fact that Nahom was already named and not given a name by Lehi. And discrediting the critics who say that Nahom couldn't possibly be right because the tribal name was NiHM.

[_Runtu]

I've read most of what they have written on the subject.. I've talked to Kevin in person. Accentuate is not a word I would use. Mention in passing, as an afterthought, maybe. What they have spent their time on is the location of the place, the fact that Nahom was already named and not given a name by Lehi. And discrediting the critics who say that Nahom couldn't possibly be right because the tribal name was NiHM.

I think it again comes back to likelihoods. Which is more likely?

a. Joseph got the name right because it was on the gold plates.

b. Joseph used a name that was on extant maps and was a familiar Biblical name.

As Blixa pointed out, the NHM find is far less impressive when you look at the specifics.

[_Who Knows]

I have never heard an apologist accentuate the Hebrew origin of the place-name. Can you quote me one, or point me to the source of your information?

from kent brown:

In Hebrew, the combination of these three consonants points to a root word that can mean "comfort" or "compassion." (The meanings are different in the Old South Arabian language.4) The reason Nephi mentioned this name while remaining silent about any other place names encountered on their trip (with the possible exception of Shazer) was likely because he considered that the existing name of the spot, "comfort" in his language, was evidence of the hand of the Lord over them, although Ishmael's own family (including Nephi's wife) seems not to have been at all positive (see 1 Nephi 16:35).

Aston:

Furthermore, this new window into the ancient
past of southern Arabia tells us rather clearly that
the origin of the name Nahom is connected to a
place of burial. And its name is also tied to the
Nihm tribe living in the area. Scholars have recognized
for some time that the Semitic roots of the
name Nahom closely relate to sorrow, hunger, consoling,
and mourning, obviously very appropriate
for a place of burial, and may therefore reflect the
origin of the Hebrew name used by Nephi.15

I can't believe you haven't heard this. It's brought up fairly often.

[_Runtu]

I can't believe you haven't heard this. It's brought up fairly often.

I think she's heard of it, but she's quibbling over the word "accentuate."

[_cosmo junction]

I can't believe you haven't heard this. It's brought up fairly often.

Frankly, I couldn't believe it either. But, I guess accentuate is perhaps a word I should have been more careful in choosing.

Though for a while there, NHM was one of the hebraisms we heard much about, including Tvedtnes' work. But I guess it's become out of vogue recently.

[_charity]

I think I have about exhausted my interest in this thread. I am sure there are still things to say and my leaving it is not reflection on what the future posts may be. Thanks for the discussion.

[_beastie]

I think I have about exhausted my interest in this thread. I am sure there are still things to say and my leaving it is not reflection on what the future posts may be. Thanks for the discussion.

Did anything we said make an impression on you, and perhaps leave you a bit less inclined to present the case for the Book of Mormon as strongly as you did?

I'm curious because I've seen many past conversations like this, and as they evolved, the evidence that believers presented as so strong and persuasive turned out to be much weaker. Yet, later I would see those same believers present the same evidence all over again as if the former conversation had never taken place. This leaves me wondering if anything we say really is digested.