Book of Mormon Evidence: Mulek, a Son of Zedekiah
Vložit
- čas přidán 30. 03. 2022
- The Book of Mormon states that King Zedekiah had a son named Mulek who, unlike his brothers, avoided execution when Babylon conquered Jerusalem in 587 BC. On its face, this claim may seem rather doubtful, and perhaps even unbelievable. After all, the King James Bible doesn’t say anything about Mulek, and some people question whether many biblical figures ever really existed. But not all is as it seems. Click on the video link below to see how linguistic analysis and a small clay stamp seal can transform doubt into a reason for faith!
evidencecentral.org/recency/e...
That which can't be defended will be forgotten. It is evidence like this that helps defend our belief in the BOM.
Love what you are producing to help people learn about interesting things and further develop faith. Thank you!
Yes sister Jasmine has a beautiful voice for teaching . And she is so knowledgeable she is without peer .
Jasmine Rappleye is marvelous as narrator. A voice of delight, right, and persuasion. Meek, inviting one to seek.
Such cool evidence! (I watched this with my children.)
Really cool! Brother Chadwick lives in my ward. Listening to him teach Sunday School is a treat. He knows so much!
It just blows my mind that people say Joseph made it up. It’s far too complex. Great video on Mulek!
Hi, I'm Michael aka Mike
Hi Mike!
@@somedude5590 hey dude
Brilliant work.
Very cool. Thank you!
Thanks for the analysis!
love these short videos - ChadJames
Very interesting!
Question though, isn’t true that Joseph was receiving the revelation from the God that created the languages? Joseph wasn’t translating by himself, so why the need to reconcíliate the texts and go far and beyond if God does know Hebrew?
The claim is literally that he wasn’t able to continue to the next character or word until the spelling was correct, right?
Just a thought, thanks for sharing!
Book of Mormon is true!
Book of Mormon is true!! Any doubters should actually read it themselves and not look for the internet cliff notes
Yeah honestly they should. I’ve seen all these angry Christian’s criticize the book when they themselves haven’t even read it.
@@mager888 🤡
Really cool. Thanks
Thank you. Please can u give the explanation of 144 000 in hebrew ols writting with the drawings
Love it!!!!
That's really cool!
Is there evidence that he survived since the Bible says that all of the sons were slain?
If he did escape and therefore wasn’t found, he might have been considered slain by the time somebody got around to writing down the story.
A reasonable possibility is Mulek was still in his mothers womb. There is no record of her death.
I read another possibility that the bible says the "sons of Zedikiah" were killed, not "all the sons." I love that the seal was discovered. It's so tiny.
My name is Michael Lewis King often called Mike my most gave me the middle name of Lewis but there are no Lewis in my family before 0r after, I have 3 grandchildren all with the initials MLK
Sounds conclusive to me. Stop being so wishy-washy! The king was Zedekiah and the son a variant of Mulek, who how could it be anything else.
i like
This is true I was there
Melchis? King, son of the king? Melchezdek. Fun, cool, stuff. Keep up the great work.
That Pokémon reference though.
MLK is melech... king.
Martin Luther King... MLK !!
And his last name also means king.
Either that's a wild coincidnce or he has some VERY clever and educated parents,
Interesting.
I did my MA thesis on Hebrew seal epigraphy identifying biblical persons at the Centre for the Study of Manuscript Cultures in Hamburg, Germany. The name Mulek מלך does not exist in Hebrew or the epigraphic record. Joseph Smith made it up, and we have extensive historical evidence of him making up fake Hebrew words and claiming fake translations of Egyptian and Greek manuscripts. It is incoherent to consider his Mulek a contracted form of Malchiah since its spelling would demand a waw consonant to mark the long o shuruk in order to distinguish its vocalization from the identically spelled word “king” in Hebrew. Supplying this vowel makes it morphologically incompatible as a contraction of Malchiah.
As for the mentioned seal, Malkiyahu was a common Judean name of the late Iron Age, one of the most common on royal seals, and there are many dozens of seals belonging to individuals titled “son of the king” in Avigad and Sass’s catalog. The title “son of the king” is so common on seals that it doesn’t aid much as evidence in biblical identification.
I don't agree with you!
To this day, the Mormon church hasn't provided any kind of archeological evidence to support anything in the Book of Mormon.
Book of Mormon indicates some tremendous spread of culture of races, there are some thirty-eight cities cataloged in the Book of Mormon as stated in Jarom 1:8, 2 Nephi 5:15, Ether 9:17-19, Heleman 3:14, Alma 16:13, Mormon 6:10-15. These were mighty civilizations, which should, by all the laws of archeological research into the culture of antiquity, have left vast amounts of "finds" to be evaluated. But such is not the case as we shall show. The Mormons have yet to explain the fact that leading archeological researchers not only have repudiated the claims of the Book of Mormon as to the existence of these civilizations, but have adduced considerable evidence to show the impossibility of the accounts given in the Book of Mormon.
The Smithsonian Institution of Washington has added its voice against the archeological claims of the Book of Mormon. And I quote:
"The Smithsonian Institution has never used the Book of Mormon in any way as a scientific guide. Smithsonian archeologist see no direct connection between the archeology of the New World and the subject matter of the book..."
Most recently, National Geographic had a TV series that lasted for 5 seasons on a new radar scanning called "LiDar." National Geographic using LiDar scanned over 800 Sq. Miles of South America jungle and discover new "Myan structures."
National Geographic archeologist went to see these newly found structures.
And NOTHING was mentioned about any new Mormon civilizations. Which doesn't look good for archeological evidence to support the Book of Mormon. And the Mormon church is running out of jungle to prove any archeological evidence to support any stories that is in the Book of Mormon.
Do you require evidence for you to have faith in something?
@An Elder in Israel
God has provided for us plenty of evidence when we have questions about His Bible. The evidence is out there. But NOTHING for the Book of Mormon.
Let hear what God Himself says about evidence in:
ROMANS 1:20
"For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse..."
There you are, God telling there is evidence for us to find.
But nothing for the Book of Mormon.
Also God gives us all the right to question anyone/church who says they are of God.
I John 4:1
"Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world..."
The Mormon church doesn't like to be tested. And that should be a BIG CONCERN for you.
@@AlbertJLouie The Bible teaches us, "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." If you require evidence to believe that The Bible is true, you don't have faith. Trusting in the Arm of God requires faith, trusting in the arm of flesh requires evidence.
@An Elder in Israel
You can quote all the Bible verses until you're blue in the face.
Satan himself quoted from the Scriptures (Matthew 4:1-11). Therefore quoting from the Bible don't make you a Christian. Knowing the true identity of Jesus Christ (John 14:6) will mean the difference between you going to heaven or hell.
Mormons teach and believe that their jesus is the brother of Satan, which contradicts what God says in His Bible that Jesus is God the Son 2nd person of the Trinity.
So, which Jesus do you believe in?
A. Your jesus of the Book of Mormon, who is the brother of Satan.
OR
B. The Jesus of the Bible, who is God the Son 2nd person of the Trinity.
I encourage you to read the Book of Mormon and pray to know what God's thoughts are. The most important "evidences" regarding divine truth are provided by God to one's heart and mind.
I find what you produce problematic because it always assumes the BoM is factually historic.
as opposed to assuming it is not? Hard to find something when you aren't looking out for it, this just presents one side and let's you decide what you think
@@beefmaster4 I see. But the claims are coming from believers. That means others get to critique or ask questions. Especially when the claims are made in public.
I would invite everyone to think and do some more research themselves. Like I commented and asked, the BoM translation claim is that is coming from God directly. Why the need to harmonize, when God knows if it’s Mike or Michael or both and the correct spelling? My God doesn’t make mistakes, therefore I can’t resist thinking the inspiration Joseph received wasn’t from God Almighty!
Just a thought.
I could comment, but Albertjlouis said it for me extremely well already.
Nil credible evidence for a uniquely Jewish civilization that once flourished and numbered so many that it's population was likened to the the sands of the sea, ( poetical language for millions), living in some 38 cities that stretched 'from coast to coast', according to Joseph Smith that is.
Nobody except the ever hopeful Mormon researchers are looking for , or have ever looked for, the great Nephite/ Lamanite civilization that Joseph Smith wrote about.
Because the authority and credibility of the LDS church rest squarely on the historical accuracy of Joseph Smith's BOM they will do everything possible to convince themselves and the world that the keystone of their faith (the book of Mormon) is true.
Kind regards to all.
They just found mounds in Missouri that suggest large population centers of millions of people. With LIDAR and other technology, we are seeing more evidence that the BoM is a historical book. Remember that the absence of evidence does not mean something did not happen.
Based
Based on what?
There is a glaring issue with this in that Mulek and Malchijah are two very different names. The example given is that Baruch and Berechiah are similar, but what is claimed in the video is false in that Baruch is not a shortening of Berechiah but a completely different name and is even spelled different in Hebrew. While it is true that Hebrew often omits vowels, this is not always the case, such as Baruch, which is spelled (transliterated) B-R-W-K. Berechiah is spelled B-R-K-Y-H(-W), showing a clear difference in how they are supposed to be pronounced. Malchijah on the seal is spelled M-L-K-Y-H-W, originally pronounced Melekyahu/Milikyahu. Mulek hypothetically would be spelled M-W-L-K, marking it out as a distinct name rather than being a shortened form of M-L-K-Y-H-W. Anyone who speaks and/or reads Hebrew would know this, so it is clear that Malchijah ben ha melek (Zedekiah) is not the same as Mulek.
Thank you! There’s some sort of Spirit at work here. I’ve heard, and seen how people are presented with this religion when seeking Truth and then they’re right back to where they began. It’s a doctrine of demons.
@@GodISSovereign17 From my experience your doctrine of demons description is highly false, not to discredit your experience, but mine is obviously quite different so I don't think your blanket statement works. But I do appreciate Josh's comments as I find the whole no vowel thing confusing, and I don't speak Hebrew!
@@beefmaster4 If something is from the Devil, your experience doesn’t matter. The Devil and his angels present themselves as Angels of Light, therefore people are going to be misled by the doctrine, that’s why it’s a doctrine of demons. It’s providing people a false sense of security, and is teaching lies for Truth. The point is to make people believe they are getting closer to God, when in fact, you’re angering him. If you read The Bible, it clearly states there will be MANY who will say “Lord, didn’t we do all these things in your name?” And he will say, “Depart from me I never knew you”. This is EVERY religion. All churches are part of The One World Order, and regardless of the denomination, are worshipping AntiChrist. Mormonism just happens to be one of THE WORST. My advice to you is to get a KJV Bible, and begin studying it ON YOUR OWN. That’s how the true worshippers worship, on their own, with The Holy Spirit. You need no man to teach you, The Holy Spirit will lead you into ALL Truth. I truly pray The Father comes to you, and shows you HIS marvelous light.
I’ve wondered if Mulek was a nickname or perhaps another son. It’s interesting that the names are close. Perhaps Joseph Smith’s versions sound close but not are not exact matches as to how we would translate them from Hebrew to English.
Part of the problem is that it is not entirely clear how this translation occurred. Interesting though.
Love the LDS church structure but having a hard time believing Jospeh Smith. Especially when temple ceremonies come directly from Free Masonry
I'm sorry you've stopped digging when you came to that conclusion. Keep learning about history in and out of the scriptures. Satan uses God's structure of government. He knows it works and he sticks to it. Temple ordinance came from Jesus Christ to Adam and Eve. The temple ordinances just like the priesthood has been given and taken through the generations depending on the worthyness of the people. The restoration is exactly that. Those things being restored.
One thing to remember. God doesn't always deliver a list of clear instructions on how things are to be done, but often rather leaves it in the hands of his prophets. God doesn't tell us what temples have to look like, how to conduct our meetings, etc. It is reasonable to believe Joseph was directed to organize a ceremony of importance to receive endowments and make covenants. He would've borrowed ideas he was familiar with to show reverence and importance to something that was sacred. It was widely known he was a free mason, so why would he make some of those things so obvious if he was trying to trick people?
And other members were masons, too. If he was trying to trick people, that would have been really idiotic.
@Bearded God- Hello. I have been studying about Free Masonry and the possible correlation to Temple rituals. An insightful book I read is "Wilford Woodruff's Witness: The Development of Temple Doctrine." Wilford was the 4th prophet of the Church and was present with Joseph Smith, then Brigham Young and John Taylor as Temple doctrine was revealed and refined over a 20+ year period from Nauvoo, Kirtland, St. George, Logan and Salt Lake Temples. In over 7,000 pages of journal entries, Wilford mentions Masonry 13 times, and none are in conjunction with Temple rites. While I'm still investigating and learning, I am inclined to believe that the Temple rites are not derived from Masonry, but are divinely inspired, and any similarities that may be construed are simply symbolism to reinforce concepts, not derived from Masonry. Because some of the symbolism in the Temple directly pertains to Jesus Christ, that would definitely not be related to Masonry since they are a fraternal and not a religious order.
@@micheleh3851 the masons are a few centuries old... The temple ordinances started on earth with Adam...there's always copy cat efforts to take the doctrines in the church and use them to get gain and power over others. Satan's doctrine
I wouldn’t say that backs up Joseph Smith being a True Prophet, considering he was a Freemason and would have access to hidden history. I believe the Book of Mormon is filled with half Truths for this reason. Joseph Smith was a prophet of Baal, and not born again. Just a little look into the Mormon Temple, and you’ll find A LOT of occultism.
I thought Joseph Smith didn't join the free masons until 1842, over a decade after the Book of Mormon was first published, even later than it was translated.
@@joeydoe2573 Joseph Smith was a crook his whole life. I can’t say for sure, but I believe they’re the ones who put him up to all this. Joseph Smith was a fraud, known to scam people with treasure maps. He had been in and out of jail, and apparently his father was known to be the same. If they did use him to seed a false religion, you wouldn’t be told his real initiation date. Likewise with Muhammad, I believe he was used the same way by the Jesuits. Infiltration of religion was key to The New World Order. Everyone religion is now under the authority of the Catholic Church. That’s exactly how it was during The Holy Roman Empire, which is essentially what we’re still under. Believe it or not, it’s really Latinos who rule the world. That’s why you never hear or see anything about them in politics.
@@GodISSovereign17 You assert “Joseph Smith was a crook his whole life.” I assume you are referring to Joseph Smith’s use of seer stones. This is a common attack used to disparage Joseph’s character. It’s a simple fact that stones and treasure seeking was a common cultural tradition in Joseph’s day, and not something exclusive to him. A local newspaper, namely the Palmyra Herald article from July 24th, 1822 had this to say; “Digging for money hid in the earth is a very common thing and in this state it is even considered an honorable and profitable employment. One gentleman digging ten to twelve years found a sufficient quantity of money to build him a commodious house.” This is because at the time there were superstitions that the Native Americans had built up mounds to hide treasure, so it was a common practice. This would have hardly been considered “crook” behavior. Today it would be comparable to buying a scratch off ticket at a gas station.
You then try to support this claim with the reasoning that he was “known to scam people with treasure maps.” In all my research I have only been able to locate one instance resembling your claim, which involved Josiah Stowell. Critics use this 1826 trial to make a similar claim to yours. However, the “witnesses” of the trial that claim Smith was found guilty, well… There's no evidence they even attended the trial. Another guilty verdict seems to have been appended as an afterthought. Throughout the document Joseph is referred to as the “prisoner”, then after the last testimony, we have one sentence in which he is named a defendant, “And thereupon the Court finds the defendant guilty.” Here we have suddenly a declaratory statement that is completely out of character with the rest of the Pearsall document. Also, if this were actually a trial, Joseph wouldn’t have testified against himself as the first witness. The other documented witnesses agree he was acquitted one way or another. Josiah Stowell HIMSELF had zero complaints against Joseph Smith, he even affirmed that Joseph’s seer-like abilities were as verifiable as he could conceive.
You also say “he had been in and out of jail, and apparently his father was known to be the same.” Of course Joseph Smith was in and out of jail! He has a message that lots of people hated, he was persecuted and attacked by mobs. Any chance to wrongfully imprison him was taken and abused. Joseph Smith was subject to at least forty-eight lawsuits. I can only find two of them in which he was guilty, openly admitted so, and recompensed for his sin. The first was a fight he had with Walter Bagby. William Clayton recorded the encounter. Mr. Bagby called Joseph a liar, then picked up a rock to throw at and injure/kill Joseph. “[Smith] followed him & struck him two or three times.” Daniel H Wells separated the two and “[Joseph] told him to assess the fine and he was willing to pay it.” Joseph pleaded guilty and paid a fine to resolve the matter as quickly as possible. Joseph was open about the encounter and acknowledged his imperfection. The second instance pertains to the Kirtland Safety Society Bank. The bank was an attempt to solve detrimental and complex financial issues plaguing the young nation. Joseph Smith and his associates clearly did not intend any illegal activity. They consulted several lawyers, both faithful and non-members in the matter of instituting the bank. The legal advice Joseph Smith received was poor and incorrect. This is at no fault of his own, and cannot be attributed to a deceptive or extortive character. The bank was judged to have violated Ohio laws. At the time, US citizens debated whether these laws were just or unjust. Nevertheless, the bank fell victim to financial disaster, and was shut down. Now onto Joseph’s father. I’ve already explained the young nation’s seer stone culture so that matter is resolved. I can find one instance where Joseph’s father was thrown in prison. He was demanded to burn the Book of Mormon, to which he refused, and was promptly thrown in jail. Does it help if I remind you that the apostle Paul was in and out of jail? Does it help if I use your same attitude to refer to Jesus as someone accused and convicted of treason, sedition, and blasphemy, and received a death sentence? The New Testament has constant references to Jesus avoiding certain people and areas, it's probable He would have been in and out of jail if He didn't do so.
Let’s discuss Joseph’s Smith’s masonry a little more based on the factual evidence. The saints were being driven from state to state, attacked, and an extermination order was even placed upon them in Missouri. It doesn’t require much thinking to see that the masonic promise of brotherhood and the greater good appealed to a desperate prophet. The construction of the Nauvoo lodge began and was finished. The temple and masonic practices are so foundationally different that you have to grasp at straws to claim the temple is founded on masonic occultism. There are no baptisms, no washings, no anointing, no sealings to family, no proxy work, no priesthood. There is only some common symbolism in the endowment and architectural structure. Anti-Mormon Fanny Stenhouse said, “It has always been commonly reported, and to a great extent believed, that the mysteries of the Endowment House were only a sort of initiation of the rites of Masonry; but I need hardly say that this statement, when examined by the light of facts, is altogether ungrounded and absurd.” Scholar Massimo Introvigne writes, “Anti-Mormons often read too much into similarities between the Endowment and Masonic ritual. Smith had used the Masonic language of the rituals for the purpose of confirming his followers familiar with Freemasonry into a doctrine which had no similarities with anything they had heard in the Masonic lodges.” The masonic ceremonies are inseparably connected to early Christianity. What do you think is more likely, that the similarities are due to Joseph stealing from the masons, or that they both are founded upon christianity? Joseph Smith even said that Masonry “was the apostate endowments, as sectarian religion was the apostate religion.”
Your entire argument is based on the presupposition that Joseph Smith was initiated in masonry at a date differing from historical documentation. Your argument is supported by common criticisms that have been obliterated, exploded and deconstructed into oblivion by the facts and context surrounding each situation. The rest of your claims are pure speculation and conspiracy. Joseph Smith is a prophet of Baal? I challenge you to support that claim. The Catholic Church controls all religions? Share any evidence at all that is plausible. Latinos rule the world? Please enlighten me and prove that claim. You can fact check everything I’ve said in this response yourself. This is all documented and researchable, unlike your conspiracy claims, which can only be supported by fringe theories, opinions, and speculation.
@@joeydoe2573 501 C3, look into it. It’s a well known fact that Jesuits have taken control of the Catholic Church, why don’t you look into what they’re about. The early church was corrupted, even Jesus and The Apostles warned about this. You’re asking me to provide you with 16 yrs worth of research, which is impossible, but it is well known by the public that the Catholic Church has orchestrated the COEXIST movement, which is uniting ALL religions into one. I personally believe ALL religions to be AntiChrist, and believe they’ve all be founded with the purpose of keeping people AWAY from The Truth. Where’s my proof? Well, the Bible says to judge them by their fruit. Look around you, there are churches of all denominations on every corner, which one has the power of God in it? Which one is changing the tide? None. Why? Because The Bible says that in the last days Faith would be hard to find, why? Because TRUE CHRISTIANS will be hard to find. You can either believe the world or believe The Bible. The Truth is not easily found but it’s there. How do I know Latinos run the world? Because The Spirit led me to this Truth through understanding prophecy and history. Just track the history of the Caucasians with The Bible and prophecy. They all come from Japheth, as well as the Asians, Russians, and Middle Easterners. You studied Joseph Smith pretty well, have you studied The Bible also? Joseph Smith had multiple wives, and married underage girls. How can you EVER read Jesus, and live such a life? Furthermore, no seer in The Bible EVER used any objects to receive prophecy or visions. Some were told to act things out or things were shown through common observance but never did they use any sort of medium. The Spirit spoke to them.
Just a little look into the Old Testament and we get to read a long list of creepy, blood splattering, Hebrew temple rituals and all required by God.
There's quite a few lies in this, folks.