Pahoran Posted March 10, 2008 Posted March 10, 2008 Yme?Yme fails to grasp the simple fact that the majority opinion on any subject is almost necessarily not an informed opinion. As I pointed out elsewhere: vox populi, vox doofus.Regards,Pahoran
Scott Lloyd Posted March 10, 2008 Posted March 10, 2008 Yme fails to grasp the simple fact that the majority opinion on any subject is almost necessarily not an informed opinion. As I pointed out elsewhere: vox populi, vox doofus.Regards,PahoranOr, put another way, pooled ignorance.
Calm Posted March 11, 2008 Posted March 11, 2008 Sorry, just me. Perhaps next time someone peeks in you'll be luckier.
poulsenll Posted March 11, 2008 Posted March 11, 2008 Sorry, just me. Perhaps next time someone peeks in you'll be luckier. While we are waiting for Yme to show up and defend himself, let me inject something that I think is worth thinking about.The question comes up as to why did the indigent culture, that Lehi must have encountered in the Land of First Inheritence, accept Nephi as ruler. If, as proposed by Sorenson, the area near Izapa was the Land of First Inheritence then the Izapa Stela V "Tree of Life" may shed some light on this question. As I see it this "tree of Life " carving fits better to the Garden of Eden "tree of Life" than to Lehi's dream. If so then they must have had some remembrance of the Garden of Eden creation story and when Lehi shows up with the Brass Plates confirming this belief, they accepted him as leader simply because he had the records of their origen in the Brass Plates. This may also have contributed to Nephi's recordeing his father's and his dream in the small plates in order to contrast it to the "Tree of Life" story in the Brass Plates.We know that something similar happened when Mosiah encountered the Zarahemlites and showed them the record of the Jews as recorded in the Brass Plates.Larry P
LifeOnaPlate Posted March 11, 2008 Posted March 11, 2008 I think if stela 5 has any bom connection it is latent Jaredite stuff, if even that.
poulsenll Posted March 11, 2008 Posted March 11, 2008 I think if stela 5 has any bom connection it is latent Jaredite stuff, if even that.LOPThat is exactly what I am proposing. One of the Jaredite offshoots or even possibly another unknown group of earlier immigrants that still had a remembrance of the Biblical creation story but had lost any records about it similar to the Zarahemlites in Mosiah's day. The Brass Plates contained that record and therefore they were willing to follow Lehi and Nephi because they were the keepers of the record. Of course there were those who listened to Laman and Lemuel's claim to the birthright and their claims to rulership.Larry P
Daniel Peterson Posted March 11, 2008 Posted March 11, 2008 A very interesting proposal, worth reflection.Yme?
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted March 11, 2008 Posted March 11, 2008 A very interesting proposal, worth reflection.Yme?Dan,I know you get a kick out of calling for YME, I personally think it is funny. But alas experiance has shown that when YME has been shown he is in error, he doesnt return.
Daniel Peterson Posted March 12, 2008 Posted March 12, 2008 Dang it, Yme, I just barely missed you!We almost collided as I was coming in and you were hurrying out.Any thoughts on the way the thread went?
Sethbag Posted March 12, 2008 Posted March 12, 2008 The question comes up as to why did the indigent culture, that Lehi must have encountered in the Land of First Inheritence, accept Nephi as ruler. If, as proposed by Sorenson, the area near Izapa was the Land of First Inheritence then the Izapa Stela V "Tree of Life" may shed some light on this question. As I see it this "tree of Life " carving fits better to the Garden of Eden "tree of Life" than to Lehi's dream. If so then they must have had some remembrance of the Garden of Eden creation story and when Lehi shows up with the Brass Plates confirming this belief, they accepted him as leader simply because he had the records of their origen in the Brass Plates.Larry, one big problem I see with this is that we know the actual native inhabitants of this continent go back over 12,000 or 13,000 years or more, and came from Asia. The Garden of Eden story goes back maybe 6,000 years. The Bible containing this Garden of Eden story as descriptive of the origins of humanity also mentions a worldwide flood as having wiped everyone out but Noah's family, so that it was the seed of Noah that repopulated the whole Earth. Thus these Asian migrants would have had to have been descendants of Noah, starting maybe 4000 or 5000 years ago or whenever the Flood is supposed to have happened. We know this isn't true because the native inhabitants of the Americas had arrived well before the Flood timeframe, and had lived here uninterupted by total extinction by flood ever since. In fact, the Flood of Noah is pure mythology, and yet it shows up at least twice in the Book of Mormon (a mention in Alma and a mention in Ether) as fact, itself a troublesome tidbit.But I can't see how the "others" who were already there when Nephi showed up could have recognized their own creation mythology in the writings he brought with him, as they simply don't overlap in space and time in the way required.Unless, of course, you're proposing "others" even to the other "others", ie: people who at one time had shown up from the Middle East a few thousand years ago and moved in with the "others" who were already here from Asian 12-13k years ago, and these "others" and the "other others" were the "others" Nephi took control of upon his arrival.Personally, I'm not buying it. It's simply not compelling.
cdowis Posted March 12, 2008 Posted March 12, 2008 Larry, one big problem I see with this is that we know the actual native inhabitants of this continent go back over 12,000 or 13,000 years or more, and came from Asia. Every man, woman and child who lived in North America at that time came from Asia, is that correct? I am interested in how "we know" this.I know no such thing. For example, we "know" that people lived here before the land bridge (were you aware of that?), which precludes a stroll across from Asia to America.
Kevin Christensen Posted March 12, 2008 Posted March 12, 2008 Regarding the Book of Mormon references to Bible stories, two important points. Their version of the Bible is clearly not the same as the one we have now. (See, for example, Noel Reynold's essay in By Study and By Faith, arguing that the Book of Mormon presupposes something like the Book of Moses in the Pearl of Great Price, and Ben McGuire's FAIR essay on the interestingly selective allusions to the David story, plus Sorenson's essay on the Book of Mormon as an E source.) We should not assume that they read their Bible the way Archbishop Usher read his. It seems to have been quite different.Secondly, their interpretation and use of received accounts simply tells us how they interpreted and used those received accounts, and has no other bearing on their eyewitness reports. For that matter, we need to be careful about how we interpret what we read, and not be too quick to make assumptions about ambiguous texts. I've previously argued here that the reference to the "waters" in Ether fits better the waters of the creation story than it does the Noah story. If that is the case, the Ether account makes no unreasonable constraints on LDS expectations about Asiatic ancestry and migrations for New World populations.Kevin ChristensenPittsburgh, PA
poulsenll Posted March 12, 2008 Posted March 12, 2008 But I can't see how the "others" who were already there when Nephi showed up could have recognized their own creation mythology in the writings he brought with him, as they simply don't overlap in space and time in the way required.SethbagYou are not taking into account the Jaredites. According to the Book of Mormon itself, they arrived in about 3000 BC and flourished. The concept of the tree of life goes back to at least 3000 BC in the near east and would have been part of the knowledge had by the Jaredites. Google the Gilgamesh mythology.Although, it would not have to be the same as the creation story in the Bible, to a people who had lost their own identity, it would have been impressive when compared to the carving on the stone. I am not implying that the stone was carved as a result of the coming of Lehi and the Brass Plates but that it was already in existence , with some concept of its meaning, prior to the arrival of the Lehites.Larry P
Doctor Steuss Posted March 13, 2008 Posted March 13, 2008 Since all the cool kids are doing it...Taco?(I did that right; right ?)
Calm Posted March 13, 2008 Posted March 13, 2008 Streuss?Actually, I feel like we are playing a strange cyberform of "Marco Polo"....
poulsenll Posted March 13, 2008 Posted March 13, 2008 Marco!PoloApparently Yme is being very shy about posting. He has posted nothing since Mar 7. He was on the board, however, yesterday afternoon. Maybe he will come out of his shell and respond to Dan soon. Otherwise we will just have to abandon this thread and start new threads and hope he will rejoin the discussion someday.Larry P
Tarski Posted March 13, 2008 Posted March 13, 2008 The claim of Joseph Smith to be a prophet rests upon the historicity of the Book of Mormon. I know there are many claims that such and such an archeological finding verifies this or that aspect of the BOM, and there are probably LDS scholars who could defend it as an historical document.My question is whether there are any historical scholars who are not LDS who consider the BOM to be historically accurate. These would be scholars who are experts in the time periods and places the BOM describes. Would any non-LDS scholar use the BOM to help him or her understand the ancient world?There is always going to be someone somewhere. Its a big world. Are there any trained scientists that believe in UFO abductions? Yes you can dig up a few. Are there any scientists that take the crazy scientology story of Xenu seriously? I bet you could dig up one or two eventually. Scientists have the same needs and fears as others. They can give in to the transcendental temptation and can be guitly of wishful thinking. Yet, in this case they are very very few indeed.
LifeOnaPlate Posted March 13, 2008 Posted March 13, 2008 This is vintage Yme. Drop a few unsustainable lines, mock a little, then, once thoroughly refuted, scamper away. Then he'll return in a few days, rejoin the thread posting about how he has a "life," thus indicating that you don't, he'll make cracks about your post count in a splendidly "holier-than-thou" attitude, and ultimately neglect responding to the actual issue at hand. for any and all who communicate on the board with Yme, please read the Nutritional Facts before engaging him to make sure they fit within the parameters of your balanced intellectual diet.
Tarski Posted March 13, 2008 Posted March 13, 2008 This is vintage Yme. Drop a few unsustainable lines, mock a little, then, once thoroughly refuted, I must have missed the thoroughly refuted part. Where was that now?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.