1 Nephi Ch 1

[AFDaw]

I know it's been started somewhat in the other thread, but figured it needed a "home" of it's own.

Any thoughts?

[Jenda]

One of the things I really like about the BoM is the tenderness that is used throughout. Yeah, it has it's moments, but on the whole, it has a tender feeling to it, much more so than the OT. For example, in 1 Nephi 1:20 .......For behold, I , Nephi, will show unto you that the tender mercies of the Lord are over all those whom he hath chosen, because of their faith, to make them mighty even nto the power of deliverance.

Over and over, it show us how much God loves us.

[AFDaw]

I have that exact part of that verse highlighted with a notation that reads "The Lord shows mercy to the faithful"

:)

[serapha]

I accidentally hit the "reply" before it was ready....

Would someone be so kind as to answer my questions on Nephi, Chapter 1?

~serapha~

THE FIRST BOOK OF NEPHI

HIS REIGN AND MINISTRY

CHAPTER 1

Nephi begins the record of his people—Lehi sees in vision a pillar of fire and reads from a book of prophecy—He praises God, foretells the coming of the Messiah, and prophesies the destruction of Jerusalem—He is persecuted by the Jews. [About 600 B.C.]...

A question...

10 And he also saw twelve others following him, and their brightness did exceed that of the stars in the firmament.

Do humans in glorified bodies radiate glory... or in heaven, is the "Glory" reserved for God the Father and God the Son? Now, we used the term "glorified bodies" for lack of a beter terminology, but when Christ on upon the earth with His glorified body, there is no indication that the body radiated "glory". Glory was a part of the deity of Christ which was suppressed for the 33 years He was upon the earth, never calling upon the "glory" of his deity. Exactly what is "glory"... a radiance, a brightness? But why does Christ have "glory"? Pure light perhaps?

another question...

19 And it came to pass that the Jews did mock him because of the things which he testified of them; for he truly testified of their wickedness and their abominations; and he testified that the things which he saw and heard, and also the things which he read in the book, manifested plainly of the coming of a dMessiah, and also the redemption of the world.

20 And when the Jews heard these things they were angry with him; yea, even as with the prophets of old, whom they had cast out, and stoned, and slain; and they also sought his life, that they might take it away....

http://frontpage2000.nmia.com/~nahualli/LD...phi/1Nephi1.htm

Verses 19 and 20 show two phases in the reaction of the sinful to the message of righteousness. The first is to mock, and the second is to attack.

Well, I guess everyone comes by "mock" and "attack" in a very scriptural manner to anyone speaking the "truth".

and another question...

how does one pronounce "Nephi"??

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=jbm...252aWV3LnBocA==

4 For it came to pass in the commencement of the first year of the reign of Zedekiah, king of Judah, (my father, Lehi, having dwelt at Jerusalem in all his days); and in that same year there came many prophets, prophesying unto the people that they must repent, or the great city Jerusalem must be destroyed.

I have a question concerning the "at Jerusalem". )verse 7 also, his own house at Jerusalem) If Lehi dwelt at jerusalem in all of this days, how is that reconciled to the statement that when the Babylonians took Jerusalem, all of the skilled smiths were removed to babylonia. What is the meaning of "at Jerusalem" in this text, and when there are entries for "at _____" is it always to be taken in the same way, something like the "law of the first mentioned" and the Bible?

8 And being thus overcome with the Spirit, he was carried away in a vision, even that he saw the heavens open, and he thought he saw God sitting upon his throne, surrounded with numberless concourses of angels in the attitude of singing and praising their God.

Do angels sing? I had the understanding that only the redeemed sing in heaven.

17 But I shall make an account of my proceedings in my days. Behold, I make an abridgment of the record of my father, upon plates which I have made with mine own hands; wherefore, after I have abridged the record of my father then will I make an account of mine own life.

'

Which plates are these?

[AFDaw]

Originally posted by serapha@Mar 26 2004, 08:34 PM

I accidentally hit the "reply" before it was ready....

Would someone be so kind as to answer my questions on Nephi, Chapter 1?

~serapha~

THE FIRST BOOK OF NEPHI

HIS REIGN AND MINISTRY

CHAPTER 1

Nephi begins the record of his people—Lehi sees in vision a pillar of fire and reads from a book of prophecy—He praises God, foretells the coming of the Messiah, and prophesies the destruction of Jerusalem—He is persecuted by the Jews. [About 600 B.C.]...

A question...

10 And he also saw twelve others following him, and their brightness did exceed that of the stars in the firmament.

Do humans in glorified bodies radiate glory... or in heaven, is the "Glory" reserved for God the Father and God the Son? Now, we used the term "glorified bodies" for lack of a beter terminology, but when Christ on upon the earth with His glorified body, there is no indication that the body radiated "glory". Glory was a part of the deity of Christ which was suppressed for the 33 years He was upon the earth, never calling upon the "glory" of his deity. Exactly what is "glory"... a radiance, a brightness? But why does Christ have "glory"? Pure light perhaps?

What does all the glory talk have to do with verse 10? It just states that in his vision, the 12 had brightness that exceeded the stars in the firmament.

another question...

19 And it came to pass that the Jews did mock him because of the things which he testified of them; for he truly testified of their wickedness and their abominations; and he testified that the things which he saw and heard, and also the things which he read in the book, manifested plainly of the coming of a dMessiah, and also the redemption of the world.

20 And when the Jews heard these things they were angry with him; yea, even as with the prophets of old, whom they had cast out, and stoned, and slain; and they also sought his life, that they might take it away....

http://frontpage2000.nmia.com/~nahualli/LD...phi/1Nephi1.htm

Verses 19 and 20 show two phases in the reaction of the sinful to the message of righteousness. The first is to mock, and the second is to attack.

Well, I guess everyone comes by "mock" and "attack" in a very scriptural manner to anyone speaking the "truth".

1st. What is the question?

2nd. Yes, I believe everyone does come by "mock" and "attack" when someone is speaking the "truth" Just look at how we LDS members are treated at CF. That's a prime example of us being mocked and attacked for trying to speak the truth.

how does one pronounce "Nephi"??

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=jbm...252aWV3LnBocA==

Ne -Phi

4 For it came to pass in the commencement of the first year of the reign of Zedekiah, king of Judah, (my father, Lehi, having dwelt at Jerusalem in all his days); and in that same year there came many prophets, prophesying unto the people that they must repent, or the great city Jerusalem must be destroyed.

I have a question concerning the "at Jerusalem". )verse 7 also, his own house at Jerusalem) If Lehi dwelt at jerusalem in all of this days, how is that reconciled to the statement that when the Babylonians took Jerusalem, all of the skilled smiths were removed to babylonia. What is the meaning of "at Jerusalem" in this text, and when there are entries for "at _____" is it always to be taken in the same way, something like the "law of the first mentioned" and the Bible?

When did the Babylonians take Jerusalem? (Was it 538bc?)

As far as "at Jerusalem" why are you trying to read too much into it? I just read it as "he went to his house in Jerusalem"

8 And being thus overcome with the Spirit, he was carried away in a vision, even that he saw the heavens open, and he thought he saw God sitting upon his throne, surrounded with numberless concourses of angels in the attitude of singing and praising their God.

Do angels sing? I had the understanding that only the redeemed sing in heaven.

Why can't angels sing? Don't they have plenty to sing about? I think they do, if not, we have a few Christmas songs that aren't right :)

17 But I shall make an account of my proceedings in my days. Behold, I make an abridgment of the record of my father, upon plates which I have made with mine own hands; wherefore, after I have abridged the record of my father then will I make an account of mine own life.

'

Which plates are these?

The Golden Plates

[serapha]

Why can't angels sing? Don't they have plenty to sing about? I think they do, if not, we have a few Christmas songs that aren't right

There is a theory on that, and I don't remember the name of the particular theory, but it is that angels can only make sounds in perfect pitch, therefore, they cannot sing in minor harmony. Basically, the means that the sad things of life give up as song that is sung in the minor keys... the sad-sounding songs. Since angels don't have the experience of sadness, they don't know the minor notes.

And, if you look at the text in context, you will see that angels chant or resound, but not that they sing...

and BTW... When I am the "music" person, we don't sing or play those Christmas songs which have angels singing.

~serapha~

[serapha]

 

4 For it came to pass in the commencement of the first year of the reign of Zedekiah, king of Judah, (my father, Lehi, having dwelt at Jerusalem in all his days); and in that same year there came many prophets, prophesying unto the people that they must repent, or the great city Jerusalem must be destroyed.

I have a question concerning the "at Jerusalem". )verse 7 also, his own house at Jerusalem) If Lehi dwelt at jerusalem in all of this days, how is that reconciled to the statement that when the Babylonians took Jerusalem, all of the skilled smiths were removed to babylonia. What is the meaning of "at Jerusalem" in this text, and when there are entries for "at _____" is it always to be taken in the same way, something like the "law of the first mentioned" and the Bible? 

When did the Babylonians take Jerusalem? (Was it 538bc?)

As far as "at Jerusalem" why are you trying to read too much into it? I just read it as "he went to his house in Jerusalem"

It does become important in the discussions on archaeological and historical evidences... what is important is "when" the skilled metal workers were taken away from Jerusalem to Babylonia. Many simply say that Lehi left before that date... but in my recent reading (Lehi, 81 evidences) it is identified that "Lehi, obviously, was not one of those previously deported, probably because he dwelt outside Jerusalem proper." )page 18)

Whereas the Bible states in 2 Kings 24...

"Now Nebuchadnezzar carried away all Jerusalem, with all its princes, all the mighty men of valour, altogether ten thousand captives which included all the craftsmen and smiths. None remained except the poorest sort of the people in the land. "

~serapha~

[AFDaw]

Originally posted by serapha@Mar 28 2004, 03:55 PM

Why can't angels sing? Don't they have plenty to sing about? I think they do, if not, we have a few Christmas songs that aren't right

There is a theory on that, and I don't remember the name of the particular theory, but it is that angels can only make sounds in perfect pitch, therefore, they cannot sing in minor harmony. Basically, the means that the sad things of life give up as song that is sung in the minor keys... the sad-sounding songs. Since angels don't have the experience of sadness, they don't know the minor notes.

And, if you look at the text in context, you will see that angels chant or resound, but not that they sing...

and BTW... When I am the "music" person, we don't sing or play those Christmas songs which have angels singing.

~serapha~

Hey...believe what you want. I believe Angels can sing.

[AFDaw]

Lehi and his family departed around 600BC. Which is before that.

[Jenda]

Originally posted by serapha@Mar 26 2004, 08:34 PM

Would someone be so kind as to answer my questions on Nephi, Chapter 1?

~serapha~

THE FIRST BOOK OF NEPHI

HIS REIGN AND MINISTRY

CHAPTER 1

Nephi begins the record of his people—Lehi sees in vision a pillar of fire and reads from a book of prophecy—He praises God, foretells the coming of the Messiah, and prophesies the destruction of Jerusalem—He is persecuted by the Jews. [About 600 B.C.]...

A question...

10 And he also saw twelve others following him, and their brightness did exceed that of the stars in the firmament.

Do humans in glorified bodies radiate glory... or in heaven, is the "Glory" reserved for God the Father and God the Son? Now, we used the term "glorified bodies" for lack of a beter terminology, but when Christ on upon the earth with His glorified body, there is no indication that the body radiated "glory". Glory was a part of the deity of Christ which was suppressed for the 33 years He was upon the earth, never calling upon the "glory" of his deity. Exactly what is "glory"... a radiance, a brightness? But why does Christ have "glory"? Pure light perhaps?

It was a vision. Often in visions, there are objects that represent different objects, that is why they often need interpreting. The brightness that seemed to radiate from the "12" represented, IMO, the "choiceness" (for lack of a better word) that the Lord bestowed on the apostles for choosing them and giving them special tasks and witnesses.

another question...

19 And it came to pass that the Jews did mock him because of the things which he testified of them; for he truly testified of their wickedness and their abominations; and he testified that the things which he saw and heard, and also the things which he read in the book, manifested plainly of the coming of a dMessiah, and also the redemption of the world.

20 And when the Jews heard these things they were angry with him; yea, even as with the prophets of old, whom they had cast out, and stoned, and slain; and they also sought his life, that they might take it away....

http://frontpage2000.nmia.com/~nahualli/LD...phi/1Nephi1.htm

Verses 19 and 20 show two phases in the reaction of the sinful to the message of righteousness. The first is to mock, and the second is to attack.

Well, I guess everyone comes by "mock" and "attack" in a very scriptural manner to anyone speaking the "truth".

Guess I don't see what the question here is. Sorry. But, if you are questioning why Lehi felt mocked and attacked, look at the reception most other prophets got, too, not just him.

and another question...

how does one pronounce "Nephi"??

Depends on if you are American or Jewish. Americans say nee-fi, Jewish people say neph-ee

17 But I shall make an account of my proceedings in my days. Behold, I make an abridgment of the record of my father, upon plates which I have made with mine own hands; wherefore, after I have abridged the record of my father then will I make an account of mine own life.

'

Which plates are these?

These are the plates that Nephi made after leaving Jerusalem. They are the large plates of Nephi.

I'm not sure what your question about skilled smiths have to do with anything. Lehi, nor Nephi, nor his brothers were smiths. They were scribes.

Could you please elaborate on the connection you are drawing?

[serapha]

I'm not sure what your question about skilled smiths have to do with anything. Lehi, nor Nephi, nor his brothers were smiths. They were scribes.

Could you please elaborate on the connection you are drawing?

Hi there!

From the text (and other writings), it is obvious that Lehi is either a caravaneer or a skilled craftman, or both. If he "in Jerusalem" as the text reads, why was he not removed in captivity to Babylon? Also, the text identifies that, "None remained except the poorest sort of the people in the land. "

Now one could say that Lehi did not live in Jerusalem (the city), but in the land of Jerusalem meaning the outlying city, but then, there is a diffulcy with the passage that states, "none remained except the poorest sor of people in the land". Now, obviously because of the references to gold and silver, they were not the "poorest sort of the people"...

~serapha~

[Jenda]

Originally posted by serapha@Mar 28 2004, 09:16 PM

I'm not sure what your question about skilled smiths have to do with anything. Lehi, nor Nephi, nor his brothers were smiths. They were scribes.

Could you please elaborate on the connection you are drawing?

Hi there!

From the text (and other writings), it is obvious that Lehi is either a caravaneer or a skilled craftman, or both. If he "in Jerusalem" as the text reads, why was he not removed in captivity to Babylon? Also, the text identifies that, "None remained except the poorest sort of the people in the land. "

Now one could say that Lehi did not live in Jerusalem (the city), but in the land of Jerusalem meaning the outlying city, but then, there is a diffulcy with the passage that states, "none remained except the poorest sor of people in the land". Now, obviously because of the references to gold and silver, they were not the "poorest sort of the people"...

~serapha~

It was answered at least once in this thread, in answer to your question.

Lehi and family left Jerusalem about 20 years before the Babylonians attacked and took all captive.

And from the text, it is obvious that Lehi and family were scribes.

[AFDaw]

When did this occur?

[serapha]

It was answered at least once in this thread, in answer to your question.

Lehi and family left Jerusalem about 20 years before the Babylonians attacked and took all captive.

And from the text, it is obvious that Lehi and family were scribes.

http://frontpage2000.nmia.com/~nahualli/LD...phi/1Nephi2.htm

Randall P. Spackman has written a detailed treatise on chronological issues in the Book of Mormon. Concerning the departure of Lehi he quotes 1 Nephi 7:14: "For behold, the Spirit of the Lord ceaseth soon to strive with them; for behold, they have rejected the prophets, and Jeremiah have they cast into prison. And they have sought to take away the life of my father, insomuch that they have driven him out of the land."

He then concludes: "this passage provides one of the most important clues for dating the time of Lehi's departure from Jerusalem. According to Nephi, the actions taken against Jeremiah and the other prophets were directly connected with the threats on Lehi's life. This argument was not an academic discussion between friendly brothers, but an intense debate involving life and death issues... Thus, the knowledge of Lehi's sons concerning Jeremiah's imprisonment places the escape of Ishmael's family after the time when the Egyptians invaded the land of Judah" [587 B.C.E.](Spackman "Introduction to Book of Mormon Chronology" FARMS reprint, 1993, p. 10).

Spackman also notes that when Lehi speaks to Laman and desires that righteousness might flow from Laman "like unto this river" (1 Nephi 2:5-9) that water had to have been coursing in the wadis. That would meant the rainy season, or December to February (Spackman p. 8). This information has Lehi's family departing Jerusalem close to December to February, at the end of 587 or the beginning of 586 B.C.E.

The Babylonian captivity was 586 B.C.E. (right?)

More current writings indicate that Lehi was present "in Jerusalem" during and after the captivity as I quoted above.

And from the text, it is obvious that Lehi and family were scribes.

Do scribes have the standard 250-pound tents laying around for 10 families?

4 And it came to pass that he departed into the wilderness. And he left his house, and the land of his inheritance, and his gold, and his silver, and his precious things, and took nothing with him, save it were his family, and provisions, and tents, and departed into the wilderness.

BTW, I like Brant Gardner's page because it has all the evidneces posted in the text.

~serapha~

[AFDaw]

The BoM says that Lehi and Ishmael leave around 600-592bc, which is still a few years before.

Who said the tents weighed 250lbs? Who knows what people had laying around back then. I don't think it seems odd though.

[serapha]

The BoM says that Lehi and Ishmael leave around 600-592bc, which is still a few years before. 

Who said the tents weighed 250lbs?  Who knows what people had laying around back then.  I don't think it seems odd though.

Hi!

Where does the bom say that?

As for the tents, that is an historical evidence.

~serapha~

[AFDaw]

At the bottom of the page.

And why does it seem odd that they would have tents?

[serapha]

Originally posted by AFDaw@Mar 29 2004, 05:58 AM

Hi!

At the bottom of the page.

I think the bottom of the page might be wrong. I'm reading critical text concerning the timeline of the bom.

And why does it seem odd that they would have tents?

The argument that is presented for Lehi being a caravaneer arises from certain words in the text. One of the words is the tents, of which there is no indication that they were purchased. There were ten couples in the group, plus what possessions they carried, and several tents would be required.

Lehi was considered to be wealthy and from what I read, they had servants, gold and silver; his family would not have lived in tents--but a caravaneer would have tents available for his work, which would include trade and marketing, and familiarity with the Frankincense Trail... all these things necessary to survive the trip through the desert.

(BTW... that would not be MY argument... )

My argument would read quite differently.

~serapha~

[Jenda]

Originally posted by serapha@Mar 28 2004, 10:00 PM

It was answered at least once in this thread, in answer to your question.

Lehi and family left Jerusalem about 20 years before the Babylonians attacked and took all captive.

And from the text, it is obvious that Lehi and family were scribes.

Do scribes have the standard 250-pound tents laying around for 10 families?

4 And it came to pass that he departed into the wilderness. And he left his house, and the land of his inheritance, and his gold, and his silver, and his precious things, and took nothing with him, save it were his family, and provisions, and tents, and departed into the wilderness.

BTW, I like Brant Gardner's page because it has all the evidneces posted in the text.

~serapha~

I don't know who Brant Gardner is, but his site is full of nothing but supposition.

There are enough clues in the text to suppose (just as accurately) that Lehi and his family were scribes.

Maybe, just maybe, because they were rich, they bought tents to travel in/with. It doesn't state in the text that they owned the tents previously, it just says they took tents and provisions with them.

[Jenda]

Originally posted by serapha@Mar 29 2004, 05:53 PM

Hi!

At the bottom of the page.

I think the bottom of the page might be wrong. I'm reading critical text concerning the timeline of the bom.

And why does it seem odd that they would have tents?

The argument that is presented for Lehi being a caravaneer arises from certain words in the text. One of the words is the tents, of which there is no indication that they were purchased. There were ten couples in the group, plus what possessions they carried, and several tents would be required.

Lehi was considered to be wealthy and from what I read, they had servants, gold and silver; his family would not have lived in tents--but a caravaneer would have tents available for his work, which would include trade and marketing, and familiarity with the Frankincense Trail... all these things necessary to survive the trip through the desert.

(BTW... that would not be MY argument... )

My argument would read quite differently.

~serapha~

The bottom of my page says the same thing, and we have different publications.

What critical text are you reading?

Maybe if you read further on in the BoM, you would come to the story of the Mulekites, which was another group that left Jerusalem about 10 years later, during the actual battle with the Babylonians. So, the text justifies itself. (But I am sure you would come back and admit you were wrong when you got to it if it hadn't been pointed out first. I have that kind of faith in you. )

[AFDaw]

Originally posted by serapha@Mar 29 2004, 05:53 PM

I think the bottom of the page might be wrong. I'm reading critical text concerning the timeline of the bom.

I think the bottom of the page might not be wrong.

[Guest Starsky]

About the tents and other supposed problems....

Remember...this is an abridged document....it isn't full of details that weren't important to the abridger...

[serapha]

Originally posted by serapha@Mar 29 2004, 05:53 PM

Hi!

At the bottom of the page.

I think the bottom of the page might be wrong. I'm reading critical text concerning the timeline of the bom.

And why does it seem odd that they would have tents?

The argument that is presented for Lehi being a caravaneer arises from certain words in the text. One of the words is the tents, of which there is no indication that they were purchased. There were ten couples in the group, plus what possessions they carried, and several tents would be required.

Lehi was considered to be wealthy and from what I read, they had servants, gold and silver; his family would not have lived in tents--but a caravaneer would have tents available for his work, which would include trade and marketing, and familiarity with the Frankincense Trail... all these things necessary to survive the trip through the desert.

(BTW... that would not be MY argument... )

My argument would read quite differently.

~serapha~

The bottom of my page says the same thing, and we have different publications.

What critical text are you reading?

Maybe if you read further on in the BoM, you would come to the story of the Mulekites, which was another group that left Jerusalem about 10 years later, during the actual battle with the Babylonians. So, the text justifies itself. (But I am sure you would come back and admit you were wrong when you got to it if it hadn't been pointed out first. I have that kind of faith in you. )

Could I have a quick reference to the Mulekites in the bom...

and "yes" I would return to correct my misunderstanding.

~serapha~

[Guest Starsky]

It isn't odd for a rich guy...He would have his own caravans and provide tents for his traveling servants...

[serapha]

Originally posted by Peace@Mar 30 2004, 06:04 PM

It isn't odd for a rich guy...He would have his own caravans and provide tents for his traveling servants...

Were scribes rich enough to have their own caravans and tents... let alone servants?

The discussion was that I was being told that they were all scribes, while the material I was reading said that their wealth was more likely from merchandising, being a caravaneer, which included traveling and a need for tents and beasts of burden.

~thanks for sharing~

~serapha~