why me Posted September 24, 2013 Author Posted September 24, 2013 Nothing new here, and this research has been going on for years. Brazil is as large as the continental USA so that it is no surprise that interesting discoveries can be made there as the rain forest is burned and ripped apart. The civilization in question is not a highly advanced civilization such as we find in Mesoamerica.The dig has been going on for some time now. But I do believe that the professionals on the site are claiming that the civilization that existed there was quite advanced or at least more advanced than previously believed. One thing that is interesting is that much of that civilization has disappeared, including the bones of the dead. But they are finding pottery that was unknown to have existed.
Robert F. Smith Posted September 25, 2013 Posted September 25, 2013 The dig has been going on for some time now. But I do believe that the professionals on the site are claiming that the civilization that existed there was quite advanced or at least more advanced than previously believed. One thing that is interesting is that much of that civilization has disappeared, including the bones of the dead. But they are finding pottery that was unknown to have existed.The making of pottery, mound building, or creation of lines similar to those at Nazca, etc., are interesting and certainly worth investigating, and the possible connection with Andean cultures (which the archeologists mention) seems reasonable. But none of that even comes close to the heights to which Mesoamerican civilization reached, from the time of the Olmec Floresence through the Maya Classic. The same can be said of the advanced Andean cultures, which likewise pale into insignificance when considered with Mesoamerica in mind. Mind you, I admire much that the Moche and the Inca were able to accomplish, just as I am an admirer of Ghassulian culture in the Old World, but there is no equivalence with Mesoamerica. I am likewise aware that trade by sea actually went on between Mesoamerica and the Peruvian-Ecuadorian area (something impossible to have done overland). Thus, it would be absurd to draw any Book of Mormon connections with the Amazon basin.
Stone holm Posted September 26, 2013 Posted September 26, 2013 We had our first adult education class tonight on Sorensons Mormon Codex
langbert Posted September 26, 2013 Posted September 26, 2013 This is wildly untrue. Just read the work of Brazilian archeologist Anna Roosevelt and some of Charles Mann's books. 1491 is a marvelous book.
theplains Posted September 26, 2013 Posted September 26, 2013 I agree. This discovery is very cool. Also, if anything regarding the Book of Mormon, it shows that archeology / man's science does not know everything. But God does. People are grasping at straws to find anything that could have a connection to theBook of Mormon lands (if it is a historical text). Its great to read about some placesmentioned in the Bible and actually go there. On the other hand, you have thosetravel companies that supposedly take you to Book of Mormon lands ... butprefaced with could be's or may be's ... If the current LDS Church is really serious about archaeology, there 'should' beplenty to dig up in New York state if you believe the writings of LDS leaders of thepast. Regards,Jim
Stargazer Posted September 26, 2013 Posted September 26, 2013 People are grasping at straws to find anything that could have a connection to theBook of Mormon lands (if it is a historical text). Its great to read about some placesmentioned in the Bible and actually go there. On the other hand, you have thosetravel companies that supposedly take you to Book of Mormon lands ... butprefaced with could be's or may be's ... Even many places in the Bible are prefaced with could be's and maybe's. For example, the traditional place where Moses received the Law is Mt. Sinai, but this is far from certain. Nearby Mt. Serbal has also been a candidate -- the earliest Christian traditions from the 3rd Century identify this one as Moses' Mountain. Nearby Mt. Catherine is also a candidate. But I know what you mean. The problem is that any confirmed archaeological connection with the Book of Mormon has a hugely thorny issue. If it can be genuinely confirmed, this suddenly places unbelievers into a very awkward place. What does one then do about Joseph Smith's story of the Golden Plates? And the Angel Moroni? And the Father and the Son in the Sacred Grove? For this reason alone, no archaeologist of any stripe whatsoever (unless LDS and clearly non-objective, ha ha) would or could ever acknowledge anything historical about the Book of Mormon. Nephi's description of the Valley of Laman, Nahom, the Frankincense Trail, and the Land Bountiful can never be acknowledged. That's the way of it, and regardless of the factuality of it, there are those who would rather eat a snake raw than admit that the Book of Mormon might actually be true, and these almost literally can not even consider that there are hard evidences of the possible historicity of the book. If the current LDS Church is really serious about archaeology, there 'should' beplenty to dig up in New York state if you believe the writings of LDS leaders of thepast. No, it didn't happen there. The only thing in New York state of archaeological interest to Latter-day Saints was dug up about 180 years ago. Regards,Jim 2
Robert F. Smith Posted September 26, 2013 Posted September 26, 2013 People are grasping at straws to find anything that could have a connection to theBook of Mormon lands (if it is a historical text). Its great to read about some placesmentioned in the Bible and actually go there. On the other hand, you have thosetravel companies that supposedly take you to Book of Mormon lands ... butprefaced with could be's or may be's ... If the current LDS Church is really serious about archaeology, there 'should' beplenty to dig up in New York state if you believe the writings of LDS leaders of thepast. Regards,JimThe only kind of fruitful archeology which the LDS Church has sponsored in New York has been to excavate the log home of Joseph Smith as a boy, and that has been quite successful. Restoration work at some of the early centers of Church activity is great for tourists and Church members. No one with common sense thinks that excavating the "Hill Cumorah" near Manchester would be productive. 1
brightpath Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 He compares it to Egypt because Lehi ancestors the Ancient Israelites came from out of Egypt. They had this knowledge with them when they came to America. The Israelites helped the Egyptians build the pyramids. They wrote in reformed Egyptian and built a temple here in America after the manner of Solomon's Temple. There is a reason the only pyramids found in the world are in Egypt and America.
Glenn101 Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 He compares it to Egypt because Lehi ancestors the Ancient Israelites came from out of Egypt. They had this knowledge with them when they came to America. The Israelites helped the Egyptians build the pyramids. They wrote in reformed Egyptian and built a temple here in America after the manner of Solomon's Temple. There is a reason the only pyramids found in the world are in Egypt and America. The pyramids found in Mesoamerica are quite unlike the ones in Egypt. More like the ones in Mesopotamia. Glenn
why me Posted October 10, 2013 Author Posted October 10, 2013 He compares it to Egypt because Lehi ancestors the Ancient Israelites came from out of Egypt. They had this knowledge with them when they came to America. The Israelites helped the Egyptians build the pyramids. They wrote in reformed Egyptian and built a temple here in America after the manner of Solomon's Temple. There is a reason the only pyramids found in the world are in Egypt and America.I was more or less stressing the advanced civilization that has been found in the Amazon with a comparison with the advanced civilization in Egypt.
brightpath Posted October 11, 2013 Posted October 11, 2013 The pyramids found in Mesoamerica are quite unlike the ones in Egypt. More like the ones in Mesopotamia. GlennYes! The point is the Israelites were around that whole region and brought that knowledge to build the pyramids to America.
Stone holm Posted October 19, 2013 Posted October 19, 2013 Yes! The point is the Israelites were around that whole region and brought that knowledge to build the pyramids to America.I don't recall any mention of pyramids in the B of M or even mention of elaborate tombs.
Recommended Posts