Changes In Maya Civilization And Nephite Destruction

[Brant Gardner]

I suppose it's possible that the Mayans were not the Nephites.

If we have the geography right (and it works very well), the Nephites were not among the Maya after the departure from the City of Nephi. When we get to Zarahemla, they are in Zoque territory. The Zoque are descendants of the Olmec. The overall culture area shared many traits, but in this case, there was a mutually unintelligible language separating the Zoque and the Maya (obviously there were those who learned both - traders need to do such things).

[Brant Gardner]

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.

Rather remarkable statements, considering than none of them are supportable. The Book of Mormon text tells us they have political ascendency, and I do suggest that it comes from important technologies. However, the resulting production of the technology had to have been adapted to local interests or no one would have wanted it. So, let's say Nephites produced some metal ornament. Logically, trade requirements would dictate that the ornament be acceptable/understandable to the locals. Market forces would dictate that the results of the technologies would not be all that different. Therefore, they might leave all kinds of traces, but we wouldn't know what they were.

As for language, I have always supposed that the lingua franca was Mesoamerican. Nothing else makes sense to me in the combination of populations, given the numbers from the Lehites.

I do believe that they were absorbed into the larger local culture. I fail to see, however, where this precludes anything in the Book of Mormon history. It certainly makes sense to me.

[Avatar4321]

If we have the geography right (and it works very well), the Nephites were not among the Maya after the departure from the City of Nephi. When we get to Zarahemla, they are in Zoque territory. The Zoque are descendants of the Olmec. The overall culture area shared many traits, but in this case, there was a mutually unintelligible language separating the Zoque and the Maya (obviously there were those who learned both - traders need to do such things).

Interesting to read considering Mosiah the first had to teach the People of Zarahemla his language.

[Muc'ul Ajwalil]

I think your the only person on the board with knowledge of Mayan language. Lucky dog, your mission language is still useful! Mine isn't much.

Sargon

Don't worry about that Sargon...your mission language will be useful to you someday...but the things that I saw, heard, felt, and smelled during my mission just about confirms everything in the Book of Mormon...I had the privilege of living among the descendants of these people and they are just about as faithful as they can get...and their language has several similarities to the Book of Mormon and Hebraic structures.

Corn ixim...pronounced like E-Shim...that's right the hill Shim...there's one example.

[Muc'ul Ajwalil]

Interesting to read considering Mosiah the first had to teach the People of Zarahemla his language.

I could testify to that. The Zoques are very unique people and had a very corrupted language...the Tzotsil, Tzeltal, and Tojolabal have basic words that are understandable by all...They still exist and live in NW Chiapas and NE Oaxaca...whereas the other three tribes are in the Altos and Selvas regions to the east.

All of them very good people...unashamedly exploited by the government and several religious groups to go against us...but nevertheless when they see the truth they are faithful until the end.

[Avatar4321]

I could testify to that. The Zoques are very unique people and had a very corrupted language...the Tzotsil, Tzeltal, and Tojolabal have basic words that are understandable by all...They still exist and live in NW Chiapas and NE Oaxaca...whereas the other three tribes are in the Altos and Selvas regions to the east.

All of them very good people...unashamedly exploited by the government and several religious groups to go against us...but nevertheless when they see the truth they are faithful until the end.

I dont doubt that in the least.

I am finding the lastest discussions on this group and neighboring mayans as absolutely fascinating. It seems the more we learn the more we find the Book of Mormon could fit in the region.

The evidence might be conclusive, but considering how the Book of Mormon was brought forth the fact that there is any evidence whatsoever screams that the Book of Mormon cannot be discounted as easily as it usually is.

[cdowis]

I'm not pretending anything, Charles. I'm curious as to where you think this change in the vernacular occurs in the Book of Mormon. Maybe I'm just not very bright (well that's not really in doubt, is it?) but I've never read that, and I've read the Book of Mormon at least 20 times through.

Mormon 9:1. Happy to help you out.

I'm not expecting written records, and I'm not sure why you think that is. It seems clear to me that we have a pretty good idea of Mayan/Mesoamerican history,

Since you are so well acquainted with this time period in mesoamerica., perhaps you can give us a list of written records from the preclassic time period -- writings on religion, culture, literature, etc. Show us those records so that we can share in your vast knowledge of this time period.

I am not talking about textbooks, but *original* sources. The rule here is that we see the facts, and judge for ourselves.

and none of it gibes with the Book of Mormon. Maybe I'm just not looking hard enough. Or maybe I'm just willfully ignoring stuff, which seems to be what you believe of me.

Share with us this great repository of writings and original records, if you please. You might start with the "Forest of Kings". Perhaps he has a bibliography of these ancient written records. You might check out page 55, for example.

Or do you contend that we can have "extensive" knowledge of mesoamerican history without written records?

Maybe I have ignored it because I can't remember your ever saying like that. Can you refresh my memory. Of course, I may just ignore it anyway.

I look forward to your response.

[John Williams]

Mormon 9:1. Happy to help you out.

Mormon 9:1: "And now, I speak also concerning those who do not believe in Christ." I really am at a loss here, Charles. Can you explain this to me?

Since you are so well acquainted with this time period in mesoamerica., perhaps you can give us a list of written records from the preclassic time period -- writings on religion, culture, literature, etc. Show us those records so that we can share in your vast knowledge of this time period.

Uh, Charles, didn't I just say "I'm not expecting written records, and I'm not sure why you think that is"? You seem to be insisting that I provide something I don't expend to find.

I am not talking about textbooks, but *original* sources. The rule here is that we see the facts, and judge for ourselves.

You mean original sources like the Book of Mormon?

Share with us this great repository of writings and original records, if you please. You might start with the "Forest of Kings". Perhaps he has a bibliography of these ancient written records. You might check out page 55, for example.

I have no idea why you are being sarcastic about a claim I never made.

Or do you contend that we can have "extensive" knowledge of mesoamerican history without written records?

Somehow my saying we have a "pretty good idea" of Mesoamerican history morphed into "extensive knowledge." I stand by my original statement. We do have a pretty good idea of Mesoamerican history, and for some reason it doesn't look like the Nephites and Lamanites.

I look forward to your response.

Believe it or not, I am still interested in hearing about "a change in a 1500 year burial practice of the local inhabitants approximately 500BCE which was recently discovered."

I'm not sure why you're so hostile, but I am interested in hearing what you have to say.

[John Williams]

Rather remarkable statements, considering than none of them are supportable. The Book of Mormon text tells us they have political ascendency, and I do suggest that it comes from important technologies. However, the resulting production of the technology had to have been adapted to local interests or no one would have wanted it. So, let's say Nephites produced some metal ornament. Logically, trade requirements would dictate that the ornament be acceptable/understandable to the locals. Market forces would dictate that the results of the technologies would not be all that different. Therefore, they might leave all kinds of traces, but we wouldn't know what they were.

We've had this discussion before, and I still find it fascinating that the superior technology was the reason for political ascendancy, but the "resulting production" was adapted to local interests to the extent that the superior technology seems to have been abandoned. Maybe we're talking about two different things. I would imagine, as you seem to be saying, that pottery (no, not that again!) would probably take on Mesoamerican forms to meet local market demands. However, the technology used to make said pottery (and metallurgy, etc.) would have been the superior type brought in by the Nephites. Can you give me some examples of superior technology being used to create Mesoamerican forms?

As for language, I have always supposed that the lingua franca was Mesoamerican. Nothing else makes sense to me in the combination of populations, given the numbers from the Lehites.

I would suggest that the text of the Book of Mormon argues against that. For example, when Mosiah discovers the Mulekites, we read:

"And at the time that Mosiah discovered them, they had become exceedingly numerous. Nevertheless, they had had many wars and serious contentions, and had fallen by the sword from time to time; and their language had become corrupted; and they had brought no records with them; and they denied the being of their Creator; and Mosiah, nor the people of Mosiah, could understand them."

The reason that the people of Mosiah could understand them was that the Mulekites' language (presumably Hebrew) had become corrupted. If the people of Mosiah had adopted a Mesoamerican language, this passage makes no sense, as they would not have expected to understand a language they weren't using, much less know that it had become corrupted.

I do believe that they were absorbed into the larger local culture. I fail to see, however, where this precludes anything in the Book of Mormon history. It certainly makes sense to me.

I don't think it precludes anything, necessarily. As I said, it doesn't make sense that the Nephites would be accepted and given political power based on technology that was never used.

Anyway, it is nice to see you again, Brant. I appreciate your reasonable and honest approach to these issues.

[cdowis]

Mormon 9:1: "And now, I speak also concerning those who do not believe in Christ." I really am at a loss here, Charles. Can you explain this to me?

Mormon 9:32-34

We also know from the book of Mosiah that the Lamanites had to be taught the language of the Nephites.

Uh, Charles, didn't I just say "I'm not expecting written records, and I'm not sure why you think that is"? You seem to be insisting that I provide something I don't expend to find.

You mean original sources like the Book of Mormon?

I have no idea why you are being sarcastic about a claim I never made.

Somehow my saying we have a "pretty good idea" of Mesoamerican history morphed into "extensive knowledge." I stand by my original statement. We do have a pretty good idea of Mesoamerican history, and for some reason it doesn't look like the Nephites and Lamanites.

Ok, we disagree. We can know very little unless we have written records. Artifacts, murals, an occasional inscription tells us very little about the history, unless you are looking at architecture, what they ate, etc. The culture of a people is found in its records, not its buildings, and physical remains.

For example, if a religion is very big on physical icons, e.g. Catholics, how much would we know of a religion without few such icons, e.g. the Baptists. Excavation in the future would give us the impression of only one major religion, while the other religion existed primarily in the records, which no longer exist.

And you would accept that as having a "pretty good idea" of the religious beliefs. The BOM tells us that there were many religions, and many times the "true church" was definitely in the minority. We would *expect* to find little evidence of Christianity, especially physical remains.

And that is exactly what we find. Having read the BOM 20 times, you should already know that.

Finally, the Lamanites destroyed the Nephite nation. What do you suppose that they did to the Nephite culture after the complete victory? What did Moroni tell us?

And that is exactly what we find. Little evidence of the Nephite culture, having been destroyed by the Lamanites. And you should know that, having read the BOM 20 times.

We find exactly what the BOM tells us that we would find. No records, only the physical remains of an apostate people, with an apostate religion.

The BOM tells us that, and that is what we find.

Believe it or not, I am still interested in hearing about "a change in a 1500 year burial practice of the local inhabitants approximately 500BCE which was recently discovered."

The point is that the archeologists have no explanation. They ignore the BOM, the landing of Lehi, which would explain why this practice was changed.

Are you familiar with the Jewish customs of burial. Would they bury their dead inside the towns, to be desecrated by the casual wanderings of the people, or would they separate the burial sites as sacred ground.

The BOM explains why a 1500 year old practice was changed, in the location of the Lehi landing, in 500 BCE. As I explained in my post.

I'm not sure why you're so hostile, but I am interested in hearing what you have to say.

I find intellectual arrogance annoying.

You said we know alot, does not match the BOM. Are you just blowing hot air, or can you actually substantiate this statement.

I agree that it does not match, but that is what we expect from the BOM record itself, and the fact that we know so =very little=. Written records are necessary to match the BOM with the history of mesoamerica.

I humbly suggest that your statement is hot air.

Again, I look forward to your response.

[John Williams]

Mormon 9:32-34

OK, that makes more sense. I guess we can agree to interpret it differently. I have read that passage many times and never interpreted it that way. At least I know what you're talking about.

Ok, we disagree. We can know very little unless we have written records. Artifacts, murals, an occasional inscription tells us very little about the history, unless you are looking at architecture, what they ate, etc. The culture of a people is found in its records, not its buildings, and physical remains.

Then we disagree. I've been rereading Durant's "The Life of Greece," and I find it impressive how much was known even back in the 1930s of places like Crete, where no written record was left.

For example, if a religion is very big on physical icons, e.g. Catholics, how much would we know of a religion without few such icons, e.g. the Baptists. Excavation in the future would give us the impression of only one major religion, while the other religion existed primarily in the records, which no longer exist.

I'm trying to understand your position, Charles. I've known you long enough (since a.r.m. days) to know you're a good man who honestly approaches the subject. Is it your position, then, that since the only record we have of the Nephites is the Book of Mormon, we should not expect to find much because they, like the hypothetical Baptists, left little iconography, etc?

And you would accept that as having a "pretty good idea" of the religious beliefs. The BOM tells us that there were many religions, and many times the "true church" was definitely in the minority. We would *expect* to find little evidence of Christianity, especially physical remains.

Fair enough, Charles. I think I understand your position. Of course, I wasn't talking about evidence of Christianity.

And that is exactly what we find. Having read the BOM 20 times, you should already know that.

I don't think the book suggests that no evidence would be found. The Book of Mormon is pretty specific about some of the technology the Nephites possessed, so shouldn't we expect some evidence of that techonology's having been used, particularly if, as Brant has said, the technology is what gave the Nephites political power?

Finally, the Lamanites destroyed the Nephite nation. What do you suppose that they did to the Nephite culture after the complete victory? What did Moroni tell us?

Obviously, any Nephite culture was destroyed. Does that necessarily imply that all traces of that culture, its technology, its culture, and its religion would be destroyed?

And that is exactly what we find. Little evidence of the Nephite culture, having been destroyed by the Lamanites. And you should know that, having read the BOM 20 times.

Are you repeating "20 times" because you think I'm lying or because you think I'm an idiot?

We find exactly what the BOM tells us that we would find. No records, only the physical remains of an apostate people, with an apostate religion.

But no remains, physical or otherwise, of the nonapostate people.

The BOM tells us that, and that is what we find.

It does not tell us that every trace of the Nephites was obliterated.

The point is that the archeologists have no explanation. They ignore the BOM, the landing of Lehi, which would explain why this practice was changed.

Are you familiar with the Jewish customs of burial. Would they bury their dead inside the towns, to be desecrated by the casual wanderings of the people, or would they separate the burial sites as sacred ground.

The BOM explains why a 1500 year old practice was changed, in the location of the Lehi landing, in 500 BCE. As I explained in my post.

Then that's interesting. You explained it in your post, but you didn't give specifics. Thank you for clarifying.

I find intellectual arrogance annoying.

I apologize if I was at all arrogant. It was not my intent.

You said we know alot, does not match the BOM. Are you just blowing hot air, or can you actually substantiate this statement.

I agree that it does not match, but that is what we expect from the BOM record itself, and the fact that we know so =very little=. Written records are necessary to match the BOM with the history of mesoamerica.

Why are you asking for substantiation of a statement you agree with?

I humbly suggest that your statement is hot air.

Well, to be brief, everything I've studied in college and since then shows a development of societies and cultures starting around 11,000 BC.These cultures grew and developed until 900 AD, when they began to decline. I have not seen any suggestion of any Nephite influence on these cultures, except for your suggestion that burial practices changed with the Nephite arrival. We do know quite a bit about the Mesoamericans. Here's a brief summary from Michael Coe:

All the Mesoamerican Indians shared a number of traits which were more or less peculiar to them and absent or rare elsewhere in the New World: hieroglyphic writing, books of fig-bark paper or deerskin which were folded like screens, a complex permutation calendar, knowledge of the movements of the planets (especially Venus) against the background of the stars, a game played with a rubber ball in a special court, highly specialized markets, human sacrifice by head or heart removal, an emphasis upon self-sacrifice by blood drawn from the ears, tongue, or penis, and a highly complex, pantheistic religion which included nature divinities as well as deities emblematic of royal descent. Also in all Mesoamerica religions was the idea of a cosmic cycle of creation and destruction, and of a universe oriented to the four directions with specific colors and gods assigned to the cardinal points and to the center.

So, yes, we do have a pretty good idea of who they were.

As I said, Charles, I've known you a long time and think pretty highly of you. I'm not sure when and how I crossed the line into an intellectually arrogant blowhard. Oh, well.

[poulsenll]

Well, to be brief, everything I've studied in college and since then shows a development of societies and cultures starting around 11,000 BC.These cultures grew and developed until 900 AD, when they began to decline. I have not seen any suggestion of any Nephite influence on these cultures, except for your suggestion that burial practices changed with the Nephite arrival. We do know quite a bit about the Mesoamericans. Here's a brief summary from Michael Coe:

So, yes, we do have a pretty good idea of who they were.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing

Meaning

A small amount of knowledge can cause people to think they are more expert than they really are.

Origin

First used by Alexander Pope (1688 - 1744) in An Essay on Criticism, 1709:

"A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again."

Pope was talking about critics.

Just because something is taught in college does not mean it is the last word on the subject. As an undergraduate I was taught from an excellent textbook written by one of the recognized authorities in Biochemistry. This textbook taught that protein synthesis was simply the reversal of the process used in the stomach to break down dietary proteins. By the time I got to graduate school it had been determined that this was not true. By the time I finished Graduate School the process of protein sythesis was shown to be much more complicated than previously thought. Today we know many things about this process but much of it is still a mystery.

Historically much the same has occurred in mesoamerican history and we still dont know enough.

Larry P

[Hashbaz]

All the Mesoamerican Indians shared a number of traits which were more or less peculiar to them and absent or rare elsewhere in the New World: hieroglyphic writing, books of fig-bark paper or deerskin which were folded like screens, a complex permutation calendar, knowledge of the movements of the planets (especially Venus) against the background of the stars, a game played with a rubber ball in a special court, highly specialized markets, human sacrifice by head or heart removal, an emphasis upon self-sacrifice by blood drawn from the ears, tongue, or penis, and a highly complex, pantheistic religion which included nature divinities as well as deities emblematic of royal descent. Also in all Mesoamerica religions was the idea of a cosmic cycle of creation and destruction, and of a universe oriented to the four directions with specific colors and gods assigned to the cardinal points and to the center.

Thanks for the Coe quote and giving me something good to work with.

Hieroglyphic writing: Used by both Nephites and the Maya

Paper books: Alma 14:8 tells us their records were burned, implying something other than metal plates were used by Nephites

Complex Calendar: Nephites used calendars based on (1) Lehi's departure (2) Reign of Judges (3) Coming of Christ. There are hints that the Mesoamerican calendar was known among the Nephites as well, as when the Mulekites specify that Coriantumr dwelt with them for 9 moons (that is the 260 day sacred calendar), and the baktun prophecies (Alma 45:10 - a baktun is the 400 year cycle of 20 katuns [a katun is 20 years])

Knowledge of of the movements of the planets: Helaman 14:6; 12:15

Ballgame: Got me there

Highly specialized markets: Actually the Maya had major markets, as demonstrated by the new murals from Calakmul that are being worked on by the epigrapher Simon Martin (they aren't published yet - sorry!). They graphically depict people selling a wide variety of goods. Compare Helaman 7:10

Human sacrifice: Alma 34:10 (the Maya also sacrificed beasts and fowl, from preclassic to postclassic)

Decapitation - 1 Nephi 4:18 (Nephi was founder of the dynasty and a culture hero, and his story surely would have been known to both his people and the Lamanites); Ether 15:30 (self-decapitation is a common motif in Maya art)

Heart sacrifice: 3 Nephi 9:20!

Pantheistic religion: Maya scholars define a god as a "supernatural sentient being that appears in sacred narrative". Using this definition, God the Father, Jesus Christ, the Holy Ghost, the Devil, devils, angels to a devil, and even the Three Nephites would be considered 'gods', as all of them are supernatural in nature, and they all appear in our sacred narrative. I'm not saying the Nephites worshiped all of these beings, but I'm saying that by using Mayanist definitions of what a god is, the Book of Mormon has a rich pantheon of deities.

Deities emblematic of royal descent: Mosiah 2:19 (thank your Heavenly King) from whom you are now descended because of the covenant (Mosiah 5:7)

Cosmic cycle of creation and destruction: Creation and Destruction is exemplified among the Maya by the dying and resurrecting Maize god and the Sun god in its daily cycle - Clearly Christ is the dying and resurrecting God of the Book of Mormon. The Nephite pride cycle might also be seen as a cycle of creation and destruction, as may the Scattering and Gathering of Israel. All three of these cycles are reiterated again and again throughout the Book of Mormon.

Four World directions: The term "four quarters/corners" of the earth (sometimes just 'quarters' which demands that there are 4) appears 15 times in the Book of Mormon. Among the Maya, North is equated with whiteness. In the Book of Mormon, the Nephites (associated with whiteness) inhabited the land northward. Among the Maya, red is associated with the East - in the Book of Mormon, the Amilicites (who marked themselves with red) came from the east to battle the Nephites (Alma 2:15); Among the Maya, black was associated with the West, likewise the Lamanites (associated with blackness) are at times specified as being in the west (see Alma 22:28).

Out of Coe's description, the only one that lacks support from the Book of Mormon is the ballgame. The Book of Mormon fits Mesoamerica, and it fits well.

[John Williams]

Pope was talking about critics.

Just because something is taught in college does not mean it is the last word on the subject. As an undergraduate I was taught from an excellent textbook written by one of the recognized authorities in Biochemistry. This textbook taught that protein synthesis was simply the reversal of the process used in the stomach to break down dietary proteins. By the time I got to graduate school it had been determined that this was not true. By the time I finished Graduate School the process of protein sythesis was shown to be much more complicated than previously thought. Today we know many things about this process but much of it is still a mystery.

Historically much the same has occurred in mesoamerican history and we still dont know enough.

Larry P

I notice you left out "and since then." I didn't stop studying when I got my degrees. Most people don't, you know.

[John Williams]

Thanks for the Coe quote and giving me something good to work with.

...

Out of Coe's description, the only one that lacks support from the Book of Mormon is the ballgame. The Book of Mormon fits Mesoamerica, and it fits well.

Well, heck, maybe I should go back to church.

[Hashbaz]

Well, heck, maybe I should go back to church. smile.gif

Please do!

[cdowis]

OK, that makes more sense. I guess we can agree to interpret it differently. I have read that passage many times and never interpreted it that way. At least I know what you're talking about.

It lends itself to more than one interpretation, but I see no reason to believe in Hebrew speaking Nephites, any more that Hebrew speaking European Jews. Both groups know Hebrew as the scriptural language, but the venacular is something else.

Then we disagree. I've been rereading Durant's "The Life of Greece," and I find it impressive how much was known even back in the 1930s of places like Crete, where no written record was left.

"A theory cannot be supported by a flawed assumption."

I'm trying to understand your position, Charles. I've known you long enough (since a.r.m. days) to know you're a good man who honestly approaches the subject. Is it your position, then, that since the only record we have of the Nephites is the Book of Mormon, we should not expect to find much because they, like the hypothetical Baptists, left little iconography, etc?

A very good summary. If we try to compare the religion/politics and other idea based issues with the BOM text, we are confronted with the lack of written records which carry the ideas inherent in religion and politics.

Even finding a religious icon, without records we cannot properly interpret it. What does the snake (Quetzacoatl) or a fish actually represent? Did it change its meaning over the centuries.

We can be overwhelmed by a religion which had pervasive icons, while we are unable to recognize a religions with few or no icons.

Fair enough, Charles. I think I understand your position. Of course, I wasn't talking about evidence of Christianity.

I don't think the book suggests that no evidence would be found. The Book of Mormon is pretty specific about some of the technology the Nephites possessed, so shouldn't we expect some evidence of that techonology's having been used, particularly if, as Brant has said, the technology is what gave the Nephites political power?

Let us compare the Northeastern precolumbian inhabitants with those in mesoamerica. Which are a near match of the BOM people ==>> We find writing (codex), calendars, sophisticated knowledge of astronomy, cement, towers used in religious rituals, etc. We find a land with volcanoes, oceans on four sides, a large concentration of cities with sophisticated political and religious organizations.

Now, where do we find this. In upstate NY or in mesoamerica.

But no remains, physical or otherwise, of the nonapostate people.

It does not tell us that every trace of the Nephites was obliterated.

For the sake of discussion, let us assume that I am standing on the remains of an authentic Nephite city.

Now, I pick up an artifact -- a jade necklace. Please tell me how to identify this as Nephite, Lamanite, or "other". Looking at the excavated city, how do I know?

There are Nephite artifacts. In the ground, in museums. The issue is not that whether we have found them, but in the problem of identifying them. (Sorenson)

Well, to be brief, everything I've studied in college and since then shows a development of societies and cultures starting around 11,000 BC.These cultures grew and developed until 900 AD, when they began to decline.

You may want to read the BOM one more time. The Mulekites, the Jaredites, the Nephites, the Lamanites, and the "others" have all lived in this area of mesoamerica.

What edition of the BOM do you have that sez only the descendants of Lehi lived on American continent?

As I said, Charles, I've known you a long time and think pretty highly of you. I'm not sure when and how I crossed the line into an intellectually arrogant blowhard. Oh, well.

Sorry, but I see nothing in your post here to change my opinion. If you go back to arm days, you should have already seen this discussion many times, but apparently you completely ignored it.

Specifically I have asked the "original Nephite city" many times, gotten no response. And here you bring up the old, tired antimormon arguments as though no one has ever addressed them.

How very tiring. Did you simply forget these discussions? Did you hope that I had forgotten?

Or did you arrogently blow hot air.

[cdowis]

"20 times" == No, I believe that you read it.

I just think you forgot what you had read. Someone stole a very valuable possession from you, and now it is lost.

Perhaps you lost it in the classroom. I know that America was inhabited by more than the BOM people, including Adam and his descendants. I figured it out. I did not throw away my salvation with intellectual rationalizations and arrogence.

[grego]

For example, if a religion is very big on physical icons, e.g. Catholics, how much would we know of a religion without few such icons, e.g. the Baptists. Excavation in the future would give us the impression of only one major religion, while the other religion existed primarily in the records, which no longer exist.

And you would accept that as having a "pretty good idea" of the religious beliefs. The BOM tells us that there were many religions, and many times the "true church" was definitely in the minority. We would *expect* to find little evidence of Christianity, especially physical remains...

What does the snake (Quetzacoatl) or a fish actually represent? Did it change its meaning over the centuries.

Thanks for clearly adding these three points. In many of the discussions I've seen on this topic, these aren't usually talked about or considered.

-=-=-=

However, what about Others in the BoM? We've had this discussoin many times, and... I'm still waiting for proof--ay, strong evidence would be a good start...

[John Williams]

"20 times" == No, I believe that you read it.

I just think you forgot what you had read. Someone stole a very valuable possession from you, and now it is lost.

Perhaps you lost it in the classroom. I know that America was inhabited by more than the BOM people, including Adam and his descendants. I figured it out. I did not throw away my salvation with intellectual rationalizations and arrogence.

Ridiculing me is probably not the best response to "intellectual arrogance." Maybe that's how you operate, but I don't.

[cdowis]

Ridiculing me is probably not the best response to "intellectual arrogance." Maybe that's how you operate, but I don't.

"Intellectual arrogance" is not a schimpfwort, it is a disease. If someone calls me an overweight diabetic, I could consider it ridicule, or I could see it for what it is. It's just a fact and I need to do something about it.

You have a spiritual disease= someone or something poisoned your mind == and until you recognize it for what it is, it will destroy you. I just happen to be the messenger, and that is indeed how I operate.

You can thank me later.

PS I note that you have not responded to my points. Are you too hurt and insulted to say anything?

Knock off the personal slams and do not judge someone else's spiritual condition. ~ MOds

[cdowis]

Thanks for clearly adding these three points. In many of the discussions I've seen on this topic, these aren't usually talked about or considered.

You need to read my previous posts.

-=-=-=

However, what about Others in the BoM? We've had this discussoin many times, and... I'm still waiting for proof--ay, strong evidence would be a good start...]

Again, you need to read my posts. You can start with 1 Ne 18:25.

That pretty much tells it all.

[John Williams]

"Intellectual arrogance" is not a schimpfwort, it is a disease. If someone calls me an overweight diabetic, I could consider it ridicule, or I could see it for what it is. It's just a fact and I need to do something about it.

You have a spiritual disease= someone or something poisoned your mind == and until you recognize it for what it is, it will destroy you. I just happen to be the messenger, and that is indeed how I operate.

You can thank me later.

PS I note that you have not responded to my points. Are you too hurt and insulted to say anything?

Nope. I just don't find it productive to respond to sneering.

[Gervin]

For the sake of discussion, let us assume that I am standing on the remains of an authentic Nephite city.

For the sake of discussion, how do you know (or assume) you are standing on the remains of an authentic Nephite city?

[grego]

Again, you need to read my posts. You can start with 1 Ne 18:25.

That pretty much tells it all.

Surely your memory is short.