Book Of Mormon Problems?

[MormonFreeThinker]

 

 

IMO, there are just as many evidences against the BoM being true as there is against the Global Flood being true, or more evidences.  I'm not agreeing with Ron, just agreeing that it is what the church leaders have taught, in keeping with scripture.   

 

No, there are no conclusive evidences against a Local Geography , their are some gaps, but it doesn't mean scholars will never solve them. It's like making a god of the gaps argument. 

 

For example, "steel" in the 19th century (and before) English can also mean "extreme hardness" or "offensive weapons" 

 

Webster's 1828 dictionary of American English: STEEL, n. [G.]1. Iron combined with a small portion of carbon; iron refined and hardened, used in making instruments, and particularly useful as the material of edged tools. It is called in chemistry, carburet of iron; but this is more usually the denomination of plumbago.2. Figuratively, weapons; particularly, offensive weapons, swords, spears and the like...4. Extreme hardness; as heads or hearts of steel.

 

Loan-shifting has occurred throughout history. Some of the Maya called the European horses and donkeys "tapirs" because, at least according to one observer, they looked so similar 

 

If Book of Mormon horses are tapirs, then the problem is solved. 

The Book of Mormon never describes horses pulling chariots, and 3 Ne 3:22 suggest they didn't. 

 

3 Nephi 3:22 "they had taken their horses, and their chariots, and their cattle, and all their flocks, and their herds, and their grain, and all their substance"

 

If Book of Mormon horses are horses(but small and not very useful), it doesn't mean we will never have conclusive evidence. 

For example, in 1974 Terracotta Warriors and Horses were discovered, but before 1974 there was no conclusive evidence. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terracotta_Army#Background

 

http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Anachronisms

Edited May 19, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker

[rameumptom]

There is no proof that the BoM is true or historically correct.  There is much evidence that it is true and correct, however.  Dozens of authentic names, locations, concepts that tie in perfectly with the ANE and Mayan worlds, Ties with the Dead Sea Scrolls and other ancient documents, etc.

I have yet to see someone explain many of these things away, beyond that there are just a bunch of coincidences.

 

That said, there is NO evidence of a global flood outside of stories of a flood that come from various places and peoples around the world.  But, for that it only takes a variety of extreme floods to create a global flood story, or for a large flood to occur in one area, and then have the story relayed to other places via travel and dispersion.

 

So the original quotes is comparing apples and oranges. Zero evidence for a global flood.  Lots of evidence for the BoM.

[Nevo]

.

Edited October 1, 2014 by Nevo

[cinepro]

 

For example, "steel" in the 19th century (and before) English can also mean "extreme hardness" or "offensive weapons" 

 

Webster's 1828 dictionary of American English: STEEL, n. [G.]1. Iron combined with a small portion of carbon; iron refined and hardened, used in making instruments, and particularly useful as the material of edged tools. It is called in chemistry, carburet of iron; but this is more usually the denomination of plumbago.2. Figuratively, weapons; particularly, offensive weapons, swords, spears and the like...4. Extreme hardness; as heads or hearts of steel.

 

 

Just so we're all on the same page, here are some of the places "steel" is mentioned in the Book of Mormon.  I guess it's up to each of us to figure out if it is referring to a specific alloy, or one of the alternate interpretations offered above:

 

 

 

[9] And I beheld [Laban's] sword, and I drew it forth from the sheath thereof; and the hilt thereof was of pure gold, and the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine, and I saw that the blade thereof was of the most precious steel.

 

1 Nephi 4

 

 

 

[15] And I did teach my people to build buildings, and to work in all manner of wood, and of iron, and of copper, and of brass, and of steel, and of gold, and of silver, and of precious ores, which were in great abundance.

 

2 Nephi 5

 

 

 

 

[8] And we multiplied exceedingly, and spread upon the face of the land, and became exceedingly rich in gold, and in silver, and in precious things, and in fine workmanship of wood, in buildings, and in machinery, and also in iron and copper, and brass and steel, making all manner of tools of every kind to till the ground, and weapons of war -- yea, the sharp pointed arrow, and the quiver, and the dart, and the javelin, and all preparations for war.

 

Jarom 1

 

 

 

[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.

 

Ether 7

Edited May 20, 2014 by cinepro

[ERayR]

There is no proof that the BoM is true or historically correct.  There is much evidence that it is true and correct, however.  Dozens of authentic names, locations, concepts that tie in perfectly with the ANE and Mayan worlds, Ties with the Dead Sea Scrolls and other ancient documents, etc.

I have yet to see someone explain many of these things away, beyond that there are just a bunch of coincidences.

 

That said, there is NO evidence of a global flood outside of stories of a flood that come from various places and peoples around the world.  But, for that it only takes a variety of extreme floods to create a global flood story, or for a large flood to occur in one area, and then have the story relayed to other places via travel and dispersion.

 

So the original quotes is comparing apples and oranges. Zero evidence for a global flood.  Lots of evidence for the BoM.

 

The evidences mean what someone defines them to mean just as you have done with the global flood evidence.  Again it all depends on which interpretation you want to accept.

[Raharu]

The Book of Mormon struggles to support itself so I don't expect external evidences to do it many favors. As an example, the current edition has many differences from the 1830 edition.

 

1830 Edition (1)

1 Nephi Chapter 3 Page 32 (The chapters have been reorganized since, for ease of access)

"...the Lamb of God is the Eternal Father and the Saviour of the world..."

 

Current Edition (2)

1 Nephi 13:40 (The book is now organized into 22 chapters instead of just 6)

"...the Lamb of God is the Son of the Eternal Father, and the Savior of the world..."

 

There are many instances in 1 Nephi where the Lamb of God is God in the 1830 edition that have been changed to show the Lamb of God as the Son of God in subsequent editions. Other changes include the names of characters and the addition or removal of words like 'no, not, etc' which change the whole meaning of verses.

 

Some of these changes are for clarity, such as changing Joseph Smith from the author to the translator.

 

 

1 http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSummary/book-of-mormon-1830#!/paperSummary/book-of-mormon-1830&p=38

A website hosted by The Church History Department of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints

 

2 https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/1-ne/13.40?lang=eng#39

The official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints where a wide array of information can be found

[cdowis]

Just so we're all on the same page, here are some of the places "steel" is mentioned in the Book of Mormon.  

 

OK, but no re-interpretation is necessary.  Iron was listed as a precious metal in the book of Mosiah, and mention of steel is completely absent after Jarom.  For those unaware, steel lends itself to rust, especially in a tropical climate.

[Guest]

No, there are no conclusive evidences against a Local Geography , their are some gaps, but it doesn't mean scholars will never solve them. It's like making a god of the gaps argument. 

 

For example, "steel" in the 19th century (and before) English can also mean "extreme hardness" or "offensive weapons" 

 

Webster's 1828 dictionary of American English: STEEL, n. [G.]1. Iron combined with a small portion of carbon; iron refined and hardened, used in making instruments, and particularly useful as the material of edged tools. It is called in chemistry, carburet of iron; but this is more usually the denomination of plumbago.2. Figuratively, weapons; particularly, offensive weapons, swords, spears and the like...4. Extreme hardness; as heads or hearts of steel.

 

Loan-shifting has occurred throughout history. Some of the Maya called the European horses and donkeys "tapirs" because, at least according to one observer, they looked so similar 

 

If Book of Mormon horses are tapirs, then the problem is solved. 

The Book of Mormon never describes horses pulling chariots, and 3 Ne 3:22 suggest they didn't. 

 

3 Nephi 3:22 "they had taken their horses, and their chariots, and their cattle, and all their flocks, and their herds, and their grain, and all their substance"

 

If Book of Mormon horses are horses(but small and not very useful), it doesn't mean we will never have conclusive evidence. 

For example, in 1974 Terracotta Warriors and Horses were discovered, but before 1974 there was no conclusive evidence. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terracotta_Army#Background

 

http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Anachronisms

What,of "steel" in the OT...yes it is there. It is not uncommon for words to be used, when no other is known. I have my own ideas about other terms you mention, but I have to be Church tonight for meeting.

[cdowis]

What,of "steel" in the OT...yes it is there. It is not uncommon for words to be used, when no other is known.

 

Also "brass".

[Vookman]

The Global Flood has no direct evidence or witnesses, only selective interpretation of data (by its advocates).

 

By contrast, even critics such as Dan Vogel acknowledge Joseph Smith had some physical object, which eyewitnesses described as the plates.  There were more than 2-dozen people who handled the plates.  Thirteen saw them.  Five said angels or God told them they had been translated correctly.

 

Not a single witness recanted, which would make the Book of Mormon the single largest conspiracy in history to not be compromised by one of its members.

 

No physical evidence of an alternative source of the metal, construction or disposition of the plates has ever been found.

 

Not a single witness or rumor was ever uncovered by someone asserting they were involved in creating the physical object Joseph Smith showed people.

 

Finally, most if not all of the witnesses at some point had their lives threaten if they did not recant, and similarly were offered thousands of dollar, the equivalent of over a million dollars today, during a time of horrible poverty and struggle on the American frontier.

 

So comparing the reality of the Book of Mormon to the flood is like comparing the reality of the eyewitness accounts of the signing of the Constitution to L. Ron Hubbard's Dianetics.

 

If you can't provide a reasonable alternative to the twenty accounts about the reality of the plates, then there certainly was a man named Moroni, a nation of Nephites, and the visit of the Savior to the Americas.

 

Or you can be a 911 Truther.  Oh, my bad, there is more evidence for that then against the Book of Mormon.

[Rob Osborn]

If one uses some logic coupled with throwing out science that doesn't coincide with the word of God then there is less and less of problems both for the BoM and for the global flood. The biggest thing to question is the dates science gives to things. The scriptures state that the temporal age of the earth to be 7,000 years. this means there is no death before 7,000 years ago. If we throw out the dates given to remains such as the horse in the America's then it is no problem. This same logic applies to the flood- there are no fossils older than 7,000 years old which also means that the geologic column is far far younger than we think it is.

As for steel, it rusts away extremely fast no matter where you store it. The Nephites found remains of the Jaredite battles but the swords (some 500 years later) blades were already going away, cankered with rust. (

11 And again, they have brought swords, the hilts thereof have perished, and the blades thereof were cankered with rust; and there is no one in the land that is able to interpret the language or the engravings that are on the plates. Therefore I said unto thee: Canst thou translate?

(Mosiah 8:11)

Other things like "elephants" also are no problem once you throw out dates because we know that indians lived alongside them.

The thing about the dates is that we have no way to validate dates of unknown origins. Once one also realizes these dates are wrong then other factors also come into play such as the correlation of the Mayan calendar is probably off. If we assume the Mayans were BoM peoples then we should automatically throw out the dates given to the Maya as the start date doesn't correlate with any lnadmark BoM event spoken of in relation to either the tower of Babel or the time of the Nephites count from leaving Jerusalem and the advent of Christs birth.

And on and on and on- the issues just keep compounding when we allow science to date things.

[Tiki]

STEEL

Steel was known in antiquity, and may have been produced by managing bloomeries, or iron-smelting facilities, in which the bloom contained carbon.[15]

The earliest known production of steel is a piece of ironware excavated from an archaeological site in Anatolia (Kaman-Kalehoyuk) and is about 4,000 years old.[16] Other ancient steel comes from East Africa, dating back to 1400 BC.[17] In the 4th century BC steel weapons like the falcata were produced in the Iberian Peninsula, while Noric steel was used by the Roman military.[18]

Steel was produced in large quantities in Sparta around 650 BC.[19][20]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steel

[Rob Osborn]

There is no proof that the BoM is true or historically correct.  There is much evidence that it is true and correct, however.  Dozens of authentic names, locations, concepts that tie in perfectly with the ANE and Mayan worlds, Ties with the Dead Sea Scrolls and other ancient documents, etc.

I have yet to see someone explain many of these things away, beyond that there are just a bunch of coincidences.

 

That said, there is NO evidence of a global flood outside of stories of a flood that come from various places and peoples around the world.  But, for that it only takes a variety of extreme floods to create a global flood story, or for a large flood to occur in one area, and then have the story relayed to other places via travel and dispersion.

 

So the original quotes is comparing apples and oranges. Zero evidence for a global flood.  Lots of evidence for the BoM.

I would tend to disagree. There is literally mountains of evidence for a flood. All over the world we see sedimentary layers that were laid down in the water. Not only that but evidences of mass death that happened at the same time trapping their remains in those sedimentary layers.

[MormonFreeThinker]

I would tend to disagree. There is literally mountains of evidence for a flood. All over the world we see sedimentary layers that were laid down in the water. Not only that but evidences of mass death that happened at the same time trapping their remains in those sedimentary layers.

 

No ad hominem please, just try to debunk the video 

 

Edited May 24, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker

[Rob Osborn]

No ad hominem please, just try to debunk the video 

 

http://www.infowars.com/fact-check-did-bill-nye-tell-a-huge-lie-about-the-fossil-layers/

http://www.icr.org/article/out-place-marine-fossil-disrupts-evolutionary/

http://www.detectingdesign.com/fossilrecord.html

[MormonFreeThinker]

http://www.infowars.com/fact-check-did-bill-nye-tell-a-huge-lie-about-the-fossil-layers/

http://www.icr.org/article/out-place-marine-fossil-disrupts-evolutionary/

http://www.detectingdesign.com/fossilrecord.html

 

infowars?

 

Alex believes that the usa government created magical fireproof detonators to destroy building 7, because the destruction of the twin towers wasn't enough for the us government. 

http://www.debunking911.com/quick.htm

 

http://www.infowars.com/the-apollo-moon-landings-exposed-in-2014/

Alex believes that the moon landing was a hoax, but General Authorities said that man did go to the moon. 

 

"On July 20, 1969, astronauts landed on the moon," - Elder Carlos E. Asay, April 1990 General Conference 

"In our time we have seen men walk on the moon" - Elder Joseph Anderso, 1972 General Conference 

"Man has been to the moon and has sent spaceships to distant planets" - Elder Jacob de Jager, April 1983 General Conference

 

So you should really question the websites that you link to.  

Edited May 24, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker

[Rob Osborn]

infowars?

 

Alex believes that the usa government created magical fireproof detonators to destroy building 7, because the destruction of the twin towers wasn't enough for the us government. 

http://www.debunking911.com/quick.htm

 

http://www.infowars.com/the-apollo-moon-landings-exposed-in-2014/

Alex believes that the moon landing was a hoax, but General Authorities said that man did go to the moon. 

 

"On July 20, 1969, astronauts landed on the moon," - Elder Carlos E. Asay, April 1990 General Conference 

"In our time we have seen men walk on the moon" - Elder Joseph Anderso, 1972 General Conference 

"Man has been to the moon and has sent spaceships to distant planets" - Elder Jacob de Jager, April 1983 General Conference

 

So you should really question the websites that you link to.

So, does this make you a hypocrite? You linked to a video made by a known atheist and mormon hater.

[canard78]

Oh look, another (badly disguised) thread on the global flood by mormonfreethinker.

[MormonFreeThinker]

So, does this make you a hypocrite? You linked to a video made by a known atheist and mormon hater.

 

inforwars and icr are the real mormon haters 

 

The video I linked to was made by a geologist, I am not aware that he is a Mormon hater. 

I never seen some of his videos, none of them talk about Mormonism.

 

He only attacks ID creationists, not Theism. 

[Rob Osborn]

inforwars and icr are the real mormon haters 

 

The video I linked to was made by a geologist, I am not aware that he is a Mormon hater. 

I never seen some of his videos, none of them talk about Mormonism.

 

He only attacks ID creationists, not Theism.

Perhaps its my bad but the voice on the video sounds a whole lot like Dawkins.

[MormonFreeThinker]

Perhaps its my bad but the voice on the video sounds a whole lot like Dawkins.

 

He is not Dawkins. 

 

If you search for "Mormon" in AnswersinGenesis, you get anti-mormon stuff. 

 

Ray Comfort, one of the top ID creationism defenders. 

[Rob Osborn]

This thread is just another case of atheist attacks on Christianity.

[Rob Osborn]

Beginning to see the duck now- if it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, swims like a duck...

[MormonFreeThinker]

Beginning to see the duck now- if it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, swims like a duck...

 

I am not so sure now, maybe you are just playing young earth fundamentalist Mormon, like this guy is playing Evangelical 

 

[Rob Osborn]

I am not so sure now, maybe you are just playing young earth fundamentalist Mormon, like this guy is playing Evangelical 

 

"Quack quack quack".

To think- you have posted back to back videos by known atheists Peter Hadfield and Edward Current- both atheists and both make videos to mock Christianity. So I say- "by their fruits you shall know them". Atheists. What more can I say?

(Hint: if you don't want to be grouped with atheists, dont link videos directly to them to support your arguments)

Edited May 25, 2014 by Rob Osborn