Jump to content

Rajah Manchou

  • Posts

  • Joined

Everything posted by Rajah Manchou

  1. Not sure he's on the board anymore, but we now know that there was likely contact between South Americans and Polynesians previous to the European arrival in the Americas: DNA reveals Native American presence in Polynesia centuries before Europeans arrived "The researchers found that contact between Polynesian individuals and a Native American group related to present-day Indigenous people in Colombia occurred as early as A.D. 1150—two centuries earlier than indicated by the 2014 DNA study. The place where the researchers could detect the earliest sign of contact was in Fatu Hiva, an island in the South Marquesas. Fatu Hiva is much farther from South America than Rapa Nui, but it could be more easily reached than Rapa Nui due to favorable trade winds and currents, notes archaeologist Paul Wallin of Uppsala University in an editorial accompanying the study in Nature. Wallin, who also worked at the Kon-Tiki Museum in Oslo, notes that the new results suggest that South Americans reached eastern Polynesia even before Polynesians from points west arrived, which would prove Heyerdahl “partly right.”
  2. Found this article today and was reminded of this thread https://razib.substack.com/p/a-whole-new-world “So with all this, are we equipped to say who the first Americans were? I think when all is said and done, we will find that the earliest humans in the New World were more closely related to the Australians and Papuans, rather than modern East Asians. In other words, the first modern humans who were present in the New World did not contribute much ancestry to today’s Native Americans at all. Only the ancestors of today’s indigenous South Americans genetically absorbed these earlier people who preceded the Beringians. This must have occurred more recently than 15,000 years ago when the Beringians arrived, and if the evidence for variation in ancestry in contemporary Amazonians is replicated, pockets of these earliest Americans may have persisted down to the relatively recent past.” It’s looking like there were people in the Americas before the ancestors of today’s Native Americans arrived, and those people resembled the present-day inhabitants of the Andaman Islands.
  3. Turns out @Fair Dinkum, that the Book or Mormon is a surprisingly accurate history of Austronesia. The SE Asian civilizations of Rahma and Komara rose and fell at the same time as the Land of Ramah and Cumorah in the Book of Mormon. Komara was founded by a warrior named Maroni, and around the close of the Book of Mormon these Komarans sailed into the Indian and Pacific Oceans carrying their genes from as far east as Madagascar and as far west as Brazil. The Comoros Islands were named after the Kumr or Komara of Southeast Asia. Here's one reference among many. Oh and the geography of ancient Komara and Rahma match the geographies of Cumorah and Rahma in the Book of Mormon. Land Northward Zarahemla Land Southward
  4. That's right, so not much substance to the argument that the Church could not have been established anywhere but the United States in the mid-19th century. The Church as we know it today was practically established in the middle of the desert of Mexico by European immigrants.
  5. The church would not have survived had the early Saints remained in the United States. They literally left because they had no religious freedom or rights.
  6. Or it demonstrates that Jospeh was not the author of the Book of Mormon. My opinion is that the Zelph and Prophet Onandagus story was Joseph trying to expand the Book of Mormon narrative to align with Samuel Mitchell's hypothesis that there was a great battle between a fair skinned race (white Lamanites) and a darker skinned race (Lamanites) in Onondaga County, next to Wayne County. Samuel Mitchell had recognized the characters on the Anthon transcript as being an authentic oriental script, so it made sense to align the BOM narrative to Mitchell's theory.
  7. Thanks for these references. I'll have to pick up Schooling the Prophet. I'm looking for any references of Joseph discussing any of the stories or characters in the Book of Mormon. Were there any times he, for example, spoke of Nephi breaking his bow, or the Lehites building their ship to cross the waters, or retelling King Benjamin's speech to his followers? I don't find anything, and it seems unusual.
  8. Can anyone point me to examples or references of Joseph speaking publicly to his followers about the characters, geography or events found in the Book of Mormon?
  9. Yes. Someone had gone to Dartmouth and scanned them, but I can't find the link at the moment. Another resource is Richard Behrens: Dartmouth Arminianism And Its Impact on Hyrum Smith And the Smith Family Dreams, Visions, and Visitations: The Genesis of Mormonism I'm suggesting that the origin story of the Book of Mormon narrative might seem remarkable to us today, but it appears to have been fairly commonplace among those who attended Dartmouth in the late 18th and early 19th century, including Hyrum Smith. For example, Behrens goes into some detail about Levi Spaulding's (Solomon Spaulding's nephew) conversion following a vision of light. Like I said earlier, I'm happily on the fence about Book of Mormon origins, and find all hypotheses to be almost equally interesting. I just don't see how it can be argued that the Book of Mormon could not have a natural explanation when there are other stories of such visions and golden books in the same time period told by people from the same school.
  10. I've always liked the idea that Asael Smith's cousin Dr. John Smith, who taught Solomon Spaulding and Ethan Smith, was the inspiration (in the prophetic sense) of all three related narratives: Spaulding's Manuscript View of the Hebrews Book of Mormon Dr. Smith taught Hebrew and curated the Hebrew collection at Dartmouth Library. He also ran his own bookshop. He wrote the curriculum that was still in place when Solomon Spaulding's nephews, Ehtan Smith's nephew and Hyrum Smith all attended Moor's Academy at Dartmouth together around 1815. Dr. John's curriculum plus the stories about Native Americans (and Asian Indians) receiving the Gospel floating around Dartmouth in 1815 would have been a very likely source of the Book or Mormon narrative. All the elements were there under one roof. What's most interesting to me, is that this narrative was also carried by Spaulding's nephew from Dartmouth to India in the 1820s. I've been to the small village in Burma (named Chummerah) where, a year before the publication of the Book of Mormon, American missionaries discovered a tribe of Israelites who were waiting for Americans to return their lost Golden Book (inscribed on gold plates) containing their ancient spiritual history. Considering the timing (1812-1830) and the actors (eg. Spaulding's nephew and Hyrum Smith's classmate), I don't see how this could be a simple coincidence.
  11. As someone who is happily on the fence about Book of Mormon historicity, I don't get the sense the tables have turned at all. Rather the arguments are getting more detailed and mature. instead of memes of Captain Moroni on a tapir people here are discussing the fine details about the hat that hid the light so that Joseph could view the stone.
  12. What is your opinion of the eight Conneaut witnesses published in 1834?
  13. You're known to have a deep affinity to biased news sources. you are susceptible to their excesses
  14. I've been in and out of Burma the past few decades, working with groups on the border. Many of them are also in hiding some have been thrown in prison. Although I agree with you that Oaks' talk will be comfort to the members of the Church in Myanmar, what is really critical at this point is that leaders in Congress condemn the military for not respecting the results of the election. Inexplicably 14 members of the House voted against such measures. Presumably to make some political point about election fraud, thinking a vote to condemn the Myanmar military might somehow invalidate their claims of election fraud in the US. 14 House Republicans vote against a measure condemning military coup in Myanmar I don't think those 14 give a rip about the Constitution.
  15. Since we are forever doomed to eternal whataboutism, might as well remind that the CHAZ was not the first occupied zone in the Pacific Northwest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Malheur_National_Wildlife_Refuge Our church and faith is all over the wikipedia article on that one. If I recall correctly, there was even an armed Captain Moroni defending it.
  16. Dunno. Anyway, when I got to the end of Oakes’ talk I wondered if I could bring myself to vote across party lines if there was a more urgent and immediate requirement that took priority over my personal political views. I’m kinda embarrassed to admit that it’d be hard to do, and that’s a problem I should figure out.
  17. If someone I voted for had said the same thing, I probably wouldn’t know better. Party lines can be blinding. I am hopeful President Oakes’ comments on not being afraid to jump parties when it’s needed will help us all cut through that.
  18. Nah, I listened to the recording. I just wanna find 11780 votes is exactly word-for-word quote, but I’ll drop it because when we discuss these things about America the thread gets closed. I’ll stick to talking about nameless countries.
  19. Not at all hanging by a thread. I mean he only wanted to find 11,780 votes. That’s not too much to ask. Come on fellas, gimme a break.
  20. My point being it happens often, even to the most exceptional nations, even as many are in denial that it nearly happened, to us. Have to give credit to our Constitution, it hung by a thread, and got us through.
  21. Constitutions are great and all, but they only work if everyone agrees to the terms and conditions. I live abroad. We've gone through six different constitutions (all of them based on the US constitution) since I arrived because politicians always seem to find a way to tip the balances in their favor. The country next door to me has a constitution too, also based on the US Constitution, but people are now being shot dead in the streets because one party got this brilliant idea from somewhere (I dare not say where) that they could simply dispute the elections if they didn't like the results. Constitutions might be divinely inspired, but President Oakes seems to be warning us that we shouldn't lean too heavily on a document that doesn't live and adapt right along side of us.
  22. Polynesians were experts, but like you say, they learned it from their ancestors. Their ancestors were the Kumr, the same people who settled (and named) Comoro Island and a likely candidate for the source of the Australasian genetic signal in the Americas. What if we're looking at everything backwards? The Book of Mormon setting is an island in the sea named Cumorah and Hagoth's ships sailed to South America in the 1st century BC. The Book of Mormon is an account of the former inhabitants of the American Continent and the islands from whence they came.
  23. The evidence for migrations across the Pacific during the Book of Mormon time period continues to grow: "Paleo-Asian" Ancestry In The Amazon Is Widespread In South America And Looks Comparatively Recent "The wide variability and wide geographic range points to a source of this genetic component in much more recent mariners, certainly no older than the arrival of the Paleo-Eskimo ancestors of the Na-Dene in Alaska (ca. 4500 years ago), but more likely (since this ancestry is not seen anywhere outside South America) via Polynesian mariners in the last 1500 years or less (about 30 generations or less), where solid evidence already shows sign of some slight recent admixture of South Americans into Polynesian gene pools nearest to South America, and where evidence from remains of flora and fauna native to the Americas in Polynesia and native to Polynesia on the Pacific Coast has established that some limited pre-Columbian maritime trade via the Pacific Ocean had to have taken place in about that time frame. The likely epicenter from which the admixture radiates also coincides with one of the most likely loci of South American source admixture into Polynesians ca. 1200 CE." This comment is also noteworthy: "It isn't obvious why this signal isn't more obviously Polynesian. And this lack of clear Polynesian genetic affinity could point to some other explanation that is still in a time frame much more recent than the Founding era of the Americas. But whatever the explanation is, it just can't have a 14,000 years old source."
  24. No need for that. It is why I find the History of the Rechabites to be such an interesting text. It's pretty much what the Book of Mormon claims to be. But there's no confusion about its origins and no burden of geography. No anachronisms or supernatural origins. It's just simply Another Testament of Jesus Christ, and it doesn't matter if its history or fiction. It does what its meant to do either way.
  • Create New...