Tacenda Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865618837/What-is-the-Book-of-Mormon-Video-created-by-3-returned-missionaries-answers-the-question.html?pg=all#8MBvVUCAK3Cz9TMU.01 My bishop posted this new video put out by 3 LDS missionaries on FB. Some comments from LDS is that it is the greatest book and most precious book out there. But why does it not include everything in our church. It could well be another Christian book of another faith. Why isn't the D&C or Pearl of Great Price in the same camp as far as books to be handed out etc. These books set us apart from other faiths.
omni Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 I must admit to being disappointed that no one has mentioned these two gems. How could Joseph have possibly known?
Gervin Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 My Open Letters to Jeremy Runnells might to useful to you. The first one gives a summary of evidence for 1 Nephi: http://www.studioetquoquefide.com/2014/08/an-open-letter-1-to-jeremy-runnells.html The second one deals with the examples of 19th century evidence Runnells brings up: http://www.studioetquoquefide.com/2014/08/an-open-letter-2-to-jeremy-runnells.html haven't gotten through the entire letter, but this statement caught my attention: "The most rigorous method for considering a text in its potential original setting is that developed by William G. Dever, a biblical archaeologist." What other methods, when compared to Dever's, fell short?
Thinking Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 I must admit to being disappointed that no one has mentioned these two gems. How could Joseph have possibly known? Yep. It was so dark that Nephi observedAnd I beheld his 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. It seems to me that it would be difficult to tell the difference between steel and pure gold without significant light.
nealr Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 haven't gotten through the entire letter, but this statement caught my attention: "The most rigorous method for considering a text in its potential original setting is that developed by William G. Dever, a biblical archaeologist." What other methods, when compared to Dever's, fell short? In his book What Did the Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It? he reviews the efforts of mid-20th century archaeologists and explains how they failed. The differences in Dever's approach and theirs are subtle, yet significant. Rather than simply finding "parallels", Dever looks for multi-faceted convergences between the text and archaeology, i.e., where multiple lines in both the text and archaeology come together. I don't actually stick strictly to Dever's method, but a full elaboration of my methodology would take nearly as many pages as the two letters themselves. I also draw on Kenneth Kitchen, James Hoffmeier, Iain Provan, Israel Finkelstein, Amihai Mazar, Anthony Frendo, and Brauch Halpern, along with Book of Mormon luminaries Hugh Nibley, Wilfred Griggs, John Sorenson, and Brant Gardner. Dever's method is my foundation and starting point, however, and I would say that my method is a variation of his (with perhaps Provan have the next strongest influence on my thinking), adapted specifically to the somewhat unique case of the Book of Mormon. So for the sake of brevity in my letters, I just described Dever's method, with a little Nibley sprinkled in there (and Halpern comes in to play in the second letter). 1
omni Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 Yep. It was so dark that Nephi observed It seems to me that it would be difficult to tell the difference between steel and pure gold without significant light.It was also apparently too dark to see the bloodied clothing, but light enough to find the brass plates in the records room.
canard78 Posted January 3, 2015 Author Posted January 3, 2015 Yep. It was so dark that Nephi observedIt seems to me that it would be difficult to tell the difference between steel and pure gold without significant light.Utterly laughable. I'll certainly not include that one. If that's really among the best we've got then it isn't looking good for the BoM 1
nealr Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 Utterly laughable. I'll certainly not include that one. If that's really among the best we've got then it isn't looking good for the BoM Oh, come on--is it really so laughable, though? Nephi could have seen the sword before, and since he was writing 30 years later, definitely would have had time to examine it since that night. Plus, up close with a lamp or a torch he could have made out some details, but nothing ever suggests that Zoram ever got that close to Nephi. This really is not that crazy. Plenty of scholars of antiquity have talked about how seriously dark it was in an ancient city. There were no street lights. If you were out and about you would have lamp or torch, but those only give off so much light. Zoram could have been able to discern Laban's armor without necessarily having enough light to see that they were stained with blood, and would have carried his lamp into the treasury to seek out the brass plates. It is only absurd if we choose to think superficially about it.
Thinking Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 If you were out and about you would have lamp or torch, but those only give off so much light. This is even more laughable, that somebody who trying to sneak into a structure to retrieve something without being seen would have a lamp or torch.
canard78 Posted January 3, 2015 Author Posted January 3, 2015 Where is a biography about your seven witnesses? It is clear that you do not know what you are talking about. ChallengeName a revelation that accurately predicted the vision of a specific group of people (small group).No thanks.
Jude2 Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 I thought the pearls were interesting, he didn’t say diamonds and rubies. 4 Nephi 1:2424 And now, in this two hundred and first year there began to be among them those who were lifted up in pride, such as the wearing of costly apparel, and all manner of fine pearls, and of the fine things of the world. In King Hasaw Chank'awil's tomb they found his body wearing lots of jade and surrounded in pearls.
Robert F. Smith Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 (edited) .................................................. 4 Nephi 1:2424 And now, in this two hundred and first year there began to be among them those who were lifted up in pride, such as the wearing of costly apparel, and all manner of fine pearls, and of the fine things of the world. In King Hasaw Chank'awil's tomb they found his body wearing lots of jade and surrounded in pearls. Such pearl and jade ornaments have been found not only in the 8th century A.D. Jaguar Pyramid Tomb 116 of Hasaw Chan K’awil at Tikal, but have also been found in other important Mesoamerican burials: -- the 7th century A.D. tomb of K’inich Janaab’ Pakal (Pakal the Great) at Palenque-- the 7th century A.D. sarcophagus of the Red Queen in Palenque Tomb XIII, possibly Tz'ak-bu Ajaw, the wife of Pakal, and the grandmother of the last Mayan ruler there. -- in the oldest pyramid tomb found in Mesoamerica, that of a 50-year-old man, probably a high priest or ruler, in Chiapa de Corzo, Mexico. It is dated between 500 to 700 B.C., and suggests to the excavators that nearby Olmec pyramids ought to be excavated. See Mark Stevenson (AP), “Oldest Mesoamerican pyramid tomb found in Mexico,” Phys.org News, May 18, 2010, online at http://phys.org/news193379449.html , Pearl & jade were also prominently featured in many ancient Chinese burials. Edited January 4, 2015 by Robert F. Smith 1
nealr Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 This is even more laughable, that somebody who trying to sneak into a structure to retrieve something without being seen would have a lamp or torch. If you are going to look around for something in complete darkness, you've got to have some sort of light. Even people sneaking around in the dark today will often use flashlights. But it doesn't really matter. Maybe Nephi didn't have a torch or any sort of light with him. So what? Zoram, who appears to be up to entirely legitimate business, certainly would have. 1
Calm Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 Did they have the shielded lanterns back then? The ones that could be covered to just shine in one direction? Just curious.
Calm Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 It's a valuable presentation but I'm afraid the layout and formatting does it no favors. If anyone is interested, a reformatted version of Poulsen's presentation is attached: Poulsen - Book of Mormon Geography.pdfJust want to make sure it isn't violating any copyright or intellectual rights to use this version, can you tell me where you got it please?
Robert F. Smith Posted January 5, 2015 Posted January 5, 2015 Oh, come on--is it really so laughable, though? Nephi could have seen the sword before, and since he was writing 30 years later, definitely would have had time to examine it since that night. Plus, up close with a lamp or a torch he could have made out some details, but nothing ever suggests that Zoram ever got that close to Nephi. This really is not that crazy. Plenty of scholars of antiquity have talked about how seriously dark it was in an ancient city. There were no street lights. If you were out and about you would have lamp or torch, but those only give off so much light. Zoram could have been able to discern Laban's armor without necessarily having enough light to see that they were stained with blood, and would have carried his lamp into the treasury to seek out the brass plates. It is only absurd if we choose to think superficially about it. Superficially? Was it a moonlit night? Were the oil lamps used that good? Did Nephi wipe off most of the blood on the metal armor (breastplate) from the beheading? There are too many imponderables.
Recommended Posts