Major Book Of Morman Related Discovery Iron Ore Mine Discovered In Peru

[Flyonthewall]

Argue about horses? Obviously, I must have missed that interesting tidbit;) Anyone....wanna clue me in??? C'mon I need a good laugh today

This brings up an interesting subject...In your opinion, what would need to be found....to prove the Book of Mormon, do you think? Or....is it like proving the Bible? As far as I know, the only find that proves the Bible is true is the little find of pieces of Solomon's Temple? I don't know of anyone finding the Arc yet.

A road sign...Welcome to Zarahemla

[Anijen]

A road sign...Welcome to Zarahemla

[Flyonthewall]

good enough for me!

[MormonMason]

Unless you buy into the fringe theory that the Teacher of Righteousness was James the Just (or his successor), and the anti-Christ was Paul.

Which I don't.

Neither do I. I'd say the history of the Teacher of Righteousness belongs squarely in the Intertestamental Period. I cannot for the life of me see why those on the fringe carry this wacky idea that James the Just was the Teacher of Righteousness. Looking at the texts themselves ought to say enough as to the recklessness of such hypotheses. Of course, there is a good reason for those who first advocated the hypotheses, sans valid evidence, and that is to help lend validity to those who would attack the early Church and claim that there was infighting amongst the apostles in support of their own religious traditions.

I have looked over every single original text amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls related to this hypothesis and cannot for the life of me see where this comes from, especially when it all fits so very well with the history of Palestine as found not only in their own records and writings but with those of Josephus and the Talmuds.

The Dead Sea Scrolls do not have anything to do with Christianity except to show certain kinds of links common between various forms of Judaism from which Christianity arose.

The more I read about "steel" in the BofM or the bible the more confusider I get. Apparently "steel" can mean a lot of things with no clear definition but with lots of evidence to back up everyone's opinions. So I suppose the argument can go on forever with no real conclusion.

Perhaps you are asking the wrong questions of the data and coming up with fallacious conclusions? That always seems to contribute to a person's confusion.

[ucfpianogirl]

Thanks....Fly!!! Great Zarahemla sign.....cute enough to pin up on the wall

Awww.....dangit!!!! Can't we talk about Coal Mining in America...first initiated in Virginia!!!! Now's that an interesting subject;) Yeaa....there ya go

[cdowis]

I don't suppose you could give us references to these artworks which gives the dating. I want to see the dates, since you insist that they are in BOM time period, and the vast array of animals, dozens or hundreds of them. This is the basis for your argument, and hope that you can document this.

Not that I don't trust you, but I think the antimormons have poisoned your mind.

[Scottie]

I don't suppose you could give us references to these artworks which gives the dating. I want to see the dates, since you insist that they are in BOM time period, and the vast array of animals, dozens or hundreds of them. This is the basis for your argument, and hope that you can document this.

Not that I don't trust you, but I think the antimormons have poisoned your mind.

Sure, I will try and track down some links. I've got a busy workday today, so it won't be until a bit later tonight.

In the meantime, if I may ask, do you beleive that horses only existed in BoM times? That artwork outside of BoM times wouldn't accuratly paint a picture of what fauna might have existed in all of pre-columbian mesoamerica? That seems like a pretty selective view of the evidences.

I see no reason to think that the animals found in the art outside of BoM times, within a thousand years, would be any different than the animal in BoM times. Could you perhaps explain why you think they would be different?

[cdowis]

Sure, I will try and track down some links. I've got a busy workday today, so it won't be until a bit later tonight.

Thanks.

In the meantime, if I may ask, do you beleive that horses only existed in BoM times? That artwork outside of BoM times wouldn't accuratly paint a picture of what fauna might have existed in all of pre-columbian mesoamerica? That seems like a pretty selective view of the evidences.

What I believe is irrevelant. The last reference to horses in the BOM is around 100AD. Horses went extinct, so the issue is when that happened. I "believe" that horses went extinct at or just before the Great War -- they were a source of food and food was very scarce at that time.

I do not believe that horses survived the War of Extermination, so any post extermination time period art is irrevelant. Also, I suspect that very few such items survived the Lamanite destruction of the Nephites. The victors tend to destroy everything belonging to the defeated. Nephite artwork probably would not have survived.

I think this whole argument is misguided.

Anyway, I look forward to your response.

[cdowis]

The Deas Sea Scrolls confirm many claims of Christ and show Christianity to be rooted in Judaism and have been called the evolutionary link between the Old and New Testaments.

Actually this is a two edged sword. Some claim that Christ had been acquainted with this group, and took some of their ideas.

[SeattleGrunge]

Sure, I will try and track down some links. I've got a busy workday today, so it won't be until a bit later tonight.

In the meantime, if I may ask, do you beleive that horses only existed in BoM times? That artwork outside of BoM times wouldn't accuratly paint a picture of what fauna might have existed in all of pre-columbian mesoamerica? That seems like a pretty selective view of the evidences.

I see no reason to think that the animals found in the art outside of BoM times, within a thousand years, would be any different than the animal in BoM times. Could you perhaps explain why you think they would be different?

I'd understand your argument of loose and tight translation for different arguments. One thing though, that I have been pondering is Potter's argument that Peru is a more logical local geography for BOM peoples. He also suggests that "horse" is referring to llama. Assuming that Joseph had no idea of llamas, neither did the people of Lehi, what would have been the best way for the Lord to have Joseph translate the character for that animal?

[Scottie]

I'd understand your argument of loose and tight translation for different arguments. One thing though, that I have been pondering is Potter's argument that Peru is a more logical local geography for BOM peoples. He also suggests that "horse" is referring to llama. Assuming that Joseph had no idea of llamas, neither did the people of Lehi, what would have been the best way for the Lord to have Joseph translate the character for that animal?

I could buy this if it weren't for Cureloms and Cumoms. We still have no idea what those are, and obviously JS used a tight translation for those animals.

So why didn't he use a tight translation for Llama? Or tapir, which has also been suggested.

Not only that, but how often do you see an animal that look kinda similar, but not really to another animal and use the known animals name? If it were me, and I had a vision of some kind of small, furry, kind of horse like looking creature, I wouldn't call it a horse!

[cdowis]

I'd understand your argument of loose and tight translation for different arguments. One thing though, that I have been pondering is Potter's argument that Peru is a more logical local geography for BOM peoples. He also suggests that "horse" is referring to llama. Assuming that Joseph had no idea of llamas, neither did the people of Lehi, what would have been the best way for the Lord to have Joseph translate the character for that animal?

Would a llama pull a chariot?

[SeattleGrunge]

Would a llama pull a chariot?

Most definitely. see here for a few pics of just that.

[SeattleGrunge]

I could buy this if it weren't for Cureloms and Cumoms. We still have no idea what those are, and obviously JS used a tight translation for those animals.

So why didn't he use a tight translation for Llama? Or tapir, which has also been suggested.

Not only that, but how often do you see an animal that look kinda similar, but not really to another animal and use the known animals name? If it were me, and I had a vision of some kind of small, furry, kind of horse like looking creature, I wouldn't call it a horse!

If you used it in every way like you have seen horses used in your previous land, would you make up a new symbol for your inscription in metal plates? I could understand people starting to call them horses if they weren't intimately involved with them previously. It would be a lot harder to call something a horse if you were very familiar with them, but not so hard if they were something you didn't know/see that much. I know this notion is a stretch, but you have to admit it isn't far fetched.

[Zakuska]

Most definitely. see here for a few pics of just that.

Hey! King Llaman-ai and his Queen... on their way to the horsey, ham goat cheese ball!

[Scottie]

If you used it in every way like you have seen horses used in your previous land, would you make up a new symbol for your inscription in metal plates? I could understand people starting to call them horses if they weren't intimately involved with them previously. It would be a lot harder to call something a horse if you were very familiar with them, but not so hard if they were something you didn't know/see that much. I know this notion is a stretch, but you have to admit it isn't far fetched.

I don't know. They obviously made up a couple of new symbols that meant curelom and cumom.

But, I can see your point. That if llamas weren't discovered until after Lehi and sons had died, and the word "horse" had been told in tales, it wouldn't be much of a stretch for them to think that a llama was a horse. Those that had never actually seen a horse would have a vague description of one, and a llama would come pretty close to fitting that description.

[SeattleGrunge]

I don't know. They obviously made up a couple of new symbols that meant curelom and cumom.

But, I can see your point. That if llamas weren't discovered until after Lehi and sons had died, and the word "horse" had been told in tales, it wouldn't be much of a stretch for them to think that a llama was a horse. Those that had never actually seen a horse would have a vague description of one, and a llama would come pretty close to fitting that description.

Thanks for throwing me a bone on that. At the same time I agree, why didn't they call it a comealong or a curemom?

[Flyonthewall]

Thanks for throwing me a bone on that. At the same time I agree, why didn't they call it a comealong or a curemom?

Or a "pushmepullyou"?

[Scottie]

Here are some links to animals in mesoamerican art...

This page has examples of art that portray the jaguar, which was often the spiritual companion of royalty:

http://www.angelfire.com/folk/sunflowerfarm/ajaguar.html

This has a picture of a ceramic vase with the quetzal bird, another important animal

http://maya-archaeology.org/museums/popolvuh/bluebirds.html

This is a bowl with the monkey

http://www.trocadero.com/stores/Wayob/item...item740430.html

This is a statue of the wind god Ilk which is often portrayed as a howler monkey

http://members.aol.com/hmupuni/ikb.htm

This has a depiction and explanation of the Maya Rabbit Scribe:

http://www.anthrobytes.com/rabbit.html

This is a copy of the famous vision serpent (when the royalty performed their sacred blood letting rituals, they went into trances and transformed into deity ancestors via the â??vision serpentâ?)

http://museumstorecompany.com/product_info...roducts_id=3215

There are other avenues to explore, as well, other than simple animal bones as refuse. Bones were also utilized to make tools or ornaments, and animals were incorporated into Mesoamerican ideology. Arthur Demarest, in his excellent book Ancient Maya, The Rise and Fall of a Rainforest Civilization states, on page 123:

â??A wide range of animal life flourishes within and below the rain forest canopies of the southern lowlands. Jaguars, ocelots, deer, fox, and rabbits inhabit the floor of the rain forest and were all utilized by the May for food, pelts, and bone ornaments or tools. Agoutis (small rodents), ant-eating tapirs of various sizes, turkeys, and herds of small wild boar (peccaries or havile) also abound in the rain forest and were important in the ancient Maya diet, as well as in their representations in ceramic art and sculpture (Benson 1977). The canopies above are home to lively troops of spider and howler monkeys and to a noisy host of exotic birds, including the familiar toucans and parrots in many varieties (Murie1935; L.C. Stuart 1964). Especially important in Maya ideology and imagery were the ever-present hummingbird and the stunningly beautiful giant macaws, with their long bright red or blue-green plumage (Griscom 1932). The latter, along with the quetzal from the highland slopes to the south, provided much of the plumage for the elaborate headdresses that were a critical marker of status for Maya elites, especially rulers.

The reptiles and amphibians of the rain forest are even more omnipresent in Maya ideology and art, especially the caiman (alligator), symbol of the earthly plane of existence, and many varieties of snakes, including boas, corals, rattlesnakes, pit vipers, and the most deadly barba amarilla (fer-de-lance) and xalpate (bothrops numifer) (Schmidt and Andrews 1936). Toads, frogs, and turtles are found in the forestâ??s lakes, swamps, and rivers. The ancient Maya made effective use of these animals as well, employing the carapaces of turtles for useful tools ranging from musical instruments to hard surfaces for shields, cotton armor, and mosaics in headdresses. The lakes, rivers, and swamps also provided important elements in the Maya diet, including fish such as mojarra, catfish, and robalo, and many types of shellfish. Fish bones were utilized by the ancient Maya for needles, awls, and other tools while fragments of shell (some imported from the Caribbean or Gulf coasts) were employed for the complex mosaic imagery on Maya headdresses, shields, and ornaments, as well as in necklaces and ear spools. Even the insect life gave the Maya both symbols and useful products, including incenses and honey from wild and domesticated hives.

The density of life in the Peten rain forest remains impressive even after two centuries of misguided modern settlement and exploitation. In those zones not yet leveled by lumbering or settlement, the cacophony of rain forest life â?? the mingled cries, howls, calls, and buzzing of birds, monkeys, frogs and insects â?? rises in the mornings and evenings to a roaring pitch. Taken together, the wildlife and vegetation of the rain forest gave the ancient Maya a nearly unlimited supply of useful products for subsistence, construction, ornament, and imagery â?? even without considering the agriculture that produced the bulk of their diet. The wealth of the rain forest was well understood by the ancient Maya. They stood in awe of the jungle and utilized its structure and its inhabitants as models for many aspects of their ideology.â?

[Scottie]

What I believe is irrevelant. The last reference to horses in the BOM is around 100AD. Horses went extinct, so the issue is when that happened. I "believe" that horses went extinct at or just before the Great War -- they were a source of food and food was very scarce at that time.

I'm curious as to your reasoning behind thinking this? Do you have evidences that support this theory?

Are you an LGT adherent? It seems very implausible that a small subset of inhabitants of a small area of central America could hunt an entire continents worth of a species to extinction, doesn't it?

I do not believe that horses survived the War of Extermination, so any post extermination time period art is irrevelant. Also, I suspect that very few such items survived the Lamanite destruction of the Nephites. The victors tend to destroy everything belonging to the defeated. Nephite artwork probably would not have survived.

What makes you think that only Nephite artwork would contain horses?

[Zakuska]

Scottie,

Horse carved on temple wall @ Chichen Itza:

Tulum - El Castillo

The Temple of the Frescoes lies between El Castillo and the entrance to the site. Here fragments of color can be seen on murals depicting Maya life. Amongst the frescoes is a portrayal of a man on a horse, which indicates that these drawings were still being worked on after the Spanish invasion. (The horse was introduced by the Spanish and clearly had a disarming effect on the Mayans - originally it was thought that horse and rider were one being and later, when one of Cort

[Scottie]

Interesting. When I searched on this horse image I found this...

One example was Hunter's "valuable Book of Mormon evidence" that showed him standing by a wall pointing to a Maya carving on the Temple of the Wall Panels at Chichen Itza, Mexico. The carving was supposed to represent a "horse." After much research, and not finding any reference to a carving of a horse at Chichen Itza, I discovered that the carving was the damaged portion of a backwards figure "S" jaguar serpent (a feather is the horse's head).

Amazon.com review of The Ancient Maya, 6th Edition

I'm guessing this is an excerpt from his book?

As I looked at the image, it does appear the stone has broken off right below the "horses" head.

[Zakuska]

The mans head has been broken off from above... Is this the legend of sleepy hollow on Ancient Myan walls!?

However... since when did a Jaguar have hoofs for feet? And a whisping hairy tail?

Heres some more Mayan Elephant stone art:

[cdowis]

I'm curious as to your reasoning behind thinking this? Do you have evidences that support this theory?

What theory? That horses became extinct in the Americas? That the BOM last mentions horses prior to 100AD?

Are you an LGT adherent? It seems very implausible that a small subset of inhabitants of a small area of central America could hunt an entire continents worth of a species to extinction, doesn't it?

OK, you tell me why horses went extinct. I am open to any theory at all.

Are you saying that horses did not go extinct? Or that there were no horses at all in the Americas? I do not understand your point.

What makes you think that only Nephite artwork would contain horses?

I did not say that. But if you have a total of 200 artworks with animals (both Nephite and Lamanite), and half of that is destroyed, it reduces the sample size considerably. But I suspect that the numbers would weigh more heavily on the Nephite side, such as 60-70 percent.

Finally, in your previous post, I see no reference to the dating of the artworks. How many are prior to 100AD? 400AD?

Again, the LDS version of the BOM makes no claim for horses after 100AD.

[Scottie]

What theory? That horses became extinct in the Americas? That the BOM last mentions horses prior to 100AD?

I see.

Are you an LGT adherent? It seems very implausible that a small subset of inhabitants of a small area of central America could hunt an entire continents worth of a species to extinction, doesn't it?

OK, you tell me why horses went extinct. I am open to any theory at all.

Species go extinct all the time! The only option in your mind is that humans hunted them to extinction?? Climate change, meteor impact, non-human predators...all of these could cause an extinction.

Are you saying that horses did not go extinct? Or that there were no horses at all in the Americas? I do not understand your point.

Of course I think they went extinct. I'd prefer to trust the scientists on this one, not religion.

What makes you think that only Nephite artwork would contain horses?

I did not say that. But if you have a total of 200 artworks with animals (both Nephite and Lamanite), and half of that is destroyed, it reduces the sample size considerably. But I suspect that the numbers would weigh more heavily on the Nephite side, such as 60-70 percent.

Why would you think the Nephites had 60-70% of the art??

Even if 50% of it is destroyed, we still don't find any horses in what remains. And it's not a small sample set.

Finally, in your previous post, I see no reference to the dating of the artworks. How many are prior to 100AD? 400AD?

I don't have all day to search the internet. By your own admission, horses existed up until 100AD. So shouldn't any artwork found before 100AD be in the pool of acceptable evidence?

I wonder if we have artwork that depicts horses from pleistocene when we know they DID exist. I'll have to check into that.

Edited to add:

Above you stated:

I think this whole argument is misguided.

This is not MY argument. This is the argument made by experts in archeology. If you think it is a misguided argument, you need more than the BoM to show that it is misguided. What other evidences do you have?

The evidence quite thoroughly points to no horses after the pleistocene extinction. This was my main point. It's not just a matter of "we haven't found bones yet". Expert archaeologists have found numerous evidences that confirm this finding.

I'm done with this thread, as I don't have the expertise to get into much more detail than what I have. If you want to argue with the experts, be my guest. As for me, I will trust their findings.