Lgt And The Lamanites Of Ammon'S Mission

[robuchan]

No, you could easily show that the population would be in the hundreds. Even if it was in the thousands, you will need to visit a small town and live there for one year. You will find that you will meet everybody before long. You will most certainly meat the mayor. It is not about standard models, it is about reality. You are grasping at straws here.

No, you are wrong.

Jacob had a son live 170 years after he was born. Sariah had a minimum of seven children over a minimum of 25 year time period. Everything is screwy. Adam lived for 900 years and had hundreds of kids. You don't know if their population modeling was closer to that.

The Sherem account takes place anywhere 30 years to 150 years after they landed in America.

You don't know how many children or grandchildren Zoram had. You don't know how many sisters Nephi had. You don't know if Nephi's sisters or brother Sam already had grandchildren when they left.

There could be tens of thousands.

[zerinus]

zerinus

These are domesticated animals, unless you accept robuchan's statement below.

Several possible answers to that:

1. They need not have been domesticated. 1 Nephi 18:25 says that these beasts were found in the forest. One normally does not find domesticated animals in the forest. The distinction between "goat" and "wild goat" is not necessarily one of domestication; it could be a difference of variety or species. In Enos 1:21 it refers to both varieties as domesticated. So if both varieties could at one time be domesticated, then both varieties might at another time have been undomesticated.

2. We know that the land had previously been inhabited by the Jaredites. The scripture says that the Jaredites had exterminated themselves. It does not say that their animals had exterminated themselves. The fact that their animals may have survived is not proof that they had survived. In fact, the book of Ether gives us some interesting information about the Jaredites with regard to the beasts in the land:

Ether 9:

31 And there came forth poisonous serpents also upon the face of the land, and did poison many people. And it came to pass that their flocks began to flee before the poisonous serpents, towards the land southward, which was called by the Nephites Zarahemla.

32 And it came to pass that there were many of them which did perish by the way; nevertheless, there were some which fled into the land southward.

Ether 10:

19 And it came to pass that Lib also did that which was good in the sight of the Lord. And in the days of Lib the poisonous serpents were destroyed. Wherefore they did go into the land southward, to hunt food for the people of the land, for the land was covered with animals of the forest. And Lib also himself became a great hunter.

20 And they built a great city by the narrow neck of land, by the place where the sea divides the land.

21 And they did preserve the land southward for a wilderness, to get game. And the whole face of the land northward was covered with inhabitants.

So the forests in the land south did indeed contain both naturally wild, as well as previously domesticated but then introduced into the wild animals of all varieties.

3. Rob's idea that they were "gifts form God" is not such a far fetched idea either. We know for example that after the Nephites had travelled 8 years in the wilderness from leaving Jerusalem, they came to a very fruitful place which they called "bountiful," and declared it as a gift from God:

1 Nephi 17:

5 And we did come to the land which we called Bountiful, because of its much fruit and also wild honey; and all these things were prepared of the Lord that we might not perish. And we beheld the sea, which we called Irreantum, which, being interpreted, is many waters.

6 And it came to pass that we did pitch our tents by the seashore; and notwithstanding we had suffered many afflictions and much difficulty, yea, even so much that we cannot write them all, we were exceedingly rejoiced when we came to the seashore; and we called the place Bountiful, because of its much fruit.

No doubt it also contained wild animals which they could hunt. So considering the forest with its abundance of food and other bounties as a gift from God is not so unheard of either.

Does that answer your question?

[robuchan]

zerinus

These are domesticated animals, unless you accept robuchan's statement below.

Ah, you are claiming neo-creationism, then. Domesticated goats and the ox (also a domesticated animal) just appeared ex nihlo.

Please give us the reference.

A few chapters earlier they were eating raw meat that was magically cured, and Nephi was building a ship to carry them across the Pacific. We have a compass which only works when the people are righteous. We're not bound by science and reality here. Nephi mentions being "blessed" in the verse before.

This is actually the most generous interpretation of the domesticated animals anachronism. You should go with it.

[Hamba Tuhan]

I suspect that if one applied "the techniques of secular scholarship" to the Book of Mormon without bringing along the firm conviction of its truthfulness, you would find results similar to applying a sledgehammer to an egg.

A witty quip, yet ultimately silly. When LDS scholars analyse the Book of Mormon text closely and critically, it's apparently an act of either distortion or desperation or both. When I apply the exact same approaches to less 'miraculous' old texts, my work earns me a PhD.

[zerinus]

This is actually the most generous interpretation of the domesticated animals anachronism. You should go with it.

There isn't really an "anachronism" here. As I have shown on my previous post, there are perfectly good explanations.

[Freedom]

No, you are wrong.

Jacob had a son live 170 years after he was born. Sariah had a minimum of seven children over a minimum of 25 year time period. Everything is screwy. Adam lived for 900 years and had hundreds of kids. You don't know if their population modeling was closer to that.

The Sherem account takes place anywhere 30 years to 150 years after they landed in America.

You don't know how many children or grandchildren Zoram had. You don't know how many sisters Nephi had. You don't know if Nephi's sisters or brother Sam already had grandchildren when they left.

There could be tens of thousands.

Your view relies entirely on the supernatural. I would rather have my conclusions based on logic and legitimate scholarship.

[Freedom]

A few chapters earlier they were eating raw meat that was magically cured, and Nephi was building a ship to carry them across the Pacific. We have a compass which only works when the people are righteous. We're not bound by science and reality here. Nephi mentions being "blessed" in the verse before.

This is actually the most generous interpretation of the domesticated animals anachronism. You should go with it.

We are bound by science and reality. Your problem is a complete ignorance of ancient texts, writing style, syntax, grammar, figures of speech, uses of symbolism, methods of portraying every day events, and the influence of the personal opinions of the original author. Because you have never read or even considered studying ancient writings, you are suffering from a serious handicap in attempting to decider the Book of Mormon.

Edited June 6, 2012 by Freedom

[robuchan]

Your view relies entirely on the supernatural. I would rather have my conclusions based on logic and legitimate scholarship.

Though a legitimate view considering the other supernatural stuff in the text, the supernatural view of it is just a bonus. Using a logical, natural model, I can quite easily explain a population > 10,000 with a date of 150 years and using Sariah as an example of child bearing.

[robuchan]

We are bound by science and reality. Your problem is a complete ignorance of ancient texts, writing style, syntax, grammar, figures of speech, uses of symbolism, methods of portraying every day events, and the influence of the personal opinions of the original author. Because you have never read or even considered studying ancient writings, you are suffering from a serious handicap in attempting to decider the Book of Mormon.

We are not bound by science and reality in extrapolating a (fictional) population in a text (for the purpose of evaluating the existence of external populations) where:

--the author of the narrative claimed existence of a Liahona which was a magical compass only working when people were righteous

--the author claimed God changed the characteristics of raw meat

--the text states Jacob's son died 170 years after he was born

--the text claims various other miracles God has done to preserve these people and bring to pass his will

[mathilde]

I'm afraid not. You can keep stamping your feet but you are quite alone in this bazaar if not creative paradigm.

Not all that alone. Those verses at the beginning of this thread made a credible point at least to me.

[zerinus]

Not all that alone. Those verses at the beginning of this thread made a credible point at least to me.

Thank you. I had stopped replying to Freedom because it was obvious that nothing further could be gained from doing so.

[Freedom]

Not all that alone. Those verses at the beginning of this thread made a credible point at least to me.

All the verses indicate is that this particular group referred to claim to be direct descendants of Laman. This does not in any way exclude them from having other non-lamanite ancestors. I am a direct descendant from my paternal great grandfather who's last name I share. This does not prove that I am not also a descendant of my great grandmother who is of a different genetic heritage. They are assuming that, because this particular group claims to be from Laman, that all their ancestors are also from Laman. This is erroneous. I can have a Chinese ancestor and a French ancestor. People say Obama is African American but this is only half his heritage. The Nephites can have a nephite ancestor and a non-isrealite ancestor. The editors of the Book of Mormon handpicked certain stories to support their doctrinal agenda. There are many accounts, for example, of battles. They all follow the same pattern. Those that don't follow the patter are only mentioned in passing as supporting evidence of a particular event. The greatest battle in Nephite history is given just a few verses. The focus is on the Exodus theme.

[Freedom]

Thank you. I had stopped replying to Freedom because it was obvious that nothing further could be gained from doing so.

and if I had a dollar for every person who has stopped replying to you...

[Freedom]

We are not bound by science and reality in extrapolating a (fictional) population in a text (for the purpose of evaluating the existence of external populations) where:

--the author of the narrative claimed existence of a Liahona which was a magical compass only working when people were righteous

--the author claimed God changed the characteristics of raw meat

--the text states Jacob's son died 170 years after he was born

--the text claims various other miracles God has done to preserve these people and bring to pass his will

Nowhere in the book is the liahona called magical. In fact it is referred to as something of simple means with no remarkable features. There is no mention of changing the characteristics of raw meet, only that it became palatable to them. The text uses numbers the same way other ancient texts' use numbers; if you have never read an ancient text, you will not be able to understand the use of numbers. Without a clear understanding of their family structures, it is inadvisable to assume the supernatural when God consistently sues simple means to fulfill his work. The miracles were all through simple means. You have a habit of creating an argument out of silence.

[Freedom]

Though a legitimate view considering the other supernatural stuff in the text, the supernatural view of it is just a bonus. Using a logical, natural model, I can quite easily explain a population > 10,000 with a date of 150 years and using Sariah as an example of child bearing.

You show me one logical natural model that turns a group of about 30 people into a group of 10,000 people in 150 years.

[robuchan]

You show me one logical natural model that turns a group of about 30 people into a group of 10,000 people in 150 years.

Assume Nephi had five sisters. Assume some of either Zoram, Sam, or Nephi's sisters were old enough that they already had grandchildren when the narrative started. Assume they all live to be 150 years old (see Jacob/Enos). Assume they all have similar child bearing range and number of children as Sariah.

[zerinus]

You show me one logical natural model that turns a group of about 30 people into a group of 10,000 people in 150 years.

It depends on how many kids they had, and if there were any infant mortalities. But since the Book of Mormon is the story of a miracle, anything is possible. For example, Nephi writes:

1 Nephi 17:

2 And so great were the blessings of the Lord upon us, that while we did live upon raw meat in the wilderness, our women did give plenty of suck for their children, and were strong, yea, even like unto the men; and they began to bear their journeyings without murmurings.

3 And thus we see that the commandments of God must be fulfilled. And if it so be that the children of men keep the commandments of God he doth nourish them, and strengthen them, and provide means whereby they can accomplish the thing which he has commanded them; wherefore, he did provide means for us while we did sojourn in the wilderness.

When you are dealing with the story of a miracle, anything becomes possible.

[zerinus]

Assume Nephi had five sisters. Assume some of either Zoram, Sam, or Nephi's sisters were old enough that they already had grandchildren when the narrative started. Assume they all live to be 150 years old (see Jacob/Enos). Assume they all have similar child bearing range and number of children as Sariah.

The formula for population growth is given as follows:

Px = Po(1+y)^x

where:

Po: Original population

y: Average yearly growth rate of the population

x: Number of years passed

Px: Population after x number of years

x is used in the formula as an exponent.

The hard part is knowing the value of y (growth rate). And of course the formula does not take into account unusual events like epidemics and so forth. Also when you start off with a very small population, the results may not be very accurate. The formula is the same as for calculating how your money grows when you put it in the bank.

Edited June 6, 2012 by zerinus

[Freedom]

Assume Nephi had five sisters. Assume some of either Zoram, Sam, or Nephi's sisters were old enough that they already had grandchildren when the narrative started. Assume they all live to be 150 years old (see Jacob/Enos). Assume they all have similar child bearing range and number of children as Sariah.

See how Enos tells us that Enos was born when Jacob was in his 80's or 90s and he lived 80 years himself. Do you see how your assumptions are flawed? Your assumptions are not based on any logic. You are creating science to justify your opinion.

[Freedom]

It depends on how many kids they had, and if there were any infant mortalities. But since the Book of Mormon is the story of a miracle, anything is possible. For example, Nephi writes:

1 Nephi 17:

2 And so great were the blessings of the Lord upon us, that while we did live upon raw meat in the wilderness, our women did give plenty of suck for their children, and were strong, yea, even like unto the men; and they began to bear their journeyings without murmurings.

3 And thus we see that the commandments of God must be fulfilled. And if it so be that the children of men keep the commandments of God he doth nourish them, and strengthen them, and provide means whereby they can accomplish the thing which he has commanded them; wherefore, he did provide means for us while we did sojourn in the wilderness.

When you are dealing with the story of a miracle, anything becomes possible.

Since we don't know this, we have to rely on what is known. The mothers were able to nourish their children. This does not in any way prove the impossible population growths that are required to support your hypothesis.

[zerinus]

Since we don't know this, we have to rely on what is known. The mothers were able to nourish their children. This does not in any way prove the impossible population growths that are required to support your hypothesis.

We don't even know what "populations" we are talking about. What is the maximum population required to satisfy your condition, and what is the basis of your assessment, and how do you know that the true figure was not greater (as a result of natural growth, not mixing populations), given the blessings that the Lord had promised them? We are talking about too many unknowns.

Edited June 6, 2012 by zerinus

[robuchan]

See how Enos tells us that Enos was born when Jacob was in his 80's or 90s and he lived 80 years himself. Do you see how your assumptions are flawed? Your assumptions are not based on any logic. You are creating science to justify your opinion.

Take off the live to 150 years assumption, and rerun it.

[Freedom]

We don't even know what "populations" we are talking about. What is the maximum population required to satisfy your condition, and what is the basis of your assessment, and how do you know that the true figure was not greater (as a result of natural growth, not mixing populations), given the blessings that the Lord had promised them? We are talking about too many unknowns.

That is why we rely on, wait for it, science. When the book is silent, we have to compare it with what is known from other books, other peoples, other similar conditions. When you start to take this approach, your arguments become mute. But of course, you refuse to read other books, examine other peoples or look into other similar conditions. Knowege precedes revelation. Are you aware that the church as a full time research department staffed with scientists? They carry out research for the brethren. You refuse to follow this model.

[ERayR]

It depends on how many kids they had, and if there were any infant mortalities. But since the Book of Mormon is the story of a miracle, anything is possible. For example, Nephi writes:

Speaking of which why weren't their any infant mortalities mentioned? There had to be some. It seems that if they were going to mention others specifically they would have mentioned infant deaths.

[zerinus]

Speaking of which why weren't their any infant mortalities mentioned? There had to be some. It seems that if they were going to mention others specifically they would have mentioned infant deaths.

Assuming that they had any (which is not at all certain, given the blessings promised them by the Lord), what makes you think that it would have been seen as a major historical event equivalent to coming into contact with a pre-existing native civilization that is worth reporting?

Edited June 6, 2012 by zerinus