Book of Mormon Hill Cumorah

[Cumorah3]

Is it just me, or is this message board becoming a great big advertisement for "Mormon Sites, Inc"? I'm sure they're a great bunch of people, but they evangelize like a religion. Maybe they should reign it in a little?

.

Maybe it's because there's a huge amount of information already compiled and published on the Mormon Sites website that is pertinent to the subject of this thread and a couple of other threads.

I very much doubt that you will see Mormon Sites referred to in any of the hundreds of other threads...

Just my opinion of course...

[Warship]

freakin,

your saying that over 50,000 can die in one spot and leave no trace of bones. I don't know about that.

Those scavengers must have done a heck of a job to not miss one weapon amongst tens of thousands dead bodies. Not all weapons are made of perishable materials. Lots of stone weapons might have been used...sling rocks should be around..I believe they rounded them for slingin' but I'm not sure(if they didn't I guess you couldnt discern them).. Any metal weapons would have a better chance of surviving..especially any gold or silver ornamental work on them.

[poulsenll]

The only Cumorah that should matter is the one that JS said it was, the one in New York. I guess I am confused as to why there are questions of more than one.

Would someone please explain (again I'm sure, as I am sure that it has been discussed before) why there might be more?

Thanks in advance.

Nana

Freakin's answer is the same one I would have given. Mormon removed all the records from the Hill Shim where they had been hidden by Ammaron(Mormon 1:2)during there journey too the Land of Cumorah and hid them again in the Hill Cumorah except for those few plates which he gave to MOroni (Mormon 6:6). Moroni after adding his writings and abridging the book of Ether carried this small group of plates with him as he wandered for 36 years before sealing up the record and burying them.(Moroni 10:1-2). Moroni does not specify where he buried them. It is presumed to be the hill in New York, later also called Cumorah, since that is where Joseph Smith found them. I encourage you to read these scriptures and figure this out for yourself.

Larry P

[Cumorah3]

Cumorah 3,

You can prove its Cumorah by

A. Finding the records deposited..Morm6:6...that will be proof beyond doubt.

B. Proving an enormous battle took place with tens of thousands dead. This will not be definite proof but substantial proof.

.

Exactly! The ultimate proof is being allowed to step into that chamber in the original Hill Cumorah where Joseph Smith and others in vision saw "wagon loads" of records, the sword of Laban, and other precious Nephite treasures, and to film them or be allowed to otherwise validly display them to the experts and others.

I don't have sources but it is my understanding that we can expect those and other ancient records, including the plates of Ether, to be brought forth sometime in these latter days. But the timing of course is in the hands of the Lord, as always.

Your point B is what I would say as well, but how do you go about proving tens of thousands killed in battles that took place some 1621 years ago?

[Cumorah3]

B. Proving an enormous battle took place with tens of thousands dead. This will not be definite proof but substantial proof.

Just how does one prove a large battle that occurred 1600 years ago? The bones would be long decomposed. Weapons and remnants of weapons would either have been picked up by scavengers or deteriorated. I think its rather unrealistic to find evidence of any large battles that occurred 500 years ago let alone 1600.

.

Apparently archaeologists are struggling with that very thing right now. How do you recognize an ancient battle field even if you know it should be right where you're looking? They haven't yet decided.

A few weeks ago I was with Dr. Ainsworth and his colleague near the Cumorah3 site in Mexico. The mayor of a small village took us on a walk into the jungle where he said we would see an ancient battle ground. We soon started finding on the surface rocks shaped like axe heads and other weapons of war. The mayor said the jungle had been bulldozed there a number of years before to prepare for a new village that apparently ended up being built nearby but not right there.

Later we were shown another place that the locals called a battle field. That place too had been ploughed in the past. And again we found stones shaped like axe heads.

Were they really ancient weapons of war? I don't know, the pros haven't yet decided what's a battle field and what's not.

[Garden Girl]

I have always believed (as I note others here believe) and interpreted scripture in BoM that the location where the last great battle took place is not the same location as the place where Joseph found the plates in the hill in New York. Moroni wandered for over 30 years, carrying with him a small group of plates, which he then hid up in the NY hill Joseph called Cumorah. Thus, there are no artifacts, or evidence of the battle, etc., at that site... only the plates where Moroni concealed them until they were to be brought forth.

The Garden Girl

[freakin a man]

freakin,

your saying that over 50,000 can die in one spot and leave no trace of bones. I don't know about that.

Those scavengers must have done a heck of a job to not miss one weapon amongst tens of thousands dead bodies. Not all weapons are made of perishable materials. Lots of stone weapons might have been used...sling rocks should be around..I believe they rounded them for slingin' but I'm not sure(if they didn't I guess you couldnt discern them).. Any metal weapons would have a better chance of surviving..especially any gold or silver ornamental work on them.

Yes I am saying that. Unless you believe that bones are not biodegradable, what reason would we have to find 1600 year old bones lying around on the ground. Unless certain conditions exist for them to be made into fossils, there is no reason to expect one to find the bones of 50000 or 500000 men dying on a battlefield 1600 years ago.

Are you suggesting that if we went to Africa and drove through the Savannah, we could expect to find the bones of all the animals that lived there over the last 1500 years? That is a lot of bones.

Once again we are talking 1600 years ago! Its been more than 580,000 days since the event occurred. A lot can happen in 580,000 days.

[Number 9]

freakin,

your saying that over 50,000 can die in one spot and leave no trace of bones. I don't know about that.

[Pokatator]

If you have the faith of a mustard seed you can move a mountain........so a hill is no problem.

[Warship]

thanks for making my point number nine. Also, you ever hear of mummies. They're over 1600 years old and I saw some bones found the other day in jars in the burial mound of a simple worker who was not "mummified". Lucy the hominod's bones I think are two million years old. So yeah, I think there might be some evidence.

[freakin a man]

Some of my favorite treasures are some ancient Roman and Greek artifacts I bought on eBay. I have some bronze arrowheads, several pieces of jewelry, a bunch of coins, and a big bronze support ring from a chariot. I was going to post a couple of pictures of the arrowheads, etc, but couldn't figure out how to do it.

Here's an eBay auction for an arrowhead that is very similar to one of mine, and from the same region and date range:

Scythian Bronze Arrowhead - 500-300BC

This particular arrowhead dates to around 500-300BC. It is just an example to show that many things survive on the battlefield after thousands of years. While bone and wood degrade, metal lasts. Things like coins, rings and other jewelry, metal weapons, armor and clasps would definitely be found on the battlefield surrounding the BoM Cumorrah.

This is called appealing to the exception and not the rule. I have never said that artifacts could not be perserved through time but they are few in number in comparison to the number that was produced in their day. You bring up an arrowhead from 300-500 B.C. Well that is great. One arrowhead from how many that where produced during that 200 year period?

A good case in point is the follow story about the Mayan wars at http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2821 When you read the article, you will notice that the discovery made about these wars was not based on them finding lots of weapons and other things littering the battlefields but from texts. Using your standards, we should find weapons all over the place.

One last note, its not unusual for the winners of war to loot what the goods of the dead if the items they find to be useful. It has happened in Iraq. Believe it or not when US soldiers have gotten killed, some of the Iraqi "insurgents" as they are called have taken the weapons.

[freakin a man]

thanks for making my point number nine. Also, you ever hear of mummies. They're over 1600 years old and I saw some bones found the other day in jars in the burial mound of a simple worker who was not "mummified".

[stargate]

All the Saints will e'er hail her

Cumorah's Hill we sing!

Would the LDS Church still hail this Hill and sing if an archaeological

dig found nothing?

Jeff

[Lolgirl]

oh, cool pictures. I know which one it was but if I tell you I will have to kill you. Sorry.

Yeah Right,

If you can find me.

[Uncle Dale]

All the Saints will e'er hail her

Cumorah's Hill we sing!

Would the LDS Church still hail this Hill and sing if an archaeological

dig found nothing?

Jeff

Joke, my friend --

J - O - K - E !

Uncle "with profound apologies to the Cornell alumni" Dale

[Uncle Dale]

If you have the faith of a mustard seed you can move a mountain........so a hill is no problem.

"For the Brother of Jared said unto the mountain Zerin, 'Remove'

[USU78]

All the Saints will e'er hail her

Cumorah's Hill we sing!

Would the LDS Church still hail this Hill and sing if an archaeological dig found nothing?

Joke, my friend -- J - O - K - E !

Uncle "with profound apologies to the Cornell alumni" Dale

Wait a minute there . . . you mean that wasn't to the tune of Logan High's Alma Mater Hymn?

USU "'Neath the Crest of Wasatch Mountains" 78

[Uncle Dale]

All the Saints will e'er hail her

Cumorah's Hill we sing!

Would the LDS Church still hail this Hill and sing if an archaeological dig found nothing?

Joke, my friend -- J - O - K - E !

Uncle "with profound apologies to the Cornell alumni" Dale

Wait a minute there . . . you mean that wasn't to the tune of Logan High's Alma Mater Hymn?

USU "'Neath the Crest of Wasatch Mountains" 78

No wonder that all the Cache Valley TBMs here were so easily fooled!

Fool me once, it's on you --

Fool me twice.... uh, how does that saying go again?

Swell the chorus ever louder

Echoes never die,

Hail to thee, our school beloved!

Hail to... etc. etc.

For Shame!

UD

[Warship]

Freakin,

Quote

" I have never said that artifacts could not be perserved through time but they are few in number in comparison to the number that was produced in their day."

Retort by Freakin

QUOTE (Warship @ Aug 8 2006, 07:37 PM)

freakin,your saying that over 50,000 can die in one spot and leave no trace of bones.

Quote

[freakin a man]

Freakin,

Quote

" I have never said that artifacts could not be perserved through time but they are few in number in comparison to the number that was produced in their day."

Retort by Freakin

QUOTE (Warship @ Aug 8 2006, 07:37 PM)

freakin,your saying that over 50,000 can die in one spot and leave no trace of bones.

Quote

[Warship]

Freakin,

Now we are getting somewhere. Yes I admit it is possible that scavengers could pick the place clean and that bad weather could erode all traces of bones.

Can you also admit that a 100,000 man battle is not the norm and happening everywhere all the time, therefore there was no need for the sarcastic "we should be finding bones everywhere by that standard" thing. Sorry I'm misquoting you..just trying to get the gist.

I believe either extreme is wrong as you probably do. I would not expect to find prodigious amounts of bones or weapons but I would expect to find some things. Older battle scenes have left enough evidence for us to piece things together. I see no reason why this could not be one of them. Just a matter of finding it.

[Uncle Dale]

My entire point can be summed up this way. It is possible that there could be remains from the great battles at Cumorah. It is possible but its not a given. Its just as easily possible that such a battle could occur and no remains or trace remains to this day. To simply assume that a battle from 1600 years ago MUST leave some trace simply is not warrented and those that expect that are not being realistic and honest to all the possiblities.

Not just A Battle -- but two massive military campaigns -- the Jaredite Ramah being

the Nephite Cumorah.

And not just transitory battles of a single day, but culminations of those same massive

military campaigns, resulting in camp-sites, garbage pits, buried corpses, discarded

and lost personal items, etc. etc.

Go to the Little Bighorn Battfield Museum in Montana -- and see how many artifacts

were left on the ground, from a relatively tiny military skirmish. Here we are not

just talking about the troopers' brass buttons and lead musket-balls, but a plethora

of artifacts from both side of that tiny battle.

Now, multiply the scale of "Custer's Last Stand" by a magnitude of several thousands,

and extend it over days or weeks -- and then multiply all of that by a factor of two

(for both the Jaredite and Nephite extinctions) -- and then tell the archaeologists that

they should not expect to find one single artifact within ten miles of the hill????

Preposterous!

But the Mormon apologists have their explanations -- both were battles in which

the soldiers had no metallic items -- both were battles in which the ravages of time

erased all trace of arrowheads, spear-points, bones, teeth, even disturbances of

the ground for burials, defensive earthworks, etc.

Resulting in what? --- In a clean, virgin site, in which only the rare artifact of the

later Seneca and other transitory "woodland Indians" was deposited. Anything we

might find on or around the hill today, would either be from these later Indians --

or from "Nephites" and "Lamanites" whose material cultures were so similar to the

later Indian tribes, as to be indistinguishable.

And the professional archaeologists and paleoanthropologists of upstate New York

are expected to buy this load of saintly malarkey? No -- only if they are employed

by BYU. The remainder of the scientists can continue living in the "real world."

Uncle Dale

[Cumorah3]

Not just A Battle -- but two massive military campaigns -- the Jaredite Ramah being

the Nephite Cumorah.

.

The Jaredite battles of course occured over a huge piece of territory and only ended at the Hill Ramah. We don't really know how many Jaredites were left when they approached that hill.

But we do know that thousands of Nephites met their end close to the original Hill Cumorah. The battles could have ranged quite a few miles from the hill.

Dr. Ainsworth's contender for the original hill dominates a huge almost flat plain in all directions. My guess is that battles would have been fought in many places on that flatter land, not just on the slopes of the hill itself. Unlike the hill near Palmyra, New York, there's a huge amount of evidence of ancient peoples around that hill in Mexico, I have seen it myself.

BYU has had an archaeological research facility in southern Mexico for decades. But they are not looking for Book of Mormon evidences.

I've been accused of "advertising" Ad removed -mods

[SlackTime]

I chose Bernal.

My reasons are pretty simple.

1. The nature of the hill gives it a commanding position from which to direct large armies. Some of the other mountains are more rugged and difficult to climb (and thus more defensible) but, this mount seems better for command and control.

2. The description fits the text.

As for the plates, Joseph, and all that. Well, Moroni's end narrative definitely suggests to me a long period of running and hiding from the enemy. And I think that those many years, being as close to the Spirit as he was, he could be led to the site in New York.

I would assume then that at the time of the battle he did hide the plates in the hill before his army was overrun. This allowed him to escape and return and fetch the plates when the lamanite army had dispursed. He traveled and hid going northward because he knew that other Nephite splinter groups had headed northward and might find some aid in that direction. In time he was led to the Cumorah in New York and buried the plates.

Naming the hill Cumorah because it, like the original Cumorah, was to be a consecrated storage/holding place for the plates. (For all I know Cumorah could have some meaning along those lines in the common speech of the Nephites - and no that wouldn't probably be reformed Egyptian.)

-SlackTime

[William Schryver]

Uncle Dale:

Go to the Little Bighorn Battfield Museum in Montana -- and see how many artifacts

were left on the ground, from a relatively tiny military skirmish. Here we are not

just talking about the troopers' brass buttons and lead musket-balls, but a plethora

of artifacts from both side of that tiny battle.

Now, multiply the scale of "Custer's Last Stand" by a magnitude of several thousands,

and extend it over days or weeks -- and then multiply all of that by a factor of two

(for both the Jaredite and Nephite extinctions) -- and then tell the archaeologists that

they should not expect to find one single artifact within ten miles of the hill????

Preposterous!

Uncle, I think you may be significantly overstating your case. In the first place, In the 130 years since the Battle of the Little Bighorn, almost every artifact, with the exception of a few shell casings and lead slugs, has completely disappeared from that site. Of course, that was quite a small skirmish compared to many Civil War battles. The site of the Battle of Gettysburg, in Pennsylvania, now yields hardly any artifactual remnants of that battle of 200,000 soldiers! Except for the odd shell casing or uniform button, there is nothing left at that site (except a cemetery) to indicate that a large battle ever took place, and we're talking here about a battle that took place less than 150 years ago! Even the site of the great Battle of the Somme (58,000 British casualties on the first day alone!) which dwarfed the Civil War battles, has been silently reclaimed by Mother Nature, in less than a century.

So, your arguments are without merit. Large battles do not leave artifacts that endure for long. Cities, yes. Battles, no.