Book of Mormon Evidences

7/29/2019 Book of Mormon Evidences

1/28

8 11/4/2007

OTHERRESOURCES

Mormanity is my LDS blog, in operation since 2004.Numerous Book of Mormon issues have beendiscussed there. Join the fray at Mormanity.org! Andvisit the other blogs on my blogroll.

My favorite resources for Book of Mormon studiesinclude:

FARMS (part of the Neal Maxwell Institute)

FAIRLDS.org

SHIELDS

Also consider the works of Kerry Shirt at his Website,"Mormonism Researched and his blog, The BackyardProfessor.)

You can order a free Book of Mormon at Mormon.org.

THE DNA ISSUE

The Church's LDS.org Web site now features severalrecent articles on the issue of DNA and the Book ofMormon, including a PDF version of my LDSFAQarticle, "Does DNA Evidence Refute the Book ofMormon?", and four excellent articles from scholarsfrom the November 2003 issue of The Journal ofBook of Mormon Studies, and more recentinformation. The collection is available on the "DNAand the Book of Mormon" page.

Index to theBook of Mormon Evidences Page:

Recent News

Introduction

Bountiful and Nahom in the Arabian Peninsula (this may be the most powerful evidence for authenticity yet!)

The Valley of Lemuel: Another "Blunder" Becomes Evidence FOR the Book of Mormon

Writing on Metal Plates

The Buried Plates: Evidence of Authenticity

Genes Linking Eurasians and Native Americans

Writing in Reformed Egyptian?

Mulek, Son of King Zedekiah?

The Use of Cement in Ancient America

Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon

Olive Culture

Wars in Winter?

Mesoamerican Fortifications

Numerous Hebraic Language Structures

Names in the Book of Mormon

"The Land of Jerusalem"--a fatal blunder??

The Great Catastrophe: Volcanism in Book of Mormon Lands

Gardens, Towers, and Multiple Markets

Mesoamerican Temples

Laban's Treasury

The Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Ancient Writings

More from Mesoamerica...

Weights and Measures in the Book of Mormon

Book of Mormon Nuggets - index to a group of separate pages

Excellent Publications to Consider

Related Web Pages by Others

Related Pages by J. Lindsay

Pre-Columbian Chickens in the Americas

Critics have scoffed at a reference to chickens in the Book of Mormon, even though the text does not state that the birds were in the Americas. (See my

discussion about chickens on my LDSFAQ page about plants and animals in the Book of Mormon .) But now there might be even less reason for people to get

their feathers ruffled with the recent discovery of pre-Columbian chicken bones in South America. They probably came from Polynesia, based on DNA

analysis. While this is not directly relevant to the Book of Mormon, it does point to the growing body of evidence for pre-Columbian transoceanic contact

between the Americas and others.

Finding Ore Near Bountiful

In the article, "Geologists Discover Iron Ore in the Region of Nephi's Bountiful," geology professor Ron Harris of BYU describes the fascinating confirmation of

a very specific Book of Mormon declaration about the presence of iron ore near the place Bountiful on the western shore of the Arabian Peninsula. I had heard

that iron ore had been found in the region of the Bountiful candidates, but in my geological ignorance I thought that this was not an especially unusual or

Home LDSFAQ Index BOM Intro LDS Intro DNA My Turn B. of Abraham Cult? Mormanity Faith & Works BOM Problems Links


2/28

mon Truth and Book of Mormon Evidences: Not Proof, But Indicati... http://www.jefflindsay.com/BMEviden

8 11/4/2007

impressive find. Isn't iron present just about everywhere? Yes, but not actual iron ore, which is rare in Arabia. Even rarer is iron ore that can be processed

using a wood-fired furnace (higher temperatures are required for many ores). There are very few places in the Arabian Peninsula that provide suitable iron ore,

and one of them was just recently discovered near what appears to be the site of Nephi's Bountiful. It's another impressive confirmation of a very specific

"prediction" made in the Book of Mormon.

Arabian Peninsula Photos Available

The photographic work of Maurine and Scot Proctor on Wadi Sayq, a possible location for Bountiful in the Arabian Peninsula, is now reported in the article,

Where Did Nephi Build the Ship?" from Meridian Magazine, Sept. 30, 2000. You can also see photos from videos about the Book of Mormon and the Arabian

Peninsula at The Nephi Project. (For a general discussion of some of the exciting Arabian Peninsula evidences for the Book of Mormon, see my discussion

below. Also see Cooper Johnson's article, "Arabia and The Book of Mormon" at FAIRLDS.org, a review of a presentation by S. Kent Brown.) Many details are

given below.

INTRODUCTION

I assume that you are already familiar with what the Book of Mormon is. If not, please see my Introduction to Book of Mormon.

The purpose of the Book of Mormon is to convince the world that Jesus is the Christ, our Lord and Redeemer. It was written by prophets anciently, preserved,

and translated in our era by the power of God as a tool to bring souls to Christ. Intellectual evidence of Book of Mormon authenticity is an issue worthy of careful

consideration. However, intellectual evidences on their own do not change lives and bring souls to Christ--that requires a spiritual witness through the power of

the Holy Ghost. Nevertheless, intellectual evidences can be valuable in opening minds and strengthening one's spiritual testimony of the truth. I am greatly

impressed with the evidence of Book of Mormon authenticity, especially factors that seemed like laughable mistakes in 1830 that now have become powerful

witnesses that the Book of Mormon is what it claims to be -- an authentic ancient document that Joseph Smith DID NOT write. He translated it through the power

of God.

BOUNTIFULAND NAHOMINTHE ARABIAN PENINSULA

This section is based largely on the book In the Footsteps of Lehiby Warren P. Aston and Michaela K. Aston (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book Comp., 1994).

Also see the article, "The Arabian Bountiful Discovered? Evidence for Nephi's Bountiful" by Warren P. Aston, and see Chapter 13 of Reexploring the Book of

Mormon, as cited above.

2006/2007 Update: The Debate Around Arabian Locations. Valuable information on the plausibility of Nephi's journey through Arabia is provided in the new

book by George Potter and Richard Wellington, Lehi in the Wilderness(Springville, Utah: Cedar Fort, Inc., 2003), which is a highly significant work, even if some

of the specific sites identified end up being surpassed by other candidates. Yes, there is a healthy debate going on over which sites are the most likely sites for

several scene in the Book of Mormon. As part of the healthy quest for understanding among LDS thinkers, there have been criticisms offered against some of the

proposed sites identified by Potter and Wellington. The contrarian side is found in "The Wrong Place for Lehis Trail and the Valley of Lemuel" by Jeffrey R.

Chadwick (FARMS Review, Vol. 17, No. 2, 2005). Potter and Wellington remain in the strong position of having done actual fieldwork in Arabia, and Chadwick's

proposed candidate for the Valley of Lemuel seems problematic in comparison, being a dry, barren valley without the river of water Potter and Wellington have

found. But he does score some important points. The issue for me is unresolved, and I will have to let readers judge for themselves, especially when newpublications from both sides of the debate come out in 2007 in the FARMS Review of Books. Stay tuned!

Overview: The Book of Mormon describes an ancient journey through the Arabian peninsula with plausible details such asdirections, a verified ancient place name, geographical details, and the description of an unexpected place called Bountifulthat now also appears to be verified. These details could not have been fabricated based on what was known in 1830--aneven modern "general knowledge" of the Arabian peninsula would not allow a typical educated adult to provide theconfirmed details in the Book of Mormon. The only plausible explanation for this is that the author of First Nephi, the bookcontaining the account of the ancient Arabian trek, actually made that trek. The most logical candidate for authorship ofFirst Nephi is Nephi, not Joseph Smith.

The Book of Mormon begins in a well-known location, Jerusalem, in 600 B.C. The book of First Nephi, the first book in the volume, describes the actions of Lehi

and his family in leaving Jerusalem before its destruction, following the counsel of the Lord, and wandering through the wilderness for several years before

embarking on a transoceanic voyage to somewhere in or near Central America. Several hints are found in the text that provide information about the journey

through the Arabian Peninsula--information which proves to provide powerful evidence for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.

Following the exodus of Lehi and his group from Jerusalem, they passed near the Red Sea, traveled "south-southeast" (1 Nephi 16:13), roughly parallel to the

Red Sea or near its borders (1 Nephi 2:5, 1 Nephi 16:14), until they reached Nahom (1 Nephi 16:34), where Ishmael was buried. (Ishmael was the father of afamily that fled Jerusalem with Lehi's family, whose daughters became wives to Lehi's sons.) There was considerable mourning at Nahom. After a while, they

traveled eastward (1 Nephi 17:1) until they reached a place they called Bountiful (1 Nephi 17:5) on the coast of the Arabian peninsula, described as rich, green

garden spot with trees, abundant fruit, water, honey, and a mountain. At this wonderful site they stayed at least long enough to construct a ship from the

abundant timber. Metal obtained from ore was also used to make tools.

The description of Lehi's journey through the desert has been attacked in anti-Mormon literature. Finding a garden spot on the coast of the Arabian peninsula

was laughable and was laughed at in the 1800s, because nobody knew of a place that could come anywhere close to being a candidate for Lehi's Bountiful.

Indeed, recent anti-Mormon books continue to mock the possibility of a place like Bountiful existing. "The Arabian desert does not have luscious garden spots:

Joseph Smith blew it. Case closed." Today we are in a much better position to assess Lehi's journey. It comes as no surprise to me that the journey described in

the Book of Mormon now has substantial support behind it.

No garden spots in the Arabian Peninsula?Enjoy these scenes from the coast of Oman, used with kind permission from the official site for the Ministry of Information of the Sultanate of Oman,

Omanet.om (that's right: it's dot "om", not "com"). The original, larger photos are in their beautiful photogallery. To access it, go to their site and clickon "gallery" and then "tourism," and then click through their photos. Amazing views! Also see the photogallery at ExploreOman.com, and my post on

Oman photos at my blog, Mormanity.


3/28


8 11/4/2007

After rain in Dhofar, near a candidate site for Bountiful (Wadi Sayq). Note thetrees.

A view in Salalah, another candidate region for Bountiful in Oman.

First, an analysis of the ways of the desert Arabs shows remarkable consistency with the actions taken by Lehi's group and with the language and metaphors

used by Lehi as he spoke to his family while traveling in the desert (well covered in Hugh Nibley's Lehi in the Desert). His general path along the Red Sea also

follows what are now known to correspond with the ancient frankincense trails in Arabia, which were major trade routes. (See an online map at Latter-day.com of

the proposed route, or a group of maps at NephiProject.com.) And, as discussed elsewhere on this page, an excellent candidate location has been found for the

Valley of Lemuel and the River of Laman--so excellent and amazing, that critics will be ignoring this issue for years to come.

But thanks to the explorations of the Astons in Yemen and Oman, and more recently the work of George Potter (the force behind the Nephi Project--see

www.nephiproject.com), we now know much more. As the Astons show in their book, the many details of Lehi's journey in the Book of Mormon can be given solid

plausibility based on modern discoveries. For example, the Astons show that there is indeed an ancient site called Nehem that is south-southeast of Jerusalem

which was on the frankincense trail and has an ancient tradition of being a place for burial and mourning. Ancient tombs are still abundant in that area. The name

Nehem/Nahom ("nhm"--which can also be rendered "Nihm") is a rare place name--with the only known site in the Arabian peninsula being at a place consistent

with the Book of Mormon account. Along with detailed documentation and references, the Astons' book includes a photograph of the 1976 Royal Geographical

Society map--apparently from the University of Sana'a in Yemen--showing Nehem as a significant burial site in the right place to agree with the Book of Mormon

description of Nahom. The existence of this site was not known to LDS scholars until a few years ago and certainly could not have been known to Joseph Smith.

(By the way, the Semitic name Nahom can refer to mourning and consolation, and may also refer to groaning and complaining, giving it special significance in

Nephi's account. See 1 Nephi 16:35.)

Some critics have argued that references to Nahom/Nehem/Nihm in writing could be traced no earlier than about 900 A.D., not to 600 B.C. That argument lost it

basis with a recent discovery of an artifact dating to the sixth or seventh century B.C. bearing the tribal name of "Nihm." S. Kent Brown describes the find (note

that I have simply left out several Semitic markings in the names below that I cannot type with ANSI characters):

"A German archaeological team under the leadership of Burkard Vogt has been excavating the Baran temple in Marib, the ancient capital of the

Sabaean kingdom that lies about 70 miles due east of modern Sana, the capital of Yemen. (It is likely that the queen of Sheba began her

journey to visit King Solomon from Marib.) Among the artifacts uncovered at the temple, the excavators turned up an inscribed altar that they

date to the seventh or sixth centuries B.C., generally the time of Lehi and his family. A certain "Biathar, son of Sawad, son of Nawan, the

Nihmite" donated the altar to the temple. the altar has been part of a traveling exhibit of artifacts from ancient Yemen...."

(S. Kent Brown, "'The Place That Was Called Nahom': New Light from Ancient Yemen ,"Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, Vol. 8, No. 1, 1999,

pp. 66-68; also see "Nahom and the 'Eastward' Turn" at FARMS.)

Impressive evidence from three inscriptions on ancient altars from Yemen has been discussed by S. Kent Brown (see " On NAHOM/NHM"), who notes that

inscriptions from ancient altars in Yemen soundly demonstrate the existence of the name "NHM" in a time and place consistent with Nephi's account of the place

Nahom. See also my Book of Mormon Nugget #15, "More Support for the Place Nahom", "The Arabian Bountiful Discovered? Evidence for Nephi's Bountiful" by

Warren P. Aston, "Nahom and the 'Eastward' Turn" at FARMS, and S. Kent Brown, "'The Place That was Called Nahom': New Light from Ancient Yemen ,"

Journal of Book of Mormon Studies8/1 (1999): 66-68, as well as Warren P. Aston, "Newly Found Altars from Nahom," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies10/2

(2001): 56-61). There is simply no question that "Nahom" in the Book of Mormon now has solid support--a direct hit in terms of Book of Mormon evidence.

Thus, there is ancient evidence referring to the tribe of Nihm, a member of which was wealthy enough to donate an altar to a temple. The reference cited above

shows a picture of the finely carved, beautiful altar. The reference to the tribe of Nihm doesn't prove the existence of a place by the same name. But as S. Kent

Brown puts it, "it is reasonable to surmise that the tribe gave its name to the region where it dwelt, evidently a few dozen miles north of modern Sana, in the

highlands that rise to the north of Wadi Jawf. Was it this name that Nephi rendered Nahom in the record? Very probably." (ibid.)

As one travels south-southeast of Jerusalem along the major trunk of the ancient Arabian trade route, the route branches east toward the southeastern coast at

only point: in the Jawf valley (Wadi Jawf) just a few miles from Nehem. From thence the eastern branch of the trade route goes toward the ancient port of

Qana--modern Bir Ali--on the Hadhramaut coast, where most of the incense was shipped. This eastern branch was the major route--the pathways to the south

were less used.

Now if Nehem is the Book of Mormon site Nahom, then is there a Bountiful to the east of it on the coast? Amazingly, we have the luxury of two excellent

candidate sites that are roughly due east of Nehem on the Oman coast. The Astons propose Wadi Sayq as the best candidate for Bountiful, and it impressively

fits the criteria that one can derive from the Book of Mormon. It is a most unusual seashore site which appears to meets virtually every criterion for the site

Bountiful in the Book of Mormon. George Potter and Timothy Sedor in their new video, "Following the Words of Nephi: The Land Bountiful," propose the area of

Salalah and the nearby ancient port of Khor Rori as the general site for Bountiful (to order the video, see George Potter's site, www.nephiproject.com). It meets

many of the criteria that Wadi Sayq does, if we allow Bountiful to include a harbor two or three miles away from an area rich in tropical fruit (the port Khor Rori

and the lush regions of Salalah aren't all within a stone's throw of each other, but are close enough).

The Astons make an impressive case and clearly show that the book of First Nephi could not have been fabricated by Joseph Smith. Their candidate site of

Wadi Sayq appears to offer almost all that we could hope for in terms of marvelous, even stunning evidence in favor of the Book of Mormon. Their work is further

supplemented by the photographic work of Maurine and Scot Proctor, reported in the article, "Where Did Nephi Build the Ship?" from Meridian Magazine, Sept.

30, 2000. The Proctors provide some additional details beyond the work of the Astons that show the plausibility of the Wadi Sayq location. The NephiProject.com

site also provides a page of maps, including a map showing a proposed route for Lehi's trail with a candidate for the Valley of Lemuel, as well as Nahom/Nehem

and an alternative good candidate for Bountiful not far from the one proposed by the Astons. (Also see " Where Did Nephi Build His Ship?" by Rex Jensen at

Latter-day.com, discussing additional tentative evidence for Wadi Sayq as a candidate for the Bountiful site from which Nephi sailed.)


4/28


8 11/4/2007

The proposal of George Potter seems rather convincing at first, but Wadi Sayq may still be the superior candidate (see the Mormanity blog post, "Warren Aston

on the Superiority of Khor Kharfot as a Candidate for Bountiful," and see "Finding Nephi's Bountiful in the Real World" by Warren P. Aston, where he offers some

arguments against the Khor Rori site). Based on the video, Salalah appears to offer much more in the way of fruit and timber than does Wadi Sayq, but this may

be due to recent irrigation. Khor Rori does provide a good harbor with an ancient tradition of ship building, but there is no evidence that ship building skills were

there anywhere close to Nephi's time. Wadi Sayq, on the other hand, offers an inlet that anciently may have been quite suitable for launching a ship. At Khor

Rori, Potter argues that Nephi could have learned the art of ship building, could have learned how to outfit and operate a ship, could have learned how to train a

crew, could have done practice runs in the harbor so his family could see that it was a good ship, could have used existing moorings and literally had his family

do down into the ship, and so forth. But Wadi Sayq has all the elements of Nephi's story--the mountain, the trees, the place to build a ship--all close together.

Both Wadi Sayq and Khor Rori fit the description of being nearly due east of Nehem, as the Book of Mormon requires (1 Nephi 17:1). But the path to Wadi Sayq

better fits Nephi's description of nearly due east from Nahom, while more zig-zags are needed to reach Khor Rori. Regarding the other Book of Mormon criteriafor the place Bountiful, the Astons list the following, along with several others:

The journey from Nahom must have provided reasonable access from the interior to the coast (not a trivial requirement given the difficult obstacles posed by mountains along much of

the coast).

Bountiful was on the coast, offering a place suitable for camping on the shore (1 Nephi 17:5,6) and for launching a ship (1 Nephi 18:8).

It was very fertile, with much fruit and honey, possibly game (1 Nephi 17:5,6; 1 Nephi 18:6).

Enough timber existed to build a durable ship (1 Nephi 18:1,2,6).

Freshwater was available year-round to enable a prolonged stay.

There was a nearby mountain that Nephi described as "the mount" (1 Nephi 17:7; 18:3).

Cliffs were available from which Nephi's brothers could threaten to cast him into the sea (1 Nephi 17:48)

Ore and flint were available (1 Nephi 17:9-11,16).

The winds and ocean currents there could permit travel out into the ocean.

Wadi Sayq appears to be the most compelling fit. The mountain for Khor Rori/Salalah, for example, isn't really close enough and overlooking the depths of the

sea as the mountain at Wadi Sayq. Both sites are relatively close, within a journey of about two days on foot. Ore has been found at both sites, though it had not

been found at Wadi Sayq when the Astons published their findings in 1994. (A 1995 FARMS-sponsored geological expedition has tentatively confirmed that ore

does exist at Wadi Sayq which may have been suitable for use as described in the Book of Mormon; and on July 12, 2000, BYU's Daily Universe reported that

Dr. Ron Harris of the Department of Geology had found abundant and usable iron ore at nearby Dhofar.) Wadi Sayq offers the largest body of coastal fresh water

on the Arabian peninsula, with a beautiful freshwater lagoon, visible on the color photo on the dust jacket of the book "In Lehi's Footsteps." Wadi Sayq has dates,

honey, and several species of trees, such as the sycamore fig and tamarind, that may be suitable for ship building. Both sites have coastal areas ideal for an

encampment on the seashore, and it is accessible from the interior desert.

In the Aston's book, you'll see trees, greenery, mountains, cliffs, etc., that bring Bountiful to life. While there are two interesting candidates, I strongly favor Wadi

Sayq. Warren Aston in e-mail from Oct. 2000 told me that those who have been to both sites agree that Wadi Sayq/Khor Kharfot is the superior location. But the

very fact that anything remotely close to a plausible candidate exists is in stark contrast to the oft-repeated claims of critics of the Book of Mormon. Critics, how

can you explain this?

Incidentally, the recent discovery of iron ore suitable for tool making using wood-fired furnaces in the region of Bountiful is a far more impressive find than one

might realize, for there are very few places in the Arabian Peninsula that have such ore,according to geology professor Ron Harris in his fascinating article, "Geologists Discover Iron

Ore in the Region of Nephi's Bountiful" in Meridian Magazineat LDSmag.com.His article

discusses the significance of the find and confirms that the iron ore near the area can be

converted to workable metal using wood-fired technology.

Here is a brief quote from the Astons' book, page 29:

"By describing in such precise detail a fertile Arabian coastal location, as well as the

route to get there from Jerusalem (complete with directions and even a place-name

en route), Joseph Smith put his prophetic credibility very much on the line. Could

this young, untraveled farmer in rural New York somehow have known about a fertile site on the coast of Arabia? Could a map or some writing

other than the Nephite record have been a source for him? The answer is a clear no. Long after the 1830 publication of the Book of Mormon,

maps of Arabia continued to show the eastern coastline and interior as unknown, unexplored territory. In fact, until the advent of satellite

mapping in recent decades, even quite modern maps have misplaced toponyms and ignored or distorted major features of the terrain."

There is simply no way that Joseph could have obtained enough information about Arabia to fabricate more than a minute fraction of the voyage described in

First Nephi. This is demonstrated in the survey of information available prior to 1830 provided by Eugene England in "Through the Arabian Desert to a Bountiful

Land: Could Joseph Smith Have Known the Way?," in Book of Mormon Authorship: New Evidences of Ancient Origins, edited by Noel B. Reynolds (Provo, Utah:

Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1982), pp. 143-156. Also see S. Kent Brown's excellent response to critics who have challenged the

significance of finds in the Arabian Peninsula dealing with the place Nahom. His article, "On NAHOM/NHM," is posted on The Nephi Project.

It is true that the name "Nehhem" or "Nehem" appear on a couple of maps of Arabia produced in Europe before the Book of Mormon was published (see In the

Footsteps of Lehi, pp. 14-17). Danish explorer Carsten Niebuhr prepared a map in 1763 and published a book in 1792, that was translated into English and

published in England, dealing with the Arabian Peninsula (his book is available online). You can see Niebuhr's map and other old maps of Arabia at Mapping

Arabia. (Click on "view slideshow" to see various maps, and then go to the 13th thumbnail for Niebuhr's map, where you can zoom in to see the details. Note that

it would have been essentially useless to someone trying to fabricate the Book of Mormon - there is no hint that any of the limited information on that map made it

into the Book of Mormon.) Also of interest is a French map produced by Rigobert Bonne around 1780, which shows "Nehem" on the map. There is no evidence

that these maps were in any way accessible to Joseph Smith. Even if he did gain access to them and to all the writings available on Arabia, the sketchy

information would not have enabled anyone to fabricate the details of Nephi's accurate description of travel through the Peninsula and the discovery of Bountiful.

For example, it appears that none of the sources that Western scholars might have used in Joseph Smith's day would have informed them about the plausibility

of a due east turn at Nahom to reach the place Bountiful (see S. Kent Brown's article. Say, here's a fun challenge: give all the maps at the Mapping Arabia site to

New: Photos from Oman

An official Web site from the Sultanate of Oman nowprovides a photogallery with some beautiful photos thatshow some of the remarkable scenes from the Omani coast,including some of the lush, green vegetation and large treesthat occur near candidate sites for Bountiful (Dhofar nearWadi Sayq, and the sites of Salalah and Khor Rori). You canalso see the harsh desert. The site is Omanet.om. Aftergoing there, click on "gallery" and then "tourism," and clickthrough their photos. Beautiful.


5/28


8 11/4/2007

a friend and ask him or her to construct a plausible path from Jerusalem to a fruitful place on the ocean for an ancient group of travelers. See what they can

come up with, and compare it to reality and the Book of Mormon.

The Arabian peninsula evidence for Book of Mormon authenticity is fascinating, though many will still dismiss it. If I asked you to write about a journey across

Tasmania or through Bhutan or some other place about which you knew little, could you possibly describe a journey and its course in a way that would gain

credibility with time? Is there any chance that you could even describe a reasonable general direction to travel? Could you pick a route that would later comply

with routes used by others in the area? Could you name a site and over a century later have others find a map with a similar name at that place? Could you

describe an unusual place that seems entirely out of line with what little you and others knew about the area, only to have others later discover an excellent

candidate for that location in a place entirely consistent with the course you describe? To me, this is one of literally hundreds of "mundane" confirmations of the

Book of Mormon as an authentic ancient document.

The only logical explanation for the account of Lehi's journey is that it was written by people who traveled through the Arabian peninsula, and that means JosephSmith did not write it. We are talking about a real ancient document that speaks to us from the dust (Isaiah 29) and confirms that Jesus is the Christ.

I highly recommend the Astons' book. Its detailed treatment, the extensive documentation, the careful consideration of numerous issues, including ocean currents

for the ocean voyage eastward, for example, and the personal description of the Astons' adventures make this an outstanding resource and a truly enjoyable

book to read. And most of the information is relevant even if Wadi Sayq is not the actual Bountiful of Nephi.

I have asked many critics of the Book of Mormon to explain how Joseph Smith could have fabricated something so "laughable" yet so amazingly accurate as the

place Bountiful and the burial place Nahom. No one so far has attempted a serious explanation. Recently, though, the Tanners have attempted to undermine the

Astons' work by suggesting that Mormon scholars are contradicting themselves (Jerald and Sandra Tanner, Answering Mormon Scholars, Salt Lake City: Utah

Lighthouse Ministry, 1996, reviewed by Matthew Roper in "Unanswered Mormon Scholars," FARMS Review of Books, Vol. 9, No. 1, 1997, pp. 87-145; for more

information on the amazingly weak response of the "best" anti-Mormons to the Arabian Peninsula evidence of authenticity, see Scott Pierson's page on the

Tanners' response--which also features a useful map and other supporting information). Citing the earlier and now outdated work of the Hiltons, who proposed an

alternative site for Nahom before the exciting discoveries of Nehem and Wadi Sayq, the Tanners make much of the Hiltons having proposed a different place

than the site Nehem. Since the two sites are 350 miles away, we are supposed to shake our heads and dismiss both due to the apparent contradiction (p. 181).

Such arguments are utterly irrelevant, for the earlier tentative work of the Hiltons has been entirely superseded by more recent discoveries.

Amazingly, the Tanners go on to suggest that the ancient burial site Nehem or Nehhm, as one source misspells it, is an utterly unacceptable candidate for

Nahom, since "only three of the five letters in Nehhm agree with the spelling Nahom. The second letter in Nehhm is e rather than a, and the fourth letter is h

instead of o. The variant spellings of Nehem, Nehm, Nihm, Nahm, and Naham do not really help to solve the problem" (p. 183). But surely the Tanners know the

deceitfulness of their argument. Surely they have encountered enough basic Biblical (and LDS) commentary to know that it is the consonants and not the vowels

that carry the meaning in Semitic languages, including Hebrew and Arabic. If nothing else, surely the Tanners have read that Jehovah in Hebrew is really YHWH,

at which point typical commentaries explain the fluidity of vowels and the primacy of consonants in written Hebrew. The crucial fact is that the root of

Nehhm/Nehem/Nahom is NHM, and that this word can be spelled in a variety of ways and may even be pronounced in a variety of ways, yet still has the same

root meaning (mourning, murmuring, sorrow, etc.). To argue about differences in vowels, in the face of remarkable evidence of congruence of Nahom and

Nehem (= NHM, an extremely rare place name), seems rather silly. (For related information, see " On NAHOM/NHM" by S. Kent Brown; see also "'The Place That

Was Called Nahom': New Light from Ancient Yemen" and "Nahom and the 'Eastward' Turn" at FARMS.)

The Tanners try to explain away the correctness of the routes described in the Book of Mormon by suggesting that some books in the 1830s did speak of a fertile

region in southern Arabia. That argument can't even come close to explaining the direct hit on Nahom, which is not mentioned in any known sources available in

1830. The sources the Tanners refer to, the works of Jedidiah Morse, speak of Arabia Felix, a fruitful place, on the eastern shore of the Red Sea , in the

southwestern part of the Arabian peninsula. Morse indicates that the rest of the Arabian peninsula was barren. Even if Joseph Smith had access to his works

(anti-Mormon critics are retroactively creating an ever growing library for the farm boy Joseph!), that would do nothing to explain how Joseph Smith couldsuccessfully locate Bountiful on the southeastern shore of the Arabian peninsula, far away from the Red Sea. Nahom, near the southwestern part of the

peninsula, was far from a Bountiful-like place, but was a place of sorrow and mourning and severe hunger (1 Nephi 16:39).

S. Kent Brown provides information about what was available from ancient writers about Arabia and the incense trail in his article, "New Light from Arabia on

Lehi's Trail" in Echoes and Evidences of the Book of Mormon, ed. D.W. Parry, D.C. Peterson, and J.W. Welch (Provo, Utah: FARMS, 2002), pp. 55-125, with

pages 69-76 and 118-119 being especially relevant. As of 1830, for example, neither the Manchester library nor the Dartmouth College library had any classical

or contemporary works dealing in any detail with Arabia (ibid., p. 75). Even if Joseph had been a voracious bookworm with a huge library at hand, there is simply

no way he could have generated the accurate details in the Book of Mormon based on what was available in print in the 1820s.

Brown's article also adds many other dimensions to our appreciation of the Book of Mormon, showing that the Dhofar region of southern Oman has the features

described in 1 Nephi, including the honey mentioned in 1 Nephi 17:5.

If the Book of Mormon is to be explained away, it won't do to simply deal with the weakest evidences for authenticity and the incompletely answered questions.

The strongest evidences must also be considered. I consider the "direct hits" in the Arabian Peninsula to be among the strongest intellectual evidences for

authenticity, though many more continue to emerge. Theories that make the Book of Mormon to be a mere product of nineteenth century knowledge are

immediately undermined by consideration of the Arabian Peninsula evidences (along with chiasmus, Hebraisms, metal plates and scriptorio, warfare in the Book

of Mormon, and many other issues).

Some critics have charged that Joseph could have found a book describing the Arabian peninsula that also had a map with the name Nehem on it. There is

absolutely no support for this concept. While obscure works had been published in Europe with a map showing Nehem, as far as we can tell it was not available

anywhere near Joseph Smith in his day. A good discussion on this topic and other topics relating to Nahom is found on a message by S. Kent Brown posted Feb.

23, 2000 in the ZLMB discussion group at ezboard.com:

And even if a library nearby had such a book, we know that Joseph was not a bookworm, but was a poor farmboy largely engaged in manual

labor prior to the Restoration. Of his family situation, Joseph said that "it required the exertions of all that were able to render any assistance for

the support of the Family therefore we were deprived of the bennifit of an education suffice it to say I was mearly instructid in reading writing

and the ground rules of Arithmatic which constuted my whole literary acquirements" (D. C. Jessee, Editor, Papers of Joseph Smith [1989], vol.

1, p. 5). His mother also affirmed that he was "much less inclined to the perusal of books than any of the rest of our children" ( History of Joseph

Smith by His Mother Lucy Mack Smith , edited by P. Nibley [1958], p. 82). I find it interesting that the critics charge that Joseph was so ignorant

and uneducated that he would not know that the birthplace of Jesus Christ was Bethlehem, while on the other hand they claim that Joseph was

so well versed in the books of the world and the Bible that he could plagiarize and integrate from many sources to create a fraud so clever that it

can fool highly educated people to this day with such subtleties as chiasmus, the correct locations for Nahom and Bountiful, and many other


6/28


8 11/4/2007

aspects that demand respect. But the fact is, they still have no remotely plausible explanation for how Joseph could have fabricated First Nephi.

2006 Update on Lehi in the Wildernessby George Potter and Richard Wellington

George Potter and Richard Wellington's recent book, Lehi in the Wilderness(Springville, Utah: Cedar Fort, Inc., 2003) provides many interesting insights into

Book of Mormon issues in the Arabian Peninsula, but it suffers from some flaws. The authors offer tantalizing finds, but in spite of their field work and abundant

photographs and maps, they may have made some serious errors at the beginning of the path they identify. While their candidate for the Valley of Lemuel and

the River Laman seem truly impressive, there is a good case that it is too far from the shores of the Red Sea and that the path required to reach it is implausible,

as is discussed in the review, "The Wrong Place for Lehis Trail and the Valley of Lemuel" by Jeffrey R. Chadwick (FARMS Review, Vol. 17, No. 2, 2005).

Chadwick proposes that Bir Marsha, a place easily accessed from the coast of the Red Sea and not distant from Potter's candidate, may be more suitable for the

Valley of Lemuel, though there may be several other good choices. As for the River Laman, Chadwick believes that it only need have been a wadi flowing with

water at the time of Lehi's sermon to his sons, and that it need not flow continuously. Lehi said that it ran continuously to the Red Sea, not that it flowed

continuously, and this can be fulfilled by a path for a wadi that goes into the Red Sea, regardless of how often the path has flowing water.

Around the region of Nahom, the authors are on more solid ground. I am also intrigued with their discussion of the place Shazer that corresponds to a specific

location along the ancient incense trails, as does Nahom. Numerous details of the journey described in the Book of Mormon are consistent with the terrain and

the ways of ancient voyagers through the Arabian Peninsula. Potter and Wellington provide a wealth of information that adds insight to Lehi's travels and to the

circumstances of his group at various stages of their long sojourn.

The authors then trace Lehi's probable path from Nahom eastward to the coast of Oman, and offer an interesting but possibly incorrect candidate for the place

Bountiful (see " Warren Aston on the Superiority of Khor Kharfot as a Candidate for Bountiful). Here they depart from the much publicized Wadi Sayq as a

candidate for Bountiful, preferring instead the region of Dhofar about 60 miles to the north, and specifically the port region of Khor Rori. Even if some parts of

their analysis are wrong, the general information about the Arabian Peninsula strengthens the case for the plausibility of First Nephi in the Book of Mormon.

Regardless of which of two good candidates is selected for Bountiful, there are many factors that support the hypothesis that the record in First Nephi is an

authentic ancient Semitic record crafted by someone who actually made an ancient journey from Jerusalem to the eastern coast of Oman. In spite of some

possibly serious errors, Potter and Wellington's book is a valuable contribution to understanding the Book of Mormon. The book is available at NephiProject.com.

Also see my Book of Mormon Nugget, "The Place Shazer."

THE VALLEYOF LEMUEL: ANOTHER"BLUNDER" BECOMES EVIDENCE FORTHE BOOKOF

MORMON

While the once-frequent jabs at Nephi's tale of finding Bountiful in the Arabian Peninsula have lost their punch with the discovery of a remarkable and

hard-to-ignore candidate for Bountiful in Oman, other aspects of Nephi's story continue to draw anti-Mormon fire. One of the most prominent targets is the Valley

of Lemuel and the River of Laman. Anti-Mormons recently have been proclaiming that no such river exists--a "slam-dunk" argument against the entire Book of

Mormon. The attack is based on the following verses from 1 Nephi chapter 2:

2 And it came to pass that the Lord commanded my father, even in a dream, that he should take his family and depart into the wilderness....

4 And it came to pass that he departed into the wilderness....

5 And he came down by the borders near the shore of the Red Sea; and he traveled in the wilderness in the borders which are nearer the Red

Sea; and he did travel in the wilderness with his family, which consisted of my mother, Sariah, and my elder brothers, who were Laman, Lemuel,

and Sam.

6 And it came to pass that when he had traveled three days in the wilderness, he pitched his tent in a valley by the side of a river ofwater.

7 And it came to pass that he built an altar of stones, and made an offering unto the Lord, and gave thanks unto the Lord our God.

8 And it came to pass that he called the name of the river, Laman, and it emptied into the Red Sea; and the valley was in the borders

near the mouth thereof.

9 And when my father saw that the waters of the river emptied into the fountain of the Red Sea, he spake unto Laman, saying: O that thou

mightest be like unto this river, continually running into the fountain of all righteousness!

10 And he also spake unto Lemuel: O that thou mightest be like unto this valley, firm and steadfast, and immovable in keeping the

commandments of the Lord!

The critics chuckle that there are NO RIVERS flowing into the Red Sea, at least not anything that could be said to be "continually" flowing. Sure, a few wadis

might get a momentary trickle during a rainstorm, but nothing that could be the basis for Lehi's lecture to Laman. Yet the Book of Mormon has Lehi and his family

stopping in an impressive valley with a river that continually (year round?) flows into the Red Sea. Slam dunk for the antis? No way!

An excellent candidate location for the River of Laman and the Valley of Lemuel has been found in an entirely plausible location. Photographic evidence and

other documentation is provided in George D. Potter's article, "A New Candidate in Arabia for the Valley of Lemuel," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, Vol. 8,

No. 1, 1999, pp. 54-63. Potter reports that in looking for a well in Arabia, about 8 miles north of Maqna on the Gulf of Aqaba, he stumbled across a magnificentnarrow canyon that ended in a palm-lined cove on the coast of the Red Sea. The canyon actually has a small stream that flows continually, throughout the entire

year, and is surrounded by very tall mountain walls. This valley is known as Wadi Tayyib al-Ism ("Valley of the Good Name"). The article is available to FARMS

members online, but to see the photos, you need to read the printed publication. (Call FARMS at 1-800-327-6715 to join or purchase materials.) Meanwhile, I've

received permission from author George Potter to display two relevant photos that he kindly sent me:


7/28


8 11/4/2007

George Potter's Photos from the Valley of Lemuel

The River Laman The Valley Cove

A 35 minute video, Discovering the Valley of Lemuel, filmed entirely onlocation, can be ordered by sending a check for $24.50 to:The Nephi Project, PO Box 300, Bear River City, UT, 84301.

Other photos from the video on the Valley of Lemuel and other photos of interest from the Arabian Peninsula are shown in a photogallery at NephiProject.com.

(While some of the findings reported in various videos at NephiProject.com may be somewhat speculative, I am particularly impressed with the work done

regarding the Valley of Lemuel.)

To really understand the amazing strength of this evidence in favor of the Book of Mormon, I highly recommend the video mentioned above. Further informationon the video is provided at a new Web site, The Nephi Project, at www.nephiproject.com. It shows, for example, that following Nephi's directions almost

inevitably would lead one to encounter the oasis and the spring that is the source of the "River Laman" at the beginning of the Valley of Lemuel, and that this is

just where the Book of Mormon says it is. It is there--and no one in the Americas knew of it in Joseph Smith's day. Few experts know of it in this day. But it is

there, an incredibly rare perennial stream in Arabia. After seeing the video, one can understand why Lehi would have been impressed with the setting and would

have referred to the valley as a symbol of strength and firmness. The video also shows the grains, dates, and other edible plants available in the area, along with

clear evidence that the stream flow all year round. The video also shows pottery fragments and remnants of possible altars dating to the first millennium B.C. that

have been found there, adding to the plausibility of the Book of Mormon account. (The video is not highly professional, but presents the evidence clearly and is

definitely worth owning.)

Could Potter's small stream, shallow and just a few feet wide, at most, qualify as a river? In the published article, Potter notes that there are several Hebrew

words which could qualify as the "river" of 1 Nephi 2, most of which refer to any running stream. They could also refer to seasonal waterways, such as the "River

of Egypt," which is Wadi El-Arish, a wadi that fills only after storms (see Anchor Bible Dictionary, 1992, Vol. 2, p. 321, 378). Or it can refer to large rivers like the

Euphrates. The small stream found by Potter keeps vegetation green and healthy even when there has been no rain for months. It flows continuously, in spite of

being reduced in volume by pumping upstream for use at a coast guard post and by many motor-driven pumps in the area tapping into the aquifer that is the

source of the spring. In fact, it appears that the stream once had much greater flow, for there is heavy erosion of the lower canyon walls and water-laid calcite

deposits on the valley floor that can be as wide as 15 to 20 feet, much wider than the stream. The river currently descends into rocky rubble as it approaches the

Red Sea. According to Dr. Wes Garner, a retired geologist from King Fahad University of Petroleum and Minerals in Saudi Arabia, movement of the continental

plates has caused the canyon to rise significantly since Lehi's time--the rocky place where the stream disappears as it approaches the Red Sea was previously

submerged. Lehi probably would have faced a larger river that visibly flowed into the Red Sea.

The shady canyon and the stream of fresh water, originating from a spring, would have provided welcome relief to the travelers and undoubtedly would have

been a place where the voyagers would camp and recharge. They may have stayed here long enough to learn that the river really does flow continuously, though

they may have inferred that based on the green vegetation supported by the river.

How about the location? The Book of Mormon text appears to say that Lehi and his family traveled for three days in the wilderness after the reached the Red Sea

(after "he came down by the borders near the shore of the Red Sea"). Is the candidate for the Valley of Lemuel in a reasonable location to match the text?

Yes--it's 70 miles south of Aqaba--that's the land distance that must be traveled by foot (or by camel), not the distance along a straight line. That's a plausible but

challenging distance on foot for three days travel, and a piece of cake by camel.

Potter provides photos, a map, and detailed directions on how to get there. More remains to be learned about this amazing site--but it must be regarded as

another powerful and verifiable piece of evidence supporting the plausibility of the Book of Mormon. An anti-Mormon laughingstock has become one more piece

of evidence for them to ignore. Meanwhile, skeptical anti-Mormons are encouraged to head off to Arabia as quickly as possible to see for themselves. (And, for arefreshing change of pace, be sure to try a little anti-Muslim evangelizing while there.) Others wishing more information are encouraged to purchase the video.

Most of the arguments against the Book of Mormon are arguments of silence. According to the critics, since something in the Book of Mormon has not (yet) been

found, it must not exist, making the book false. But these arguments of silence have a tendency of crumbling before the voice of data. Modern ignorance about

remote places and ancient peoples continues to erode, leaving the foundation of the Book of Mormon exposed as a solid fortress rising above the plains of

doubt. Oh, yes--we're just in the infancy of knowledge here. Almost none of the likely candidates for Book of Mormon sites in Mesoamerica have been carefully

excavated. Many more discoveries await us--be patient!

WRITINGON METAL PLATES

Absolutely laughable in 1830, now not only well established as an ancient practice, but as a particularly significant ancient practice in the Middle East in the era of

600 B.C.--especially for religious documents. Most significant, perhaps, is the ancient practice of "scriptorio"--putting the title page at the END of the book,

something which is a hallmark of ancient writings on plates from the Middle East, and which is also strong evidence of authenticity for the Book of Mormon.


8/28


8 11/4/2007

Joseph Smith could not have known of "scriptorio" when he translated the gold plates and noted that the title page was at the end, on the last page. For details

on this important external evidence, see my page on "Metal Plates and the Book of Mormon", taken from a FARMS Update (in compliance with their "fair use"

policy). Also see my Book of Mormon "Nugget," "Hiding Sacred Records like the Golden Plates: A Well Established Ancient Practice ," and my LDSFAQ page on

Metals in the Book of Mormon.

2003 Update: Ancient book of gold plates discovered! See the BBN News article from May 26, 2003, " Unique Book Goes on Display." This volume of gold

plates, bound with gold rings at the side as was the Book of Mormon plates, comes from the ancient Etruscans, who had origins in the Middle East (Turkey) and

were wiped out by the Romans in the 4th century B.C. Also see the related story from May 23, 2003, "World's Only Etruscan Gold Book Added to Bulgaria's

Archeology Treasures."

THE BURIED PLATES: EVIDENCEOF AUTHENTICITY

Where did Joseph Smith get the idea of ancient records on metal plates hidden in a stone box that was buried in the earth? Critics mocked this for decades--until

many other examples of ancient records preserved on plates or in stone boxes were found. In our day, scholars know that there is a vast ancient tradition

pertaining to preserving sacred records by concealing them for some future time. Some of this evidence is brought together lucidly in John A. Tvedtnes, The

Book of Mormon and Other Hidden Books(Provo, Utah: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 2000). Also see my Book of Mormon "Nugget,"

"Hiding Sacred Records like the Golden Plates: A Well Established Ancient Practice ." It turns out that this practice of concealing records "is most prominent in

the ancient Near East, the land from which the Book of Mormon people emigrated to the New World. The practice of concealing records in stone boxes is also

well attested in the ancient world and was still being practice in Moroni's day. And the use of metal for preserving sacred records is also attested, particularly in

the ancient Near East. Joseph Smith could not have known this, and his early critics had no clue either (and many modern critics still remain blissfully unaware of

the extensive discoveries in this area). How, then, if the Book of Mormon is a forgery, did Joseph manage to be so lucky as to make up a story about the plates

that fits ancient patterns so well?

GENES LINKING EURASIANSAND NATIVE AMERICANS?

Contrary to anti-Mormon claims, DNA evidence does not refute the Book of Mormon. The issue requires more analysis than I wish to fit on this page, so I have a

separate lengthy page on the issue at http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/DNA.shtml . (I am happy to report that the Nov. 16, 2003 version of that essay that I

converted to a PDF file has been posted on the LDS.org Web site at http://www.lds.org/newsroom/files/jeff_lindsay_dna.pdf --also see other resources on this

topic on the LDS.org "DNA and the Book of Mormon" page.)

In my article, I point out that there are genes found in Native Americans that are also found in Jews, including mitochondrial DNA haplotype X (found among

some Israelis and Europeans) and a Y chromosome haplotype called "1C". These genes can also be found in Asia, and so don't prove that people from the

Middle East came to the Americas--but that possibility most certainly is NOT excluded by the DNA evidence. Other data may point more directly to Middle

Eastern origins for some of the many genes in the Americas, including an analysis of ancient skulls from the Americas and HLA genes. But even without the

discovery of such evidence or of the possibly relevant DNA haplotypes, a proper understanding of what the Book of Mormon actually says and what the scientific

data actually say rapidly leads one to the conclusion that the DNA-based attacks on the Book of Mormon are without merit. The scientific data may challenge

some popular misinterpretations of the Book of Mormon, but they do not challenge the text itself. For details, see "Does DNA evidence refute the Book of

Mormon?"

In spite of the popular "Asia only" paradigm for Native American origins, evidence for ancient transoceanic contact exists and the Bering Strait theory appears to

be unable to explain the origins of all ancient Americans. I discuss transoceanic contact and the Bering Strait in my page on the Smithsonian Institution's 1996

Statement Regarding the Book of Mormon.

WRITINGIN REFORMED EGYPTIAN?

One of the most common attacks against the Book of Mormon focuses on the use of "Reformed Egyptian" as the writing system for the golden plates (Mormon

9:32-34). It is alleged that the no self-respecting Israelite would ever use Egyptian to write sacred scripture, and it is alleged that no such language as "Reformed

Egyptian" has ever existed. These arguments are typified in the anti-Mormon book, Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about Mormonismby "Dr." John

Ankerberg and "Dr. Dr." John Weldon (neither one of which appears to have a legitimate Ph.D.):

"Mormonism has never explained how godly Jews [sic] of A.D. 400 allegedly knew Egyptian, nor why they would have written their sacred

records entirely in the language of their pagan, idolatrous enemies" (p. 284). "How likely is it that the allegedly Jewish [sic] Nephites would have

used the Egyptian language to write their sacred scriptures? Their strong antipathy to the Egyptians and their culture makes this difficult to

accept. When modern Jews copy their scripture, they use Hebrew. They do not use Egyptian or Arabic, the language of their historic enemies"

(pp. 294-95). "[N]o such language [as reformed Egyptian] exists and Egyptologists declare this unequivocally" (p. 294).

Ankerberg and Weldon are wrong on several counts--grossly wrong, as shown by Daniel C. Peterson in a noteworthy book review in Review of Books on the

Book of Mormon, Vol. 5, 1993, pp. 43-45 (available online). Several modified or "reformed" Egyptian scripts are well known, including forms called Demotic and

Hieratic. "Reformed Egyptian" is clearly an appropriate generic term for those writing systems. However, the "Reformed Egyptian" used by the Nephites is

described as a language system unique to them (Mormon 9:32-34), having evolved with their culture over a 1,000-year period. It was apparently used for sacred

writings, and should have been almost wholly lost with the destruction of Nephite civilization. How can we expect Egyptologists, with typically no training in

Central American matters, to know whether such a language ever existed there? Daniel Paterson gives further analysis (Peterson, pp. 44-45):

[W]ho says that the Nephites wrote in Egyptian? That is certainly one possibility, but several scholars (e.g., Sidney Sperry, John Sorenson, and

John Tvedtnes) suggest, rather, that the language of the Nephites was Hebrew, written in Egyptian characters. The practice of representing one

language in a script commonly associated with another language is very common. Yiddish, for instance, which is basically a form of German, is

routinely written in Hebrew characters. Swahili can be written in either Roman or Arabic scripts. Judeo-Arabic, as written for instance by Moses

Maimonides, was medieval Hebrew written with Arabic letters. In fact, almost any textbook of colloquial Arabic or Chinese or Japanese aimed at

Western learners will use the Latin alphabet to represent those languages. Language and script are essentially independent. Turkish, which used


9/28


8 11/4/2007

to be written in a modified Arabic script, has been written in Latin letters in the Republic of Turkey since the 1920s. However, in the areas of the

old Soviet Union, it is now usually written in Cyrillic (Russian) characters. Likewise, perhaps the major difference between Hindi and Urdu may

be the mere fact that the former uses a Devanagari writing system, while the latter uses a modified Arabo-Persian script. So this phenomenon of

changing the script with which one writes a language is by no means unusual.

But we need not speak only in theoretical terms. We have, in fact, an ancient illustration that comes remarkably close to the Book of

Mormon itself. Papyrus Amherst 63, a text from the second century B.C., seems to offer something very much like "reformed

Egyptian." It is a papyrus scroll that contains Aramaic texts written in a demotic Egyptian script. (Aramaic is a language closely related to

Hebrew. of the Old Testament book of Daniel is written in Aramaic, and it was the spoken language of Jesus and his apostles. Incidentally,

however, a Christian form of the language, Syriac, came to use an alphabet related to Arabic--again illustrating the independence of script and

tongue.) Interestingly, one of the items found on Papyrus Amherst 63 is a version of Psalm 20:2-6. Ankerberg and Weldon wonder why "godly

Jews [sic] . . . would have written their sacred records entirely in the language of their pagan, idolatrous enemies." Perhaps they should askthem some day, for godly Jews most certainly did (see "Language and Script in the Book of Mormon," Insights: An Ancient Window, March 1992,

p. 2).

By the way, Peterson gives a footnote on Ankerberg's claim about Jews exclusively using Hebrew:

The statement "When modern Jews copy their scripture, they use Hebrew. They do not use Egyptian or Arabic, the language of their historic

enemies" is quite an astonishing display of ignorance. Since the Egyptian language has been dead for centuries, it is hardly remarkable that

modern Jews do not read the Bible in Egyptian. On the other hand, "the first and most important rendering [of the Old Testament] from Hebrew

[into Arabic] was made by Sa'adya the Ga'on, a learned Jew who was head of the rabbinic school at Sura in Babylon (died 942)" (George A.

Buttrick, ed., The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible [hereafter IDB], 4 vols. and supplement [Nashville: Abingdon, 1962-1976], 4:758b). Thus,

Jews have indeed translated the Bible into "Arabic, the language of their historic enemies." They also have translated it into the language of their

"historic enemies" the Greeks (IDB 4:750b on the Septuagint) and Aramaeans (IDB 1:185-93; 4:749-50, on the Aramaic Targums).

More information and relevant examples are given in the article, "Jewish and Other Semitic Texts Written in Egyptian Characters" by John A. Tvedtnes and

Stephen D. Ricks, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, Vol. 5, No. 2, 1996, and also the excellent FARMS article " Reformed Egyptian" by William Hamblin. And

for fun, be sure to see the site, Ancient Scripts--a marvelous collection of information on scripts of the ancient world.

Update: The FARMS publication, Insights, in Feb. 1998 reported on presentations at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Religion (AAR) and the

Society of Biblical Literature (SBL), held Nov. 1997 in San Francisco. Non-LDS scholar Nili S. Fox discussed the development of Egyptian hieratic numerals used

in Hebrew texts by Israelites during the ninth through seventh centuries B.C. Fox noted that the Israelite scribes were acquainted with the Egyptian writing

system and that there was a longer history of ties between Egypt and both Judah and Israel than previously thought. Hebrews using an Egyptian writing system?

The idea is a lot more plausible today that it was in Joseph Smith's time. The anti-Mormon critics who dismiss the possibility ("Jews hated the Egyptians, their

former slavemasters, and would never think of using anything from Egyptian culture!") continue to stand on a foundation of sand, and the sand is shifting again.

MULEK, SONOF KING ZEDEKIAH?

Chapter 40 of Reexploring the Book of Mormonpresents the evidence--from non-LDS sources--that tentatively confirms something that has long been attacked

in the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon indicates that Mulek was a surviving son of King Zedekiah (after the Babylonian invasion of Jerusalem destroyed

the royal household). Mulek somehow (perhaps using a boat from the Phoenicians?) made it to the American continent, where his people and the others they

encountered there formed a group called the "Mulekites" which were later absorbed by the Nephites. The survival of a son at first glance seems to contradict theBiblical account and has long been attacked. But a careful reading does not eliminate the possibility of a surviving child, and now new evidence has been found

suggesting that there was a survivor with a name similar to Mulek (MalkiYahu, which could be shortened to a form such as Mulek.) For details on this exciting

piece of evidence, see my "Book of Mormon Nugget," Mulek, Son of Zedekiah.

2004 Update: Recently, an ancient seal was discovered in Jerusalem bearing the title, "Malkiyahu the son of the king." This may very well be a seal from the

Mulek, the son of King Zedekiah. This is entirely plausible based on what we know of ancient Israel and the information in the Book of Mormon and the Bible.

Details of this discovery are provided by Jeffrey R. Chadwick, "Has the Seal of Mulek Been Found?," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2003,

pp. 72-83, available online in HTML or PDF (use the PDF version to see the seal and the Hebrew characters), provided by FARMS.

Though the entire article should be read carefully to appreciate the possible significance of the find, here are the concluding remarks of Chadwick:

So was Mulek the "Malkiyahu the son of the king" mentioned in Jeremiah 38:6? Nothing in the Bible or the Book of Mormon negates this

identification. And the evidence rehearsed above lends significant support to it. The m-l-kbasis of both Hebrew names is clear, and the case of

Berekhyahu/Baruch demonstrates that there is theoretical precedent for a person being called both Malkiyahu and Mulek--the one a longer, more

formal version of the name with a theophoric yahu element [an ending based on an abbreviation of the divine name, YHWH], and the other a

shorter form lacking that element but featuring a different vowel vocalization. Malkiyahu/Mulek would not have been killed by the Babylonians

before Zedekiah's eyes, as were his brothers (all younger than himself), because as the king's oldest son and heir to the throne, he was likely

sent to Egypt by his father well before the fall of Jerusalem and the capture of the royal family. Whether Mulek was sent to Egypt as a royal

messenger or ambassador or in an effort to ensure his safety, it is unlikely that he could have taken all of his possessions with him to Egypt.

Other men in Judah with the ben hamelektitle are known to have possessed multiple stamp seals, and if Malkiyahu/Mulek did also it would have

been easy for him to have left one behind. Some 2,570 years or so later, that seal was found by someone digging in Jerusalem and was

surreptitiously sold. The stamp seal of "Malkiyahu son of the king" now in the London collection of Shlomo Moussaieff seems to be authentic. In

answer to the question posed at the outset of this article--and the significance of this can hardly be overstated--it is quite possible that an

archaeological artifact of a Book of Mormon personality has been identified. It appears that the seal of Mulek has been found.

THE USEOF CEMENTIN ANCIENT AMERICA

A long-ridiculed "anachronism" in Book of Mormon is the reference in Helaman 3:9-11 to cement work among some of the ancient inhabitants of this continent in

the 1st century B.C. At this time, many Nephite people moved into the north lands (probably southern Mexico). Trees were very scarce there, apparently because


10/28


28 11/4/2007

of environmental irresponsibility among a previous, fallen civilization (I refer to the "Jaredites," probably correlated with the Olmecs). While taking care to protect

and nurture trees for the future, the Nephites used other materials to build their cities. Buildings made from cement are specifically mentioned. For decades, this

seemed like a mistake.

In 1929, Heber J. Grant (former President of the Church) told the story of a man with a doctorate who had ridiculed him for believing in the Book of Mormon. That

learned man cited the mention of cement work as an obvious lie "because the people in that early age knew nothing about cement." President Grant, who was a

young man at the time of that conversation, said:

"That does not affect my faith one particle. I read the Book of Mormon prayerfully and supplicated God for a testimony in my heart and soul of

the divinity of it, and I have accepted it and believe it with all my heart." I also said to him, "If my children do not find cement houses, I expect

that my grandchildren will." He said, "Well, what is the good of talking with a fool like that?" (April 1929 Conference Report, p. 128 ff.)

President Grant's statement was prophetic. Today, tourists to Mesoamerica can find ancient cement work in abundance at Teotihuacan (which is clearly "in the

land north" according to modern models for Book of Mormon geography). Mesoamerican cement was being used at least by the first century B.C. (David A.

Palmer, In Search of Cumorah, Horizon Publishers, Bountiful, UT, 1981, p. 121). Palmer shows a photograph of cement used to surface a temple at the Chiapa

de Corzo site. Palmer also cites Monte Alban, which is south of Teotihuacan but still in the "land north," as another example of ancient cement work. Several

examples of cement work use tiny volcanic stones (0.5 to 2 mm diameter) mixed with clay and lime to produce the cement. Cement was also used in the ancient

city of Kaminaljuyu (modern Guatemala City).

Mesoamerican work with cement involved more than merely applying a veneer to buildings. Important structural elements were made with cement, and the use of

cement in Mesoamerica dates to about the time when the Book of Mormon reports its development (46 B.C.). John Welch provides further data in his article, "A

Steady Stream of Significant Recognitions" in Echoes and Evidences of the Book of Mormon, ed. D.W. Parry, D.C. Peterson, and J.W. W elch (Provo, Utah:

FARMS, 2002), pp. 372-374:

No one in the nineteenth century could have known that cement, in fact, was extensively used in Mesoamerica beginning largely at this time, the

middle of the first century B.C.[1]

One of the most notable uses of cement is in the temple complex at Teotihuacan, north of present-day Mexico City. According to David S.

Hyman, the structural use of cement appears suddenly in the archaeological record. And yet its earliest sample "is a fully developed product."

The cement floor slabs at this site "were remarkably high in structural quality." Although exposed to the elements for nearly two thousand years,

they still "exceed many present-day building code requirements." [2] This is consistent with the Book of Mormon record, which treats this

invention as an important new development involving great skill and becoming something of a sensation.

After this important technological breakthrough, cement was used at many sites in the Valley of Mexico and in the Maya regions of southern

Mexico, Guatemala, and Honduras, which very well may have been close to the Nephite heartlands. Cement was used in the later construction of

buildings at such sites as Cerro de Texcotzingo, Tula, Palenque, Tikal, Copan, Uxmal, and Chichen Itza. Further, the use of cement is "a Maya

habit, absentfrom non-Maya examples of corbelled vaulting from the southeastern United States to southern South America." [3]

Mesoamerican cement was almost exclusively lime cement. The limestone was purified on a "cylindrical pile of timber, which requires a vast

amount of labor to cut and considerable skill to construct in such a way that combustion of the stone and wood is complete and a minimum of

impurities remains in the product." [4] The fact that very little carbon is found in this cement once again "attests to the ability of these ancient

peoples." [5]

John Sorenson has further noted the expert sophistication in the use of cement at El Tajin, east of Mexico City, in the centuries following Book of

Mormon times. Cement roofs covered sizable areas: "Sometimes the builders filled a room with stones and mud, smoothed the surface on top to

receive the concrete, then removed the interior fill when the [slab] on top had dried." [6]

Footnotes for the above passage:

1. See Matthew G. Wells and John W. Welch, "Concrete Evidence for the Book of Mormon," Insights (May 1991): 2.

2. David S. Hyman,A Study of the Calcareous Cements in Prehispanic Mesoamerican Building Construction(Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, 1970), ii, sec. 6, p. 7.

3. George Kubler, The Art and Architecture of Ancient America, 2nd ed. (Baltimore: Penguin, 1975), 201, emphasis added.

4. Tatiana Proskouriakoff,An Album ofMaya Architecture (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1963), xv.

5. Hyman,A Study of the Calcareous Cements, sec. 6, p. 5.

6. John L. Sorenson, "Digging into the Book of Mormon," Ensign, October 1984, 19.

A question arises about the use of wood in the production of cement. If timber was so scarce in the area where cement was made, as the Book of Mormon

indicates (Helaman 3:6,7), then how could the locals make cement? I have previously suggested that making cement does not require high-quality timber suitable

for making buildings, but merely material that can burn. There can be a shortage of high-quality trees yet plenty of flammable material that can support cement

making. However, based on what scholars have learned about the region in southern Mexico where cement was used anciently, it appears that the deforestation

problem mentioned in the Book of Mormon was at least partly caused by the high demand for wood to support the manufacture of cement. On this interesting

topic, Brant Gardner has an excellent essay on Helaman chapter 3 and the issue of cement manufacture that shows some of the scholarly support for the issue

of deforestation and cement making in a region that fits the Book of Mormon's description, with the suggestion that Mormon in Helaman 3 was describing the land

as he knew it after 300 A.D., and not at the time when cement making was first started there.

As to the possible importance of Teotihuacan itself, consider the following tentative suggestion from Michael J. Preece ( Review of Books on the Book of Mormon,

Vol.3, 1991, p.38):

The Book of Mormon text often speaks of a mysterious land. It may be referred to as the "land which was northward" (Alma 63:4) or simply the

"land northward" (Alma 63:5-8, 10; Helaman 3:3-4, 7, 10-11). In another place it is referred to as the "northernmost part of the land" (3 Nephi

7:12). It is possible that this land is in the same location as the "great city of Jacobugath" (3 Nephi 9:9). Dr. Allen suggests that this mysterious

land might be the ancient city of Teotihuacan, built in the valley of Mexico, near where Mexico City lies today.... The ancient culture which

inhabited this city had its beginnings about 150 B.C. and fell about A.D. 750. The circumstantial evidence that Teotihuacan may indeed have

been the "land northward" includes the fact that between 55 B.C. and A.D. 29, the Book of Mormon mentions several migrations into this land

where large bodies of water were found. This is the same period when Teotihuacan was experiencing a high growth rate. The valley of Mexico


11/28


28 11/4/2007

contained many lakes, and in fact Mexico City is built on a dry lake bed. The Book of Mormon speaks of the people in the land northward building

houses out of cement because timber was scarce in the land (Helaman 3:7, 10-11). The archaeological site of Teotihuacan contains many

buildings made of cement, and timber is indeed scarce in the valley of Mexico...."

On a related note, the Book of Mormon speaks of highways and roads (3 Nephi 6:8; 8:13). Some LDS people have pointed to the discovery of cement roads

among the Incas as supporting evidence, but the Inca empire was too far south to fit into a modern understanding of Book of Mormon geography. However,

lime-surfaced causeways (called sacbes) have been discovered in Central America, some dating to Book of Mormon times. Researchers at Tulane University

found one from near 300 B.C. (E. Wyllys Andrews V et al., "Komchen: An Early Maya Community in Northwest Yucatan," presented at the 1981 meeting of the

Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologia, San Cristobal, Chiapas, p. 15, as cited by J. Sorenson, Ensign, Oct. 1984, p. 18). Another in Belize was used between 50

B.C. and 150 A.D. (Andrews, "Dzibilchaltun," in Supplement to the Handbook of Middle American Indians, ed. J.A. Sabloff, vol. 1, Archaeology, University of

Texas Press, Austin, 1981, p. 322, as cited by Sorenson, 1984, p. 23). South of Mexico City are about two miles of ancient paved roads( American Antiquity, Vol.

45, 1980, p. 623), while one roadway in Yucatan is over 50 miles long (A. Bustillos Carillo, "El Sacbe de los Mayas: Caminos Blancos de los Mayas, Base de su

Vida Social y Religion," 2nd ed., B. Costa-Amic Editorial, Mexico, 1974, p. 23, as cited by Sorenson, 1984, p. 18). As we learn more about these ancient

roadways and their uses, we hope to understand more about Book of Mormon peoples and their lives. In any case, the mention of cement work and roadways in

the Book of Mormon appears plausible today, but was implausible to experts of the past.

By the way, the ancient adobe pueblos that existed in Mexico as well as the US Southwest could also qualify as "cement" houses. The word "adobe" was not

commonly used in Joseph Smith's day, was not in the 1830 Webster's Dictionary, and did not appear in print in English until 1834 (B. Stubbs, Journal of Book of

Mormon Studies, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1996, p. 39). If Joseph did not have that word in his vocabulary, the word "cement" in the Book of Mormon could also include

adobe. Perhaps the adobe builders were linked to Book of Mormon peoples.

A FARMS publication online also discusses cement in the Book of Mormon.

CHIASMUSINTHE BOOKOF MORMON

A recent discovery is that ancient Middle Eastern poetry--including the Bible--often used a poetical form called chiasmus, a form of parallelism in which key ideasare structured in a mirror image reflective form such as A,B,C,C',B',A'. Some of the most powerful and beautiful examples of this ancient form are found in the

Book of Mormon (first discovered in 1967 by John Welch). The importance of chiasmus in ancient Semitic writings has only been recognized in this century, and

still today very few educated people have ever heard of it. Its strong presence in the Book of Mormon is evidence that its writers possessed an ancient Semitic

literary tradition, as the Book of Mormon claims, and (in my opinion) single-handedly refutes the claim that the Book of Mormon is the product of a 19th century

writer (though there are numerous other factors that refute such a claim). Alma 36 is a classic example. For details--fascinating evidence that the Book of

Mormon is an authentic ancient document--see my new "Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon" page.

OLIVE CULTURE

Jacob chapter 5 offers a detailed description of practices regarding the cultivation of olive trees, taken from a Jewish text that was on the sacred writings

available on the brass plates that Lehi brought with him from Jerusalem. These descriptions agree well with what is known of ancient olive cultivation in ways that

were far beyond what Joseph Smith could have known. While Romans 11:13-26 refers to grafting of olive trees, this offers scant information compared to the

extensive and detailed information in Jacob 5, the longest chapter in the Book of Mormon.

For impressive details about the accuracy of Jacob 5 and its plausibility as an ancient text, see The Allegory of the Olive Tree, ed. Stephen D. Ricks and John W.

Welch (Salt Lake City: FARMS and Deseret Book, 1994), particularly Chapter 21, "Botanical Aspects of Olive Culture Relevant to Jacob 5" by Wilford M. Hess,

Daniel J. Fairbanks, John W. Welch, and Jonathan K. Driggs, pp. 484-562, and other chapters about ancient olive practices and symbolism. The details in Jacob

5 appear to be a masterful and accurate representation of ancient horticultural practices regarding olive trees, including the art of grafting branches from one tree

to another, which is still common for those caring for olive trees.

Below is an excerpt from John Gee and Daniel C. Peterson, "Graft and Corruption: On Olives and Olive Culture in the Pre-Modern Mediterranean," in The

Allegory of the Olive Tree, pp. 186-247, taken from pages 223-224:

It purports to be the work of an ancient northern Israelite author, living between 900-700 B.C., about olive growing. [Footnote 275 discusses the

details leading to this conclusion.] Almost every detail it supplies about olive culture can be confirmed in four classical authors whose authority

on the subject can be traced back to Syro-Palestine. Zenos's parable fits into the pattern of ancient olive cultivation remarkably well. The placing

of the villa above the vineyards [Columella, Rei Rusticae I, 5,7] means that, when the master gives instructions to his servants, they have to "go

down" into the vineyard (Jacob 5:15, 29, 38). It was also customary for the master of the vineyard to have several servants (cf. Jacob

5:7,10-11,15-16, 20-21, 25-30, 33-35, 38, 41, 48-50, 57, 61-62,70-72,75). [Cato, De Agri Cultura 10; Varro, Rerum Rusticarum I, 18.] When

only one servant is mentioned in Zenos's parable, the reference is most likely to the chief steward. Likewise, Zenos's mention of planting (Jacob5:23-25, 52, 54), pruning (Jacob 5:11, 47, 76; 6:2), grafting (Jacob5:8,9-10,17-18, 30, 34, 52, 54-57, 60, 63-65, 67-68), digging (Jacob 5:4,

27, 63-64), nourishing (Jacob 5:4,12, 27, 28,58,71; 6:2), and dunging (Jacob 5:47, 64, 76), as well as the fact that dunging occurs less

frequently in the parable than the nourishing, all mark it as an authentic ancient work. The unexpected change of wild olive branches to tame

ones (Jacob 5:17-18) would have seemed a divine portent to our ancient authorities. [Theophrastus, Historia Plantarum II, 3,1.]

Even more striking, for Joseph Smith to have made up the parable from these classical authors, he would have had to read all four:

Theophrastus is the only one to discuss the differences between wild and tame olives, the tendency for wild olives to predominate, and prophetic

use of the olive tree as a sign. [Romans 11:16-24 does mention wild and tame and grafting, but nothing about the fruit or the purposes thereof.

A casual reading of Paul leaves the impression that it is as easy to be one way as the other.] Varro and Columella are the only ones to

acknowledge the Phoenician connections. Cato and Varro are the only ones who discuss the servants' roles. Cato and Columella alone note the

placement of the villa above the groves; Varro is the only author to discuss the "main top" in association with the "young and tender branches"

(cf. Jacob 5:6). Yet Joseph Smith probably did not have access to these works. And even if he had, he could not read Latin and Greek in 1829.

Theophrastus's Historia Plantarum first published in English in 1916, [Theophrastus, Enquiry into Plants, trans. Arthur Hort (London: Heinemann,

1916)] and no part of his De Causis Plantarum was available in English until 1927 [Robert E. Dengler, ... Ph.D. Dissertation, University of

Pennsylvania, 1927]. While English translations of Cato, Varro, and Columella were available to the British in 1803, 1800, and 1745 respectively


12/28


28 11/4/2007

[Thomas Owen, M. Porcius Cato concerning Agriculture (London: White, 1803), ...], it is hardly likely that they were widely circulated in rural

New York and Pennsylvania. Joseph Smith could have known nothing about olives from personal experience, as they do not grow in Vermont and

New York. Can it reasonably be supposed that Joseph simply guessed right on so many details? And even if he somehow managed to get the

details from classical authors, how did he know to put it into the proper Hebrew narrative form? [The narrative of Zenos follows the Hebrew

narrative pattern as laid down by Robert Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative (New York: Basic Books, 1981).]

Even if Joseph Smith had somehow gathered the details of ancient olive culture from someone who knew it intimately, he would still have had no

plot. [Zenos's plot is much more complicated than Paul's, and if Joseph Smith is adding to the plot, it must be explained how he got the extra

details ... and made them fit in with ancient olive lore.]

For online verification of olive culture principles from non-LDS resources, consider "The Secrets of Olive Trees" from BienManger.com (also

LeGourmetMarket.com), from which the following excerpts are taken. That page verifies several concepts in Jacob 5, such as the ability of olive trees to grow inrich and poor soils, the importance of grafting, the ability to regenerate or rejuvenate a decaying olive tree, and the practice of applying dung:

SOILS

The olive tree often grows on poor and dry soils, but gives remarkable results on rich soils (California) or by irrigation (Spain and Oranie). . . .

GRAFTING : the propagation of a given variety of table olives is done by grafting, except in special cases (cuttings, stump chips of the same

variety).

Depending on what has to be grafted, the following techniques are being used :

For the seedlings and the sprouts coming from stocks of a different variety, you can use cleft grafting or budding.

In the case of older trees, be it the grafting of wild olive trees or of olive groves whose production is to be modified, it is advised to use inarching

or bark grafting. . . .

REGENERATION :

It may be necessary to rejuvenate an olive grove if it has not been maintained for a long period or if it has suffered accidents, thus becoming

unable to produce a normal crop.

It is sufficient to cut away all branches, except the largest ones and then graft the remaining stumps. The grove should then bear a unique

variety of table olives and be able of bearing fruit in excellent conditions.

A trunk in very bad shape should be cut at the base in order to start with three replacing shoots. . . .

MANURE :

Although manuring largely pays off, olive trees are still too rarely manured. Manure should be organic, on a basis of dung or cattle cake.

When possible, a culture of green fertilizers (vetch, lupin, etc.), mowed at maturity and ploughed in, will complete the dressing of organic

matter. . . .

Other olive-re

Documents

Book of Mormon Evidences