Changes In Maya Civilization And Nephite Destruction

[poulsenll]

Well, the area we're discussing is the area believed by most LDS scholars to be the land of the Book of Mormon. If the Mayans weren't the remnant of the Lamanites, then Mormons have a real problem with this region as the two would not likely coexist. I'm fairly sure we're not talking about the New York area where Moroni fled, nor do I know how far the Lamanites would have followed him. At one point, he expresses fear that the Lamanites might get him, and I'd always thought that was when he was near New York. Either he was closer to Mesoamerica or those Lamanites were persistent.

CS

Geographycally and probably culturally, mesoamerica can be divided into 4 areas. These are the Peten lowlands, the Guatamala highlands near Guatamala city, the Grijalva basin and the Central Mexican plateau near Mexico City. These three areas are separated from each other by either distance or by mountain ranges with a limited number of passes providing access to the different areas. The various textual descriptions about the location of the Nephite culture after the time of Mosiah indicate that it was at an intermediate elevation being up from the seashore where the Zarahemlites came from and down from the Land of Nephi-Lehi which was abandoned by the Nephites at the time they joined up with the Zarahemlites. The relationship between the land of Nephi-Lehi and the land of Zarahemla is quite clear given that one group went back up to Nephi-Lehi to claim the land of their inheritance and had to be rescued and brought back down to the land of Zarahemla. The fact that the river Sidon flowed through or by the land of Zarahemla among other criteria rules out the Usamacinta as Sidon simply because the Usamacinta does not flow through an sufficiently large area of intermediate altitude to account for the apparent size of the land of Zarahemla and the other lands that were within easy travel distances of the city of Zarahemla. The Usamacinta drops rapidly from the highlands into the Usamacinta lowlands as clearly shown by using Google earth. This leaves the Grijalva basin as yhe most likely candidate for the land of Zarahemla. For a more detailed discussion of this rationale, see Sorenson's "An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon"

The Classic Maya and their ancesters occupied the Peten lowlands which tends to rule them out as Nephites or at least not as Nephites in the central parts of the land. Lamanites, yes, in as much that they were not Nephites.

Larry P

[Wiki Wonka]

Or "Lamanites" refers to "non-Nephites", which could have been anybody in Norh America.

I believe that in the minds of the Nephites that "Lamanites" were simply "non-Nephites." I also suspect that there was probably a lot more detail on the identity of non-Nephite groups in the actual records, and that Mormon simply called them all "Lamanites" during his abridgment. After all, it was mentioned that space on the plates was very limited.

[PacMan]

Cinepro cracks me up! Typical critic...confounding evidences for proof. I don't know that anyone is suggesting this find is any sort of proof, but simply something to be taken note of. Moreover, I find it highly amusing that many critics find the 'convenience' of the Nehpites being destroyed...as to conveniently "loose" all evidences of their existence. Funny...since civilizations from Egypt to the Americas would do just that--wipe them out completely, re-write history on the monuments, and destroy any other mentioning of them. The only convenience I see is with its parallelism to reality.

PacMan

[cinepro]

Cinepro cracks me up! Typical critic...confounding evidences for proof. I don't know that anyone is suggesting this find is any sort of proof, but simply something to be taken note of.

PacMan

If you'll review Coyote07's post #14, you'll see that we are both in agreement to the article's likely relevancy towards the Book of Mormon.

But if the article is as irrelevant to the Book of Mormon as we all seem to agree it is, I wonder why it was brought up in the first place on a "Mormon Apologetics" discussion board in the first place.

[charity]

Non-believers read the article and ask where the Book of Mormon is in all this. Where is the infusion of Christian religion with mass conversions and divisions into warring factions around 600BC? Where is the complete homogenization of religion to local but universal Christianity with 200 years of peace starting in 33AD?

The cinepro's of the world always overlook this little inconvenient fact: National Geographic states:

â??Fire is Born appears to have dropped whatever pretense he had assumed as a goodwill ambassador. His forces destroyed most of Tikalâ??s existing monumentsâ??stelae put in place by 14 earlier rulers of Tikal. A new era had begun, and later monuments celebrated the victors.â?

Conquerers almost always come in and destroy as much as they can of the vanquished. The Spanish deestroyed almost all the books, this warrior with an obviously as yet untranslated name destroyed all the stelae. It sure makes it hard to learn about earlier civilizations and societies, since that is what seems to be a fairly common practice.

[ERMD]

Ooooo-pretty picture! Were some Mayan pyramids really overlayed in gold like this? (what a shame it would have been to have to run all that blood down on that beautiful gold!)

It's the lighting that gives the picture that sheen.

The magazine goes into quite a bit of detail about the photographic process and how the lighting was done.

Pretty cool stuff.

[cdowis]

Well, the area we're discussing is the area believed by most LDS scholars to be the land of the Book of Mormon. If the Mayans weren't the remnant of the Lamanites, then Mormons have a real problem with this region as the two would not likely coexist. I'm fairly sure we're not talking about the New York area where Moroni fled, nor do I know how far the Lamanites would have followed him. At one point, he expresses fear that the Lamanites might get him, and I'd always thought that was when he was near New York. Either he was closer to Mesoamerica or those Lamanites were persistent.

You are committing the common fallacy that the LGT only includes mesoamerica. That is the locale for the BOM text, but it is clear from the text itself that the "land northward" was extensively populated. You pretend that it was completely empty and the Lamanites persued him thousands of miles northward which is absolute nonsense.

[juliann]

Biggest thing I see critics do is read to much into what the actuall text says. I dont care to really debate this thought. Just a thought.

Remember, the discovering has been done. There will be no more...we already know everything that needs to be known about the world. That is the only mindset that can account for the refusal of countermos to acknowledge even one mundane or meaningless parallel to the BOM. It would rock their world.

[John Williams]

Remember, the discovering has been done. There will be no more...we already know everything that needs to be known about the world. That is the only mindset that can account for the refusal of countermos to acknowledge even one mundane or meaningless parallel to the BOM. It would rock their world.

Um, most of us acknowledge parallels. We don't however, consider them particularly compelling evidence supporting Book of Mormon claims. And the "we already know everything" mantra is getting a little old.

Hey, what do you know? The NHM thing is a pretty good parallel. I guess my world has been rocked.

[grego]

That is the locale for the BOM text, but it is clear from the text itself that the "land northward" was extensively populated. You pretend that it was completely empty and the Lamanites persued him thousands of miles northward which is absolute nonsense.

cdowis,

Yes, we still don't know.

Do you have references for the first claim about the land northward?

Also, why would it be "absolute nonsense"? The BoM states that the Lamanites would track down the remaining disciples of Christ and kill them. Believing the vision about Moroni's death (killed by Lamanites), there would be no need for an entire army to go to NY for one man--just send out specialized low-number tracking hit squads--which is what the vision might have shown. Especially using long-distance weapons like arrows, it could have been from under 100 to under 10.

[solomarineris]

Of course, it proves nothing, but looking for correlations is always entertaining.

Entertaining it might be but your correlation is a monumental waste of time. There is nothing in Maya/Aztec/Toltec Cultures remotely connected to BoM. We all kow that.

[freakin a man]

If you'll review Coyote07's post #14, you'll see that we are both in agreement to the article's likely relevancy towards the Book of Mormon.

But if the article is as irrelevant to the Book of Mormon as we all seem to agree it is, I wonder why it was brought up in the first place on a "Mormon Apologetics" discussion board in the first place.

I went back to post 14 and this is what is said:

Hmmm...point of clarification. I don't believe that Fire is Born as an individual had anything to do with the BoM. Fire is Born's arrival is apparently a catalyst for a major change in the Maya civilization which unified them and brought their civilization to new cultural heights. He brought the influence of Teotihuacan . I'm not sure why anyone would think that he was a BoM character?? Or that he associated with any BoM characters? If he had any interaction with them at all, he probably had them exterminated.

Ooooh.....Ahhhh.....not! Just an interesting comparison and food for discussion, nothing more.

I don't think there is a claim of the article being completely irrelevant to the Book of Mormon. Just that "fire is born" is not necessarily a known BOM character. We can't go into the BOM and point to a specific person and say "That is "fire is born." THe purpose was simply to show perhaps some plausible parallels that may exist.

What I find interesting is the how you jumped all over this. I find it funny how skeptics demand evidence and when something that not even declared as evidence is presented but just as a "food for thought" type thing, it immediately has to be refuted or put down by skeptics. It simply shows me that skeptics really don't want to look at anything even with a partially open minded. Bottom line is they really never will be satisified.

[Maidservant]

I am curious if there are any cultures being studied in these areas and time periods that had a 3 pronged leadership as the Nephites seemed to: the chief judge (civilian), the captain of war, and the prophet. In USA, our civilian and military leader are the same; but not in the Nephite constitution. The chief judge had nothing to say about how wars were handled, the captain of war did ('captain of war' is my word). The chief judge was a more or less elected office. But the war office seemed to be a dynasty and, again, our favorite and seemingly most godly examples in the BofM seem to be the war captain dynasty -- in fact, Moroni, same dude on top of all temples, same dude in Joseph Smith's bedroom -- was the last in a long line of these war captains in his 'previous' life. Way cool to me.

[solomarineris]

Remember, the discovering has been done. There will be no more...we already know everything that needs to be known about the world. That is the only mindset that can account for the refusal of countermos to acknowledge even one mundane or meaningless parallel to the BOM. It would rock their world.

No Juliann, not all discovering has been done yet.

We still have to discover (verify) "the Face" on Mars, according to Hoagland, there are monuments on Mars.

He also claims that the "Bulge" on the Equator of Moon Iapetus is artificially created.

[Marmonboy]

Isn't there supposed to be a big black monolith on Iapetus?

Actually, not that many Lamanite kings are listed by name, and most of those who are, are Nephite dissenters. Since the Nephite civilization was already in decline, and the records were abridged anyway, it's possible that Fire is Born's name was not recorded in the abridgement we have.

[Wiki Wonka]

I don't think there is a claim of the article being completely irrelevant to the Book of Mormon. Just that "fire is born" is not necessarily a known BOM character. We can't go into the BOM and point to a specific person and say "That is "fire is born." THe purpose was simply to show perhaps some plausible parallels that may exist.

You are correct. I'll elaborate a bit further in order to clarify my point-of-view. I personally favor the limited geography theory centered in Mesoamerica, which would also mean that there were a lot of other groups of people on the continent of which the BoM makes no mention. The Nephites had a couple hundred years of peace, then began to divide into opposing groups again. Eventually, something dealt them a final blow and eliminated their culture. It is entirely possible that the arrival of an outside influence was the catalyst the triggered the events that led final Nephite destruction. The comparision to the story of Fire is Born simply shows a bit of plausible correlation between events of the historical record and the events recorded in the BoM record in the same timeframe. I don't believe the Fire is Born matches any known character in the BoM, but it is possible that the effects of his actions are reflected in the BoM verses I quoted.

[poulsenll]

You are correct. I'll elaborate a bit further in order to clarify my point-of-view. I personally favor the limited geography theory centered in Mesoamerica, which would also mean that there were a lot of other groups of people on the continent of which the BoM makes no mention. The Nephites had a couple hundred years of peace, then began to divide into opposing groups again. Eventually, something dealt them a final blow and eliminated their culture. It is entirely possible that the arrival of an outside influence was the catalyst the triggered the events that led final Nephite destruction. The comparision to the story of Fire is Born simply shows a bit of plausible correlation between events of the historical record and the events recorded in the BoM record in the same timeframe. I don't believe the Fire is Born matches any known character in the BoM, but it is possible that the effects of his actions are reflected in the BoM verses I quoted.

In the following article Brant Gardner discusses the significance of the Teotihuacan incursion into the south.

http://www.fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/20...al_History.html

He quotes a little understood verse in Helaman 2:13-14

13 And behold, in the end of this book ye shall see that this Gadianton did prove the overthrow, yea, almost the entire destruction of the people of Nephi.

14 Behold I do not mean the end of the book of Helaman, but I mean the end of the book of Nephi, from which I have taken all the account which I have written.

where Mormon blames the final fall of the Nephites to what Mormon calls the Gadianton robbers.

Gardner then goes on to give evidence that equates the Gadianton robbers to the Teotihuacan armies, their secret combinations and tactics for conquest.

He then draws the following conclusion.

In the greater context of Mesoamerican history, there is every reason to suppose that Mormon was concerned with militaristic influences coming from Teotihuac

[JarMan]

Wouldn't that be cool if the arrival of the Lehites had been a similarly noted catalyst for change in the existing civilizations....

I find it interesting that written language seems to have developed in MA at about 600 BC.

And what about the mathematical concept of "0"? Or advances in Maya astronomy?

I'm not sure we know exactly when either of those appeared among the Maya, but it seems like they must have been concurrent with or after the appearance of writing.

[John Williams]

I find it interesting that written language seems to have developed in MA at about 600 BC. Since the Lehites didn't come as conquerors, and since there were relatively few of them, I don't know what other changes we could expect to see.

Isn't it a little strange that the written language wasn't reformed Egyptian?

There is more than just a parrallel here. This is what is called a "convergence" where information from the anthropological record not only parrallels a Book of Mormon event but brings meaning to an otherwise enigmatic statement in Mormon's abridgement. Remember that when Mormon inserts a bit of his own into the text, he is doing so from hindsight based on personal knowledge of events that were only prophecys in the text that he was abridging.

Larry P

I guess I can see the parallel, but not convergence. I doubt Brant himself would call it convergence. How does the rise of secret societies converge with an established nation-state conquering other polities?

[JarMan]

Isn't it a little strange that the written language wasn't reformed Egyptian?

Why would it be? Reformed Egyptian is basically Hebrew in Egyptian symbols. The Maya spoke Mayan languages, not Hebrew.

The mere concept or idea of writing is literally monumental. If you had no concept of it, and then somebody shows up with writing, you'd want to make use of it. But you wouldn't necessarily go about it the same way the foreigners did. You could easily create your own system to fit your existing language.

And besides, the Mayans probably learned the concept of writing from the Laman/Lemuel branch of the Lehites and who knows if they used reformed Egyptian anyways.

[John Williams]

Why would it be? Reformed Egyptian is basically Hebrew in Egyptian symbols. The Maya spoke Mayan languages, not Hebrew.

The mere concept or idea of writing is literally monumental. If you had no concept of it, and then somebody shows up with writing, you'd want to make use of it. But you wouldn't necessarily go about it the same way the foreigners did. You could easily create your own system to fit your existing language.

And besides, the Mayans probably learned the concept of writing from the Laman/Lemuel branch of the Lehites and who knows if they used reformed Egyptian anyways.

I've always thought it was interesting that the Lehites could enter a populated area, and if Brant Gardner is right, assume political/religious leadership because of their superior technology, and yet leave no trace either in the language or history or technology of Mesoamerica.

The alternative is that they were absorbed by the local culture, in which case the Judeo-Lehite history of the Book of Mormon doesn't make a lot of sense.

[grego]

I've always thought it was interesting that the Lehites could enter a populated area, and if Brant Gardner is right, assume political/religious leadership because of their superior technology, and yet leave no trace either in the language or history or technology of Mesoamerica.

The alternative is that they were absorbed by the local culture, in which case the Judeo-Lehite history of the Book of Mormon doesn't make a lot of sense.

More alternatives than just that.

-=-=-=

but brings meaning to an otherwise enigmatic statement in Mormon's abridgement.

I don't see it as that. I see it as just a possibility.

[juliann]

If you'll review Coyote07's post #14, you'll see that we are both in agreement to the article's likely relevancy towards the Book of Mormon.

But if the article is as irrelevant to the Book of Mormon as we all seem to agree it is, I wonder why it was brought up in the first place on a "Mormon Apologetics" discussion board in the first place.

To watch you "can't you see the evidence??" types scramble when you don't like the evidence and move into your real "the discovering has all been done and no evidence will prove otherwise" thinking.

[juliann]

More alternatives than just that.

There are rarely more than two possibilities in the countermo world. There have been at least three covered in this thread at which point we will likely observe meltdown. That is when we will see them start frantically talking about elves and such to avoid dealing with civilization patterns that might indicate the thinking has not all been done.

You pretend that it was completely empty and the Lamanites persued him thousands of miles northward which is absolute nonsense.

To do otherwise would require more than two possibilities.

[JarMan]

Either the Lehites dominated the existing culture to the point that there are obvious archaeological indicators. Or the existing culture dominated the Lehites and wiped out any traces of their cultural and religious identity. But nothing in between. Only the two ends of the spectrum exist, but not the spectrum itsself.

The emergence of writing in MA around 600 BC may be a lucky coincidence. Or it could be evidence of contact with a culture that already possessed writing. Many believe that some of the writing systems that supposedly appeared independently were really developed after contact with other cultures who already possessed some sort of writing. There's really no way to prove that Mayan languages developed independently because that would be like proving a negative. (The negative, in this case, being that no cultures with writing ever came into contact with the Maya.) What we should really be asking is, which culture did the Maya come into contact with around 600 BC that gave them the idea of writing? The Lehite culture is one such answer to this question.