How To Find Nephite Artifacts

[Loquacious Lurker]

most likely egyptian characters used to write hebrew.

Why wouldn't they use HEBREW characters to write Hebrew? After all, Mormon claimed he could do just that, many, many hundreds of years after Lehi.

You wouldn't use Russian characters to write in English, would you? Especially if you already knew how to write in English...?

Who said the land was empty?

This is what I was taught in Seminary. Of course, that was fifteen years ago. I realize that there has been time for many evolutions of the story since then.

2 Nephi 1:8 -- "And behold, it is wisdom that this land should be kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations; for behold, many nations would overrun the land, that there would be no place for an inheritance."

An overrun land was a spoiled land. So says Nephi.

The fact is, the continant wasnt empty, that is a fact.

God changed his mind and decided to let other nations in after all, before Lehi and his seed could inherit it?

You also dont have Spaniards invading the bible lands and destroying the documentation that allows for such identification.

No, no Spaniards, just Canaanites and Assyrians and Kenites and Arabs and Medians and Akkadians and Mesopotamians and Sumerians and Elamites and Amorites and Hurrians and Persians and Egyptians and Arabs and Babylonians and Hittites and Midianites and Syrians and Philistines and Phoenicians and Medians and Greeks and Scythians and Romans and -- whew! I am leaving out a TON! -- then of course, there were the European crusades, and -- and --

Please don't tell me that a few hundred Spaniards wiped out all of this evidence, when the Bible lands have been overrun for four thousand years and still manage to produce artifacts. That Spaniards argument holds no water with me.

If you can give me a history of Teotihuacan in 300 words max, that is comparable to a history of Jerusalem of 300 words max, with kings, priuests, religious cults and battles then Ill eat my hat. THAT is why OW and NW archeology are like apples and oranges.

What do the ruins of a pagan, polytheistic, animistic, Mongoloid-derivative people have to do with Lehi and his descendants?

That's like trying to prove the existence of the city of Jericho by studying the tribal history of peoples of the Russian steppes.

[charity]

Wow. Unreal.

Okay. The tribe of Manasseh were not Jews. That means that the Abrahamic covenant did not in any way apply to them, and they were not of God's Chosen people. They were no different than Gentiles.

Is that what you are saying...?

Of course, you realize, that the entire Jewish world does not agree with you. Because Manasseh was the son of Joseph, who was the son of Jacob, with whom God made a covenant to establish the people and nation of Israel. Jacob's father was Isaac, and Isaac's father was Abraham, whom God promised his seed would fill the entire earth, and with whom he establish his covenant -- called the "Abrahamic covenant".

The Blessing of Jacob, in Genesis 49, according to you, does not apply to Manasseh? Manasseh is not part of the Abrahamic covenant?

Whatever. The Bible disagrees with you.

Lurker, here is a little lesson. Watch the genealogy really carefully. Abraham had a son Isaac. Isaac had a son Jacob. Jacob had 12 sons. Asher, Benjamin, Dan, Gad, Issachar, Joseph,* Judah, Levi, Naphtali, Reuben, Simeon, and Zebulun. The Twelve Tribes of Israel are named after these sons, with this exception. Joseph, as the birthright son, got the double portion. So two tribes are named for his sons, Ephraim and Mannasseh. Levi, who had the priesthood got no land portion at all.

Jews are really the Tribe of Judah. (Ju - get it?)

So only descendants of Judah are Jews. Descendants of Mannasseh are not Jews. But they are children of Israel, and they qualify for Abraham's blessing.

This is what the Bible teaches.

[Olavarria]

Why wouldn't they use HEBREW characters to write Hebrew? After all, Mormon claimed he could do just that, many, many hundreds of years after Lehi.

Why was ladino(jewish spanish) written in hebrew letters up until the 19th centuary?

Why did the mozarabs(christians in muslim spain) write spanish using arabic script?

Why do turks write turkish using latin script?

Why do persians write pharsi using arabic script?

*Why did some ancient sucka write Psalm 20:2-6 in aramaic, using demotic script?

Each case has to be viewd on an individual basis. But the BoM Prophets explain why they did it.

Mormon 9:32-33

32 And now, behold, we have written this record according to our knowledge, in the characters which are called among us the reformed Egyptian, being handed down and altered by us, according to our manner of speech.

33 And if our plates had been aufficiently large we should have written in Hebrew; but the Hebrew hath been altered by us also; and if we could have written in Hebrew, behold, ye would have had no bimperfection in our record.

Nephi 1:2

2 Yea, I make a record in the language of my father, which consists of the learning of the Jews and the language of the Egyptians

2 things are apparent. 1) the modified egyptian script was more consice and compact than the hebrew(saves room on plates). 2)Lehi had some serious egyptian roots. Afterall his geneology was written in egyptian.

An Excerpt from Lehi's Jerusalem is in order: read an be enlightened. Egyptian was used in record keeping during the time of Lehi and before by Jews living in Israel and Judah

http://farms.byu.edu/publications/bookscha...2&chapid=28

You wouldn't use Russian characters to write in English, would you? Especially if you already knew how to write in English...?

No I wouldnt, nor would any other american. But some ancient jews in the OW did.

This is what I was taught in Seminary. Of course, that was fifteen years ago. I realize that there has been time for many evolutions of the story since then.

Evolutions in the story?

Where do you come up with this stuff? What was so reformed about the reformed egyptian? Well, it was altered according to the manner of their speech. The BoM is littered with hebraisms, many of which dont survive in the KJV but do in the BoM. Hebraisms+egyptian script= egyptian script used to write hebrew, just as it was done in the OW.

2 Nephi 1:8 -- "And behold, it is wisdom that this land should be kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations; for behold, many nations would overrun the land, that there would be no place for an inheritance."

An overrun land was a spoiled land. So says Nephi.

God changed his mind and decided to let other nations in after all, before Lehi and his seed could inherit it?

Oh yes, and "this land" is all of N and S america? were does it say that in the BoM? Were does it say there werent already people their that they, the Lehites, didnt over run?

7 Wherefore, this land is consecrated unto him whom he shall bring. And if it so be that they shall serve him according to the commandments which he hath given, it shall be a land of liberty unto them; wherefore, they shall never be brought down into captivity; if so, it shall be because of iniquity; for if iniquity shall abound cursed shall be the land for their sakes, but unto the righteous it shall be blessed forever.

8 And behold, it is wisdom that this land should be kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations; for behold, many nations would overrun the land, that there would be no place for an inheritance.

9 Wherefore, I, Lehi, have obtained a apromise, that binasmuch as those whom the Lord God shall bring out of the land of Jerusalem shall keep his commandments, they shall cprosper upon the face of this land; and they shall be kept from all other nations, that they may possess this land unto themselves. And if it so be that they shall dkeep his commandments they shall be blessed upon the face of this land, and there shall be none to molest them, nor to take away the land of their einheritance; and they shall dwell safely forever.

How could the children of Lehi be enslaved by other nations, if they were all alone? The promise is that the would not be overrun or stepped on, not that they would be alone. As a matter of fact, the mulekites arrived at around the same time, and the jaredites were in their last throws of civilization. They were not alone. THEY, the people, will be kept free from other nations. It does not say, they shall be kept alone.

No, no Spaniards, just Canaanites and Assyrians and Kenites and Arabs and Medians and Akkadians and Mesopotamians and Sumerians and Elamites and Amorites and Hurrians and Persians and Egyptians and Arabs and Babylonians and Hittites and Midianites and Syrians and Philistines and Phoenicians and Medians and Greeks and Scythians and Romans and -- whew! I am leaving out a TON! -- then of course, there were the European crusades, and -- and --

cute. Are you seriosly comparing the conquests of by these people to the Spanish conquest? Seriosly?

Are you seriosly telling me that those people you listed actually tried to destroy jewish Civ? Did the ROmans try to supplant the Jews, or turn the Jews into Latin speaking,Jupiter praying Italains? Did Italians migrate en masse to the promised land?

Are you seriosly telling me that we have translatable material in the NW from 600-bc to 420ad? Is there anyting in meso america that compares to the Dead Sea Scrolls at the shrine of the book? Id really like to know. Tell me, who was the mesoamerican Tacticus,Herodotus or Josephus? Can you give me your copy of the mayan Antiquities written in the 1st centuary? To think, all this time there is a mesoamerican history, outside the BoM, that everyone has been hiding from me.

So, Herod ruled Palastine during the time of Christ; who ruled Teotihuacan during the same period? Was he Mixtec, Totonac,mayan or Nahuat?

The BoM people have left artifacts, but without a written history(outside the BoM), there simply is no way to recognize the remains. Tell me, what was the nephite equivalent of a Jesus fish?

Please don't tell me that a few hundred Spaniards wiped out all of this evidence, when the Bible lands have been overrun for four thousand years and still manage to produce artifacts. That Spaniards argument holds no water with me.

I think the aztecs did their fare share when they came down in the 1200's from the american south west.

Surely your not telling us that only a few hundred spaniards came to the NW after the initial conquests by Pizarro(o the incas) and Cortez(in mexico)? No one else came to find gold?

If this isnt true,then you must provide us with a detailed history of mesoamerica. I guess Michael Coe is wrong when he says only 3.5 mayan legible codices survive, out of the thousands that existed. If you have thousands of codices under your bed, then its time you do the world a favor and producean actual history of mesoamerica that does not start at the 1200s ad. The only exception is Palenque, with a lineage pedigree that goes from 431ad-799, after the BoM. No books have survived, only inscriptions on the walls.

Please, Im dying to know who lived in San Lorenzo, what gods they worshipped and the wars they fought. Tell me, who ruled Teotihuacan? Why was it built? Do you have any Toltec poetry? Perhaps you can tell us some good Pre-Classic Maya war stories about capture and sacrifice? Who did the people in La Venta worship? What were the name of their chief priests?

Surely you can tell us the creation myths of the people at El Mirador? Who was the greates king of Pre-Classic Maya, how many people did he conquer? Do you have any accounts of the increase in volanism that occured during the 1st centuary? Surely there was a Mexican Pliney?

Because Im starting not to buy the idea that succedeing cultures didnt destroy everything too.

What do the ruins of a pagan, polytheistic, animistic, Mongoloid-derivative people have to do with Lehi and his descendants?

Because but for the ruling lineage of prophet kings that kept the record of the BoM and their followers, they BoM peoples were in varying degrees during there 900 year history a pagan,polytheistic, animistic and probably Mogoloid derivative (who says the skin of blackness was caused by magic?) people.

Pagan is such a loaded word. What is a pagan? Are we mormons pagan for our use of pentagrams on our temples and a belief in the Heavenly Mother? I know alot of people that say, yes. I of course, disagree.

polytheists? I hate to burst your bubble but jews during the time of Lehi and before, like mormons, were actually henotheists. They belived in the existance of many Gods, but only worshipped one. The strict monotheism of today is actually a later development that came after the babylonian exile.

animistic: who says the BoM people werent animists? Some would say mormons are animists, considering we belive that everything was created spiritually before it was created physically thus trees and fido have souls too. If the Nephites had the BoMoses they would also fit this mold.

That's like trying to prove the existence of the city of Jericho by studying the tribal history of peoples of the Russian steppes.

No its like trying to prove the existance of Zerahemla using only one record in a place of the world we(modern people) still know very little about, and lack a documented history for.

I hate to overkill this quote but I must:

"Our knowledge of ancient Maya thought must represent only a tiny fraction of the whole picture, for of the thousands of books in which the full extent of their learning and ritual was recorded, only four have survived to modern times (as though all that posterity knew of ourselves were to be based upon three prayer books and Pilgrim's Progress)." (Michael D. Coe, The Maya, London: Thames and Hudson, 4th ed., 1987, p. 161.)

NOW If I were to apply that to any group in the mediterranean, you know it would be a lie.

"Our knowledge of ancient Jewish thought must represent only a tiny fraction of the whole picture, for of the thousands of books in which the full extent of their learning and ritual was recorded, only four have survived to modern times (as though all that posterity knew of ourselves were to be based upon three prayer books and Pilgrim's Progress)." (Pedro Olavarria The Jews, London: Thames and Hudson, 4th ed., 1987, p. 161.)

"Our knowledge of ancient Greek thought must represent only a tiny fraction of the whole picture, for of the thousands of books in which the full extent of their learning and ritual was recorded, only four have survived to modern times (as though all that posterity knew of ourselves were to be based upon three prayer books and Pilgrim's Progress)." (Pedro Olavarria, The Greeks, London: Thames and Hudson, 4th ed., 1987, p. 161.)

"Our knowledge of ancient Egyptian thought must represent only a tiny fraction of the whole picture, for of the thousands of books in which the full extent of their learning and ritual was recorded, only four have survived to modern times (as though all that posterity knew of ourselves were to be based upon three prayer books and Pilgrim's Progress)." (Pedro Olavarria, The Egyptians, London: Thames and Hudson, 4th ed., 1987, p. 161.)

"Our knowledge of ancient Persian thought must represent only a tiny fraction of the whole picture, for of the thousands of books in which the full extent of their learning and ritual was recorded, only four have survived to modern times (as though all that posterity knew of ourselves were to be based upon three prayer books and Pilgrim's Progress)." (Pedro Olavarria, The Persians, London: Thames and Hudson, 4th ed., 1987, p. 161.)

KEEP BELIEVING THAT NW ARECHEOLOGY IS JUST AS DEVELOPED AS OW ARCHEOLOGY

[Chris Smith]

Hi Her Amun,

With respect to the OP, I would say that a good place to start in identifying Nephite artifacts would be a process of elimination. If an artifact is associated with a culture that worshipped serpents and birds and the like, for example, then it is not a good fit for a BoM culture (and particularly not for the Nephites). If a culture did not have monumental architecture then it is not a good fit for a BoM culture (except maybe the Lamanites). Etc.

So, finding cultures that do not have features that are uncharacteristic of BoM cultures might be a good starting place for listing some possible candidates.

-CK

[cdowis]

With respect to the OP, I would say that a good place to start in identifying Nephite artifacts would be a process of elimination. If an artifact is associated with a culture that worshipped serpents and birds and the like, for example, then it is not a good fit for a BoM culture (and particularly not for the Nephites).

Was Samuel the Lamanite preaching on the wall to Christians? Was Alma teaching Christians in the city of Ammonihah?

Was Mormon admonishing Christians during the war of extermination? Was Nephi (in the book of Helaman) preaching to Christians?

Or were they preaching to a people who worshipped serpents, birds, and the corn god.

[charity]

Please, Im dying to know who lived in San Lorenzo, what gods they worshipped and the wars they fought. Tell me, who ruled Teotihuacan? Why was it built? Do you have any Toltec poetry? Perhaps you can tell us some good Pre-Classic Maya war stories about capture and sacrifice? Who did the people in La Venta worship? What were the name of their chief priests?

You have a long list Her Amun. I would be happy if these critics could just tell me two things. What is the real name of San Lorenzo, the name the people who lived there called it. Likewise La Venta. Those are the Spanish names. What are the real names? Simple request.

[Loquacious Lurker]

Why was ladino(jewish spanish) written in hebrew letters up until the 19th centuary?

Why did the mozarabs(christians in muslim spain) write spanish using arabic script?

Why do turks write turkish using latin script?

Why do persians write pharsi using arabic script?

*Why did some ancient sucka write Psalm 20:2-6 in aramaic, using demotic script?

Each case has to be viewd on an individual basis. But the BoM Prophets explain why they did it.

Mormon 9:32-33

32 And now, behold, we have written this record according to our knowledge, in the characters which are called among us the reformed Egyptian, being handed down and altered by us, according to our manner of speech.

33 And if our plates had been aufficiently large we should have written in Hebrew; but the Hebrew hath been altered by us also; and if we could have written in Hebrew, behold, ye would have had no bimperfection in our record.

Nephi 1:2

2 Yea, I make a record in the language of my father, which consists of the learning of the Jews and the language of the Egyptians

2 things are apparent. 1) the modified egyptian script was more consice and compact than the hebrew(saves room on plates). 2)Lehi had some serious egyptian roots. Afterall his geneology was written in egyptian.

An Excerpt from Lehi's Jerusalem is in order: read an be enlightened. Egyptian was used in record keeping during the time of Lehi and before by Jews living in Israel and Judah

None of this in any way counters my point that Mormon could have written in Hebrew if he had enough space to do it in, so I'm not really sure why you even posted it.

1. Mormon could write in Hebrew.

2. Mormon lived many, many years after Lehi.

3. Therefore, someone passed down the knowledge of how to both speak and write in Hebrew over many generations.

Thowing in facts about the writing practices of Medieval Spaniards, or Turks, or Persians has no bearing on what Mormon himself wrote whatsoever.

No I wouldnt, nor would any other american. But some ancient jews in the OW did.

Too bad you can't find any evidence of Hebraic writing in the New World.

Evolutions in the story?

Where do you come up with this stuff?

Well, I was taught that Lehi inherited a land that was completely empty. I was taught this in Provo, Utah, in Seminary, approximately fifteen years ago. Now it is being said that Lehi's land was already occupied (in defiance of 2 Nephi). I don't know what else to call that BUT "evolution" of the story. I just don't know. "Changing the story"? "Fixing the numbers"? "Cooking the books"? What would you call it, when something taught as adamant fact has been completely turned on its ear? I thought "evolution" was quite polite.

In fact, I daresay that most Mormons today STILL believe that Lehi inherited an empty land, and that Native Americans are Lamanites, direct descendants of Lehi's son Laman.

What was so reformed about the reformed egyptian? Well, it was altered according to the manner of their speech. The BoM is littered with hebraisms, many of which dont survive in the KJV but do in the BoM. Hebraisms+egyptian script= egyptian script used to write hebrew, just as it was done in the OW.

Wait a minute. Hold everything. WHY are people in this thread saying that Hebrew was not spoken, if there are "Hebraisms" in the BoM? Well? Which is it? "A" cannot equal "Not A". Either they spoke and wrote in Hebrew, or they didn't. It can't be both ways. In order to learn a language well enough to write in it, a working knowledge of syntax, verbiage, figures of speech, etc., must be mastered.

If there are actual "Hebraisms", and by that I take it that you mean "figures of speech", then that even argues more strongly my point that the familiarity of Hebrew extended well beyond the basic knowledge of how to scratch the characters down on something, and into a true fluency and facility of the language.

Lehi lived in Jerusalem, but even more importantly, his children did also. They would have learned to speak Hebrew fluently from their friends, even if Lehi and Sarai spoke nothing but Egyptian or Norwegian or Innuit at home.

My point (and hopefully for the last time)

1. Mormon could have written in Hebrew, if he had enough space.

2. Mormon lived a LONG time after Lehi.

3. Mormon had to learn Hebrew from somewhere.

4. Someone taught Mormon Hebrew.

5. Someone taught him not just the alphabet, but the language. Why do we know this? Because, according to Her Amun, there are "Hebraisms" in the BoM. And also, Mormon himself declares this.

Mormon could write in Hebrew = Mormon could understand Hebrew

Oh yes, and "this land" is all of N and S america? were does it say that in the BoM?

I never implied that, since I don't believe any of its claims in the first place.

BUT, since you asked, Helamon 3:8 --

"And it came to pass that they [the Nephites] did multiply and spread, and did go forth from the land southward to the land northward, and did spread insomuch that they began to cover the face of the whole earth, from the sea south, to the sea north, from the sea west, to the sea east."

It's phrases such as "cover the face of the whole earth" that make me think that. AND the fact that this is precisely what was taught for many many years by the LDS church.

Were does it say there werent already people their that they, the Lehites, didnt over run?

2 Nephi 1:8

How could the children of Lehi be enslaved by other nations, if they were all alone? The promise is that the would not be overrun or stepped on, not that they would be alone.

I guess that is just another internal BoM inconsistency. I don't know how you can think that one people being "enslaved" by another is not "overrunning" or being "stepped on" by them.

Further, Joseph Smith himself, in Times and Seasons,

"In this important and interesting book [i.e., the Book of Mormon] the history of ancient America is unfolded, from its first settlement by a colony that came from the tower of Babel [Jaredites], at the confusion of languages to the beginning of the fifth century of the Christian era."

There is never at any time, in any part of the BoM, any mention given of other neighboring peoples to the Jaredites, or to the Nephites and Lamanites.

As a matter of fact, the mulekites arrived at around the same time, and the jaredites were in their last throws of civilization. They were not alone. THEY, the people, will be kept free from other nations. It does not say, they shall be kept alone.

The Jaredites were Semitic peoples also, yes? And so were the Mulekites? No Asians in the mix, right?

cute. Are you seriosly comparing the conquests of by these people to the Spanish conquest? Seriosly?

You said BoM archaeological evidence was lacking, due perhaps to Spanish conquistadores destroying archaeological evidence. I merely pointed out that the Bible lands had their own litany of misery that FAR exceeded anything the NW has endured, and STILL manages to produce archeological evidence to corroborate the peoples which are mentioned in its text.

Your original point was not about conquest, but about archaeological evidence. My original point countered that. Don't try to make my original point about something else.

Are you seriosly telling me that those people you listed actually tried to destroy jewish Civ?

Gee, the Assyrians didn't try to destroy Israel? Hmm. I'll have to go back and study my history AGAIN.

I could compile an entire list of peoples who tried to destroy Israel as a nation, starting with the Assyrians, or maybe the Arab tribes, but frankly, I find that prospect tedious, and probably, you do too.

Did the ROmans try to supplant the Jews, or turn the Jews into Latin speaking,Jupiter praying Italains? Did Italians migrate en masse to the promised land?

What does that in any way have to do with my point that there were other people in the Middle East capable of destroying archaeological evidence, and yet it still exists despite that?

Since these questions have nothing to do with that original point of mine, I am going to ignore that strawman.

Are you seriosly telling me that we have translatable material in the NW from 600-bc to 420ad? Is there anyting in meso america that compares to the Dead Sea Scrolls at the shrine of the book? Id really like to know. Tell me, who was the mesoamerican Tacticus,Herodotus or Josephus? Can you give me your copy of the mayan Antiquities written in the 1st centuary? To think, all this time there is a mesoamerican history, outside the BoM, that everyone has been hiding from me.

Again, what does this have to do with anything? I'm not sure where you are going with this point. Or even if it is a point. Ranting about Mesoamerican lack of evidence only proves MY point.

So, Herod ruled Palastine during the time of Christ; who ruled Teotihuacan during the same period? Was he Mixtec, Totonac,mayan or Nahuat?

Her Amun, who are you talking to? I'm not being rude, I'm genuinely confused. Are you trying to say that the remains of a pagan, animistic, polytheistic, Asiatic people with a language based IN NO WAY on Hebrew, has some kind of relationship AT ALL with Hebrews of the house of Israel?

The BoM people have left artifacts, but without a written history(outside the BoM), there simply is no way to recognize the remains.

Tell me, what was the nephite equivalent of a Jesus fish?

Uh, you're asking me to speculate on what I consider to be two disparate mythologies.

I think the aztecs did their fare share when they came down in the 1200's from the american south west. Surely your not telling us that only a few hundred spaniards came to the NW after the initial conquests by Pizarro(o the incas) and Cortez(in mexico)? No one else came to find gold?

1. You said archaeological evidence was missing in the Americas, with possible blame placed on the Spaniards.

2. I countered by saying that Bible lands were criss-crossed by millions of people over at least a four thousand year period, and still managed to produce archaeological evidence.

Okay, let's say it wasn't a few hundred Spaniards. Let's say it was a thousand. Or, better yet, let's say it was ten thousand. How about fifty thousand? A hundred thousand?

That still doesn't reach the sheer magnitude of the millions of people who have ravaged the Middle East over thousands of years, and yet there is still evidence of people and place names mentioned in the Bible.

If this isnt true,then you must provide us with a detailed history of mesoamerica. I guess Michael Coe is wrong when he says only 3.5 mayan legible codices survive, out of the thousands that existed. If you have thousands of codices under your bed, then its time you do the world a favor and producean actual history of mesoamerica that does not start at the 1200s ad. The only exception is Palenque, with a lineage pedigree that goes from 431ad-799, after the BoM. No books have survived, only inscriptions on the walls.

Please, Im dying to know who lived in San Lorenzo, what gods they worshipped and the wars they fought. Tell me, who ruled Teotihuacan? Why was it built? Do you have any Toltec poetry? Perhaps you can tell us some good Pre-Classic Maya war stories about capture and sacrifice? Who did the people in La Venta worship? What were the name of their chief priests?

Surely you can tell us the creation myths of the people at El Mirador? Who was the greates king of Pre-Classic Maya, how many people did he conquer? Do you have any accounts of the increase in volanism that occured during the 1st centuary? Surely there was a Mexican Pliney?

Again, ranting about polytheistic, animistic, blood-letting Asiatic peoples in no way establishes any link to monotheistic, Semitic, Mosaic-law-abiding Israelites and their conquest of the New World.

I'm not really sure why you think there is any correlation between the two at all.

Because Im starting not to buy the idea that succedeing cultures didnt destroy everything too.

Because but for the ruling lineage of prophet kings that kept the record of the BoM and their followers, they BoM peoples were in varying degrees during there 900 year history a pagan,polytheistic, animistic and probably Mogoloid derivative (who says the skin of blackness was caused by magic?) people.

The Jaredites, Mulekites, and Lehites were ALL Semitic peoples. No one else is mentioned in the entirety of the BoM.

Pagan is such a loaded word. What is a pagan? Are we mormons pagan for our use of pentagrams on our temples and a belief in the Heavenly Mother? I know alot of people that say, yes. I of course, disagree.

Pagan --One who is not a Christian, Muslim, or Jew, especially an adherent of a polytheistic religion in antiquity.

polytheists? I hate to burst your bubble but jews during the time of Lehi and before, like mormons, were actually henotheists. They belived in the existance of many Gods, but only worshipped one. The strict monotheism of today is actually a later development that came after the babylonian exile.

The entirety of the Old Testament is basically God self-indulgently demanding he alone be worshipped. If you want to argue that those people who lived under Mosaic law were in any way polytheistic, then have a field day. The Old Testament annihilates that point. There's not one thing I want to add to that argument.

animistic: who says the BoM people werent animists?

Important: I said the indigenous peoples of this continent were animists. The Book of Mormon people were believers in Moses' God.

Some would say mormons are animists,

I would agree with them.

considering we belive that everything was created spiritually before it was created physically thus trees and fido have souls too. If the Nephites had the BoMoses they would also fit this mold.

They would not then fit the mold of traditional Israelites/Jews.

I hate to overkill this quote but I must:

You labor under the belief that Mayans or Aztecs or whomever must be descendants of Lehi/Jared/Laman, et al.

I fail to see any correlation whatsoever between these two peoples, who are separated by language, culture, religious practice and belief, and genetic makeup.

KEEP BELIEVING THAT NW ARECHEOLOGY IS JUST AS DEVELOPED AS OW ARCHEOLOGY

By "developed", I will continue to believe that the standards of collection of evidence are no different despite what continent these people collecting evidence are on, that is why they are able to call themselves "archaeologists" in the first place, and not grave robbers. There is nothing wrong with the collection of evidence, only that there is a lack of this evidence in the first place.

The problem here is in trying to fit the square peg of indigenous Americans into the round hole of Semites from the Middle East. That is why there is no evidence, that is why there are no artifacts. There is plenty of archaeological evidence from the New World, and it all points to one thing -- the people here migrated from Mongolia as long as fifteen or twenty thousand years ago, and they filled the continent. There is no evidence whatsoever that Hebrew peoples ever visited here.

(edited to go back and italicize everything due to the "quote" boxes not working, even though I checked it THREE times.)

[charity]

Why are there Hebraisms if the language was actually Egyptian? You keep forgetting we are told over and over that this is a mix.

1 Ne. 1: 2Yea, I make a record in the language of my father, which consists of the learning of the Jews and the language of the Egyptians.

[thesometimesaint]

ACW:

Yes. Separated by about 56,000,000 years.

[Olavarria]

1. Mormon could write in Hebrew.

2. Mormon lived many, many years after Lehi.

3. Therefore, someone passed down the knowledge of how to both speak and write in Hebrew over many generations.

Thowing in facts about the writing practices of Medieval Spaniards, or Turks, or Persians has no bearing on what Mormon himself wrote whatsoever.

He himself explained why they used egyptian, twas most economical. The fact is jews during Lehi's time did keep records in egyptian. THe hebrew in egyptian characters theory explains the use of a reformed egyptian and all of the hebraisms in the BoM, many of which arnt in the KJV.I gave many examples some modern, some medeval and some ancient just to show that it is not uncommon. Because you down played the "hebrew in egyptian characters theory" by saying :" why would he do that? Do you write english in cyrillic?"

Too bad you can't find any evidence of Hebraic writing in the New World.

Why would we expect to find any? The only people who used it were a small priestly lineage that existed for only 900 years, occupying a space of only 200 by 50 miles(more or less). If 99% of mayan writing has been lost why should we expect the 3%(guesssing) of the 99% thats an altered hebrew?

Where do you come up with this stuff?

forgive my cynicism. You have been polite and I should too.

Well, I was taught that Lehi inherited a land that was completely empty. I was taught this in Provo, Utah, in Seminary, approximately fifteen years ago. Now it is being said that Lehi's land was already occupied (in defiance of 2 Nephi). I don't know what else to call that BUT "evolution" of the story. I just don't know. "Changing the story"? "Fixing the numbers"? "Cooking the books"? What would you call it, when something taught as adamant fact has been completely turned on its ear? I thought "evolution" was quite polite.

I dont doubt your story for one second. As far as I know, the Church has no official stance on this issue.

Joseph Fielding Smith(the 2nd one) held the same view its in Doctrine of Salvation. The questian I ask is "what does the book say?" and "what does the archeologysay"? The book is silent on the matter, though certain things happen in the book by way of population and linguistics that definatly suggest other non-jaredites being here already. Why the silence? 1) the nature of the book. Mormon says:

Helaman3:14-16

14 But behold, a hundredth part of the proceedings of this people, yea, the account of the Lamanites and of the Nephites, and their wars, and contentions, and dissensions, and their preaching, and their prophecies, and their shipping and their building of ships, and their building of temples, and of synagogues and their sanctuaries, and their righteousness, and their wickedness, and their murders, and their robbings, and their plundering, and all manner of abominations and whoredoms, cannot be contained in this work.

15 But behold, there are many books and many records of every kind, and they have been kept chiefly by the Nephites.

16 And they have been handed down from one generation to another by the Nephites, even until they have fallen into transgression and have been murdered, plundered, and hunted, and driven forth, and slain, and scattered upon the face of the earth, and mixed with the Lamanites until they are cno more called the Nephites, becoming wicked, and wild, and ferocious, yea, even becoming Lamanites.

In other words, they purposefully left out 99% of the history. Why? 1)They are not trying to tell a secular history, they are telling the history of God's dealing with men. 2)Its a lineage history(as all ancient histories are). These folks were only concerened about the priests, kings and generals.

In fact, I daresay that most Mormons today STILL believe that Lehi inherited an empty land, and that Native Americans are Lamanites, direct descendants of Lehi's son Laman.

Good for them. I dont think Heavenly Father cares about what we think about these details, otherwise the specifics would have been revealed already. I also believe that Native Americans are descendants of the Laman and Lemuel. My great-great grand mother was a taino indian(or so the family legends say. I believe it cuz alot of us have some very dark features), but she was not my only ancestor. I also have ancestors from the canary islands, the basque country and italy. Like I said, when Lehi got here their were already millions of people; what happended was genetic swamping. Are his descendants alive today? You bet just go to your local indian casion or INS holding facility and you'll meet a bunch of them. But Lehi is not their only ancestor, he is simply the most important one.

Wait a minute. Hold everything. WHY are people in this thread saying that Hebrew was not spoken, if there are "Hebraisms" in the BoM? Well? Which is it? "A" cannot equal "Not A". Either they spoke and wrote in Hebrew, or they didn't. It can't be both ways. In order to learn a language well enough to write in it, a working knowledge of syntax, verbiage, figures of speech, etc., must be mastered.

I never said they didnt "speak it", I only said they didnt speak it as the vernacular. I agree that In order to learn a language well enough to write in it, a working knowledge of syntax, verbiage, figures of speech, etc., must be mastered. But that doesnt mean that hebrew was the vernacular of the nephites or anything more than a religious tongue.

Take Latin once more, the Pope writes all his official encyclicals in Latin(Or so I was told in catholic highschool). Now does he talk latin in the street? I doubt it. Did you know that Latin was used as the language of science but until the fairly recently? Newton wrote his scientific works, not in English, but in Latin. Heck, every other scientist at that time did too. Yet we know that the english didnt walk around speaking latin in the streets or from their mothers knee. Latin was the language of arts and science.

This sort of thing happends more often than we moderns are used too.

If there are actual "Hebraisms", and by that I take it that you mean "figures of speech", then that even argues more strongly my point that the familiarity of Hebrew extended well beyond the basic knowledge of how to scratch the characters down on something, and into a true fluency and facility of the language.

Yes, but among which group of people in the society. I maintain that it is only among the priestly lineage of nephite kings not the masses.

Lehi lived in Jerusalem, but even more importantly, his children did also. They would have learned to speak Hebrew fluently from their friends, even if Lehi and Sarai spoke nothing but Egyptian or Norwegian or Innuit at home.

Just as my great grandfather spoke basque, too bad he moved to Puerto Rico, a swamp of spanish.

1. Mormon could have written in Hebrew, if he had enough space.

I agree

2. Mormon lived a LONG time after Lehi.

yep

3. Mormon had to learn Hebrew from somewhere.

yep

4. Someone taught Mormon Hebrew.

yep

5. Someone taught him not just the alphabet, but the language. Why do we know this? Because, according to Her Amun, there are "Hebraisms" in the BoM. And also, Mormon himself declares this.

yep

Mormon could write in Hebrew = Mormon could understand Hebrew

or at least their version of it remember what he says:

Mormon9:33

And if our plates had been asufficiently large we should have written in Hebrew; but the Hebrew hath been altered by us also; and if we could have written in Hebrew, behold, ye would have had no bimperfection in our record.

So what is the problem? I think hebrew was to Mormon what Latin is to Benedict.

I never implied that, since I don't believe any of its claims in the first place.

Yes, but it seems to be the model you are working of from.

BUT, since you asked, Helamon 3:8 --

"And it came to pass that they [the Nephites] did multiply and spread, and did go forth from the land southward to the land northward, and did spread insomuch that they began to cover the face of the whole earth, from the sea south, to the sea north, from the sea west, to the sea east."

An east sea a west sea, and a narrow neck of land:

It's phrases such as "cover the face of the whole earth" that make me think that.

Thats undertsandable, the questian is: how much of the earth was know to these people? I dont think "cover the whole earth" includes Wyoming any more than "cover the whole earth" includes China.

AND the fact that this is precisely what was taught for many many years by the LDS church.

I wasnt aware that the 1st Presidency issued any official declarations on the matter. Could you point me to some?

I guess that is just another internal BoM inconsistency.

The onlything it is inconsistant with is a hemispheirc model of BoM geography, or the idea of an empty continant pre-600bc. 2 things the BoM does not give us.

I don't know how you can think that one people being "enslaved" by another is not "overrunning" or being "stepped on" by them.

You missunderstand what I say. The threat of enslavement would be meaningless if there werent already people to be enslaved by. They were not alone. Lehi's promise of the blessing is not in regards to them being alone, but being free.

Further, Joseph Smith himself, in Times and Seasons,

"In this important and interesting book [i.e., the Book of Mormon] the history of ancient America is unfolded, from its first settlement by a colony that came from the tower of Babel [Jaredites], at the confusion of languages to the beginning of the fifth century of the Christian era."

The Prophet is just as free to speculate about the BoM as I am. He, like me, was a reader of the book not the writer. He , like me, based his interpretation on the science available at the time.

There is never at any time, in any part of the BoM, any mention given of other neighboring peoples to the Jaredites, or to the Nephites and Lamanites.

No, it simply uses catchall phrases like "nephite" and "lamanite" and completely avoids getting into historical detail. Its a lineage history, like all ancient histories. It focuses on a lineage, the one that came out of Jerusalem.

The Jaredites were Semitic peoples also, yes?

Who knows? I think they were.

And so were the Mulekites? No Asians in the mix, right?

No Asians in the mix if you deny the Behring Straight fact. There were already millions of mongoloids here which crossed over from the Behring Strait way before Lehi got here.

You said BoM archaeological evidence was lacking, due perhaps to Spanish conquistadores destroying archaeological evidence. I merely pointed out that the Bible lands had their own litany of misery that FAR exceeded anything the NW has endured, and STILL manages to produce archeological evidence to corroborate the peoples which are mentioned in its text.

Your still comparing apples to oranges. You ignore the fact that the OW has what the NW lacks: a continous written history. We know Why,When and by whome Constantinople got changed to Istanbul, Gaul into France and Jerusalem into Al Quds. That is lacking in the NW thus a comparison between the two is fool hardy. We can read inscriptions from 600bc in Egypt and Palestine because of things such as the Rosetta STone(which contained the same document in egyptian and greek, side by side) and the fact that the jews have a continous written history. There is nothing like that in the NW. Ow archeology and NW archeology are nothing alike. There is stuff we know about the OW that we dont know about the NW, hence your inability, or anyones for that matter, to produce the histories I asked for.

Your original point was not about conquest, but about archaeological evidence. My original point countered that. Don't try to make my original point about something else.

Your original point was comparing OW archeology to the NW archeology. They are nothing alike. In the NW, we still dont know for the most part,who we are dealing with(600bc-420ad).

Are you seriosly telling me that those people you listed actually tried to destroy jewish Civ?

Gee, the Assyrians didn't try to destroy Israel? Hmm. I'll have to go back and study my history AGAIN.

Thats a perfect example of what Im talking about. Where are the ten tribes? Without a written history we cant say for sure what happended. Yet we know a hell of alot more about the fate of Judah than we do of Ishaacar, why? Continous written history.

I could compile an entire list of peoples who tried to destroy Israel as a nation, starting with the Assyrians, or maybe the Arab tribes, but frankly, I find that prospect tedious, and probably, you do too.

Yes, and we both know that none of these groups did anything like the spanish did. Case in point, many jews can still read hebrew. Do you know of any mayans that can still read mayan?

What does that in any way have to do with my point that there were other people in the Middle East capable of destroying archaeological evidence, and yet it still exists despite that?

Because your still denying the difference between the NW and the OW.

Since these questions have nothing to do with that original point of mine, I am going to ignore that strawman.

Your the one with the straw man bro. You are comparing a Isreal to Mexico, when they have 2 completly different situations by way of what survived from 600bc-420ad. Your the one thats acting as if we know as much about San Lorenzo as we do of Jerusalem.

Again, what does this have to do with anything? I'm not sure where you are going with this point. Or even if it is a point. Ranting about Mesoamerican lack of evidence only proves MY point.

It has everything to do with it. We can compare the Bible to the Lacish letters, Dead Sea Scrolls or Tacticus because the Lacish letters, Dead Sea Scrolls and Tacticus survived. We cant compare the BoM history to anyother mesoamerican history from 600bc to 420ad, because nothing survived.

So, Herod ruled Palastine during the time of Christ; who ruled Teotihuacan during the same period? Was he Mixtec, Totonac,mayan or Nahuat?

Her Amun, who are you talking to? I'm not being rude, I'm genuinely confused.

Im simply pointing out what you dont seem to understand, that being, that we dont know half as much about the ancient mexicans as we do about the ancient jews.

Thus comparing the BoM to the ruins in Mexico,whether you believe it is true or not, is nothing like comparing the Bible to the ancient mediterrainian.

Are you trying to say that the remains of a pagan, animistic, polytheistic, Asiatic people with a language based IN NO WAY on Hebrew, has some kind of relationship AT ALL with Hebrews of the house of Israel

What I am saying is that whether they do or not cant be tested.

You seem to believe that it can.

Now, why do you think that just because Lehi and his family came from Jerusalem that their dissendants were not a pagan(whatever that means), animistic, polytheistic, Asiatic people with a language based IN NO WAY on Hebrew? Who said these people(outside the lineage of Prophet-historians) were speaking hebrew? Who said they didnt mix with the Behring straiters and thus became asiatic? Ever wonder how one segment of the family can change skin color in one generation? Its called race mixing.

Who said they didnt believe animals and trees had spirits? Who said they were not worshipping idols? The ancient american prophets preached against idolatry, so someone had to be worshipping idols. Your whole argument is based on the idea that these people crossed the ocean and didnt change, that they were just like the people back home. That they didnt blend into the existing culture. You have no basis for assuming that, especially since we know that the Behring Straiters were already here.

Uh, you're asking me to speculate on what I consider to be two disparate mythologies.

Thats exactly my point, you dont take the BoM seriosly or even give it a shot. That is why you study this in a vacum of the folklore you learned in seminary and not of what we actually know about the ancient world and what the book actually says. Your insistance that nephites couldnt be mongoloid is based on the asusmption that the BoM didnt take place in the real world. I say that it did, so things like the Behring Strait are tottally relevant when speculating on what these people looked like. In insist on assuming that these people spoke hebrew in the street, just because Lehi may have. Yet, you ignore the fact that many cultures have liturgical languages and that the nephites may have been no different.

But that is exactly the point, you dont even acknowledge the possibility that their were nephites, so to compare what happends in the real world to what the BoM actually says is out of the questian. Rather, you have in your mind a primary school oversimplificatied assumptions of an empty continant and a race war between hasidic jews and Sitting Bull, when the BoM does not justify that idea. So you compare the primary school oversimplification with the ruins of mesoamerica and conclude that the religion of your fathers is a fabrication. Why? because accepting the oversimplified assumtions is easier than confronting the possibility that your wrong, and that the BoM is a real mesoamerican lineage history written by a lineage that originated in Jerusalem.

That still doesn't reach the sheer magnitude of the millions of people who have ravaged the Middle East over thousands of years, and yet there is still evidence of people and place names mentioned in the Bible.

Your still ignoring the central fact my friend that when studying mesoamerica, we dont have 1/2 the knowledge of these people as we do in the OW. That is why the BoM stacks up really well in the OW and not so much in the NW, there is more stuff in the OW with which to compare it to. Whereas in the NW not much of anything (nephite or otherwise) has survived.

Again, ranting about polytheistic, animistic, blood-letting Asiatic peoples in no way establishes any link to monotheistic, Semitic, Mosaic-law-abiding Israelites and their conquest of the New World.

You didnt answer my questians.

I believe that the BoM people were polytheistic, were animistic, were blood letting(Alma34:11) and asiatic(given the genetic swamping by the Behring stariters). Its happended before*. Mosaic law abiding? Only for 600 yrs and with varying degrees of faithfulness. Conquest of the NW? What?

*

I'm not really sure why you think there is any correlation between the two at all.

http://lds.org/library/display/0,4945,510-1-3067-1,00.html

You might find John Clarke's paper interesting.

The Jaredites, Mulekites, and Lehites were ALL Semitic peoples. No one else is mentioned in the entirety of the BoM.

But they are implied. Besides, they(BHeRiNG STRaiTeRS) were here whether we like it or not.

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/pdf.php?fi...p;type=amJtcw==

Pagan --One who is not a Christian, Muslim, or Jew, especially an adherent of a polytheistic religion in antiquity.

Where does it say the nephites alaways held to that standard as it is understood today? Was 1st temple judaism pagan? They worshipped El, his Wife Asherah and Their Sons, Jehovah being the chiefest. Besides, we know that it was only during the 1st 200 yrs after Christ that these people held the line, every other time they were in a constant flux between obedience and idolatry.

The entirety of the Old Testament is basically God self-indulgently demanding he alone be worshipped. If you want to argue that those people who lived under Mosaic law were in any way polytheistic, then have a field day. The Old Testament annihilates that point. There's not one thing I want to add to that argument.

Our OT was composed after the Babylonian exile, after Lehi left Jerusalem.

Read and be enlightened:

Asherah: Goddesses in Ugarit, Israel and the Old Testament

Did God Have A Wife? Archaeology And Folk Religion In Ancient Israel (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company 2005)

Judith M.Hadley: The Cult of Asherah in Ancient Israel and Judah (U of Cambridge 2000)

Jenny Kien: Reinstating the Divine Woman in Judaism (Universal 2000)

Asphodel P. Long: In a Chariot Drawn by Lions (Crossing Press 1993).

Raphael Patai: The Hebrew Goddess (Wayne State University Press 1990 and earlier editions)

William L. Reed: The Asherah in the Old Testament (Texas Christian University Press, 1949).

Steve A. Wiggins: A Reassessment of "Asherah": A Study According to the Textual Sources of the First Two Millennia B.C.E. (Kevelaer: Verlag Butzon & Bercker; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1993). Second edition: (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2007)

ALSO

http://www.margaretbarker.com/Papers/Whatd...osiahReform.pdf

Important: I said the indigenous peoples of this continent were animists. The Book of Mormon people were believers in Moses' God.

And what makes you think they didnt have the BoMoses? Even if "animism" isnt kosher, what makes you think they held the line?

Some would say mormons are animists,

I would agree with them.

So then why wouldnt the nephites be?

considering we belive that everything was created spiritually before it was created physically thus trees and fido have souls too. If the Nephites had the BoMoses they would also fit this mold. They would not then fit the mold of traditional Israelites/Jews.

Assuming the really did/do hold the moasiac line.

I fail to see any correlation whatsoever between these two peoples, who are separated by language, culture, religious practice and belief, and genetic makeup.

Thats cool. But "failing to see" is alot different from saying "there is none". All Im saying is that unlike the OW with the Bible, the NW does not lend itself to the same type of comparison to the BoM? Why? because unlike the OW, we moderns dont know the half of what went on in the new.

By "developed", I will continue to believe that the standards of collection of evidence are no different despite what continent these people collecting evidence are on, that is why they are able to call themselves "archaeologists" in the first place, and not grave robbers. There is nothing wrong with the collection of evidence, only that there is a lack of this evidence in the first place.

I have no problems with that, in regards to the NW.

The problem here is in trying to fit the square peg of indigenous Americans into the round hole of Semites from the Middle East.

The questian is, how OW were they? It seems that they werent so very OW at all.

2 Ne. 25: 1-2, 5-6, 9, 15, 18

1 Now I, Nephi, do speak somewhat concerning the words which I have written, which have been spoken by the mouth of Isaiah. For behold, Isaiah spake many things which were hard for many of my people to understand; for they know not concerning the manner of prophesying among the Jews.

2 For I, Nephi, have not taught them many things concerning the manner of the Jews; for their aworks were works of darkness, and their doings were doings of abominations.

â?¢ â?¢ â?¢

6 But behold, I, Nephi, have not taught my children after the manner of the Jews; but behold, I, of myself, have welt at Jerusalem, wherefore I know concerning the regions round about; and I have made mention unto my children concerning the judgments of God, which ahath come to pass among the Jews, unto my children, according to all that which Isaiah hath spoken, and I do not write them.

That is why there is no evidence, that is why there are no artifacts. There is plenty of archaeological evidence from the New World, and it all points to one thing -- the people here migrated from Mongolia as long as fifteen or twenty thousand years ago, and they filled the continent. There is no evidence whatsoever that Hebrew peoples ever visited here.

Tell me, what traces would a family of 13-18 leave behind when dropped into this mongolian bucket?

[Olavarria]

Hi Her Amun,

With respect to the OP, I would say that a good place to start in identifying Nephite artifacts would be a process of elimination. If an artifact is associated with a culture that worshipped serpents and birds and the like, for example, then it is not a good fit for a BoM culture (and particularly not for the Nephites). If a culture did not have monumental architecture then it is not a good fit for a BoM culture (except maybe the Lamanites). Etc.

So, finding cultures that do not have features that are uncharacteristic of BoM cultures might be a good starting place for listing some possible candidates.

-CK

2 Ne. 25: 1-2, 5-6, 9, 15, 18

1 Now I, Nephi, do speak somewhat concerning the words which I have written, which have been spoken by the mouth of Isaiah. For behold, Isaiah spake many things which were ahard for many of my people to understand; for they know not concerning the manner of prophesying among the Jews.

2 For I, Nephi, have not taught them many things concerning the manner of the Jews; for their aworks were works of darkness, and their doings were doings of abominations.

â?¢ â?¢ â?¢

5 Yea, and my soul delighteth in the words of aIsaiah, for I came out from Jerusalem, and mine eyes hath beheld the things of the bJews, and I know that the Jews do cunderstand the things of the prophets, and there is none other people that understand the things which were spoken unto the Jews like unto them, save it be that they are taught after the manner of the things of the Jews.

6 But behold, I, Nephi, have not taught my children after the manner of the Jews; but behold, I, of myself, have dwelt at Jerusalem, wherefore I know concerning the regions round about; and I have made mention unto my children concerning the judgments of God, which ahath come to pass among the Jews, unto my children, according to all that which Isaiah hath spoken, and I do not write them.

Who says that the quetzal(bird) and the feathered serpeant werent nephit eversions of the dove and jesus fish? Without accompanying text we just dont know. One thing is certain, many nephites were worshipping false gods.

WHAT IS A NEPHITE?

1)anyone who is not a lamanite. Jacob 1:13

2)political affiliation, loyal to the Nephi dynasty,kinda like Saudi, as in ibn Saud. Jacob 1:14

3)believer in the religion taught by Nephi and his descendants, kinda like a Sunni vs Shia. 4 Nephi 1:37

4) a blood descendant of Nephi. 3 Nephi 5:10

Who is to say that a descendant of Nephi was not worshipping the corn god?

Who is to say that some polytheistic worshipper of CHUCHUCHUMAKWAKA wasnt loyal to the Nephi dynasty?

[ACW]

ACW:

Yes. Separated by about 56,000,000 years.

Wow!!! I'm glad they evolved into smaller animals. Now I won't be so annoyed when I have to clean their droppings off my picnic table.

[Chris Smith]

Her Amun,

So what you're saying is that any artifact we come across could theoretically belong to a Nephite civilization? The Book of Mormon makes no falsifiable claims about what a Nephite civilization would look like? How convenient.

I find no awareness in the Book of Mormon of widespread cults worshipping birds or serpents. The argument from silence does not a priori falsify an identification of said worshippers with the Nephite culture, but it is so griveous an omission as to raise some very severe suspicions.

Perhaps the biggest problem with the BoM is that it evidences no awareness of the supposed "others" that are so crucial to arguments forwarded by divines like Sorenson and Roper. Perhaps the best way to identify a Nephite civilization would be to find a region that was almost totally empty until a sudden population explosion in 600 BC, and that remained more or less isolated for the next thousand years.

-CK

[cdowis]

Her Amun,

So what you're saying is that any artifact we come across could theoretically belong to a Nephite civilization?

Understand that it is the antimormons who are demanding "Hebrew" artifacts, Nephite and Lamanite. We are asking these antimormons how to identify a Nephite artifact.

The burden on on their shoulders, if they claim there are no Nepite artifacts, to show how to identify a jade necklace, etc etc as Nephite vs someone else.

The Book of Mormon makes no falsifiable claims about what a Nephite civilization would look like? How convenient.

So you agree that it is an absurd assertion that "no Nephite artifacts have been found." How convenient to make such a statement and unable to prove it.

It is sheer nonsense to make such a claim.

Put up, or shut up.

I find no awareness in the Book of Mormon of widespread cults worshipping birds or serpents.

I find several references to apostate religions, which DENY Christ. Their particular brand of apostasy is not detailed in the BOM text. We can discover that they worshipped birds, serpents, etc etc by the **archeological** evidence.

Do we have to do the thinking for you?

The argument from silence does not a priori falsify an identification of said worshippers with the Nephite culture, but it is so griveous an omission as to raise some very severe suspicions.

I am beginning to suspect that the antis are logically flawed in their assertions.

Perhaps the biggest problem with the BoM is that it evidences no awareness of the supposed "others" that are so crucial to arguments forwarded by divines like Sorenson and Roper.

Read my previous post on their discovery of domesticated animals when they landed.

Perhaps the best way to identify a Nephite civilization would be to find a region that was almost totally empty until a sudden population explosion in 600 BC, and that remained more or less isolated for the next thousand years.

That is not what the BOM says. That is the antimormon version of the BOM text.

-CK

[Olavarria]

Her Amun,

So what you're saying is that any artifact we come across could theoretically belong to a Nephite civilization?

Any artifact from between 600bc-420ad could possibly belong to a "nephite". Just like any dollar bill you pick up on the street could possibly belong to a methodist republican descendant of the mayflower people or a mexican national that voted for Fox in the last election. But the dollar bill, or the Jade necklace in and of themselves give us no clues as to whether or not they did.

The Book of Mormon makes no falsifiable claims about what a Nephite civilization would look like? How convenient.

Convieniance or not, the BoM doesnt tell us much of anything about these people. It does tell us a heck of alot about Christ, which is what I think what the Prophets were going for.

I find no awareness in the Book of Mormon of widespread cults worshipping birds or serpents.

The argument from silence does not a priori falsify an identification of said worshippers with the Nephite culture, but it is so griveous an omission as to raise some very severe suspicions.

...why?

These Prophet historians were obsessed with writing about Jesus, why do they need to describe jaguar cults?

Perhaps the biggest problem with the BoM is that it evidences no awareness of the supposed "others" that are so crucial to arguments forwarded by divines like Sorenson and Roper.

But they are implied:

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/pdf.php?fi...p;type=amJtcw==

Again, it goes back to why the book was even written by these people: to bring people to Christ, not give them an ethnography lesson.

Jacob 1:14

14 But I, Jacob, shall not hereafter distinguish them by these names, but I shall call them Lamanites that seek to destroy the people of Nephi, and those who are friendly to Nephi I shall call Nephites, or the people of Nephi, according to the reigns of the kings.

Looks like a delibrate attempt at simplification to me.

Perhaps the best way to identify a Nephite civilization would be to find a region that was almost totally empty until a sudden population explosion in 600 BC, and that remained more or less isolated for the next thousand years.

I disagree, as I said to Loquacious Lurker, I dont think a careful reading of the view justifies that position.

The only way to scientifically prove the BoM, with the kind of evidence that would make everyone look stupid for not converting is by finding a nephite version of Pacal's tomb. You need to find the tomb of Helaman ben Alma ben Alma ben ....Nephi ben Lehi al Mannasi, or a set of gold plates with a copy of 2nd Nephi on them, or even a codex with one of Alma'a sermons. That is the only way. But like Ive been saying, given that we cant find anything for any mesoamerican priest or kingly lineage fom that period, we shouldnt expect the nephite ineage to put up any more than we would the hundreds of others that were probably contemporaneos with theirs

...the anti's however have been saying the opposite, despite what the BoM and mesoamerican archeology actually say. They act as if the NW archeological information is identical to the OW situation. Its not, which explains why the BoM fits soooo well into the ancient near east and so-so in the NW. Take the Sumerians and the Olmecs for instance. We know what Ur was called and the names of its kings. What we dont know jack trash about San Lorenzo. We dont even know what the Olmecs called themselves. Where the Jaredites Olmecs? I think so, but that is something that cant be proven or disproven.

damn....I really gotta get married. What kind of mormon am I?

[Anijen]

Does this image displays anything remotely Christian? BoM is full of hints and evidences about Jesus. How come we do not see anything related to Christianity in any mesoamerican culture?

An Eartshattering evidence of Jesus appearing in Nephites is not mentioned anywhere.

How can one have faith for things to appear when they don't exist in any shape or form last couple milenia?

We have plenty other evidences leading other cultures, it's just that BoM archeology is missing.

I have seen glyphs were it appears that a feathered persons palms are bleeding

Burning Water by Soujonor (non mormon)

Sorry thats Burning Water by Laurette Sejourne

[Olavarria]

I have seen glyphs were it appears that a feathered persons palms are bleeding

Burning Water by Soujonor (non mormon)

Sorry thats Burning Water by Laurette Sejourne

who knows?

[krose]

Who said the land was empty?

The fact is, the continant wasnt empty, that is a fact.

One question:

It is now a common assertion of apologists that the American continents were well populated when Nephi arrived. But when was this concept first advanced? I never heard it until after the Native-American DNA studies were published.

[valkator]

Some possible research threads to follow with respect to artifacts:

1. The first official 'Semite' was Sargon, who brought his language to Sumeria from the 'North'...ie: he was, likely, an Indo-European who brought his language TO the people that became associated with being 'semites'.

2. The 'indigenous' people of Sumeria that were 'colonized' under Sargon were originally organized into 'city states' and relate that they were the survivors of a cataclysm who had migrated there.

3. The indigenous Sumerians practiced animal and human sacrifice and worshipped various manifestations of the 'sun god' - directly related to the Meso-American civilizations. Humans, in their theology, were created as a worker slave race to serve offworld gods - of which, two brother gods fought over the 'rightfulness' of this action. Blood/burnt offerings were how they were to 'feed' these gods in propitiation. There are reliefs of 'blond and red headed' men in the Meso American ruins, being sacrificed.

4. Identifying names, places, and dates is not an exact science and should not be a barrier to revising knowledge based on new evidence. Radio Carbon dating methods do not take into account the change in isotopes that occur from cataclysmic explosions.

5. The apostle Paul is said to have been in Arabia for 3 years and the earliest division within the developing 'ekklesia' was between Paul and Peter.

6. The New Testament documents have been heavily edited, rewritten, and made to 'fit' a certain mold to justify certain 'truths'.

7. Languages that relate to the 'indigenous' people of Sumeria that escaped a cataclysm and settled in this region will not be found amongst the semitic languages - but those spoken prior to the arrival of Sargon. Migration patterns, both pre and post cataclysm center on an escape TO the near-east out of the most heavily impacted areas -- and not from it.

We are repeating this very same 'circle' today -- going 'back' to the Middle East -- with the new 'civilization of Noah' going to be the most heavily hit -- or so it seems based on pattens.

[poulsenll]

One question:

It is now a common assertion of apologists that the American continents were well populated when Nephi arrived. But when was this concept first advanced? I never heard it until after the Native-American DNA studies were published.

It was proposed by Sorenson in 1985 and probably by others before that. Long before the DNA flap started.

Larry P

[LifeOnaPlate]

I'd like to see something with a little Hebrew or Egyptian or Reformed Egyptian on it. After all, they would have been teaching the art of writing in at least two languages, father to son, for hundreds and hundreds of years. Millons of students would have been practicing how to write, for hundreds and hundreds of years. Lacking papyrus, they might have learned to write on sandstone walls. After all, the Native Americans used canyon walls for their pictographs and petroglyphs. Why not a bit of Hebrew from one of the millions of students who would have been learning?

And yet there is not one shred of evidence. Not even of that.

If during an archaeological dig, in one of these Mayan cities, they unearthed an artifact -- just one -- that had Hebrew on it, and dated to around 600 BCE...

I would re-think every dismissal of the church I have ever made. I would re-think my atheism. I would spend months of intensive soul-searching.

As it is, I do none of these things for the very same reason that you LDS faithful do not spend months soul-searching over whether Zeus is really God of the universe.

Incidentally, my very TBM dad always claimed that the dinosaur bones were material from other planets that HF used to create this one. So how could birds be descended from them?

A sign-seeker aye?

[rick7475]

Has anyone mentioned the two Mesoamerican artifacts that contain letters that were a close match to the letters on the Anthon transcript?

â??The â??Anthon Transcriptâ?? and Two Mesoamerican Cylinder Seals,â? Newsletter and Proceedings of the Society for Early Historical Archaeology 122 (Sept. 1970): 1â??8.

And the article discussing these finds:

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=jbm...88#Anchor-12574

So there is your smoking gun.

[solomarineris]

I find Nephite artifacts every time I open the BoM. Everything else is just a nice piece of parsley.

[/quot

Yea, I lose it ever time I visit Metropolitan Museum ofr Art in Manhattan.

Ican see none collaborate, NONE of the horses,elephants, wheat barley.

Help me if you can with a visual evidence.

[cdowis]

>Yea, I lose it ever time I visit Metropolitan Museum ofr Art in Manhattan.

Ican see none collaborate, NONE of the horses,elephants, wheat barley.

Help me if you can with a visual evidence.

Based on your statement above, you might want to focus on improving your mental, rather than your visual acuity.

Let me give you your first lesson ==>> "Not found, not exist" is a logical fallacy. Demanding artifacts which have not been discovered is based on a logical fallacy.

Rather than saying "Show me horse fossils", you should be stating "Let me show you how to identify Nephite/Lamanite artifacts."

You are the one demanding evidence, so it is your burden to show us how to distinguish Nephite/Lamanite artifacts from "outsider" artifacts. If I see a jade necklace, how would I be able to identify which group made that necklace.

[cdowis]

Has anyone mentioned the two Mesoamerican artifacts that contain letters that were a close match to the letters on the Anthon transcript?

The prob with such comparisons is that any similarities could simply be due to random chance. You need a *system* of writing, not just "letters that were a close match".