ERayR Posted August 13, 2014 Posted August 13, 2014 I am not saying that the Mesoamerican model is proven, I am saying that the model doesn't contradict what already has been proven about ancient america. While I find it interesting and convincing Dr. Sorenson's tome uses a lot of references that are still being discussed and disputed by some. So no it hasn't already been proven.
MormonFreeThinker Posted August 13, 2014 Author Posted August 13, 2014 (edited) Now lets look at your claim that it is the only reasonable possibility. As long it is not proven there is room for reasonable people to disagree. You seem to think that if one doesn't see things as you do they are not reasonable No, I am open minded. If I am wrong, tell me the evidence, not your opinions please. What advance cities date to Book of Mormon times in the Americas? What is that evidence that other geographies are plausible? While I find it interesting and convincing Dr. Sorenson's tome uses a lot of references that are still being discussed and disputed by some. So no it hasn't already been proven. Not everything has been proven, I agree, but here is a list of what already has been proven. http://www.bmaf.org/about/why_mesoamerica Edited August 13, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker
cdowis Posted August 13, 2014 Posted August 13, 2014 ERayR, Red typeface is used by the moderators to make comments. It is very distracting to try to read your comments, so please choose another color.
ERayR Posted August 13, 2014 Posted August 13, 2014 No, I am open minded. If I am wrong, tell me the evidence, not your opinions please. What advance cities date to Book of Mormon times in the Americas? What is that evidence that other geographies are plausible? The irony. Someone whose posts are all his own interpretation of the data. Would you please omit your personal opinions Not everything has been proven, I agree, but here is a list of what already has been proven. http://www.bmaf.org/about/why_mesoamerica A list that only proves it is a possibility. While I may agree to the possibility it still does not prove the BoM location.
ERayR Posted August 13, 2014 Posted August 13, 2014 ERayR, Red typeface is used by the moderators to make comments. It is very distracting to try to read your comments, so please choose another color. Gotch OK
MormonFreeThinker Posted August 13, 2014 Author Posted August 13, 2014 (edited) The irony. Someone whose posts are all his own interpretation of the data. Would you please omit your personal opinions Sure, please tell me the evidence A list that only proves it is a possibility. While I may agree to the possibility it still does not prove the BoM location. I agree it doesn't prove the Book of Mormon location, but it shows that it is plausible. That list has proven facts to show that the Mesoamerican geography is plausible. What is the evidence that other geographies are plausible? Edited August 13, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker
ERayR Posted August 13, 2014 Posted August 13, 2014 Sure, please tell me the evidence I agree it doesn't prove the Book of Mormon location, but it shows that it is plausible. That list has proven facts to show that the Mesoamerican geography is plausible. What is the evidence that other geographies are plausible? Evidence for what? At last we agree. It is certainly plausible but someone with a different opinion is not mentally deficient.
MormonFreeThinker Posted August 13, 2014 Author Posted August 13, 2014 Evidence for what? That other models are plausible? What is the evidence that the Great Lakes model is plausible? What is the evidence that the Peru model is plausible?
ERayR Posted August 13, 2014 Posted August 13, 2014 That other models are plausible? What is the evidence that the Great Lakes model is plausible? What is the evidence that the Peru model is plausible? I never said I supported these other models but were I inclined I could probably find a few things. It is sometimes amusing to watch you argue straw mwn.
MormonFreeThinker Posted August 13, 2014 Author Posted August 13, 2014 I never said I supported these other models So you agree that the other models are not plausible? If you think they are plausible, what is the evidence? could probably find a few things. just few things are not going to make a model plausible.
ERayR Posted August 13, 2014 Posted August 13, 2014 So you agree that the other models are not plausible? If you think they are plausible, what is the evidence? just few things are not going to make a model plausible. You do have a penchant for attributing your words to someone else. Please stop doing that to me. I nowhere said they were not plausible. I said I did not agree with them. Big difference. Just so you get it I am not saying they are plausible either. You are very difficult to carry a reasonable conversation with. I am on the verge of putting you on ignore.
Garden Girl Posted August 15, 2014 Posted August 15, 2014 Something I always found interesting...There was a paper presented by Dr. Lynn M. Hilton at the 30th Annual Symposium on the Archaeology of the Scriptures, held at BYU on Sept 26, 1981... titled: "The Hand As A Cup in Ancient Temple Worship." The paper states that after the children of Israel left Egypt, they built a Tabernacle and furnished it according to Moses' instructions, which the Lord had shown him on the mount. Included were the furnishings, vessels, and rituals. One commandment Moses received was that they should make "spoons of pure gold" (EX 25:29) with each tribe contribuitng one spoon, to be used in the ritual of burning incense.The spoon termed "kaph" in Hebrew, which means "hollow of the hand." These were used for centuries in the Tabernacle and later in Solomon's temple (1 Kings 7:50; 2 Chron 24:14).In citing the archaeologial finds of these incense "spoons" or carved hands in cupping shape, northern Syria is mentioned, as well as Megiddo, and have been seen in the ancient art of Palestine, Yemen and Mexico...Hilton states that no doubt Lehi and his family, while in Jerusalem, were well acquainted with the rituals of Solomon's temple, including the burning of incense in spoons. And that on his way to the New World Lehi offered "sacrifices and burnt offerings" (1Ne 5:9, 7:22). It would have been easy to obtain frankincense as they traveled through what is now Saudi Arabia and Oman. The Nephites continued "burnt offerings" after their arrival in America (Mos. 2:3). Therefore, states Hilton, we should not be surprised to see in the art of ancient Mexico, native priests depicted offering incense in spoon-like instruments (depicted in "A Pentential Rite of the Ancient Mexicans," Papers, Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard Univ., Vol . 1, No. 7, 1940). This art echos similar art depicting Pharoah Seti I and his son Rameses II offering incense in a spoon, found in a drawing from a carving found on the wall of the Osiris Temple at Abydos, dating to the 19th Dynasty, ca 1300 BC...The thing I found interesting in all this is that the paper does not cite any indication of "spoons" being found in the New World in the now northern U.S., only in ruins of Yuc'atan and Chiapas, Mexico... as well as ancient Mexican art... so the thought to me is, who introduced them to that area... Nephites? GG 2
Garden Girl Posted August 16, 2014 Posted August 16, 2014 N. American ancient spoon. Hello Sevanbak...It's not that there were not general "spoons" in No Amer that were part of the general tools and utensils... these types of spoons were very different than the incense burners or "spoons" used in temple rituals, both in biblical and BoM times. First, they followed the description and purpose as told in the bible, i.e., are made of gold... they were found in the shape of a hand with a bowl sitting in the cupped hand, and as clearly shown in ancient drawings/art. The long handle was tube like which allowed the priest to gently blow the flame for the incense... this depiction was found on temple walls in Egypt, a panel from the Hypostyle Hall of the Temple of Karnak, ca. 1298 - 1235 BC, showing Ramses II offering insense in a "spoon." And also on the wall of the Osiris Temple at Abydos, ca. 1300 BC. The same depiction was found in Mexican art of priests holding "spoons" of burning incense. GG
Sevenbak Posted August 16, 2014 Posted August 16, 2014 (edited) I hear what you're saying, but I don't necessarily agree with your conclusion. The Nephites only lived in the Land Northward for roughly 55 years under the Mosaic Law, and those that lived there during that time were generally not righteous. I'm not a meldrumite, nor a Sorensonite, so the gold spoons in Mexico would fit with my expectations. First off, they only migrated there beginning at the end of Alma. And it was largely an apostate land. Nephi and Lehi had a 7 year long failed mission there, but they were rejected due the the wickedness of the people. The land was hit the hardest at the crucifixion, again, due to the wickedness of the people. Based on that, I would not expect faithful Nephites to be practicing the faith of their fathers much in the land northward. Of course, after Christ came, they wouldn't have practiced the mosaic law at all. Again, it was only 55 years since the start of their migration at the end of Alma to the crucifixion. And to a newly migrated to, sparse land. So while I agree that the gold spoons could very well be part of that ancient Jewish faith practiced in Mexico, the lack of it in N. America doesn't argue against Nephite lands in N. America. To me, it actually supports it, according to the text. Edited August 17, 2014 by Sevenbak 1
Garden Girl Posted August 17, 2014 Posted August 17, 2014 So while I agree that the gold spoons could very well be part of that ancient Jewish faith practiced in Mexico, the lack of it in N. America doesn't argue against Nephite lands in N. America. To me, it actually supports it, according to the text. I agree, because IMO the people were shown in the text to set off in ships "northward," and also migrating over time would have reached No. America as well as migrating to So America. GG
Helen47 Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 What ever happened about Ray Matheny's paper in archaeology and the Book of Mormon where he thought there were many problems finding evidence for animals and metallurgy in the Mesomerica area? Is he still a member? It was his wife whowrote the paper in New Approaches to the Book of Mormon.
Brant Gardner Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 What ever happened about Ray Matheny's paper in archaeology and the Book of Mormon where he thought there were many problems finding evidence for animals and metallurgy in the Mesomerica area? Is he still a member? It was his wife whowrote the paper in New Approaches to the Book of Mormon.The paper you are referring to was one where he was speculating on what he might say if he were not LDS and didn't believe in the Book of Mormon. Bill Hamblin has reproduced Matheny's letter explaining that it was not a paper that represented Ray Matheny's opinions, but what Matheny thought someone else would say.
Helen47 Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 And yet his wife seems to take the opposite position
Brant Gardner Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 And yet his wife seems to take the opposite positionThere isn't anything in print as there is from Ray, but I know of another person who has had a conversation with her where she indicated that the article might not reflect her opinion of the Book of Mormon. I have personally corresponded with her and know that she is rather sorry that the article was published. More importantly, what this tells us is that we cannot rely on "authority" without actually engaging with the evidence.
Bob Crockett Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 Evidence is usually intepreted by authorities if it involves a technical matter. To truly reach a secular conclusion that the Book of Mormon's text relates well to some existing geography, one might need a geographer who specializes in ancient texts.
ERayR Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 I agree, because IMO the people were shown in the text to set off in ships "northward," and also migrating over time would have reached No. America as well as migrating to So America. GG And they have reached even further than North America. They were on ships and had an open ocean.
ERayR Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 Evidence is usually intepreted by authorities if it involves a technical matter. That is the strength of interpretations of technical matters. It is also the weakness in technical interpretations as authorities sometimes develop tunnel vision.
Helen47 Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 That is strange don't you think? Go to all the trouble to have it published along with a number of apostates and Mormon critic and then be sorry. Her crediblity would be enhanced if she wrote something about where she might be wrong. On page 322 (NABOM) she writes "Does the shoe fit for the current Limited Tehuantepec theory models? Rather than a comfortable "Cinderalla" fit, it is more like a "step sister' mismatch. requiring considerable remodelling of shoe and foot" Very strange.
Helen47 Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 I understand it took Columbus around 66 days to get to America. The Jaradites blown by a strong wind take 344 days. Why the large discrepancy?
Recommended Posts