The “tzohar” of Noah’s ark and the brother of Jared’s 16 glowing stones. Ep. 88
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 сер 2024
- At face value, the account in the book of Ether about the brother of Jared’s 16 miraculously luminous stones seems like a rather random occurrence. In the past, some critics of our faith have even mocked the idea. But in the context of ancient Jewish folklore, the story might not be so strange after all. Many believe that Noah used something similar to illuminate his ark. Perhaps the brother of Jared piggy-backed off of what he’d heard about Noah’s stone (whether fact or legend) in order to solve the problem of illumination for his own vessels.
See video transcript here: [We’ll put a link here when available]
From Book of Mormon Central: bit.ly/2XZMVuz
“Glowing Stones in Ancient and Medieval Lore,” by John Tvedtnes: bit.ly/2XB97Mz
“When Is A Window Not A Window?” (Take it for what it’s worth): bit.ly/3gPqhxD
Babylonian Talmud source: bit.ly/30abVC6
Midrash Rabbah source: bit.ly/307Q12r
Some additional information concerning Jewish tradition on this topic: bit.ly/3gSr691
Notes:
-Unfortunately the renowned literary critic Harold Bloom passed away in 2019, so I can’t ask him about this assessment, but maybe this business with the brother of Jared and the glowing stones was one piece of a very large puzzle that prompted him to write, “I can only attribute to [Joseph’s] genius or daemons his uncanny recovery of elements in ancient Jewish theurgy that had ceased to be available either to Judaism or to Christianity, and that had survived only in esoteric traditions unlikely to have touched Smith directly.” -Harold Bloom, “The American Religion,” pg. 101.
-The following quote surely has interesting implications/connections to Joseph Smith’s seer stone: “Rabbinic legend also records, in typically scattered fashion, how the sacred jewel reached Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. … A reference to the Tzohar is perceived when Joseph’s servant finds his cup in Benjamin’s saddlebags and says, Is this not the cup in which my lord drinketh, and whereby indeed he divineth? (Gen. 44:5). The explanation is that Joseph discovered that if he put the Tzohar in that cup and peered into it, he could divine the future as well as interpret dreams. That is how he was able to interpret the dreams of the butler and the baker, and then the dreams of Pharaoh.” -Howard Schwartz, “Reimagining the Bible: The Storytelling of the Rabbis,” pg. 18. Source: bit.ly/3dG3IcW
SUBSCRIBE:
saintsunscripted/subscribe
Follow Us:
Facebook: / saintsunscripted
Instagram: / saintsunscripted
Twitter: / saintsunscript
Follow the Hosts:
Kwaku: / kwakuel
Justin: / motioncoaster
Mimi: / mimi.bascom
David: / davidesnell
The Sunday Pews (by David): / thesundaypews
Faith and Beliefs is by far my favorite videos of Saints Unscripted. It brings so much information to light.
I see what you did there💡
You should make a video with ALL Joseph Smith’s “lucky guesses “. 😂
There could certainly be many more added to this list, but here's a sample: ua-cam.com/video/V_0JKtjgzbM/v-deo.html
The fact that Joseph Smith probably couldn't have known that the word "window" represented luminous stones in the old testament should point non believers to see that the BOM was inspired since they were mentioned specifically in Ether.
@@joeoleary9010 He meant in the context of the ancient Jewish folklore the story of Ether (the luminous stones) may have that similarity regarding the stones but the Book of Mormon story is something completely different so he's not trying to match stories, just that the stones used may have been similar.
@@joeoleary9010 It would take me all day to write the LDS view on the bible and the accuracy within and DEFINITELY not going to argue but I believe what I believe about the BOM and I will testify until my last breath that it is true so I don't need to link it to anything...its just interesting to think about and he's not claiming to know everything. I honestly don't know why non believers even watch this stuff when all you guys do is get worked up about it. Go enjoy your day instead of watching LDS videos online.
These videos are one of the biggest highlights of my week!
Thanks David, good stuff!
Oh my Goodness!!! Very interesting info.
Amazing video!!!
Great episode! Always something new and enlightening "no pun intended" to ponder. By the way "not John", I see chest hair. Not a criticism, actually "bravo" for bucking the trend.
"Interesting stuff"! Thanks for passing it along :-)
Well one thing is true. You my friend do impressive research 👏🏾
I love these educational videos! So well done, thank you!
Love the video 10/10 also you guys should do a talk with the guy that does LDS Q&A he’s a really cool Latter Day Saint youtube Chanel👍
What was it about the ocean in the time of Jared that they needed, essentially submarines to cross the ocean. but in Nephi's day they just needed a ship?
Dave Snell is quality word! 💛😎
david janbaz David!! Yes!! Do you still work at that EMFJ outlet in Santa Fe Springs?
So at the time Brother of Jared took the Stones for God to light up. Jesus gave him 2 Stones (Urim and Thummim). Some people have told me that those Urim and Tummim were 2 of the stones the Lord touched. but it does not say that. it says He gave him 2 Stones.
what do we know about this?
There's a fascinating link between The Book of Mormon and Robert Fulton, the inventor of the first practical submarine (Nautilus). The Book of Mormon describes these ancient vessels that appear to be primitive submarines. The BOM says fire wont work to light the vessels so the Brother of Jared "molten" two stones per vessel and has the "finger of the Lord" touch them so they glow. Robert Fulton knew light in a submarine would be critical and his first attempts were to use candles. This worked but only for short periods of time. Later he added two small glass windows on the conning dome to light the vessel during the daylight hours. The word "molten" implies the Brother of Jared created glass stones and the phraseology "touched by the finger of the Lord" is mystic language for sunlight. (Joseph Smith was a mystic.) The glowing stones in the Brother of Jared's vessels could simply be glass windows or, more intriguing, a primitive periscope.
Interesting theory! I hadn't heard that before.
Mind blowing.
Love it.
Ahhh, crystals!
We need to keep in mind that we now know, contrary to what Nibley believed in decades past, that Joseph had access to and utilized the Adam Clarke Bible Commentary in the JST (See Haley Wilson Lemmon and Thomas Wayment BYU paper)
If we look up Genesis 6:16 in the Clarke Commentary we read: "...The original word צהר
tsohar signifies clear or bright; the Septuagint translate it by επωυναγων, "collecting, thou shalt make the ark," which plainly shows they did not understand the word as signifying any kind of window or light. Symmacbus translates it διαφανες, a transparency; and Aquila, μεσημβρινον, the noon. Jonathan ben Uzziel supposes that **it was a precious luminous stone** which Noah, by Divine command, brought from the river Pison."
So we have wicked people, both Noah's neighbors and the pre-voyage Jaredite neighbors.
Both are blessed to be preserved.
Both commanded to build sailing, tight sailing, vessels.
Both told to load animals amd supplies onto their vessels.
And both, if Uzzial is to be believed, had some glowing rock.
On top of the similarities of these stories we also have to remember that Joseph was a scryer, a person who believed that rocks could be magical. The whole Book of Mormon came about because of a glowing rock, of course it was placed in a hat instead of a boat, but glowing all the same.
So, to see it in the text of the book many believe Joseph authored, isn't all that surprising.
Could be! It's unclear when Joseph acquired Clarke's commentary. Though Clarke did suggest (just after your quote ends) that the word in question "is probably a word which should be taken in a collective sense, signifying apertures for air and light." I find it unlikely the 24 year-old Smith gleaned this detail from one paragraph on page 57 of Clarke's 1,039 page work, but it's the most plausible explanation I've seen yet, thanks for pointing this out.
The paper you mentioned only demonstrates JS had access in the Nauvoo period. There is not clear evidence he had read it prior to translating the Book of Mormon.
@@davidjanbaz7728 Nice pivot, bro.
UPDATE: For anyone still interested in the influence of Adam Clarke's bible commentary over Joseph Smith's translation efforts, a new paper by the Interpreter Foundation has just been published that, in my opinion, seriously compromises the integrity of the entire theory. I'm not super invested in the argument either way (I'm fine with the idea that Joseph referenced other works while hashing out the JST), but frankly I've been swayed to the side of disbelieving the Adam Clarke theory. Here's the link: journal.interpreterfoundation.org/some-notes-on-joseph-smith-and-adam-clarke/?fbclid=IwAR2xn3lgU0YLjpYKpC5oKSpFeo6bLg_4Yrh8LBWUPKH5o297NwhNByYUF1U
The ancient Silmarils, that did glow with the light of the two Trees from before the fall.
More proof.
Sooo.. Mormonism is true?
Yes.
Yes.
lol delusional
@@Lklee08 I mean...I don't know what answer you were expecting. You're commenting on a video viewed by Latter-day Saints. If you didn't expect a yes, that makes you delusional.
No authentic proof / backing from nonLds nonmormon sources
Are there any good reasons to believe that Noah’s Ark, the Tower of Babel, or the Jaredite voyage are literal historical accounts?
I don't know, but it wouldn't be a problem if they weren't literally historic. My older brother is a devout member but he leans more to believing that these were not historical. A big reason is because these stories in genesis are found in multiple ancient religions and cultures, somehow implying that they were like...cautionary tales rather than historical accounts. Anyway, my brother knows more about it. He's a smart guy and a scholar.
@@calebscoville2585: The Jaredite voyage being a cautionary tale would mark quite a shift in LDS theology
@@seans5289 Oh my bad I didn't read your comment right. I wasn't talking about the Jaredite voyage at all. Just stories in genesis in the bible.
@@seans5289 Now I think the tower of babel is included in my brother's beliefs in "these things probably aren't literal", and I know that is tied to the Jaredite account, so I'm not sure what my brother thinks about that. I'd have to run that by him and check.
@@calebscoville2585: Yeah. I’m curious how the two positions could be reconciled.
No