Lehi in the Desert, the World of the Jaredites, There Were Jaredites (Collected Works of Hugh Nibley) [Hardcover]

Hugh Nibley (Author), John W. Welch (Editor), Darrell L. Matthews (Editor), Stephen R. Callister (Editor)

Product Details

• Hardcover: 464 pages
• Publisher: Deseret Book Co (January 1988)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0875791328
• ISBN-13: 978-0875791326
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 6.2 x 1.8 inches
• Shipping Weight: 2 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.6 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (9 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #304,805 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

31 of 36 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Thumbnail of Book of Mormon archaeology., November 12, 2001

By 

Kendal B. Hunter (Provo, UT United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Lehi in the Desert, the World of the Jaredites, There Were Jaredites (Collected Works of Hugh Nibley) (Hardcover)

"Lehi in the Desert and World of the Jaredites" is Dr. Hugh Nibley's first book dealing with the Book of Mormon as an historical text, to analyze the book using every historical tool available. Part of the problem is that many of the critics of the Book of Mormon do not have the Mid-East historical, linguistic, or cultural background plus Ph.D. level historical training and experience to do a satisfactory peer-reviewed study and critic of the Book of Mormon. So what most Book of Mormon critics give instead of substance is heavily footnoted pap and opinion, or they treat the book as you would a Mark Twain novel, completely ignoring the book's truth claims.

Dr. Nibley's premise is simple: the Book of Mormon claims to be the product of Mid-East culture-specifically Egyptian and Jewish cultures--so why not analyze the book as you would any other document that claims to be from a similar time period. It is so simple, it is pure genius!

One of the fascinating evidences cited is the name evidence. Certain names become more popular during different time periods, and the names used in the Book of Mormon correspond to 600 BC. Along these lines is the name Paanchi, one of the pharaohs of Egypt, and masculine Alma, which appears on a recently discovered document. Another point he discusses is the word "Deseret," which is associated with honeybee worship in Egypt.

This is a good read, with no advanced degree in history or special language skills required. The book of Mormon is one of those few books that people do not have to read to have an opinion, which is sad since so much is available on the book.

17 of 21 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Mind of a Scholar Heart of a Believer, August 6, 2003

By 

Zachary C. Hoskins "zchance" (Saratoga Springs, Utah United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Lehi in the Desert, the World of the Jaredites, There Were Jaredites (Collected Works of Hugh Nibley) (Hardcover)

Hugh Nibley is revered by scholars and hobbyists of the Book of Mormon for good reason. His reputation for rigorous research and intellectual honesty are recognized by those who do not subscribe to the Christian precepts of the Book of Mormon as well as those who do. This book is a seminal work in the body collection of writing both for and against the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. Any person with an interest in the authenticity of that book ought to add this compendium of Nibley's early writing to his/her collection.

What is remarkable about Nibley is his approach to studying the contextual clues found in the Book of Mormon. Any writer from any age will necessarily betray quite a lot about his background origin and beliefs by the things he chooses not to say and expound on as much as what he does say. Nibley draws our attention to phrases like "And my father dwelt in a tent" 1 Nephi 2:15 and "river of water" 1 Nephi 2:6. Seemingly odd phrases to a casual reader, but against the background of Nibley's vast knowledge of things Middle Eastern, they stand out as sharp evidence regarding the historicity and authenticity of the Book of Mormon.

I began writing this review in response to the two former reviews. Having come this far I am less interested in responding to them directly, however since there are a few glaring errors I feel compelled to take the time to correct them. First, the Book of Mormon introduction page does not "... state that the people in the Book of Mormon are the principal ancestors of the American Indians", nor anything of the kind. You may read it for yourself at .... if you have any questions. Secondly, while I am merely a hobbyist, it doesn't take a genius to recognize that Nibley's religion (the fact that he is LDS) is a testimony to his honesty rather than the converse. Consider how dishonest it would be for him to be a researcher that believed in the authenticity of the Book of Mormon and was not LDS? The comparison to the Tobacco industry is a silly one as chemistry is a hard science dealing in things that can be quantified and archaeology by its nature is necessarily speculative. I am not 100% certain of this, but I have never heard any reference to Nibley as church historian, and I don't believe he ever has been. I also did several searches on Google and the only pages I find that have the words "Hugh Nibley" and "church historian" are ones that contain information about Leonard J. Arrington, church historian. Last, is the thought that Nibley picks and chooses only evidence that supports the Book of Mormon, I'd like to extend hearty congratulations to the reader from Provo UT for recognizing that there is archaeological evidence supporting the Book of Mormon, and would like to know since he posits its existence what "evidence" was ignored?

The bottom line is that if you take seriously the question of the historicity and authenticity of the Book of Mormon you will read this book. If you don't, the book isn't exactly a light read, so you might try something by John Grisham instead.

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Thought-provoking, but not up to today's scholarly standards, September 22, 2008

By 

Jaroslav Melgr "jaroski" (Colorado) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Lehi in the Desert, the World of the Jaredites, There Were Jaredites (Collected Works of Hugh Nibley) (Hardcover)

Probably the greatest value in this book is in the number of questions it attempts to ask and the type of issues it delves into rather than the answers it comes up with. It is a compilation of articles written by Hugh Nibley over a course of a few years and first published in a single volume in 1952.

Hugh Nibley was undoubtedly a very knowledgeable person and a great scholar. He wrote on a variety of topics, but generally speaking his works fell into one of the following broad categories: 1. ancient studies, 2. early LDS Church history and 3. social criticism, particularly as pertaining to the LDS Church members. Nibley's best writings are those he wrote as a social critic -- "Approaching Zion" is Nibley in his finest moment.

In case of ancient studies, while Nibley raises interesting questions and issues, he often wonders all over the place, does not document his sources very well and often presents his opinions as facts. He is well read and his mind runs a mile a minute and even when he's proven wrong he doesn't bother to go back and correct his views, he's simply moved on. "Lehi in the Desert" falls into this category. Here Nibley explores a variety of issues that weren't necessarily explored before. This book alone supplied a host of research topics for en entire generation of LDS scholars to come after him. However most of Nibley's conclusions in this book are poorly supported. He seldom documents his sources and when he does, he often uses outdated scholarship. For example in his discussion on weather relies almost solely on a book written around 1900 -- about 50 years prior to Nibley's article! Another example are his remarks on the ancient origin of names of various Book of Mormon characters. Here he presents a very interesting analysis, but no sources are provided to allow anyone to retrace Nibley's steps and verify his work.

That is not to say that the book does not have a merit. As I said earlier, Nibley does raise many interesting questions and forces the reader to look at the Book of Mormon through different light. He does make a number of valid and interesting conclusions, one just needs to be careful not to fall into a cultic following of blindly accepting everything written by Hugh Nibley as the Gospel. For Gospel it is not.

I would not necessarily discourage folks from reading this book, but certainly caution them to read it with open mind. As I said, it has some merit. But I would encourage the interested reader to turn to other, much up-to-date LDS scholarship. In this regard, there is much available these days that I'd point the reader to first, before referring them to this book. For example, "Glimpses of Lehi's Jerusalem" is a great book on the topic of interest to many Latter-day Saints. And generally speaking Pike, Skinner, Chadwick and Seely produce great scholarship with respect to ancient studies.