The Nahom Follies

[_mentalgymnast]

To others, who come at this material without having been brought up to take it seriously, the sense of amazement has a very different origin.

It seems like no matter what you may think about Joseph Smith and/or Christianity/religion, etc., you would still be 'amazed' at some of the stuff that we come across in the Book of Mormon? You would AT LEAST, I think, find it interesting that we would find the detailed narrative of travel we find in 1 Nephi 16-17 that leads to Bountiful.

At every turn, pun intended, we have Joseph going into significant detail to describe this journey, navigationally, along with other things. Why? What's his motive in doing this? It seems like this young man would/could have sat down as he created this book and come up with something that didn't contain all these gems of detail and/or complexity...chiamus, interwoven narrative/history/characters, etc. I suppose that I'm simply amazed that he'd take the time and effort and creative energy to do so. Seems like he could have taken a much less intensive approach.

But I suppose the same could be said of Tolkien.

What is the origin of your amazement as an outsider looking in as you look at 1 Nephi 16-17?

Regards,
MG

[Guest]

To others, who come at this material without having been brought up to take it seriously, the sense of amazement has a very different origin.

It seems like no matter what you may think about Joseph Smith and/or Christianity/religion, etc., you would still be 'amazed' at some of the stuff that we come across in the Book of Mormon? You would AT LEAST, I think, find it interesting that we would find the detailed narrative of travel we find in 1 Nephi 16-17 that leads to Bountiful.

At every turn, pun intended, we have Joseph going into significant detail to describe this journey, navigationally, along with other things. Why? What's his motive in doing this? It seems like this young man would/could have sat down as he created this book and come up with something that didn't contain all these gems of detail and/or complexity...chiamus, interwoven narrative/history/characters, etc. I suppose that I'm simply amazed that he'd take the time and effort and creative energy to do so. Seems like he could have taken a much less intensive approach.

But I suppose the same could be said of Tolkien.

What is the origin of your amazement as an outsider looking in as you look at 1 Nephi 16-17?

Regards,
MG

As Darth J has brilliantly pointed out, were we to place the Book of Mormon lands in Italy, we would also find a number of amazing coincidences. The fact is that the laws of probability assure us that it is easy to look for possible geographical locations in the Book of Mormon, what is extremely difficult, as Givens unintentionally points out above, is to look for evidence at actual locations for the Book of Mormon. The story of Thomas Stuart Ferguson is a great example of what happens when one looks for actual evidence at specific locations. Given the time span and scope of the Book of Mormon, having only identified one tentative physical location out of thousands of possibilities should be proof for anyone that the story is fiction. This is the Texas Sharpshooter fallacy at its worst.

[_Mormon Think]

I do think that the Hiltons are a generation or two behind the current theory. If I recall correctly, there is a book and video by a Warren Aston...

Aston is also the go to guy for alien encounters and UFO's

http://alienexperiences.com/24WARREN.html

After spending a few minutes on that UFO site, the guy has zero credibility.

Bill

[_mentalgymnast]

After spending a few minutes on that UFO site, the guy has zero credibility.

Bill

I grew up in the sixties and seventies in Southern Cal. UFO's were the rage. I read book upon book dealing with UFO's. Lots of folks have varying degrees of interest and/or belief in the possibility of extraterrestrial life.

http://www.educatinghumanity.com/2011/1 ... -ufos.html

That Warren Aston has an interest in UFO's does not surprise me. I'm not sure where that take away 'credibility' in the writings that are linked to on Jeff Lindsay's site:

http://www.jefflindsay.com/BMEvidences.shtml#geography

What do you think about UFO's? And if you don't give extraterrestrial life and/or visitors any credence, does that view rule the day?

by the way, I don't know quite what to think about UFO's nowadays. But they sure were the rage back in the day...

Regards,
MG

[_Chap]

UFOs really are off topic, surely?

[_mentalgymnast]

In regards to the 'turn by turn' navigations in the wilderness narrative in 1 Nephi 16-17 we have this interesting observation:

Link of NHM with eastward turn

There is another piece that one should add to the NHM issue. It concerns Nephi’s note that “we did travel nearly eastward from that time forth,” following events at Nahom (1 Ne. 17:1). This geographical notice is one of the few in Nephi’s narrative and invites examination. One observes that northwest of Marib, the ancient capital of the Sabaean kingdom of south Arabia, almost all roads turn east, veering from the general north-south direction of the incense trail. Moreover, the eastward bend occurs in the general area inhabited by the NHM tribe. (I add parenthetically that I assume that Lehi’s party had been following or shadowing the incense trail because wells were located at more or less regular intervals along the route. This view would fit most naturally with the observation in the Book of Mormon that Lehi’s party traveled in a generally south-southeast direction, an observation which matches the direction of the incense trail [see 1 Ne. 16:13-14, 33].)

An important question is whether Joseph Smith could have learned about this eastward turn in the main incense trail. As far as I have been able to discover, no written source, Classical or contemporary, mentions it. It is my view, therefore, that only a person who had traveled either near or along the trail would know that it turned eastward in this area. To be sure, the longest leg of the incense trail ran basically north-south along the highland (eastern) side of the Al-Sar~t mountains of western Arabia (actually, from the north, the trail held in a south-southeast direction, as Nephi says). But after passing south of Najran (modern Ukhdãd, Saudi Arabia), both the main trail and several shortcuts turned eastward, all leading to Shabwah, then the chief staging center for caravans in south Arabia. One spur of the trail continued farther southward to Aden. But the traffic along this section was very much less than that which went to and from Shabwah. The main trail and its spurs ran eastward, matching Nephi’s description, because wells were there and because Shabwah controlled the finest incense of Arabia that was coming westward from Oman. This general area is the only place along the incense trail where traffic ran east-west. Hence, until other evidence surfaces, I conclude that neither Joseph Smith nor anyone else in his society knew about this turn in the incense trail which the narrative of First Nephi features. (Incidentally, for maps that show the eastward spurs of the trail that led to Shabwah, see Pierre Robert Baduel [ed.], L’Arabie antique de Karib’îl à Mahomet: Nouvelles données sur l’histoire des Arabes grâce aux inscriptions. La Revue du Monde Musulman et de la Méditerranée, no. 61 [1991-3], map 1; and Nigel Groom, Frankincense and Myrrh [London: Longman Group Ltd., 1981], 167, 192.)

Have any of the critics taken on this particular observation and shown it to be unimportant or a 'non-evidence'?

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

UFOs really are off topic, surely?

Yes. I'd rather not continue in that direction. MormonThink brought it up.

Regards,
MG

[_Fence Sitter]

In regards to the 'turn by turn' navigations in the wilderness narrative in 1 Nephi 16-17 we have this interesting observation:

Link of NHM with eastward turn

There is another piece that one should add to the NHM issue. It concerns Nephi’s note that “we did travel nearly eastward from that time forth,” following events at Nahom (1 Ne. 17:1). This geographical notice is one of the few in Nephi’s narrative and invites examination. One observes that northwest of Marib, the ancient capital of the Sabaean kingdom of south Arabia, almost all roads turn east, veering from the general north-south direction of the incense trail. Moreover, the eastward bend occurs in the general area inhabited by the NHM tribe. (I add parenthetically that I assume that Lehi’s party had been following or shadowing the incense trail because wells were located at more or less regular intervals along the route. This view would fit most naturally with the observation in the Book of Mormon that Lehi’s party traveled in a generally south-southeast direction, an observation which matches the direction of the incense trail [see 1 Ne. 16:13-14, 33].)

An important question is whether Joseph Smith could have learned about this eastward turn in the main incense trail. As far as I have been able to discover, no written source, Classical or contemporary, mentions it. It is my view, therefore, that only a person who had traveled either near or along the trail would know that it turned eastward in this area. To be sure, the longest leg of the incense trail ran basically north-south along the highland (eastern) side of the Al-Sar~t mountains of western Arabia (actually, from the north, the trail held in a south-southeast direction, as Nephi says). But after passing south of Najran (modern Ukhdãd, Saudi Arabia), both the main trail and several shortcuts turned eastward, all leading to Shabwah, then the chief staging center for caravans in south Arabia. One spur of the trail continued farther southward to Aden. But the traffic along this section was very much less than that which went to and from Shabwah. The main trail and its spurs ran eastward, matching Nephi’s description, because wells were there and because Shabwah controlled the finest incense of Arabia that was coming westward from Oman. This general area is the only place along the incense trail where traffic ran east-west. Hence, until other evidence surfaces, I conclude that neither Joseph Smith nor anyone else in his society knew about this turn in the incense trail which the narrative of First Nephi features. (Incidentally, for maps that show the eastward spurs of the trail that led to Shabwah, see Pierre Robert Baduel [ed.], L’Arabie antique de Karib’îl à Mahomet: Nouvelles données sur l’histoire des Arabes grâce aux inscriptions. La Revue du Monde Musulman et de la Méditerranée, no. 61 [1991-3], map 1; and Nigel Groom, Frankincense and Myrrh [London: Longman Group Ltd., 1981], 167, 192.)

Have any of the critics taken on this particular observation and shown it to be unimportant or a 'non-evidence'?

Regards,
MG

Oh the irony of asking the critic to respond to one singular observation when, even within the faithful, there is a raging debate about the actual location of the entire Book of Mormon setting in the Americas. You guys can't even agree on which continent the Book of Mormon took place and yet you think a single turn in a long route is evidence.

This reminds me of the scene in The Hunt For Red October when Baldwin predicts which way Connery will turn his sub next.

Capt. Bart Mancuso: How did you know that his next turn would be to starboard?

Jack Ryan: I didn't. I had a 50/50 chance. I needed a break. Sorry.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Why in the world God have them set sail anywhere but the Mediterranean? Perhaps NHM is ancient Hebrew for WTF, God???

- Doc

[_canpakes]

In regards to the 'turn by turn' navigations in the wilderness narrative in 1 Nephi 16-17 we have this interesting observation:

An important question is whether Joseph Smith could have learned about this eastward turn in the main incense trail. As far as I have been able to discover, no written source, Classical or contemporary, mentions it. It is my view, therefore, that only a person who had traveled either near or along the trail would know that it turned eastward in this area.
...
Hence, until other evidence surfaces, I conclude that neither Joseph Smith nor anyone else in his society knew about this turn in the incense trail which the narrative of First Nephi features.

Have any of the critics taken on this particular observation and shown it to be unimportant or a 'non-evidence'?

Regards,
MG

In this situation, 'many days' were required to walk about a 1000 miles or so to where apologists posit 'Nahom' to be.

This was referred to as 'wandering in the wilderness' even though apologists claim that this was along a well-known and well-traveled trade route.

Then, an eastward turn to 'Bountiful', across what apologists argue is the desert, took 8 years, even though the physical distance is considerably shorter. And, there was no mention of any difference of environment between this leg and the last even as apologists would have us believe that the route switched to an extremely arid desert (nor is there mention of much of anything except the main story characters, strangely enough, considering the anecdote about the size of the party growing through births, etc.).

Meanwhile, the apologists do not venture an opinion on wherever 'Shazer' is, also having been mentioned in this journey, and more frequently so that the one-time mention of Nahom.

And the apologists keep up the 'How could Joseph have known?" refrain, even though spice trade with this part of the world is mentioned in the Old Testament (see Jeremiah 6:20).

This is a huge stretch by apologists in trying to link the existing reference 'NHM' to the Book of Mormon's Nahom. And even with that, it says nothing about the New World habitation.

I think that most folks are going to consider this set of circumstances and come away concluding that this is a fitful grasping at straws. But, to each his own.