Three-days Of Darkness

[cdowis]

I remember seeing on TV that the street lights turned on automatically, as if it were night.

Another program showed that one result of volcanic activity can be large mud slides when the ice on the top of the volcano melts.

Again, JS knew all this from his vast library in Palmyra.... or is this another coincidence?

Which is it...... the library, or coincidence?

[cdowis]

I'm having trouble finding "volcano" in my Book of Mormon. Could you point me to the right verse again?

The word is not there. Only a detailed description of a volcanic eruption.

No doubt the Palmyra library contained the descriptions of Vesuvius by Pliny the Younger. [/TIC]

OK, one vote for the library.

Can you give us the particulars.... please match Pliny's description of the volcano and the events of the BOM. The lightening, the mud slides, the darkness, unable to light fires, darkness, etc. I don't remember that he gave so much detail, but I am sure you know what you are talking about.

I really think you should go with the "coincidence" explanation, but let's see what you got. Please give us specifics.

[Glenn101]

There is an element of divine intervention here also to augment the tales of seemingly natural but cataclysmic disasters. The more righteous part of the people were spared.

Glenn

[cdowis]

After 3 days of such volcanic activity everyone gets up in the morning darkness is gone(3 Nephi 10)and apparently nothing is destroyed. The people all go to the temple at Bountiful, hear Jesus read KJV Matthew 5, ignore the ash and destruction around them, have a sacrament with bread and wine, then head to the clean rivers to get baptized?

Is this all consistent with the same volcano scenario?

See the thread on when Christ appeared to the Nephites. This is one major argument that he appeared almost a year later, rather than immediately after the destruction. They heard a voice shortly after the destruction, but the actual visit was later.

Also, the description of the destruction is consistent with both volcanic eruption combined possibly with a hurricane. This volcanic eruption theory strongly supports the LGT, since mesoamerica has both.

[Log]

Are you suggesting that the carbon dioxide was high enough to suppress combustion and simultaneously low enough to not be toxic to humans?

Yes; at least, it didn't kill everyone.

[Aquilifer]

OK, one vote for the library.

Can you give us the particulars.... please match Pliny's description of the volcano and the events of the BOM. The lightening, the mud slides, the darkness, unable to light fires, darkness, etc. I don't remember that he gave so much detail, but I am sure you know what you are talking about.

I really think you should go with the "coincidence" explanation, but let's see what you got. Please give us specifics.

We need an emoticon for tongue-in-cheek.

But Pliny does have great descriptions of what he witnessed, including lightning, darkness ("'We had scarcely sat down to rest when darkness fell, not the dark of a moonless or cloudy night, but as if the lamp had been put out in a closed room"), pyroclastic flows (sorry, no major mudslides in this eruption) and earthquakes.

There's a reason eruptions with such characteristics are called 'Plinian'.

[phaedrus ut]

It seems that Jesus appeared at least 40-days later as he mentions that he first ascended to heaven before showing up in America.

The text also indicates as much as a full year had passed.

See the thread on when Christ appeared to the Nephites. This is one major argument that he appeared almost a year later, rather than immediately after the destruction. They heard a voice shortly after the destruction, but the actual visit was later.

There is a bit of ambiguity in the text. Parts indicated as much as a year but parts of the narrative seem to suggest continuity. I can see both sides.

Going with a year raises a interesting question. Where did he go for a year? If Jesus is gone for a year and then returns to the earth does that not qualify as a second coming? Or is it just visit 1.5 because it's kind of part of the first one?

Phaedrus

[Scott Lloyd]

There is a bit of ambiguity in the text. Parts indicated as much as a year but parts of the narrative seem to suggest continuity. I can see both sides.

What, specifically, in the text compels the conclusion, to which you have jumped, that Jesus's appearance occurred immediately after the destruction? Is this not yet another instance of a critic taking his own ignorant assumption about what the text says and using it to try to ridicule the Book of Mormon? Something on the order of the DNA arguments?

Going with a year raises a interesting question. Where did he go for a year?

The resurrected Lord can pretty much go and come as he pleases.

It was not necessarily a year. It could have been several months. Maybe it was longer than a year. The point is that there is nothing in the text that binds one to think the appearance was immediately after the destruction, and it is far more reasonable to assume that substantial time had passed.

If Jesus is gone for a year and then returns to the earth does that not qualify as a second coming? Or is it just visit 1.5 because it's kind of part of the first one?

Are you going to argue that his appearance to the Prophet Joseph Smith constitutes his Second Coming?

What we refer to as the Second Coming pertains to his coming in glory incident to his reigning personally on the earth for a thousand years.

His visit to the Nephites is a separate event, also prophesied in scripture. (See John 10:16 and 3 Nephi 15:17.)

[cdowis]

There is a bit of ambiguity in the text. Parts indicated as much as a year but parts of the narrative seem to suggest continuity. I can see both sides.

You gave some excellent reasons for the one year. It does not make sense to appear when everyone is traumatized, all of the roads blocked and destroyed, people attempting to find food and shelter, etc.

Immediately after the destruction, people are not going to sit around and talk. They are in survival mode.

Going with a year raises a interesting question. Where did he go for a year? If Jesus is gone for a year and then returns to the earth does that not qualify as a second coming? Or is it just visit 1.5 because it's kind of part of the first one?

He was visiting his other sheep. He told the Nephites that they were not the only ones to receive his visit, that there were other sheep to visit. He also spent several months with his disciples, forty days for just one visit. His final (?) ascension is recorded in the NT.

Phaedrus

[sleepyhead]

Hi,

I see some similarities between this thread and an earlier one about childhood memories of past lives. http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?showtopic=37963

The "proof" presented was similar. How could JS know about earth quakes, how could a child know about a past life. The decision to accept/reject the "proof" dependent on whether one believes in a historical book of mormon/reincarnation.

[Scott Lloyd]

Hi, I see some similarities between this thread and an earlier one about childhood memories of past lives. http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?showtopic=37963 The "proof" presented was similar. How could JS know about earth quakes, how could a child know about a past life. The decision to accept/reject the "proof" dependent on whether one believes in a historical book of mormon/reincarnation.

I don't think anyone here has presented the theory of intense volcanic activity as "proof" of the Book of Mormon. Only that such cataclysmic events as described in 3 Nephi are plausible because they are consistent with intense volcanic activity.

When I was in my youth, I sometimes wondered how darkness could be palpable. When I heard Kowallis's theory, it suddenly became very clear to me how something such as volcanic ash in the atmosphere could cause a condition of palpable darkness.

[Aquilifer]

Hi,

I see some similarities between this thread and an earlier one about childhood memories of past lives. http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?showtopic=37963

The "proof" presented was similar. How could JS know about earth quakes, how could a child know about a past life. The decision to accept/reject the "proof" dependent on whether one believes in a historical book of mormon/reincarnation.

Except that the argument for reincarnation relied on theological and philosophical outlooks, which are non-falsifiable. Third Nephi's narrative is consistent in many ways with established geology and understanding of volcanic activity. One can compare the story's "clues" with what we know about geological events, an established standard. That's not "proof", but this isn't merely an assertion that can be blown off as dependent on one's belief in the Book of Mormon.

[consiglieri]

Are you going to argue that his appearance to the Prophet Joseph Smith constitutes his Second Coming?

1.75

[consiglieri]

When I was in my youth, I sometimes wondered how darkness could be palpable. When I heard Kowallis's theory, it suddenly became very clear to me how something such as volcanic ash in the atmosphere could cause a condition of palpable darkness.

A hit, a very palpable hit!

Hamlet, V, 2

[sleepyhead]

Except that the argument for reincarnation relied on theological and philosophical outlooks, which are non-falsifiable. Third Nephi's narrative is consistent in many ways with established geology and understanding of volcanic activity. One can compare the story's "clues" with what we know about geological events, an established standard. That's not "proof", but this isn't merely an assertion that can be blown off as dependent on one's belief in the Book of Mormon.

The thread on childhood memories concerned the claimed memories of a child with regards to a lifetime when he was an aviator which are falsifiable. The childs narrative is consistent in many ways with an individual who lived during WWII. One can compare the story's "clues" with what we know about this individual. That's not "proof", but this isn't merely an assertion that can be blown off as dependent on one's belief in reincarnation

[Scott Lloyd]

1.75

He was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:

Appearance number 1.15

"After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once"

Appearance number 1.2

After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.

Appearance number 1.25

And last of all he was seen of me [Paul] also, as one born out of due time.

Appearance number 1.65.

Vision of Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon in the Kirtland Temple: Appearance number 1.80

Have I missed any?

[consiglieri]

Mary.

[krose]

I always had the impression that this was a pitch-black darkness, like in a cave. How dark does it get when a volcano blocks the sun with ash? Isn't it just dim?

[Rommelator]

Have I missed any?

Lorenzo Snow in the SLC Temple.

[selek]

I always had the impression that this was a pitch-black darkness, like in a cave. How dark does it get when a volcano blocks the sun with ash? Isn't it just dim?

Did you read the quote earlier by Pliny (Post 31)?

"We had scarcely sat down to rest when darkness fell, not the dark of a moonless or cloudy night, but as if the lamp had been put out in a closed room".

It all depends upon how thick the ash plume is and how widespread it is.

[Flyonthewall]

I always had the impression that this was a pitch-black darkness, like in a cave. How dark does it get when a volcano blocks the sun with ash? Isn't it just dim?

I had always envisioned pitch-blackness as you describe...I have heard that volcanic ash can turn a normal day into the dark of night. Never actually been in that situation so I don't really know for sure.

[Scott Lloyd]

I always had the impression that this was a pitch-black darkness, like in a cave. How dark does it get when a volcano blocks the sun with ash? Isn't it just dim?

You really need to read Bart J. Kowallis's BYU Studies article. It quotes traditional accounts of people who experienced the aftermath of volcanic eruptions. Here's the link again:

http://byustudies.byu.edu/Products/MoreInf...amp;ProdID=1154

[Flyonthewall]

You really need to read Bart J. Kowallis's BYU Studies article. It quotes traditional accounts of people who experienced the aftermath of volcanic eruptions. Here's the link again:

http://byustudies.byu.edu/Products/MoreInf...amp;ProdID=1154

Sorry, the link goes to "page cannot be found"

[Aquilifer]

The thread on childhood memories concerned the claimed memories of a child with regards to a lifetime when he was an aviator which are falsifiable. The childs narrative is consistent in many ways with an individual who lived during WWII. One can compare the story's "clues" with what we know about this individual. That's not "proof", but this isn't merely an assertion that can be blown off as dependent on one's belief in reincarnation

Cute, but completely avoiding the point. A child today is inundated with WWII references. A kid in upstate New York in 1829 doesn't have many geology references.

[krose]

Perhaps. I'm often confused at efforts to link these sorts of things to natural events. Why bother? At some point in all of the explanations it always comes down to the Mysterious Hand of God causing it through some sort of miraculous means.

In this case (assuming the volcanic ash natural explanation is accepted) it comes with the sudden and complete disappearance of the darkness -- and therefore the alleged ash and its after-effects -- after three days. Why not just stick with the miraculous in the first place? Once you accept a great and super-powerful being, it's not a stretch to just say he could easily cause a darkness so thick that no light could penetrate just with his powers, without resorting to a messy natural explanation.

Anyway, maybe this is an even better 'hit' for the idea's source?

Exodus 10

21