Book of Lehi and the 116-page Manuscript

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7339
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

The space of many days

Post by Shulem »

As noted earlier in this thread and in others on this board, “the space of many days” serves as sneaky substitutes for the actual days previously tendered in the missing manuscript for the length of time that passed while traveling between point A and point B. The prime examples showcased below strongly indicate how Joseph Smith was lying while reinventing the same stories under a different guise. He simply did not recall those numbers which were surely recorded in the Book of Lehi as important documentation in creating chronology of the Nephites in the New World. The number (?) of days Nephi spent asea was just as important as the number (344) of days the brother of Jared spent at sea on those ridiculous barges -- a whale of a tale! Everyone is going to want to know how long the journey took and yet Nephi neglects to record the time! A voyage of consequence will surely be marked by time spent at sea or the number of days. But the space of many days was a creative maneuver on Smith’s part while improvising out of a tough spot with a sneaky attempt to maintain credibility while leaving out critical information which surely would have been documented by the original author.
1 Nephi 18:23 wrote:And it came to pass that after we had sailed for the space of many days we did arrive at the promised land; and we went forth upon the land, and did pitch our tents; and we did call it the promised land.
2 Nephi 5:7 wrote:And we did take our tents and whatsoever things were possible for us, and did journey in the wilderness for the space of many days. And after we had journeyed for the space of many days we did pitch our tents.
It could be argued that the amount of space it required to etch “the space of many days” on gold leaf required more space while at the same time it provides useless information with regard to time management. How much more easier and effective it would be to simply record the number (x) rather than something that has no value or real measure of time.

I really do believe these examples serve to show how Smith improvised and made things up on the fly. It was all part of the grand deception which is entirely what the Book of Mormon is based on.

What say ye, Don Bradley? You have spent a lot of time inventing and showcasing faith promoting parallels and theories in your book (The Lost 116 Pages) but have done nothing to question or speculate why Smith may have been covering his tracks by playing with words.

This is an elephant in the room! Open your eyes, Don. Wake up! You are not fooling me.
User avatar
bill4long
Apostle
Posts: 760
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2021 3:56 am

Re: The space of many days

Post by bill4long »

Shulem wrote:
Fri Jan 03, 2025 3:48 pm
And we did take our tents and whatsoever things were possible for us, and did journey in the wilderness for the space of many days. And after we had journeyed for the space of many days we did pitch our tents... It could be argued that the amount of space it required to etch “the space of many days” on gold leaf required more space while at the same time it provides useless information with regard to time management. How much more easier and effective it would be to simply record the number (x) rather than something that has no value or real measure of time.
Salient observation.
Identifying as African-American Lesbian who is identifying as a Gay Man and a Gay Journalist
Pronouns: what/me/worry
Rocker and a mocker and a midnight shocker
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7339
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: The space of many days

Post by Shulem »

bill4long wrote:
Fri Jan 03, 2025 5:12 pm
Shulem wrote:
Fri Jan 03, 2025 3:48 pm
And we did take our tents and whatsoever things were possible for us, and did journey in the wilderness for the space of many days. And after we had journeyed for the space of many days we did pitch our tents... It could be argued that the amount of space it required to etch “the space of many days” on gold leaf required more space while at the same time it provides useless information with regard to time management. How much more easier and effective it would be to simply record the number (x) rather than something that has no value or real measure of time.
Salient observation.

You can be sure the lost manuscript that detailed the account of Nephi fleeing from his brethren to establish a new homebase a little northward contained the number of days they were at large before finally pitching their tents. Many details were lost and what we get in the present Book of Mormon is nothing more than crumbs or at best, second hand helpings. Consider how the Mosiah Priority took precedence by which there was a large space of time between telling the story of King Benjamin’s rule and retelling the account of Nephi’s flight into the wilderness. The Nephite log remains silent when Smith had to retell the story of how Nephi ditched his brethren, so we are fed the spurious line, “for the space of many days.”

I testify that I know Joseph Smith lied. I know it with all my mind and heart.

I bear solemn witness. I defy earth and heaven to refute me!
Brack
Teacher
Posts: 251
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 9:58 pm

Re: Genealogy Omitted!

Post by Brack »

Shulem wrote:
Thu Mar 30, 2023 6:40 pm
Nephi,

You should start with your sappy brother Jacob who wasted page after page plate after plate writing a ridiculously long and tedious parable of Zenos and the grafting in of Israel. Hardly anyone in the church in modern times bothers to read that long and awful parable. Everyone just skips over it. What would be more of interest is checking out your genealogy leading back to Joseph who was sold in Egypt that you neglected to record!

You’re not fooling me, Nephi. I know why you didn’t record your genealogy which wouldn’t have taken very long or much space on your precious plates. Is it you just don’t think it’s important enough or because you (JOSEPH SMITH) can’t remember the names and order in which they were originally dictated on the missing manuscript?

Shulem
There was a big book that came out back in the 90s about the parable of Zeno's. Link
I purchased that book back then, but it got lost over time.
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 7387
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: Genealogy Omitted!

Post by Moksha »

Brack wrote:
Thu Jan 30, 2025 2:14 am
There was a big book that came out back in the 90s about the parable of Zeno's.
I purchased that book back then, but it got lost over time.
Ah, the Lost Book of Zenos!
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7339
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Vineyard vs. Orchard

Post by Shulem »

Brack wrote:
Thu Jan 30, 2025 2:14 am
There was a big book that came out back in the 90s about the parable of Zeno's. Link
I purchased that book back then, but it got lost over time.

The parable of Zenos is a fish to be fried in another venue but I will say that apologetic excuses and reasonings for accepting/allowing the word VINEYARD instead of ORCHARD is a silly argument that king Solomon would have never bought. Joseph Smith should have never used the word “vineyard” to represent an orchard of olive trees. There are no vines or grapes within the confines of Zenos’s so-called “vineyard” anymore than there is a king’s name in the hieroglyphic writing of Facsimile No. 3. Leave it to the Mormons to twist and corrupt by calling an orchard a vineyard or by calling an Egyptian god a slave.

I know the parable of Zenos is pure fiction created out of the mind of Joseph Smith.

PS. Moksha, do you think I should toss this post down into the Terrestrial board for a new thread and fry a fish?
Valo
High Priest
Posts: 376
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2023 12:58 pm

Re: Vineyard vs. Orchard

Post by Valo »

Shulem wrote:
Fri Jan 31, 2025 11:42 am
Brack wrote:
Thu Jan 30, 2025 2:14 am
There was a big book that came out back in the 90s about the parable of Zeno's. Link
I purchased that book back then, but it got lost over time.

The parable of Zenos is a fish to be fried in another venue but I will say that apologetic excuses and reasonings for accepting/allowing the word VINEYARD instead of ORCHARD is a silly argument that king Solomon would have never bought. Joseph Smith should have never used the word “vineyard” to represent an orchard of olive trees. There are no vines or grapes within the confines of Zenos’s so-called “vineyard” anymore than there is a king’s name in the hieroglyphic writing of Facsimile No. 3. Leave it to the Mormons to twist and corrupt by calling an orchard a vineyard or by calling an Egyptian god a slave.

I know the parable of Zenos is pure fiction created out of the mind of Joseph Smith.

PS. Moksha, do you think I should toss this post down into the Terrestrial board for a new thread and fry a fish?
Olive trees are often planted in and around vineyards for various reasons, including providing shade, natural pest control, and as a reminder of home for Mediterranean immigrants who started vineyards in places like California. In some cases, olive trees are planted alongside grapevines to offer an additional crop and to utilize the land efficiently.
MerriamWebster wrote:Vineyard - a sphere of activity : field of endeavor
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7339
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Vineyard vs. Orchard & Oliveyard

Post by Shulem »

Valo wrote:
Fri Jan 31, 2025 2:36 pm
Olive trees are often planted in and around vineyards for various reasons, including providing shade, natural pest control, and as a reminder of home for Mediterranean immigrants who started vineyards in places like California. In some cases, olive trees are planted alongside grapevines to offer an additional crop and to utilize the land efficiently.

Zenos is purported to be of ancient times, predating Lehi. Mediterranean lifestyles and crops in California have nothing to do with ancient Jews or Israel during the times of Solomon or thereafter. Orchards and vineyards are separate crops and both have their own purpose and function -- they are named accordingly. The Zenos account makers it clear there are many olive trees and the function thereof is a tree ORCHARD or an oliveyard. The parable mentions no vines or grapes. There is no wine included in the parable! There is no vineyard in the parable just as there is no king's name in Facsimile No. 3 and neither is there a principal waiter to serve wine in the Facsimile as Smith claimed in his faulty translations. Both accounts (Zenos & Facsimile 3) are mislabeled and are dead wrong.

Valo wrote:
Fri Jan 31, 2025 2:36 pm
MerriamWebster wrote:Vineyard - a sphere of activity : field of endeavor

What does MerriamWebster have to do with the price of tea in China let alone Zenos living in ancient Israel? The only dictionary you should consult for Joseph Smith is the one in which he had access to:

Websters Dictionary 1828 wrote:VIN'YARD , noun

A plantation of vines producing grapes; properly, an inclosure or yard for grape-vines.

The Bible shows how vineyards and orchards (oliveyards) are separate fields produced through husbandry and are named accordingly:
  • Exodus 23:11 In like manner thou shalt deal with thy vineyard, and with thy oliveyard.
  • Deuteronomy 22:9 Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled. (Lev 19:19 thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed)
  • Joshua 24:13 And I have given you a land for which ye did not labour, and cities which ye built not, and ye dwell in them; of the vineyards and oliveyards which ye planted not do ye eat.
  • 1 Samuel 8:14 And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants.
Marcus
God
Posts: 6184
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm

Re: Vineyard vs. Orchard

Post by Marcus »

Shulem wrote:
Fri Jan 31, 2025 11:42 am
Brack wrote:
Thu Jan 30, 2025 2:14 am
There was a big book that came out back in the 90s about the parable of Zeno's. Link
I purchased that book back then, but it got lost over time.

The parable of Zenos is a fish to be fried in another venue but I will say that apologetic excuses and reasonings for accepting/allowing the word VINEYARD instead of ORCHARD is a silly argument that king Solomon would have never bought. Joseph Smith should have never used the word “vineyard” to represent an orchard of olive trees. There are no vines or grapes within the confines of Zenos’s so-called “vineyard” anymore than there is a king’s name in the hieroglyphic writing of Facsimile No. 3. Leave it to the Mormons to twist and corrupt by calling an orchard a vineyard or by calling an Egyptian god a slave.

I know the parable of Zenos is pure fiction created out of the mind of Joseph Smith...
I agree completely. I am reminded of a discussion we had here about the anachronisms of this Joseph Smith-created parable. In addition to using the wrong designation (vineyard), the description of grafting techniques applies to a 19th century vineyard of fruit, not an orchard of olive trees from many, many centuries earlier. Here's a summing up:
_honorentheos wrote:
Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:37 am
...Jacob 5 is purported to be unique parable preserved from an otherwise unknown biblical prophet named Zenos who would have to have lived in the Kingdom of Judah prior to the Babylonian captivity. The Lehite party is claimed to have had his words preserved and brought with them to the Americas in the brass plates which the Book of Mormon describes as the pure form of the Old Testament before it was corrupted. This makes this parable unique in that it is composed by a person living in the middle east at an unknown time but at least before 600 BCE, but his works ultimately only end up being available to the migrated Lehite party living in the Americas. Part of what makes it especially unique is that it includes a description of the Nephites and Lamanites as offshoots of Israel. Were it to be discovered in manuscript form in the Old World, it would be immensely consequential as evidence for the Book of Mormon’s validity as an ancient text.

The parable describes a master of a vineyard that grows olives that are compared to the tribes of Israel. It makes use of olive tree grafting as an analogy for God having a chosen tree (Israel) that alternately bears good or bad fruit along with having healthy or unhealthy root stock which God, the master gardener along with his servants, either grafts from or into other branches in order to produce good fruit. The analogy cumulating with the restoration of Israel with it’s promised blessings being distributed throughout the world’s peoples as all the good fruit bearing trees share root and branch.

So the problem: The practice of grafting olive trees is not attested to among the Israelites in historical records during the timeframe when it could have reasonably made it into the brass plates before Lehi and his family left for the Americas. It is mentioned as a technology very prolifically as Greek influence spread a century or two later but not before this. The Bible may or may not describe grape vine grafting but it isn’t indisputable either. Olea culture among the Israelites would have included cultivating olives but not necessarily the important part for the parable – grafting.

When apologists hold up Jacob 5 as an example of, “How could Joseph have known?” they often point out the accuracy of various techniques used in grafting fruit trees. The grafting of apples was a common practice in the 19th century frontier, and when compared in detail the grafting techniques described in Jacob 5 are comparable to those used when grafting apples. Apples grown from seed are very genetically variable so an apple grown from seed from a parent whose fruit is sweet won’t necessarily be sweet and the grafting of branches from a tree known to bear sweet fruit onto one that bears sour or bitter fruit was very much part of the practice.

In short, Jacob 5 aligns very well with the practices of apple cultivation including grafting which Joseph Smith would have been familiar as his mother describes their family cultivating apples in her biographical works.

Jacob 5 can’t be known as to how well it aligns with the practices of pre-exilic Israelites when it comes to grafting if they did indeed practice olive tree grafting because it isn’t actually described in historical texts from the time period. Apologists who defend it report on later works but these are typically from a period when the practice has expanded out of Greece.

To add to this, the little bit from the Talmud quoted in the Purdue paper I shared earlier suggests that Israelites may not have grafted olive trees after they were familiar with its use as a horticultural technology with grapes or perhaps other fruit.

It appears, based on this, that Jacob 5 is better evidence for the Book of Mormon being a product of the 19th century than it is of ancient origin.
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 7387
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: Book of Lehi and the 116-page Manuscript

Post by Moksha »

The Grove of Academe was also full of olive trees.

I would have also planted avocado and chocolate trees, but they came from the Americas where they were called cureloms and cumoms. You know it is true because both items are kosher. They should have also planted pineapple trees because Socrates in his wisdom liked pineapple on his pizza.

I hope that helps.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
Post Reply