Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Scientific proof for Ether 15:2


Recommended Posts

On another thread, a poster questioned whether or not science can verify Ether 15:2.

Quote

 He saw that there had been slain by the sword already nearly two millions of his people, and he began to sorrow in his heart; yea, there had been slain two millions of mighty men, and also their wives and their children.

I'm open to any comments on how this could be done. I suppose it involves evidence of 2 million dead bodies from a cataclysmic battle.

Edited by Bernard Gui
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

Yes and No. 

Apologists can find creative answers, like saying that it is an ancient exaggeration, so that means the Bible and the Book of Mormon is not falsifiable.

However, science can verify that there is no evidence of such battle (2 million dead) in ancient pre-classic Mesoamerica.  

There is also no evidence that such a battle did not take, or could not, take place.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, ksfisher said:

There is also no evidence that such a battle did not take, or could not, take place.

The burden of proof falls on you, show me evidence that 2 million is at least plausible. 

Bytheway, one of the best Book of Mormon defenders, Stephen Smoot, said "Book of Mormon's Battle Numbers Don't Add Up" He then thinks speculation is evidence.

It is true that the ancients did exaggerate, but there is no evidence that 2 million was meant as an exaggeration. Perhaps it was direct revelation? 

but when Book of Mormon says barley, it is truly barley. 

 

 

Edited by TheSkepticChristian
Link to comment
34 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

The burden of proof falls on you, show me evidence that 2 million is at least plausible. 

Bytheway, one of the best Book of Mormon defenders, Stephen Smoot, said "Book of Mormon's Battle Numbers Don't Add Up

 

 

I would agree that the numbers are improbable.  However, improbability does not equal impossibility. 

 

Edited by ksfisher
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Bernard Gui said:

On another thread, a poster questioned whether or not science can verify Ether 15:2.

I'm open to any comments on how this could be done. I suppose it involves evidence of 2 million dead bodies from a cataclysmic battle.

Why is that even an important question? 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

The burden of proof falls on you, show me evidence that 2 million is at least plausible. 

No one owes you anything particularly with how badly you mangled the scripture and asked for evidence for something the scripture does not even support. Stop being a doofus.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

On another thread, a poster questioned whether or not science can verify Ether 15:2.

I'm open to any comments on how this could be done. I suppose it involves evidence of 2 million dead bodies from a cataclysmic battle.

First, we've got to work on actual guitars.  Second  ...  well, it involves a phone booth: 

 

Link to comment
4 hours ago, USU78 said:

Besides, your sneer notwithstanding, barley was not unknown in preColumbian times:  http://mormonchallenges.org/book-of-mormon-5-barley-and-wheat/

but because it was found now you can say that Book of Mormon barley is truly barley. 

Bytheway, there is no evidence of barley in ancient Mesoamerica. 

3 hours ago, The Nehor said:

No one owes you anything particularly with how badly you mangled the scripture and asked for evidence for something the scripture does not even support. Stop being a doofus.

What? I was simply saying that the Book of Mormon is not falsifiable. It is Bernard Gui that is asking for proof. Please read what I am saying before attacking me like that. 

So, do you believe it was literally 2 million? or an exaggeration? 

5 hours ago, ksfisher said:

I would agree that the numbers are improbable.  However, improbability does not equal impossibility. 

 

I agree, but it is not useful, we can't be 100% sure of anything. 

Edited by TheSkepticChristian
Link to comment
3 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

On another thread, a poster questioned whether or not science can verify Ether 15:2.

I'm open to any comments on how this could be done. I suppose it involves evidence of 2 million dead bodies from a cataclysmic battle.

That is indeed a large number before the industrialization of warfare. However in the closing years of the people found in the Book of Ether, the Nephites and Lamanites warfare became so intense that at the end of each day's war, they slept upon their swords and warfare went on and on. But even in Joseph's day, if he were drawing upon early (his) history, he would be drawing on pre-industrial war. 

Link to comment
9 hours ago, ksfisher said:

I would agree that the numbers are improbable.  However, improbability does not equal impossibility. 

 

U.S. dead in all of WW2 totaled just under 418,000.  That is a mechanized country fighting other mechanized countries with tanks, bombers, napalm, machine guns, and ships.  Two million did not die in some supposed ancient war using primitive weapons. The logistics of supplying armies that large would require a massive infrastructure. There would be physical evidence of something of this magnitude.  There would oral and written records passed down.  This plus the Jadeite barge story really show that someone had a good imagination.

Link to comment
9 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

even Brant Gardner says 2 million is an exaggeration.

Right. And why? First is the problem of counts and estimates in antiquity. People rarely counted that high, it would be rare to walk through a battlefield counting bodies, and the science of estimates awaited a thousand years or so to be invented. Numbers in the Book of Mormon do not "behave" like counts--particularly in the larger numbers. Combining what is known of how historical peoples used numbers, and particularly looking at the way numbers are used in the Book of Mormon, these large battle numbers should not be taken at face value.

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, Brant Gardner said:

You need to be more precise. It isn't apologists, it is historians. You are suggesting that Thucydides couldn't have written history because we know that he intentionally enlarged the numbers of Persians. That certainly suggests that the number was suspect, but says nothing about the actual event. On point 1, it has nothing to do with apologists inventing anything. It is historians dealing with the nature of historical documents.

On the second point, you are correct that no battle that large has been found. Of course, the "that large" hinges on the prior error, but the missing evidence of battles remains. On that point you should consult the archaeologists as well as historians. There are some very large Aztec battles recorded in history for which we have no archaeological evidence. The missing evidence you suggest is a problem is endemic in the area and creates an issue for cultures much later than that in Ether. We don't have all that many bones of the people who lived in an area, let alone in battlefields that were likely not in the cities where the excavations are happening.

I'm hearing you say that Science does not prove the book of Ether. There is no archaeological evidence for such a large battle. As you state, this is very understandable. "Proof" of historicity doesn't exist but missing evidence doesn't prove it didn't happen either.

 

Link to comment
21 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I'm hearing you say that Science does not prove the book of Ether. There is no archaeological evidence for such a large battle. As you state, this is very understandable. "Proof" of historicity doesn't exist but missing evidence doesn't prove it didn't happen either.

 

A large part of apologetics seems to be coming up with explanations for how the lack of evidence for the Book of Mormon does not prove it ahistorical.

Link to comment

The book of mormon and Bible will always be possible, even though they are highly improbable as historical documents. Ether 12, the Exodus, God commanding Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac, and the garden of eden are examples of the improbable. It seems that Joseph Smith and his Biblical counterparts had good imaginations. 

Link to comment
52 minutes ago, consiglieri said:

A large part of apologetics seems to be coming up with explanations for how the lack of evidence for the Book of Mormon does not prove it ahistorical.

True. It's hard to prove a negative.

Also, science can neither prove that Yoda existed, or that he didn't, a long time ago in a galaxy far, far, away.

So those who want to believe, can.

Edited by HappyJackWagon
Link to comment
31 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

True. It's hard to prove a negative.

Also, science can neither prove that Yoda existed, or that he didn't, a long time ago in a galaxy far, far, away.

So those who want to believe, can.

So, is wanting to believe what it comes down to?  If so, shouldn't the missionary work be radically changed and/or toned down?

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, James Tunney said:

So, is wanting to believe what it comes down to?  If so, shouldn't the missionary work be radically changed and/or toned down?

I don't know that the two are connected but sure, I'll bite. Missionary work should be radically changed and toned down.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...