Traveler Posted February 21, 2004 Report Posted February 21, 2004 About 5 years ago I was invited to spend a week at a home in the Persian Gulf area of a devout Moslem and a very friend. The event was for his sister’s wedding. A Moslem wedding lasts for a week and I was honored by the invitation. I learned a most interesting thing from my hosts. Something known throughout Arabia but completely lost and unknown in our western civilization. In the center of my friends home town is a giant statue devoted to “The Tree of Life” of Arabia. This statue is famous throughout Arabia and the Islamic people. The reason is because this tree is a powerful symbol of Allah’s love of the people that live in Arabia. The Tree of Life is the second of 3 great gifts from Allah to those that live in Arabia. The First gift is water. This is the greatest treasure in Arabia. The third gift is the domestication of the camel. The second gift is a special palm tree that grows in Arabia and some places of Northern Africa. This is the date palm tree. The reason this tree is so important is because the dates of this particular tree are rather good to eat and are one of the only foods that will last for weeks on end without spoiling in the heat of Arabia for anyone traveling. It is survival and life. Anciently there was no other food that would sustain someone traveling for any distance in Arabia. It has been called the “Tree of Life” for good reason for thousands of years. But there is not even of hint of this tree in western sources prior to Laurence of Arabia who was the first to note it from out side middle eastern society. Although the date palm is mentioned in the Bible its importance is lost to our place and time. For the most part the date tree’s fruit ranges in color from brown to pale yellow when it is ripe and the lighter the color the sweeter the taste of the fruit. There is however, one variety of this date palm tree whose fruit is almost white. It is the tree with the white fruit that is the model for the statue in my friends home town. It is the most highly valued and believed to be the one most similar to the “Tree of Life” in the Garden of Eden”. This tree grows naturally only in Western Arabia and has been found as far north as the area where the Book of Mormon describes the “Valley of Lemuel”, which by the way there really is such a valley exactly where the Book of Mormon says there is. And there is a river of water flowing rear-round into the Red Sea. It is the only place where there is a river of water in Arabia that flows year-round into the Red Sea.. How many trees do you know that produce “white fruit”? And how many of them are called “The Tree of Life”? Where in 1830 could anyone in the West find a historically accurate document that mentions this fact and others about Arabia (for example the year-round river flowing into the Red Sea)? Once again this is proof that the Book of Mormon is a historically accurate account. Our western accounts including computers internet and other access still lacks the depth of understanding given in the Book of Mormon almost 150 years ago. Poor Antishock can’t even find where the frankincense trail went so he can pretend to manufacture criticism that Lehi used the frankincense trail. It is my impression that even on this forum the critics are worse than just pretenders. Convincing me of their utter ignorance and foolishness. It is likely they have never been to Arabia or ever befriended anyone that has been to Arabia. But they are still experts when it comes to history that could apply to the Book of Mormon. When they say there is nothing to support the validity of the Book of Mormon they say their criticism in complete ignorance of obvious things like the “Tree of Life” or of a place Nephi called “Bountiful” or “Nahor” in Arabia. And it is my impression that they love their ignorance and prefer it to truth. And that my friends, is why they come across to me as prejudice and bigots. And that is why I believe that when facts are placed before them they deny it supports the Book of Mormon and they dream up some other reticules argument, like nobody in 600 BC could cross Arabia even though it had been going on for over a thousand years along the very trail Lehi took his family. In truth there are many facts of the Book of Mormon that are demonstrated to be historical and accurate. I have presented but a few. Everything I presented was not known by Joseph or during his time. Lehi’s Tree of Life is still not understood. I have yet to see an accurate LDS depiction that is not made inaccurate because of our western culture. How much more is there that even we LDS do not yet understand? The Traveler Quote
Guest Starsky Posted February 21, 2004 Report Posted February 21, 2004 Thanks Traveler...that was awesome! Quote
Guest Posted February 21, 2004 Report Posted February 21, 2004 Originally posted by Peace@Feb 20 2004, 11:45 PM Thanks Traveler...that was awesome! Yea, way to go! Great post! WooHoo! Quote
Guest Starsky Posted February 21, 2004 Report Posted February 21, 2004 Originally posted by evil_dude+Feb 20 2004, 10:47 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (evil_dude @ Feb 20 2004, 10:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Peace@Feb 20 2004, 11:45 PM Thanks Traveler...that was awesome! Yea, way to go! Great post! WooHoo! You wouldn't be one of our famous banned characters would you newby? Quote
Guest Posted February 21, 2004 Report Posted February 21, 2004 The obvious answer of course is that if I were banned I would not be posting here but you know that since it says moderator under your name. Quote
Tr2 Posted February 21, 2004 Report Posted February 21, 2004 I'm not seeing how this validates the historical truth of the BoM. If this tree means the BoM is true then can I go read a history book, find out what plants were growing in the 1500's, tie that into my story, and that makes it all true? Quote
Guest Posted February 21, 2004 Report Posted February 21, 2004 Originally posted by Tr2@Feb 21 2004, 01:04 AM I'm not seeing how this validates the historical truth of the BoM. If this tree means the BoM is true then can I go read a history book, find out what plants were growing in the 1500's, tie that into my story, and that makes it all true? Now you're thinking like an apologist! Great post! Awesome! Thanks! Quote
Traveler Posted February 21, 2004 Author Report Posted February 21, 2004 Originally posted by Tr2@Feb 21 2004, 12:04 AM I'm not seeing how this validates the historical truth of the BoM. If this tree means the BoM is true then can I go read a history book, find out what plants were growing in the 1500's, tie that into my story, and that makes it all true? You should learn before you think. If Joseph had done as you suggested there would have been no "Tree of Life" in the Book of Mormon. You are very wrong on two points. First: Plants growing in the 1500 have nothing to do with time of the Book of MormonSecond: There are no historical references to a "Tree of Life" in any publication in our western culture prior to around 1940. Outside of LDS references and the Garden of Eden I doubt you can find a reference of historical fact of a tree that produces "white" fruit.Though you may not realize it, your objection also proves that the Book of Mormon is based on true historical fact rather that someone like yourslef that thinks only to manufacture non-truth. If you were a little smarter you might consider a study of the time and palce you wish to lie about. But if there was no information (and the Tree of Life was not available to Joseph) a smart lier would at least pick a topic they know something about.What the Tree of Life means is that the Book of Mormon is more based on historical fact than critics like yourself who do not seem to care at all about historical facts.The Traveler Quote
Cal Posted February 21, 2004 Report Posted February 21, 2004 Originally posted by Traveler+Feb 21 2004, 09:04 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Traveler @ Feb 21 2004, 09:04 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Tr2@Feb 21 2004, 12:04 AM I'm not seeing how this validates the historical truth of the BoM. If this tree means the BoM is true then can I go read a history book, find out what plants were growing in the 1500's, tie that into my story, and that makes it all true? You should learn before you think. If Joseph had done as you suggested there would have been no "Tree of Life" in the Book of Mormon. You are very wrong on two points. First: Plants growing in the 1500 have nothing to do with time of the Book of MormonSecond: There are no historical references to a "Tree of Life" in any publication in our western culture prior to around 1940. Outside of LDS references and the Garden of Eden I doubt you can find a reference of historical fact of a tree that produces "white" fruit.Though you may not realize it, your objection also proves that the Book of Mormon is based on true historical fact rather that someone like yourslef that thinks only to manufacture non-truth. If you were a little smarter you might consider a study of the time and palce you wish to lie about. But if there was no information (and the Tree of Life was not available to Joseph) a smart lier would at least pick a topic they know something about.What the Tree of Life means is that the Book of Mormon is more based on historical fact than critics like yourself who do not seem to care at all about historical facts.The Traveler When you write a 540 page story, you are bound to get a few things right by coincidence. After all, trees and tree symbolism is hardly unknown in story telling history. Even the Bible has several "tree" symbolisms. Didn't JS's father or grandfather have a dream similar to Lehi's about the "tree of life". It isn't what JS got right, it's all the things he got wrong that make the BoM problematic. Quote
Guest curvette Posted February 21, 2004 Report Posted February 21, 2004 The tree of life was a vision of Lehi's. It wasn't an actual tree. It was symbolic. Quote
Guest Starsky Posted February 21, 2004 Report Posted February 21, 2004 When you write a 540 page story, you are bound to get a few things right by coincidence. After all, trees and tree symbolism is hardly unknown in story telling history. Even the Bible has several "tree" symbolisms. Didn't JS's father or grandfather have a dream similar to Lehi's about the "tree of life". It isn't what JS got right, it's all the things he got wrong that make the BoM problematic. He got em wrong according to men...not God. And Moroni mentioned there were errors of men....but then he knew there were going to be 'perfect' stone throwers out there. Quote
Guest Starsky Posted February 21, 2004 Report Posted February 21, 2004 Originally posted by curvette@Feb 21 2004, 12:15 PM The tree of life was a vision of Lehi's. It wasn't an actual tree. It was symbolic. It can be both as in the garden of choice. Quote
Traveler Posted February 21, 2004 Author Report Posted February 21, 2004 Originally posted by Cal+Feb 21 2004, 10:17 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cal @ Feb 21 2004, 10:17 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Originally posted by -Traveler@Feb 21 2004, 09:04 AM <!--QuoteBegin--Tr2@Feb 21 2004, 12:04 AM I'm not seeing how this validates the historical truth of the BoM. If this tree means the BoM is true then can I go read a history book, find out what plants were growing in the 1500's, tie that into my story, and that makes it all true? You should learn before you think. If Joseph had done as you suggested there would have been no "Tree of Life" in the Book of Mormon. You are very wrong on two points. First: Plants growing in the 1500 have nothing to do with time of the Book of MormonSecond: There are no historical references to a "Tree of Life" in any publication in our western culture prior to around 1940. Outside of LDS references and the Garden of Eden I doubt you can find a reference of historical fact of a tree that produces "white" fruit.Though you may not realize it, your objection also proves that the Book of Mormon is based on true historical fact rather that someone like yourslef that thinks only to manufacture non-truth. If you were a little smarter you might consider a study of the time and palce you wish to lie about. But if there was no information (and the Tree of Life was not available to Joseph) a smart lier would at least pick a topic they know something about.What the Tree of Life means is that the Book of Mormon is more based on historical fact than critics like yourself who do not seem to care at all about historical facts.The Traveler When you write a 540 page story, you are bound to get a few things right by coincidence. After all, trees and tree symbolism is hardly unknown in story telling history. Even the Bible has several "tree" symbolisms. Didn't JS's father or grandfather have a dream similar to Lehi's about the "tree of life". It isn't what JS got right, it's all the things he got wrong that make the BoM problematic. As an expert please tell us a historical fact about Arabia that the Book of Mormon has wrong. Do you have one or not? I contend the Book of Mormon is accurate - I presented evidence and proof. And you have presended .... What .... NOTHING? Please tell me what is this glaring problem in the Book of Mormon about Arabia. Why do you hide it?I believe you do not know anything about Arabia and that you cannot handel the truth. Am I wrong about the Tree of Life? Am I wrong about Bountiful. Am I wrong about "borders" and the Hebrew and Arabic words for Borders? Am I wrong about the wadi Tayyib al-Ism?NO my friend that can't stand truth. I am right any you can't handel it. Sorry but that is your problem.The Traveler Quote
Traveler Posted February 21, 2004 Author Report Posted February 21, 2004 Originally posted by curvette@Feb 21 2004, 12:15 PM The tree of life was a vision of Lehi's. It wasn't an actual tree. It was symbolic. The eagle is symbolic of many things. But even though it is a symbol it also exist and its existance adds to the symbolic meaning. I am sorry if something real being used as a symbol upset you.The Traveler Quote
Traveler Posted February 21, 2004 Author Report Posted February 21, 2004 The Point I wish to make is that we know exactly where Lehi started and we have the Book of Mormon to compare to true facts concerning Arabia. I am not talking about speculation I am talking about facts! The facts are right and exact. Then lets admit them. If anyone can get facks right by chance perhaps someone could show me of such an example. Without an example - I don't believe the logic. If there is such an example of such chance where there is accuracy and no error - I would like to see it. As of yet I see no facts that the Book of Mormon got anything wrong about Arabia. The Traveler Quote
Guest curvette Posted February 22, 2004 Report Posted February 22, 2004 Originally posted by Traveler+Feb 21 2004, 04:41 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Traveler @ Feb 21 2004, 04:41 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--curvette@Feb 21 2004, 12:15 PM The tree of life was a vision of Lehi's. It wasn't an actual tree. It was symbolic. The eagle is symbolic of many things. But even though it is a symbol it also exist and its existance adds to the symbolic meaning. I am sorry if something real being used as a symbol upset you.The Traveler Did I sound upset? I'm not the least bit upset. I think you sound cranky. I think you need a nap. Quote
Cal Posted February 22, 2004 Report Posted February 22, 2004 Originally posted by Peace@Feb 21 2004, 12:41 PM When you write a 540 page story, you are bound to get a few things right by coincidence. After all, trees and tree symbolism is hardly unknown in story telling history. Even the Bible has several "tree" symbolisms. Didn't JS's father or grandfather have a dream similar to Lehi's about the "tree of life". It isn't what JS got right, it's all the things he got wrong that make the BoM problematic. He got em wrong according to men...not God. And Moroni mentioned there were errors of men....but then he knew there were going to be 'perfect' stone throwers out there. Peace--there you go again--CIRCULAR LOGIC---ie. The BoM is true; how do I know? Because Moroni and the BoM God told me so? Therefore the BoM is true. You are assuming the truth of the thing you are trying to prove in order to make the proof! Peace--learn to think before you TESTIFY! Quote
Guest Starsky Posted February 22, 2004 Report Posted February 22, 2004 Well if it takes circles to stay within the truth...so be it. And if you want to be blind....so be it Cal. Your choice...But I choose to see and understand. You can claim circular thinking because I come back to God...but isn't that the whole point...coming back to God??? Quote
Cal Posted February 22, 2004 Report Posted February 22, 2004 If you think circular logic is impressive, then all I can say is bon voyage! Enjoy the trip!By the way---by your logic, the Kabala must be the word of God too, since it says so itself. All a book has to do is to claim within itself to be true and that is proof that it is? Quote
Guest Starsky Posted February 22, 2004 Report Posted February 22, 2004 If you think circular logic is impressive, then all I can say is bon voyage! Enjoy the trip!By the way---by your logic, the Kabala must be the word of God too, since it says so itself. All a book has to do is to claim within itself to be true and that is proof that it is? Again you prove your ignorance.....the Holy Ghost can and will testify that the Book of Mormon is what it claims itself to be....and if there is truth in other works...so be it...according to Paul and JS we are to search for whatever is praiseworthy, virtuous, and of good report. Quote
Cal Posted February 22, 2004 Report Posted February 22, 2004 Again--JS said it is true so it must be! As to praiseworthy? First, praisworthy doesn't necessarily mean literally true does it? Secondly, how can something be all that praiseworthy, if it is a fraud? Quote
Guest Starsky Posted February 22, 2004 Report Posted February 22, 2004 Originally posted by Cal@Feb 22 2004, 12:26 PM Again--JS said it is true so it must be! As to praiseworthy? First, praisworthy doesn't necessarily mean literally true does it? Secondly, how can something be all that praiseworthy, if it is a fraud? Philipians 4:8 Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.That was Paul...not JS.Also: Moroni 10:5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.6 And whatsoever thing is good is just and true; wherefore, nothing that is good denieth the Christ, but acknowledgeth that he is.7 And ye may know that he is, by the power of the Holy Ghost; wherefore I would exhort you that ye deny not the power of God; for he worketh by power, according to the faith of the children of men, the same today and tomorrow, and forever. Quote
Cal Posted February 22, 2004 Report Posted February 22, 2004 Duh! Like it makes a difference--they were both well meaning delusionals (and maybe not so well meaning) Quote
Snow Posted February 22, 2004 Report Posted February 22, 2004 Hey Cal. Personally I like Peace. But given what you think of Peace's lines of reasoning, what does it say about you that you spend all this time arguing with her? Quote
Rodney Posted February 22, 2004 Report Posted February 22, 2004 Originally posted by curvette@Feb 21 2004, 06:23 PM I think you sound cranky. I think you need a nap. And you might wanna check that diaper... Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.