Helaman 3: Lgt And Others Theory?

[zerinus]

Robuchan who started this thread wrote;

My post on the evidence of others has more to do with the topic than yours; "whether there is credible evidence in the Book of Mormon"

I stand by my post specifically this; "human migration to this hemisphere as early as twenty-thousand years ago. This was before the Jaredites. These are others pure and simple."

I am not aware that anyone has argued categorically that there were no "others," including the OP. The argument has always centred on whether the Book of Mormon suggests there were others or not; or that if there were, that they interacted with the Book of Mormon people at any time in their history. You guys have always cited examples like Sherem, or the large populations of the Lamanites etc. as evidence of the existence of "others" in the BoM, whereas the opposing side (including me) have argued against that as being a credible argument. Now you guys are trying to change the goal posts, and making out as if the argument was about something else. I am not going to let you get away with that.

Edited June 29, 2012 by zerinus

[zerinus]

No but there ceratinly is evidence that the BoM covers but a small portion of the records.

Helaman

14 But behold, a ^ahundredth part of the proceedings of this people, yea, the account of the Lamanites and of the Nephites, and their wars, and contentions, and dissensions, and their preaching, and their prophecies, and their shipping and their building of ships, and their building of ^btemples, and of synagogues and their ^csanctuaries, and their righteousness, and their wickedness, and their murders, and their robbings, and their plundering, and all manner of abominations and whoredoms, cannot be contained in this work.

Okay, what has that got to do with anything?

[Cobalt-70]

Where does it suggest, other than that one small location formerly inhabited by Jaradites, that the area was not already populated? If you came to Vancouver you would see that Indians (people from India) 'cover the earth' in this region'. They are in every community.

It doesn't really matter. Make the desolate "land northward" region as small as you want. Who is the "Nephite" civilization that crossed the "narrow neck" and began to cover this "desolate" land beginning around 45 BC? Where are their 45 BC era cement cities with wood shipped from the land southward?

[cursor]

Walk this through me, though. So the Jaredites and Nephites were living basically right next door to each other. Both thoroughly mixed with Others but not each other. Both having risen to dominate the culture, supplying the kings, etc. Both were unique for the area for their advanced technology, writing systems, etc. Yet they never knew of each other?

The Nephites and the Jaredites occupied different areas, at different times. After the Jaredite civilization collapsed, and as the Nephite group increased in size, there was minor overlap (Mosiah 8:7-. Both the Jaredites [and much later] the Nephites were destroyed at the same geographic location (Ether 15:11).

Edited June 29, 2012 by cursor

[cursor]

Who is the "Nephite" civilization that crossed the "narrow neck" and began to cover this "desolate" land beginning around 45 BC? Where are their 45 BC era cement cities with wood shipped from the land southward?

Read An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon, pp 265-269.

[Freedom]

It doesn't really matter. Make the desolate "land northward" region as small as you want. Who is the "Nephite" civilization that crossed the "narrow neck" and began to cover this "desolate" land beginning around 45 BC? Where are their 45 BC era cement cities with wood shipped from the land southward?

Teotihuacan is over 400 km from the narrow neck of land and is a good example of recent finds that prove such construction. When the book was written, there was no evidence of cement houses. Such types of structures are now being found in the hundreds. To say it poses a problem is to to suggest that new discoveries are not being made on a regular basis that dispels long held beliefs. We now know there are such structures, and since it was found relatively recently, we cannot argue that no more such discoveries will be found.

[Freedom]

Walk this through me, though. So the Jaredites and Nephites were living basically right next door to each other.

According to what reference?

Both thoroughly mixed with Others but not each other.

according to what reference?

Both having risen to dominate the culture, supplying the kings, etc.

I think we can presume this but I don't think it can be proven conclusively. We have no record of the kings of the Nephites other than the first and the last.

Both were unique for the area for their advanced technology, writing systems, etc.

According to what reference?

Yet they never knew of each other?

again, according to what reference?

[cursor]

It sounds to me like robuchan is simply "seeking to understand," and is probably not interested in fencing. Hey ... I could be wrong.

[Anijen]

Now you guys are trying to change the goal posts, and making out as if the argument was about something else. I am not going to let you get away with that.

If you read my past posts I have always maintained the argument that archaeological evidence is evidence of others. It is not I who am changing the goal post. My past posts prove this.

Now lets just see who is changing the goal post, you wrote;

I am not aware that anyone has argued categorically that there were no "others," including the OP.

But in a previous post you responded to the OP when you wrote this;

1. Right.

2. Right.

3. Right.

As an answer to this;

1. The Nephites expanded northward covering a large area, implying the entire continent.

2. The land was uninhabited (no Others).

3. The land was previously inhabited by the Jaredites not Others.

So you wrote "right" that 1. northward implied the whole continant. You also wrote "right" that, that land was uninhabited by others.

You were agreeing that the entire land was the continent and that it was uninhabited then you write;

"I am not aware that anyone has argued categorically that there were no "others," including the OP."

I find it ridiculous and a bit hypocritical that you accuse me of changing the goal post when I have been writing about these others all along.

[Freedom]

I find it ridiculous and a bit hypocritical that you accuse me of changing the goal post when I have been writing about these others all along.

Behavior that you see as hypocritical I see as consistent. Has he called you an idiot and a retard yet for believing what you believe? Don't worry, it will come.

[Anijen]

So the Jaredites and Nephites were living basically right next door to each other.

The Jaredites lived north of the Nephites but not at the same time.

Both thoroughly mixed with Others but not each other.

This is my belief yes. I subscribe to this point of view because we know there were others. We know there were many others from the archaeological remnants. The odds are that the Jaredites and later the Nephites probably encountered others and eventually interacted and mingled with them. Although this was done at different time periods.

Both having risen to dominate the culture, supplying the kings, etc.

We know from the Book of Mormon that there were many Kings both in the Nephite community and Lamanite community. They did not obtain total domination. We know this because of the story of King Lamoni who remember was a lesser king (to his father), all the while there was also a king of the Nephites (Mosiah).

Both were unique for the area for their advanced technology, writing systems, etc

We know from the Book of Mormon that they both did have a writing system but that does not make them unique, both the Mayans and the Olmecs also had a writing system. This is one reason some believe that the Book of Mormon setting was in Mesoamerica.

Yet they never knew of each other?

I believe that both the Jaredites and the Nephites knew of these others. It is my opinion that they not only knew of them but that the Lamanites fully mingled and become assimilated with them and that also happened with the Nephites but at a slower pace. I say slower because I feel they tried to keep the law of Moses and not intermarriage but as converts came from the indigenous people that made it acceptable to marry them. That is what I mean by a slower pace.

I hope all that helps.

Edited June 29, 2012 by Jeff Holt

[Anijen]

Behavior that you see as hypocritical I see as consistent. Has he called you an idiot and a retard yet for believing what you believe? Don't worry, it will come.

I have thick skin, I can take it.

In the end Zerinius is my brother in the gospel, so is Meldrum, and the brother who believes the Book of Mormon happened in Malaysia. I will respect our gospel ties or I should say eternal relationship (they are my brothers) but I am free to disagree with their opinions.

Edited June 29, 2012 by Jeff Holt

[cursor]

Ancient "others" in the Americas:

Ancient"]Voyages Across the Ocean to America: From "Impossible" to "Certain"

John L. Sorenson, 2005

[Bernard Gui]

so therefore this region is how many kilometers away and how many hectares in size? I don't see any numbers here. From my perspective, Mount Baker is enormous and a great distance even by Car. I can see it from Vancouver. If I took a month of work and walked there in back would this provide a clear reflection of the geography, population and climate of all of North America?

Impossible to know. How fast could a Nephite walk? How many hours is a day and a half? Is sleep factored in or does

he walk through the night? What is terrain like? Does the Nephite jog or walk? Is he riding a tapir or a deer?

But for conjecture's sake,

a Nephite and a half walks 100 miles and a half in a day and a half.

How many miles could a Lamanite walk in three days?

1.5 days= 36 hours

Estimated average walking speed= 4 mph

36 hours X 5 mph=180 miles

or 1.5 days=36 hours, but take out 4 hours for sleep=32 hours

32 hours X 5 mph=160 miles

So, assuming a flat terrain with no obstacles, the border would be somewhere between 100 and 160 miles.

Maybe.

Still a long line to defend.

Bernard

Bernard

Edited June 29, 2012 by Bernard Gui

[Cobalt-70]

Read An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon, pp 265-269.

I don't have a copy of the book. What does it theorize?

[cursor]

I expect that my father (the author) wouldn't have a problem with me posting it here (I'll do it in multiple, sequential posts ... but seriously, you should buy it):

The Hagoth Affair

With the onset of peace, pent-up curiosity about the land northward broke out publicly. Morianton, we recall, had envisioned taking over the territory beyond the narrow neck "covered with bodies of water" and had tried vainly to reach that area (Alma 50:29), which we have concluded would be in south-central Veracruz. Moroni had feared that an alliance would be made between that area and Bountiful, probably just on the other side of the Coatzacoalcos River. Joining those two regions into a single state would have revived the old territorial unit that the Gulf Coast Olmecs had exploited so successfully centuries before. An ambitious man like Morianton (whose name was purely Jaredity, incidentally) must have seen potentiuals for building political power in the land of Desolation and beyond which could resurrect the old Olmec/Jaredite pattern. Others apparently saw similar possibilities. The motto of the times among the restless after the war ended seemed to be, "Go north, young man."

Seriously ... go buy the book. Seriously ... you won't be sorry. Nevertheless, I will continue to type (as I view my very personal, [father's] hand-signed copy of his book (25+ years ago).

[Cobalt-70]

Teotihuacan is over 400 km from the narrow neck of land and is a good example of recent finds that prove such construction. When the book was written, there was no evidence of cement houses. Such types of structures are now being found in the hundreds. To say it poses a problem is to to suggest that new discoveries are not being made on a regular basis that dispels long held beliefs. We now know there are such structures, and since it was found relatively recently, we cannot argue that no more such discoveries will be found.

From what I understand, Teotihuacan was founded before 150 BC, which is way too early to be identified as the "desolate" area of Helaman 3 founded in 46 BC by cement-building Nephites. Also, I think the "concrete" there is dated from the ADs. Also, has anybody found non-indigenous wood in Teotihuacan, shipped from below the "narrow neck"? And if so, how was it shipped there, seeing as how the city is inland, and there are no canals there running from Maya country? Did the earthquakes when Jesus came make those canals disappear?

Edited June 30, 2012 by Cobalt-70

[cursor]

The thirty-seventh year into the era of the reign of the judges (aobut 60 B.C.) saw 5,400 men, plus women and children, leave Zarahemla for the north (Alma 63:4). In the next year \many more departed. Perhaps others departed from Lamanite country at the same time. More than curiosity must have impelled such numbers. What was it? Probably as much push as pull was exerted. We saw earlier that the area in the land of Zarahemla that could boast good crop conditions was limited. We have also seen the population increasing over time. When too many bodies occupy a resource area, temporary accommodation may take place with increase in stress (as in the conflict with the king-men). but eventually some of the surplus people are likely to relocate. A reading of Alma 62:39-41 (note especially the "famines") suggests that crowding of the resource base had been one cause of the ware just past, as much as it had been a result. In any case, the land northward lay before them with the prospect that it could accommodate some of the crowded southerners. They had already got into the pattern of wholesale resettlement under wartime conditions. But it is most unlikely that mere individuals would have gone off to northern colonies. Only "corporate," organized unites would have the resources to undertake such an ambitious task. The groups likely would have to be strong in a military sense to take control of any areas of much value, for it is a general ecological rule that all the better settlement areas would long since have been occupied. Lineage units are likely to have been the ones to carry off a successful move. As a result, the Nephite colonies may have been quite concentrated geographically (but note Helaman 3:. They would hardly have scattered by individual families on the face of the land, as did U.S. pioneers int he West. The prime movers were, in all likelihood, ambitious leaders who saw a chance for increased personal and lineage power in the move. Morinaton and Jacob (3 Nephi 7:12) illustrate the type.

[be aware that this supplied input is authored by an individual who knows as much or more than anyone else about Mesoamerican past.]

[cursor]

I see that Cobalt-70 has intermittently posted.

I will continue posting tomorrow from the referenced source material.

[rodheadlee]

Okay, what has that got to do with anything?

Nevermind, I don't want to derail the thread.

[zerinus]

If you read my past posts I have always maintained the argument that archaeological evidence is evidence of others. It is not I who am changing the goal post. My past posts prove this.

And if you read my posts (going back as far as you like), you will realize that my argument has consistently been that there is no credible evidence in the Book of Mormon itself that there were "others," or that if there were, that they interacted with the BoM people at any time during their history. On the contrary, all available evidence in the Book of Mormon itself points to the contrary. That has been my consistent position throughout. It is only arguments against that these that I have disagreed with. I have never argued against archaeological evidences, or anything of that description. My position has consistently been that the text of the Book of Mormon cannot be used to support the "others" theory. The text militates against it; it does not sport it. The archaeological evidence is irrelevant to the discussion as far as I am concerned. My disagreement with you guys has always centred on opposing that thesis alone. It has never been about archaeology or anything of that kind. Therefore you are changing the goal posts. Having failed to provide credible evidence about your "others" theory from the Book of Mormon, you now want to pretend that it was all about archaeology and not the Book of Mormon. That is hypocritical and false. The argument was not about archaeology; it has always been about the Book of Mormon.

Now lets just see who is changing the goal post, you wrote;

But in a previous post you responded to the OP when you wrote this;

As an answer to this;

So you wrote "right" that 1. northward implied the whole continant. You also wrote "right" that, that land was uninhabited by others.

Well; that is not what he had said. He said (1) ... a large area, implying the whole continent. and (2) The land was uninhabited (no others). (1) does imply a large area, though the whole continent is an exaggeration. Obviously nobody can occupy every square inch of the continent. Even the people of the United States do not occupy every square inch of the United States. And (2) means that the Book of Mormon suggests that the land they occupied was uninhabited (there were no others), and that is true. There is no indication in the Book of Mormon itself that they had encountered "others".

You were agreeing that the entire land was the continent and that it was uninhabited then you write;

"I am not aware that anyone has argued categorically that there were no "others," including the OP."

I find it ridiculous and a bit hypocritical that you accuse me of changing the goal post when I have been writing about these others all along.

It is only when you (and others) have argued that the Book of Mormon itself supports the "others" theory that I have disagreed. My argument has never been against whether there were others per se or not, or whether there is archaeological evidence for it or not; but whether the text of the Book of Mormon can be used to support it or not. Those are two different things. You cannot site Sherem, or the corruption of their languages, or the large populations of Lamanites (or Nephites) etc. as evidence that there were "others". That is what I have been arguing against. Archaeology has nothing to do with any of this. Archaeology may not support the Book of Mormon. It doesn't support Adam and Eve. It doesn't support the Flood. It doesn't support the Exodus. It doesn't support Israelites in Egypt. I am not bothered about any of this. I am arguing from the Book of Mormon point of view, not from archaeological point of view.

Edited June 30, 2012 by zerinus

[zerinus]

Behavior that you see as hypocritical I see as consistent. Has he called you an idiot and a retard yet for believing what you believe? Don't worry, it will come.

I think that your problem is more serious than that.

You are out of the thread.

[Freedom]

From what I understand, Teotihuacan was founded before 150 BC, which is way too early to be identified as the "desolate" area of Helaman 3 founded in 46 BC by cement-building Nephites. Also, I think the "concrete" there is dated from the ADs. Also, has anybody found non-indigenous wood in Teotihuacan, shipped from below the "narrow neck"? And if so, how was it shipped there, seeing as how the city is inland, and there are no canals there running from Maya country? Did the earthquakes when Jesus came make those canals disappear?

I think you are missing the point. We have now found evidence of building styles as mentioned in the Book of Mormon. The archaeology is in its infancy and in many cases already destroyed by vandals. What is being found is consistent with what is found in the book and there are no archaeological problems as you suggest. We now know there were houses of cement. More sites have yet to be investigated.

[robuchan]

Thanks for the replies in this thread. I started with an incorrect understanding that the land Desolate to the north of the Nephites was uninhabited at the time they came to America. Still trying to piece all this together. The Others theory remains an impossible reading of the text to me, but I will continue to study.

[cdowis]

Thanks for the replies in this thread. I started with an incorrect understanding that the land Desolate to the north of the Nephites was uninhabited at the time they came to America. Still trying to piece all this together. The Others theory remains an impossible reading of the text to me, but I will continue to study.

Have you figured out how Nephi found an ox when they landed? Perhaps you should think about that question in your continued study. You might start by reading wiki:

An ox (plural oxen), also known as a bullock in Australia, New Zealand and India, is a bovine trained as a draft animal. Oxen are commonly castrated adult male cattle; castration makes the animals more tractable. Cows (adult females) or bulls (intact males) may also be used in some areas.

Oxen are used for plowing, for transport (pulling carts, hauling wagons and even riding), for threshing grain by trampling, and for powering machines that grind grain or supply irrigation among other purposes. Oxen may be also used to skid logs in forests, particularly in low-impact, select-cut logging.

Note that they are "trained" and normally "castrated". Now, ask yourself, does a bovine castrate itself, and train itself as a draft animal? Certainly not on this planet.

Are you going to admit that the ox is a domesticated animal, and clear evidence that there were inhabitants in the area where Lehi landed. Or are you going to give us some absurd argument that the ox is a wild animal, as you did with the goats.

Edited June 30, 2012 by cdowis