Neal A Maxwell Institute And Native Americans

[Robert F. Smith]

.......................................................

...................... Native Americans

.....................................................................

Actually, there are no native americans -- all of us are immigrants.  It's just that some of us came here very early, others much more recently.  That is why anthropologists tend to call them Amerinds.

[Bomgeography]

I edited the post to emphasize the dates. They are the precise problem. Evidence from those dates are difficult to use because the do not conform to modern standards, and are known to be incorrect in the vast numbers of conclusions they make. See post #165 by Anijen in the thread on the New Book of Mormon Geography model.

Keeping a fire going is a very common cultural trait. It is found in so many cultures and time periods that it cannot be used to make a connection between cultures. It might be linked to the difficulty of creating fire that then engendered a tradition, but that is VERY old.

Similarly:

That is quite common among incense users. Again, it is so widespread as to be useless for making any connection.

Actually, there is another option, and one much more likely based on the way I have seen the literature develop for describing Native American cultures. The similarities are due to the Christian and/or Masonic beliefs of those who described the ceremonies. They say something that they reinterpreted in their own context, and then it gets pulled from that context and reused for modern purposes without examining the original information. That is precisely what I saw in the Central Mexican Quetzalcoatl material. Fortunately, there were sufficient data there to trace the development. I suspect that we don't have quite enough for the Natchez, but I can virtually guarantee that a close examination would lead to the same conclusions. The similarities are due to the reporter, not what was seen.

I don't see coincidences I see evidence for the historicty of the Book of Mormon. When I look at the mental gymnastics that meso American experts do in order to say tapirs are horses and wood clubs with obsidian are iron swords. I'm absolutely astounded at how easy meso american protagonists can dismiss legitimate evidence then call a tapir a horse. Edited November 17, 2015 by Bomgeography

[Bomgeography]

I edited the post to emphasize the dates. They are the precise problem. Evidence from those dates are difficult to use because the do not conform to modern standards, and are known to be incorrect in the vast numbers of conclusions they make. See post #165 by Anijen in the thread on the New Book of Mormon Geography model.

 

 

Keeping a fire going is a very common cultural trait. It is found in so many cultures and time periods that it cannot be used to make a connection between cultures. It might be linked to the difficulty of creating fire that then engendered a tradition, but that is VERY old.

 

Similarly:

 

 

That is quite common among incense users. Again, it is so widespread as to be useless for making any connection.

 

Actually, there is another option, and one much more likely based on the way I have seen the literature develop for describing Native American cultures. The similarities are due to the Christian and/or Masonic beliefs of those who described the ceremonies. They say something that they reinterpreted in their own context, and then it gets pulled from that context and reused for modern purposes without examining the original information. That is precisely what I saw in the Central Mexican Quetzalcoatl material. Fortunately, there were sufficient data there to trace the development. I suspect that we don't have quite enough for the Natchez, but I can virtually guarantee that a close examination would lead to the same conclusions. The similarities are due to the reporter, not what was seen.

I edited the post to emphasize the dates. They are the precise problem. Evidence from those dates are difficult to use because the do not conform to modern standards, and are known to be incorrect in the vast numbers of conclusions they make. See post #165 by Anijen in the thread on the New Book of Mormon Geography model.

 

 

Keeping a fire going is a very common cultural trait. It is found in so many cultures and time periods that it cannot be used to make a connection between cultures. It might be linked to the difficulty of creating fire that then engendered a tradition, but that is VERY old.

 

Similarly:

 

 

That is quite common among incense users. Again, it is so widespread as to be useless for making any connection.

 

Actually, there is another option, and one much more likely based on the way I have seen the literature develop for describing Native American cultures. The similarities are due to the Christian and/or Masonic beliefs of those who described the ceremonies. They say something that they reinterpreted in their own context, and then it gets pulled from that context and reused for modern purposes without examining the original information. That is precisely what I saw in the Central Mexican Quetzalcoatl material. Fortunately, there were sufficient data there to trace the development. I suspect that we don't have quite enough for the Natchez, but I can virtually guarantee that a close examination would lead to the same conclusions. The similarities are due to the reporter, not what was seen.

I want to say this about the fire portion. The eternal fire was held in such regard that if it did go out the people responsible and their family members were killed because of it. It had a lot more do do with it then it was hard to start fires.

[Brant Gardner]

I don't see coincidences I see evidence for the historicty of the Book of Mormon. When I look at the mental gymnastics that meso American experts do in order to say tapirs are horses and wood clubs with obsidian are iron swords. I'm absolutely astounded at how easy meso american protagonists can dismiss legitimate evidence then call a tapir a horse.

 

It isn't a strong support for your argument to ignore specific arguments and only counter with disparaging remarks that rely on cliches. 

 

Regarding the question of the horse and tapir, your comments indicate that you have not read the original arguments (or not understood them). You are repeating what others have said who have also not read or understood the argument. Nevertheless, I would suggest that you need to understand those because you have exactly the same "horse" problem in your geography.

 

For the record, although Sorenson's suggestion of the tapir might have been an animal that was labeled "horse" (no stranger than the hippopotamus-"river horse"), I think there is a different and more consistent explanation for how the word "horse" occurs in the English text.

[Bomgeography]

The preeminent scholar Saul Lieberman documented many close parallels between pagan temples and the Jewish temple, but concluded that most of these are due to a shared approach to temples.

The preeminent scholar Saul Lieberman documented many close parallels between pagan temples and the Jewish temple, but concluded that most of these are due to a shared approach to temples.

I have looked at meso American temples and their human sacrifices and see absolutely no connection with Jewish temples unlike native Americans east of the Rockies were Joseph smith sent missionaries to teach the Lamanites.

[Bomgeography]

It isn't a strong support for your argument to ignore specific arguments and only counter with disparaging remarks that rely on cliches. 

 

Regarding the question of the horse and tapir, your comments indicate that you have not read the original arguments (or not understood them). You are repeating what others have said who have also not read or understood the argument. Nevertheless, I would suggest that you need to understand those because you have exactly the same "horse" problem in your geography.

 

For the record, although Sorenson's suggestion of the tapir might have been an animal that was labeled "horse" (no stranger than the hippopotamus-"river horse"), I think there is a different and more consistent explanation for how the word "horse" occurs in the English text.

Horses existed in North America unlike South America. No expert can say for sure when every singles horse went extinct. Also it's a known fact based on stones projectiles found with horse protein on them that horses were hunted and that their extinction was likely to due to human predation.

[Brant Gardner]

I want to say this about the fire portion. The eternal fire was held in such regard that if it did go out the people responsible and their family members were killed because of it. It had a lot more do do with it then it was hard to start fires.

 

And you believe that is unique because?

[Bomgeography]

And you believe that is unique because?

If it so common why didn't the Aztec and Mayans keep an eternal fire in their temples. I did a quick Google search but I see no evidence for this if you can prove otherwise I would like to see sources.

[Brant Gardner]

I have looked at meso American temples and their human sacrifices and see absolutely no connection with Jewish temples unlike native Americans east of the Rockies were Joseph smith sent missionaries to teach the Lamanites.

What Volgadon was trying to point out is that there is a big problem with a methodology that depends upon simplistic parallels. There are too many times when the parallels we think we see are due to other factors. The kinds of evidence you are suggesting means something, such as the fires and incense, are so widespread among humanity that it is impossible to use them for specific parallels to ancient Israel. The same parallel could be drawn to all kinds of cultures with just as much ease.

 

Once again, however, instead of dealing with the particular issue, you have elected to say something disparaging about Mesoamerica. That is unfortunate, because the way you are doing it declares that you are unaware of the actual arguments involved. I can't imagine any proponent of a Mesoamerican setting for the Book of Mormon suggesting that Nephite temples practiced human sacrifice. You appear to believe that all Mesoamerican cultures are supposed to be connected to the Book of Mormon. You should know a little more about theories you are quick to disparage.

[Brant Gardner]

If it so common why didn't the Aztec and Mayans keep an eternal fire in their temples. I did a quick Google search but I see no evidence for this if you can prove otherwise I would like to see sources.

They did. I guess there is still value to reading things beyond Google.

[Bomgeography]

What Volgadon was trying to point out is that there is a big problem with a methodology that depends upon simplistic parallels. There are too many times when the parallels we think we see are due to other factors. The kinds of evidence you are suggesting means something, such as the fires and incense, are so widespread among humanity that it is impossible to use them for specific parallels to ancient Israel. The same parallel could be drawn to all kinds of cultures with just as much ease.

 

Once again, however, instead of dealing with the particular issue, you have elected to say something disparaging about Mesoamerica. That is unfortunate, because the way you are doing it declares that you are unaware of the actual arguments involved. I can't imagine any proponent of a Mesoamerican setting for the Book of Mormon suggesting that Nephite temples practiced human sacrifice. You appear to believe that all Mesoamerican cultures are supposed to be connected to the Book of Mormon. You should know a little more about theories you are quick to disparage.

Do you have comment about Mayans or Aztecs not having an eternal flame in their temple or any eternal fire at all. You did say it was common but maybe not as common as one might expect.

Those North American natives really do have a lot in common with Hebrews. Interesting!

[Bomgeography]

They did. I guess there is still value to reading things beyond Google.

Source please

[Rajah Manchou]

Those North American natives really do have a lot in common with Hebrews. Interesting!

http://www.zoramnews.com/2015/11/lost-jews-find-a-welcoming-audience/

Zoram. Tribe of Manasseh. Returning to Israel. Coincidence?

 

Edited November 17, 2015 by Rajah Manchou

[volgadon]

You do know that what you call a wooden club did not function as a club, and that obsidian holds an edge sharper than the typical sword? Did you further know that Spaniards classified them as swords?

[Brant Gardner]

Source please

Check out the chapter on the New Fire Ceremony in David Carrasco's City of Sacrifice.

[Brant Gardner]

Do you have comment about Mayans or Aztecs not having an eternal flame in their temple or any eternal fire at all. You did say it was common but maybe not as common as one might expect.

Those North American natives really do have a lot in common with Hebrews. Interesting!

OK, I'll bite. Please supply the evidence that only the North American natives and the Hebrews had an eternal flame in their temples. Please note that I would really like to have evidence that your source actually understands world religions and isn't one of the writers imposing their ideas on native practices. Remember that Erich von Daniken wrote a book about the native americans and space ships, but it isn't considered correct.

[Bobbieaware]

OK, I'll bite. Please supply the evidence that only the North American natives and the Hebrews had an eternal flame in their temples. Please note that I would really like to have evidence that your source actually understands world religions and isn't one of the writers imposing their ideas on native practices. Remember that Erich von Daniken wrote a book about the native americans and space ships, but it isn't considered correct.

A low blow. Introduce an extraneous reference to the whacky Erich von Daniken's space alien speculations into the debate to poison the well by subtly suggesting that the proponents of the Heartland Theory migjt also be gullible and whacky.

[Anijen]

...Also it's a known fact based on stones projectiles found with horse protein on them that horses were hunted and that their extinction was likely to due to human predation.

CFR. Although you have brushed me off previously, one of the skills I have garnered through my studies of Ancient Americans is in identification of projectiles (stone, bone, or other) Please quote your source on this info and please do not give quote your source (a site where I have to rummage through hundreds of bad sites).

 

A color image from several angles of this "projectile" would be helpful, that way I can analyze the image and possibly trace where it came from and then give an accurate date of the stone. I can do this by studying the patterns of the projectile, how it was knapped, compare the size (larger ones are usually much older), if it is fluted (then probably Clovis), compare patterns with other projectiles with same color, mineral, etc. to help determine possible age and area and uses. 

 

Because it had horse protein on it does not necessarily mean horses existed in America at 200AD. Have you considered the projectile might be much older? Have you considered the possibility that projectiles move (hunter gatherers by their very nature were not domesticated and did not stay in any one place like an agri dependent people would)?

 

I admit I am not skilled on DNA remains [horse proteins] on the stones, but I do know it is not a strong argument for your hypo on a heartland theory. But if I had to compare a projectile that had "horse protein" on it or actual horse bones found in Mesoamerica, just a guess here, the horse bones would trump horse protein. Just saying.

[Anijen]

A low blow. Introduce an extraneous reference to the whacky Erich von Daniken's space alien speculations into the debate to poison the well by subtly suggesting that the proponents of the Heartland Theory migjt also be gullible and whacky.

Well what do you expect. It was an honest reference. The same books and authorities heartlanders use and quote as sources also have been on the Art Bell show which threw archaeology study back 100 years, because of the constant drivel of the ten commandments and other Hebrew writings on stones, later announced as fakes.

Why don't you believe that the pyramids were built by aliens? The sources you use for Hebrew and Ten Commandments written on stone in precolumbian America are the same (in many instances used literally by the same authors).

[Brant Gardner]

A low blow. Introduce an extraneous reference to the whacky Erich von Daniken's space alien speculations into the debate to poison the well by subtly suggesting that the proponents of the Heartland Theory migjt also be gullible and whacky.

Have you followed the discussion of the problems with the sources that are being given? I agree that von Daniken is really strange, but the point is that just because something has been published doesn't mean that it should be accepted as a valuable source. In this case, the problem is that the majority of the parallels that are being proposed are based in literature that does not meet current standards, and does not square with what is now known. They were products of the times, and at the time not crazy at all. However, they were also not careful and interjected their own interpretations in ways that have distorted the evidence. When modern readers take those distortions and use them as evidence for the Book of Mormon, we have built our case on the shakiest of foundations.