Iron as a Decoration

[beastie]

Did you even bother to research the time periods of the various cultures these tools and weapons were found in? It would see since you hold to tightly to the scientific approach, you'd appreciate the fact that the Moche, Mixtec, Chimu and the others that were documented in various museums from South America to the US wouldn't mistate these cultures that the metal weapons were found in. The physical evidences are overwhelming. The Adena or Mississippian cultures alone left so much coper and bronze artifacts behind it can't be ignored of dismissed.

Let me be very clear. I am only interested in metal weapons or evidence of metallurgy from Mesoamerica. I know about these other areas and their metallurgy. As I thought I already clearly stated, LGT in Mesoamerica is, in my opinion, the only theory even worth debating. Mind you, I don't think a strong case can be made for setting the BoM in Mesoamerica, as there are serious disconnects in that theory, as well, but the other theories are laughable.

So, once again, I ask you to provide evidence of metallurgy or metal weapons in Mesoamerica during the BoM time period.

[Anijen]

Let me be very clear. I am only interested in metal weapons or evidence of metallurgy from Mesoamerica. I know about these other areas and their metallurgy. As I thought I already clearly stated, LGT in Mesoamerica is, in my opinion, the only theory even worth debating. Mind you, I don't think a strong case can be made for setting the BoM in Mesoamerica, as there are serious disconnects in that theory, as well, but the other theories are laughable.

So, once again, I ask you to provide evidence of metallurgy or metal weapons in Mesoamerica during the BoM time period.

Beastie I can see your POV you want evidence of classic or pre classic metallurgy in Mesoamerica, is this correct? Could not a individual metallurgist (blacksmith) abandon Peru and make it up to Mesoamerica in that time period?

You would even be more pleased if the metal shown was not malleable but an alloy of some type, is that also correct?

Could it be possible that the sword of Laban was passed down from descendant to descendant and all other swords made in its image IE a macana or macuahuitl etc?

[beastie]

Beastie I can see your POV you want evidence of classic or pre classic metallurgy in Mesoamerica, is this correct? Could not a individual metallurgist (blacksmith) abandon Peru and make it up to Mesoamerica in that time period?

You would even be more pleased if the metal shown was not malleable but an alloy of some type, is that also correct?

Could it be possible that the sword of Laban was passed down from descendant to descendant and all other swords made in its image IE a macana or macuahuitl etc?

Sure, an individual metallurgist could migrate to Mesoamerica. But if one did, he/she must not have shared this technology with anyone. Specifically, as Iâ??ve mentioned repeatedly on this thread, that would include the technology to create and control high temperature heat, which would be reflected in the type of pottery that would be produced. That doesnâ??t work for the BoM, because metallurgy is required from the Jaredite period onward.

To constitute evidence of metallurgy, the end product should be a metal that can be obtained only through that process, and not a metal that can be shaped through simple hammering.

There are problems with associating the macuahuitl with the sword described in the BoM. First, Nephi claims that he taught his people to make swords â??after the mannerâ? of Labanâ??s sword. You can read Deanne Mathenyâ??s essay to see the problems outlined in detail. This sentence sums up the problem:

After sorting through the difficulty with terminology, it becomes clear that no evidence has been discovered which documents that the broad-sword type of macuahuitl was in use during the period covered by the Book of Mormon.

http://www.signaturebookslibrary.org/book/chapter8.htm

[beastie]

QUOTE(beastie @ Feb 1 2009, 07:13 AM) *

John Clark, from his BYU devotional address about Mesoamerica and the BoM, in the Q/A period:

Beyond smug.

Do you understand why John Clark made the statement that he did?

[beastie]

The most humorous moment on this thread, so far, has been Zak offering an article that described artifacts from Japan and China as proof of Mesoamerican use of decorative metal on buildings. Even funnier was watching him completely ignore his gaffe, and persist in pretending that he was offering solid evidence that should be taken seriously. This confirms what I've long suspected about Zak, which is that he probably isn't even reading articles he links and offers, much less really reading the responses of others.

Aside from the humor, this thread has been very interesting for another reason. For several years I've watched apologists (usually associated with FARMS/MI) work diligently to persuade believers of the validity of LGT in Mesoamerica. It would appear that they have not had much success in that quest, if this thread is anything to judge by. Not only are the most vocal believers on this thread apparently completely unconvinced by LGT, but there has been a remarkable dearth of LGT defenders, as well.

[Anijen]

I am a LGT guy and believe it was the Mesoamerican region. I also believe that one day proof of some type of metallurgy will be found, if not in my life time then afterward. I also believe there are some evidences out there now which do not prove metallurgy (preclassic or classic era) but are interesting still none the less.

I think to absolutely dismiss the idea and say it isn't even plausible is too arrogant for my taste especially from one who is not an expert in the field and has an agenda against the BoM.

For the record I do not need proof or require it in anyway. My faith is based on the conviction and validation by the Holy Ghost.

[beastie]

I think to absolutely dismiss the idea and say it isn't even plausible is too arrogant for my taste especially from one who is not an expert in the field and has an agenda against the BoM.

So do you agree with sevenbak who called this statement of Clark's "smug"?

[John Clark:] Well, for example, you had this flap about DNA recently. ... The DNA question is never going to be a problem. It only works one way, and in our favor. But the only reason that it looked like a flap or a problem is because they say: Well, Mormons believe (first of all they tell us what we believe) Mormons believe that all Indians in North and South America descended from these people who came over that are described in the Book of Mormon. I grew up believing thatâ??but that's false, that's absolutely wrong.

And so once you say there were other people here, you say: OK, where were the Nephites, and how many more people were here. We have all kinds of other DNA signatures to worry about all of a sudden. It may be that we never find any Hebrew DNA (whatever that looks like) in the New World. ... But if we do find some, that's fine; if we don't find some, that's fine too. There's no way that negative evidence on that hurts the Book of Mormon whatsoever once you believe in a limited geography. If you believe in a global geography, you're basically done, toasted, game over.

[The Dude]

I am a LGT guy and believe it was the Mesoamerican region. I also believe that one day proof of some type of metallurgy will be found, if not in my life time then afterward. I also believe there are some evidences out there now which do not prove metallurgy (preclassic or classic era) but are interesting still none the less.

I think to absolutely dismiss the idea and say it isn't even plausible is too arrogant for my taste especially from one who is not an expert in the field and has an agenda against the BoM.

From what I have seen from beastie, I guess that experts in the field who do not have an agenda against the BoM would sort of agree with beastie. If they did, would you call them arrogant too? (In other words, does this insidious "lack of expertise" challenge really make a difference to you? Or is it just a dig you cannot resist?)

Come to think of it, I guess experts in the field who have an agenda in favor of the BoM aren't holding out for metallurgy to show up in Mesoamerica during the right time period. That's why they suggest things like obsidian-bladed broadswords instead. That's why they say we already have Nephite artifacts and we just don't know it. It seems more plausible to them (the LDS experts).

Just guessing.

Anijen, if you know an LDS Mesoamerican expert who thinks metallurgy is in the ground waiting to be found, that would help support your POV in the same way beastie is supporting hers.

For the record I do not need proof or require it in anyway. My faith is based on the conviction and validation by the Holy Ghost.

Granted.

[Anijen]

Beastie;There are problems with associating the macuahuitl with the sword described in the BoM. First, Nephi claims that he taught his people to make swords â??after the mannerâ? of Labanâ??s sword.

I do not see this as a problem even the Spanish in their journals described the macuahuitl as a "sword" they wielded it with two hands.I have a wooden sword it has no metal but it is called a sword regardless of the substance.

Dude;Or is it just a dig you cannot resist?

It appears we are both gratitutious with digs.

[beastie]

I do not see this as a problem even the Spanish in their journals described the macuahuitl as a "sword" they wielded it with two hands.

I have a wooden sword it has no metal but it is called a sword regardless of the substance.

You misunderstood my point. Nephi said he made the swords "after the manner" of Laban's swords, and later swords were described as being metal. It really makes no sense to say that the macuathuitl was what made "after the manner" of Laban's sword.

In addition, as Matheny asserts, the sword-like macuahuitl was used post-BoM time period. Did you read Matheny's essay I linked? It has quite a bit of detail supporting her assertions.

[John Williams]

I do not see this as a problem even the Spanish in their journals described the macuahuitl as a "sword" they wielded it with two hands.I have a wooden sword it has no metal but it is called a sword regardless of the substance.It appears we are both gratitutious with digs.

How do you account for the steel Jaredite swords?

Ether 7: 9 Wherefore, he came to the hill Ephraim, and he did molten out of the hill, and made swords out of steel for those whom he had drawn away with him; and after he had armed them with swords he returned to the city Nehor, and gave battle unto his brother Corihor, by which means he obtained the kingdom and restored it unto his father Kib.

Here you have the melting of ore to make steel swords. These are not macahuitls.

[The Dude]

It appears we are both gratitutious with digs.

And?

You didn't answer my question.

[lostindc]

You misunderstood my point. Nephi said he made the swords "after the manner" of Laban's swords, and later swords were described as being metal. It really makes no sense to say that the macuathuitl was what made "after the manner" of Laban's sword.

In addition, as Matheny asserts, the sword-like macuahuitl was used post-BoM time period. Did you read Matheny's essay I linked? It has quite a bit of detail supporting her assertions.

Why are you still here?

It is like the Dude saying he does not want to live a religiously dominated area yet spends all his time on a religious message board. It just makes no sense.

[John Williams]

Why are you still here?

It is like the Dude saying he does not want to live a religiously dominated area yet spends all his time on a religious message board. It just makes no sense.

So people who find Mormonism interesting are not allowed to talk about it?

[Anijen]

beastie

You misunderstood my point. Nephi said he made the swords "after the manner" of Laban's swords

I did not misunderstood your point I was making a counterpoint. Nephi also said he made a temple after the manner of Solomon but that doesn't mean he used the same materials. I still think a macuahuitl is a manner of a sword not a club it slices not bashes, it was described by Cortez's own men as a very sharp sword.

beastie;

In addition, as Matheny asserts, the sword-like macuahuitl was used post-BoM time period. Did you read Matheny's essay I linked? It has quite a bit of detail supporting her assertions.

I read it and she appears to be your twin. The warriors the Spaniards met had macuahuitls which were described as swords. They had them prior to the Spanish conquest. From this we determine that at some prior time they were made after a manner of a sword, to say there was none in BoM times because of the following image is speculative.

Dude;

You didn't answer my question.

I agree with beastie on that there is no proof [yet] of pre-classic metallurgy in Mesoamerica. I disagreed with her flippant way of dismissing experts such as Sorenson, Clark and Gardner. I also pointed out that she appears to have a agenda to disprove the BoM and she thinks she has. I disagree with her, you don't, now what?

John W

How do you account for the steel Jaredite swords? Here you have the melting of ore to make steel swords. These are not macahuitls.

I cant. But unlike you the Dude and Beastie I do not need archeology evidence.

Edited to add that I believe they smelted metal here as the BoM claims. When I wrote I cant that meant to back up with evidence.

[John Williams]

I cant. But unlike you the Dude and Beastie I do not need archeology evidence.

Can you clarify? If archaeological evidence is beside the point, why are we even discussing this?

[lostindc]

I think people who find Mormonism interesting are not allowed to talk about it

Sounds good to me, I like your idea

[John Williams]

Sounds good to me, I like your idea

Then you had better shut up.

[Anijen]

Can you clarify? If archaeological evidence is beside the point, why are we even discussing this?

Exactly! I would suggest that it bugs some people that intelligent logical people can have views even faith that is not backed up by science.

or it could be just for giggles

[John Williams]

Exactly! I would suggest that it bugs some people that intelligent logical people can have views even faith that is not backed up by science.

or it could be just for giggles

It doesn't bug me. It's just odd that people would try to make it work with the archaeology and then turn around and say it doesn't matter anyway.

[Anijen]

It doesn't bug me. It's just odd that people would try to make it work with the archaeology and then turn around and say it doesn't matter anyway.

Perhaps like human reflex not to keep your hand on something that burns, it is human of us to defend what we love. I will freely admit there are gaps as far as archaeological proof goes but there are evidences here and there that may strengthen us. To shrug it away with contempt and condescendingly say to all BoM believers that were up in the night and are stupid for believing in these things is well, arrogant IMO.

I am not saying anyone has called us stupid, I am paraphrasing attitudes that are out there.

[John Williams]

Perhaps like human reflex not to keep your hand on something that burns, it is human of us to defend what we love. I will freely admit there are gaps as far as archaeological proof goes but there are evidences here and there that may strengthen us. To shrug it away with contempt and condescendingly say to all BoM believers that were up in the night and are stupid for believing in these things is well, arrogant IMO.

I am not saying anyone has called us stupid, I am paraphrasing attitudes that are out there.

That's good because I have never called believers stupid. I think I understand why people believe, as it's the same reason I believed for 40 years. I respect people's beliefs, but I also understand why I no longer believe. It certainly wasn't a matter of shrugging things off.

[Hamba Tuhan]

I think I understand why people believe, as it's the same reason I believed for 40 years.

John, I can't think of any way I might prove this to your satisfaction, but I'd be willing to bet large sums of money (if I had them) that the reason I believe is actually radically different to the reason you once believed.

[Zakuska]

To constitute evidence of metallurgy, the end product should be a metal that can be obtained only through that process, and not a metal that can be shaped through simple hammering.

What in the text warrants "forging of metal"? Nephi "molted" metal from a rock but even forged metal can be hammered into shape after the fact.

[Zakuska]

I am a LGT guy and believe it was the Mesoamerican region. I also believe that one day proof of some type of metallurgy will be found, if not in my life time then afterward. I also believe there are some evidences out there now which do not prove metallurgy (preclassic or classic era) but are interesting still none the less.I think to absolutely dismiss the idea and say it isn't even plausible is too arrogant for my taste especially from one who is not an expert in the field and has an agenda against the BoM.For the record I do not need proof or require it in anyway. My faith is based on the conviction and validation by the Holy Ghost.

This opens a big hole for beastie.When conquering armies bury the dead of the enemy they usually rob the dead of their precious metals and possessions. We wouldn't see ritualized burials of honor with metal objects of adornment.

So do you agree with sevenbak who called this statement of Clark's "smug"?

Your highlighting was what was smug.Also... Is Global = Hemespherical?