Mesoamerican Theory Predictions

[Helen47]

I can imagine there are lots of closet doubters in the LDS church who believe neither in the  BOM or BOA bugt for family reasons say nothing. Walters told me of one Proffessor at BYU who was in this position. Life is too short to worry about books that ae obviously no historical. There were "mormons" flying off the Atlantic seaboard before Smith was around "Mormon Articus" and there was even on in a Berlin zoo "der Mormon simia".

Edited August 20, 2014 by Helen47

[MormonFreeThinker]

I can imagine there are lots of closet doubters in the LDS church who believe neither in the  BOM or BOA bugt for family reasons say nothing.

 

I am a believer, and you keep ignoring my request. 

Solve the Bible problems first, the big significant unsolved problems.   

 

Matthew 7:3-5 3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5  first take the plank out of your own eye

 

 

Dr. James Hoffmeier is probably the best Christian apologist for the Book of Exodus in the world, he is an Egyptologist. James Hoffmeier admitted that there is no direct archaeological evidence for Book of Exodus during his lecture in Lubbock Christian University. 

 

Please solve the Bible problems first. 

Edited August 20, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker

[cdowis]

I can imagine there are lots of closet doubters in the LDS church who believe neither in the  BOM or BOA bugt for family reasons say nothing. 

Walters told me of one Proffessor at BYU who was in this position.

 

 

Yawn.  Only one?    

 

I find it curious that you find it so amazing that someone with a PhD has lost their faith in God and religion -- not just in Mormonism, but also with the bible, with its story of the creation, the flood, Moses, etc etc. 

 

What exactly is your point.  You are batting a thousand here on the forum.

Edited August 20, 2014 by cdowis

[Helen47]

But Mormonism is so fascinating. Polygamy, polyandry, multiple gods, all fascinating subjects. Just watching the intellectual somersaults whenever some new problem rises like the papyri, dna evidence etc. The spanish were astrounded I understand how the Mayan went to the toilet. The man squatted and the women stood.  Did the people in the city of Nephi have sanitation? BTW what happened to the waste matter on the barges in Ether?.

[Bob Crockett]

Are you going to respond to Sorenson's open letter?

 

Must I?

I simply answered the question posed as to whether Coe wrote anything. I don't necessarily agree with him nor defend him.

[Robert F. Smith]

To really know if Sorenson "drew a target before shooting arrows" we'd have to know when Soreson made the prediction related to information that has come forth about Lake Atitlan in Guatemala. Local peoples have seen ruins beneath the surface of the lake. The lake level dropped several meters following an earthquake in 1976.

Sorenson published his book in 2013. That provides plenty of time to "discover" such a target.

Because those who have not actually read John Sorenson's works tend to flail about in the dark, they often substitute sarcasm for facts:

 

Sorenson published Mormon's Codex in 2013.

Sorenson published An Ancient American Setting in 1985

Sorenson circulated his formal geographic correlations in 1975 (I was part of the group of 20 which evaluated his and Garth Norman's competing correlations at that time), before the 1976 earthquake.

In these and even earlier writings, Sorenson regularly placed Lamanite Jerusalem at Maya Yaxallum / Yaxa-llum “Green-Land, New-Land” (= Santiago-Atitlán, Guatemala, and environs), or with sunken Samabaj in that same Lake Atitlán.[1]

[1] J. Sorenson, An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon, 222-224 (map 11); Sorenson, Mormon’s Codex, 133-136.

[Robert F. Smith]

I am a Christian. Like Peter Enns on Patheos I understand the Bible has problems. I do not accept the Bible has no mistakes like many Reformed do.

Peter Enns is very impressive, and he is always fair.

[Robert F. Smith]

I can imagine there are lots of closet doubters in the LDS church who believe neither in the  BOM or BOA bugt for family reasons say nothing. .......................................................................................  

With a good imagination, one might come up with almost anything, and not have to be bothered by the facts.

[MormonFreeThinker]

But Mormonism is so fascinating. Polygamy, polyandry, multiple gods, all fascinating subjects. Just watching the intellectual somersaults whenever some new problem rises like the papyri, dna evidence etc. 

 

I am still waiting, Solve the Bible problems first, the big significant unsolved problems. Why do you only care about the controversial issues in my church? Go solve the controversial issues of your religion first. 

 

 

Dr. James Hoffmeier is probably the best Christian apologist for the Book of Exodus in the world, he is an Egyptologist. James Hoffmeier admitted that there is no direct archaeological evidence for Book of Exodus during his lecture in Lubbock Christian University.

[Robert F. Smith]

I feel the problems with say for example the Book of Abraham are far worse than that of the Bible..........................................................  

....................

Sorry, Helen, but you'd be wrong.  The opposite is true.

Just as a primer, you might want to look at David Bokovoy, Authoring the Old Testament: Genesis - Deuteronomy (2014), with two more volumes forthcoming in that series.

[MormonFreeThinker]

Sorry, Helen, but you'd be wrong.  The opposite is true.

Just as a primer, you might want to look at David Bokovoy, Authoring the Old Testament: Genesis - Deuteronomy (2014), with two more volumes forthcoming in that series.

 

Let Helen solve the Bible problems first. Christians critics should solve their problems first before criticizing our church. No point to argue with Christian critics, they will never listen with an open mind. 

 

 

Dr. James Hoffmeier is probably the best Christian apologist for the Book of Exodus in the world, he is an Egyptologist. James Hoffmeier admitted that there is no direct archaeological evidence for Book of Exodus during his lecture in Lubbock Christian University.

Edited August 20, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker

[Robert F. Smith]

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?

Columbus' voyage was across the short Atlantic, while the Jaredites crossed the great Pacific:

 

Morgan W. Tanner, “Jaredites,” Encyclopedia of Mormonism (1992), 718, online at http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Jaredites ;

The Jaredites crossed the sea to the New World in eight "barges" in 344 days, driven by currents and winds. Their route is unknown. Perhaps coincidentally, the North Pacific current takes about the same time to cross from Japan to Mexico (Sorenson, An Ancient American Setting, 111).

 

More recently, Japanese floating metal docks, torn loose by a great tsunami March 11, 2011, from the port of Misawa, arrived by June 4. 2012, on the Oregon coast = 4,560 miles in 449 days (@ about 10 miles per day).  http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/06/07/154496527/japanese-dock-reaches-oregon-tsunami-debris-arriving-sooner-than-expected .

 

Anthropologists and historians try to deal with the real world, rather than throwing around invective.

Edited August 20, 2014 by Robert F. Smith

[Robert F. Smith]

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.

What I find strange here, Helen, is that I can't understand what you are saying.  Is this inadvertantly incoherent, or is it simply a lack of logical sequence from one premise to another?

[cdowis]

Must I?

I simply answered the question posed as to whether Coe wrote anything. I don't necessarily agree with him nor defend him.

 

Sorry, I quoted "Coe is extremely knowledgeable of LDS positions." from someone clearly posing as you, using your name.

 

Perhaps you should report this to the moderator..

 

I was pointing out to this impostor that if Coe "knows LDS positions", and speaking with great and profound authority about the BOM, I would expect him to be personally knowledgeable about its contents.

 

But that's just me.

Edited August 20, 2014 by cdowis

[Helen47]

Can DavidB read egyptian? How does he interpret the figures in Fac 3? I think DavidB will eventually take a nonhistorical view of the BOA. In his facebook page he does not seem to have problems with Graham who has attacked the BOA. I think he said he couild if proven accept tbe BOA as Midrash.Maybe he can translate that part of Fac 2 that "cannot be interpretated at this time". Then he would really be a seer.

Edited August 20, 2014 by Helen47

[Okrahomer]

Can DavidB read egyptian? How does he interpret the figures in Fac 3? I think DavidB will eventually take a nonhistorical view of the BOA. In his facebook page he does not seem to have problems with Graham who has attacked the BOA. I think he said he couild if proven accept tbe BOA as Midrash.Maybe he can translate that part of Fac 2 that "cannot be interpretated at this time". Then he would really be a seer.

It would be helpful, if rather than hopping from one thing to the next, you would pause and at least acknowledge one or two of the thoughtful rejoinders that have already been offered in response to your numerous posts. Are you doing this on purpose?

[Darren10]

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/underwater-archaeology-and-the-book-of-mormon-in-sorensons-mormons-codex/#_ednref2

First of all, Who is this un-named "expert"? And wouldn´t a volcanic event cause tremours and after tremours that would cause building damage? And if the buildings appear to be undamaged,, does that imply a "sudden rise of water" or does it imply a slow, gradual submergence??

If the submergence took a long time, does that then link it to a BofM event or entirely un-link it?

From your link, the cited portion of Mormon's Codex was credited to pages 646-647 of that book. I opened the book to those pages and found the footnote there (Sorensen's book is THOROUGHLY footnoted) and the expert is Dr. Richardson B. Gill and his book, "Maya Droughts". Here's an interesting tidbit from a review of his book:

In fact, Mayan city-states and even smaller settlements were designed with water management a primary consideration, with central reservoirs, residential reservoirs, canals, and the terrain and pavement of the city itself all engineered to facilitate the collection and storage of water during the wet season. This was important, because, as explained in a chapter on "Paleoclimatology," small-scale (relative to the great final calamity) droughts were endemic to the Maya area as shown both by Maya water management strategies and more recent evidence from sediment recovered from the bottom of lakes. Records during the Spanish colonial period point to further famines on a regular basis after the conquest. In fact, during the colonial period, population looses from drought in the Yucatan ranged up to 30 or 40%.

In another chapter titled "Volcanoes and Weather" Dr. Gill argues that there is a strong correlation between the eruptions of large volcanoes around the world, and the worldwide weather patterns that lead to drought in Mesoamerica. This particular chapter not only provided evidence to support this correlation, but evidence that the volcanoes may have been a forcing mechanism for those weather patterns. Volcanoes and weather are a topic of some interest to me, and until I read this book, I had trouble finding a good introduction to the study of volcanoes, and to the relationship between volcanoes and weather. Now I have.

http://www.szoraster.com/Science/The%20Great%20Maya%20Droughts.htm

That coincides nicely from what Sorensen was seemly attempting to say regarding the sunken city.

Regarding your exploratory questions regarding volcanic activity, my exploratory thoughts wonder if the volcano occurred far enough not to damage buildings but triggered water to rise rapidly.

[Darren10]

Note that while it is not a conventional writing system it is a writing system and it is quite effective once learned.

 

http://archaeology.about.com/od/americanancientwriting/a/quipu.htm

That's not a writing system at all. It's more of a sculpture representing ideas and very far removed from the writing system Nephi brought ot the New World and as found by Joseph Smith via the Angel Moroni.

[cdowis]

Can DavidB read egyptian? How does he interpret the figures in Fac 3? I think DavidB will eventually take a nonhistorical view of the BOA. In his facebook page he does not seem to have problems with Graham who has attacked the BOA. I think he said he couild if proven accept tbe BOA as Midrash.Maybe he can translate that part of Fac 2 that "cannot be interpretated at this time". Then he would really be a seer.

 

May I suggest starting a new thread, or going to one of the many BOA threads.  We are talking about the BOM here.

[SmileyMcGee]

I agree that it is not testable for now, but his predictions are testable, and are now confirmed. You keep ignoring that Inflation theory was not proven before 2014, and many other important theories in cosmology and astrophysics have not been proven, but it doesn't mean that the predictions have no value. Why do you ignore that? so you don't think that theoretical physics is important until it is proven?

That underwater city may have nothing to do with the Book of Mormon, we do not know, but that point is that his predictions are true whether we like it or not. Can you predict something like that?

Please re-read what I previously wrote, I said that if it is shown that the city has nothing to do with the book of Mormon, the predictions will lose their value. If it is shown that it is a Book of Mormon city, the predictions will become a billion dollars. For now, they have value because we now know that the three specific predictions are true.

The point is that the predictions make the theory plausible. That is my point.

I see what you're saying now, my mistake. Thanks for the clarification.

[Bob Crockett]

Sorry, I quoted "Coe is extremely knowledgeable of LDS positions." from someone clearly posing as you, using your name.

 

Perhaps you should report this to the moderator..

 

I was pointing out to this impostor that if Coe "knows LDS positions", and speaking with great and profound authority about the BOM, I would expect him to be personally knowledgeable about its contents.

 

But that's just me.

Nope.  That was my post.   I don't think there is any legitimate dispute that Coe has taken some time to understand the LDS position on Mesoamerican archaeology, and that he is massively qualified to make statements about Mesoamerican archaeology.  One can see that he is qualified, as well, in his interview with Dehlin although I have little patience to listen to lengthy podcasts.  My observations about Coe don't mean that I think he is right, as Dr. Sorenson pointed out many flaws in Coe's statements.  Frankly, I can't understand why somebody like Dr. Coe would waste any time with Mormon Mesoamerican theorists, as their theories are wholly unsupportable by Church teachings.

[guerreiro9]

... as their theories are wholly unsupportable by Church teachings.

Are you saying that a belief that the locations described in the Book of Mormon correspond with locations in Mesoamerica goes against Church teachings or that it is unconfirmed by Church teachings?

I agree with the latter, but not with the former.

-guerreiro9

[MormonFreeThinker]

 Mormon Mesoamerican theorists, as their theories are wholly unsupportable by Church teachings.

 

The Church does not have an official position, but "the Church exhorts all people to approach the gospel not only intellectually but with the intellect and the spirit, a process in which reason and faith work together."  

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine

 

"making sense of encounters between faith and reason — no matter the religious tradition — is part of the human religious experience. Latter-day Saints believe that men and women bear the divine gifts of intellectual reasoning"

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/mormon-and-modern

 

The Mesoamerican theory is plausible, it is reasonable, and it doesn't contradict the known facts about ancient america.  

The Great Lakes and Peru theories are not plausible. 

Edited August 20, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker

[Bob Crockett]

I don't think it is an adequate response to say that the Church encourages intellectual pursuit.  Who doesn't encourage learning?  Rather, the question is whether or not the Church thinks it is appropriate to publish speculation on Book of Mormon geography.

What is the very best statement by a Church authority signing on to a MesoAmerican LGT theory which also places the Hill Cumorah there? Surely you have one.  After 40 years of a rather well-developed theory, it would seem by now that somewhere the Church has approved it.

Edited August 20, 2014 by Bob Crockett

[guerreiro9]

I don't think it is an adequate response to say that the Church encourages intellectual pursuit.

What is the very best statement by a Church authority signing on to a MesoAmerican LGT theory which also places the Hill Cumorah there? Surely you have one.

The Church has a single stance on Book of Mormon geography which is that the Church has no stance on Book of Mormon geography. This includes the location of the hill Cumorah.

-guerreiro9