Jim Stiles Posted March 3, 2016 Posted March 3, 2016 12 hours ago, VideoGameJunkie said: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1mFdO1wB08 This video was uploaded in 2006, but it shows how they can find stuff for the Bible, but not for the Book of Mormon. Or are scientists just not looking hard enough, or are they wrong? It has the creepy music used by the History Channel when it discusses near-eastern archaeology.
Kenngo1969 Posted March 3, 2016 Posted March 3, 2016 13 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said: Anti-Mormon is a pajorative... Oh, noes!!! Cain't have people usin' none a them pajoratives!!! Wait. What's a pajorative? 1
Kenngo1969 Posted March 3, 2016 Posted March 3, 2016 (edited) 12 hours ago, VideoGameJunkie said: Their conclusion is that there's proof for the events of the Bible, but no proof for the Book of Mormon. What do I think? I dunno, I'd like there to be proof of the Book of Mormon, but I don't know of any. Well, that's one of their downfalls: they talk in terms of proof. There is proof neither for the Book of Mormon nor for the Holy Bible. There may be evidence for the former and/or for the latter, but given the nature and purposes of the works, there is unlikely to be proof for them (to severely understate the case). P.S.: And Video Game Junkie, the answer to your question is, And if the video does say the Book of Mormon didn't happen, ergo, what? I can say you're a leprechaun. For all I know, you may even be a leprechaun. We've never met face-to-face. How would I know if you're not a leprechaun. Welp, I guess it's one a them thangs I'm just gonna have to accept on faith! Edited March 3, 2016 by Kenngo1969 1
Gray Posted March 3, 2016 Posted March 3, 2016 (edited) Proof is for mathematics, not archaeology/anthropology. Edited March 3, 2016 by Gray 4
thesometimesaint Posted March 3, 2016 Posted March 3, 2016 12 hours ago, VideoGameJunkie said: Their conclusion is that there's proof for the events of the Bible, but no proof for the Book of Mormon. What do I think? I dunno, I'd like there to be proof of the Book of Mormon, but I don't know of any. Proof is a very different standard than evidence. Proof only exists in the realm of mathematics. 3
Jim Stiles Posted March 3, 2016 Posted March 3, 2016 12 hours ago, Calm said: If you prefer videos, here is one made in response: I have watched the first 8 minutes of this video, there is a alot of neo-orthodoxy when it comes to the discussion of metals in the Book of Mormon. Steel during Joseph Smith Jr.'s time was basically what it is now: an alloy of iron and carbon with a carbon content less than 2.1%. More neo-orthodoxy about chariots. Some of the Nahom nonsense; the inscription was NHM. Claims that the LDS church stated that the Lamanites were not the only people in the Americas, yet the old version of the Introduction to the Book of Mormon says that the Lamanites were the primary ancestors of the Native Americans.
bcuzbcuz Posted March 3, 2016 Posted March 3, 2016 13 hours ago, RevTestament said: There is actually considerable archaeological evidence supporting the Book of Mormon, but one must look in the right place. Point me in the direction then. It either is or it isn't. The videos presented on this OP refer several times to the Olmec culture. I'd like to see something more specific than supposition
RevTestament Posted March 3, 2016 Posted March 3, 2016 13 minutes ago, bcuzbcuz said: Point me in the direction then. It either is or it isn't. The videos presented on this OP refer several times to the Olmec culture. I'd like to see something more specific than supposition Thank you for asking, but what I am preparing is not finished yet. I don't believe the Olmec culture has anything to do with the Book of Mormon, although it provides evidence of a trade with Africa. I believe Africans/Egyptians were part of that culture as well as Asians. Africans may have even been revered as trading partners, bringing all kinds of stuff. In return, they brought back things like tobacco and cocaine used in Egyptian mummies. There is essentially no hard evidence to put the events of the Book of Mormon there. That is the problem with C. America - there is no on the ground archaeology which supports the BoM. Parallels in stories and such don't prove much. Critics use the same to say the BoM was plagiarized from this story or that. I am not saying the culture of the BoM has nothing to do with the BoM - the Mayans I believe were influenced by the Hopewell culture, see Mayan toy wheels and axles, panpipes, etc. The events of the Book of Mormon took place in N. America. I'm sorry I won't be more specific at this time. It is still months in preparing - or maybe more than another year. But I am planning to make it free when it is done.
canard78 Posted March 3, 2016 Posted March 3, 2016 2 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said: Well, that's one of their downfalls: they talk in terms of proof. There is proof neither for the Book of Mormon nor for the Holy Bible. There may be evidence for the former and/or for the latter, but given the nature and purposes of the works, there is unlikely to be proof for them (to severely understate the case). P.S.: And Video Game Junkie, the answer to your question is, And if the video does say the Book of Mormon didn't happen, ergo, what? I can say you're a leprechaun. For all I know, you may even be a leprechaun. We've never met face-to-face. How would I know if you're not a leprechaun. Welp, I guess it's one a them thangs I'm just gonna have to accept on faith! I'd like to think the Book of Mormon and least has a little more evidence than the existence of Leprechauns. There are people who believe in Leprechauns apparently... maybe they have their own John Sorenson. Paddy O'Mally or something.
cdowis Posted March 3, 2016 Posted March 3, 2016 (edited) 3 hours ago, RevTestament said: -there is no on the ground archaeology which supports the BoM. I have see this claim many times. Please help me understand what you are saying. Let's suppose that we are excavating a city in the BOM time period and discover a jade necklace. Please help us to know how to identify whether this is from the Nephites/Lamanites, or some other culture. OK, we are now taking a tour of this excavated city, so I want to know whether it is related to the Book of Mormon. Here we have an entire city, many buildings, lots of artifacts. now YOU tell us how we can identify whether this is a BOM city? Am I looking for a crucifix, or an icon of the Blessed Mary, a building with the Angel Moroni steeple? You see, your statement is garbage, nonsense, unless you can identify what we are looking for. There are thousands of artifacts in museums, and prove that NONE of these are Nephite/Lamanite. In case you are unaware, virtually ALL of the written records (codices) were destroyed by the Spanish, so that severely limits our understanding of their culture. We discover these people have written records, a sophisticated calendar, towers used in religious worship, human sacrifice, extensive warfare, multiple cultures, cement cities. And yet none of these things are found in mesoamerica? Thankyousoverymuch. Edited March 3, 2016 by cdowis 1
VideoGameJunkie Posted March 3, 2016 Author Posted March 3, 2016 Should they excavate the Hill Cumorah?
RevTestament Posted March 3, 2016 Posted March 3, 2016 53 minutes ago, VideoGameJunkie said: Should they excavate the Hill Cumorah? No. It is a glacial hill or drumlin. The records were not stored there with the exception of the BoM which is gone. It is not where they lived, so there is not going to be much there except glacial gravel.
cdowis Posted March 3, 2016 Posted March 3, 2016 1 hour ago, VideoGameJunkie said: Should they excavate the Hill Cumorah? Which one? 1
RevTestament Posted March 3, 2016 Posted March 3, 2016 1 hour ago, cdowis said: I have see this claim many times. Please help me understand what you are saying. Let's suppose that we are excavating a city in the BOM time period and discover a jade necklace. Please help us to know how to identify whether this is from the Nephites/Lamanites, or some other culture. You did not accurately quote me. What I said is this: "There is essentially no hard evidence to put the events of the Book of Mormon there." meaning in Guatemala. There is nothing in the Book of Mormon to suggest anything about jade. It is an inconsistent finding. The BoM talks about gold, silver, copper, iron, and some other items called non-English names. Please show one that is consistent with jade. Jade was valued by Asiatic cultures esp the Chinese. And that is what we find in Olmec society - people still there with Asiatic genes, and with period sculpures of the people which look quite Asian including the eyefold, etc. Where are the Olmec coins? or money such as shiblum and shiblon? Further, Olmec society was there before the Nephites. Quote OK, we are now taking a tour of this excavated city, so I want to know whether it is related to the Book of Mormon. Here we have an entire city, many buildings, lots of artifacts. now YOU tell us how we can identify whether this is a BOM city? Am I looking for a crucifix, or an icon of the Blessed Mary, a building with the Angel Moroni steeple? You see, your statement is garbage, nonsense, unless you can identify what we are looking for. There are thousands of artifacts in museums, and prove that NONE of these are Nephite/Lamanite. There were no cross symbols in the Americas. There were some fairly universal sun symbols which have a symmetric cross enclosed in a circle. It is found all over the world. My statement is not garbage tho. Trying to convince people that rock pyramids have anything to do with the BoM is garbage however. Here is the type of thing which should tip one off: http://www.econ.ohio-state.edu/jhm/arch/efw.html that was surveyed by the Corps of Engineers. Unfortunately, it is now probably under a damned lake. Quote In case you are unaware, virtually ALL of the written records (codices) were destroyed by the Spanish, so that severely limits our understanding of their culture. We discover these people have written records, a sophisticated calendar, towers used in religious worship, human sacrifice, extensive warfare, multiple cultures, cement cities. And yet none of these things are found in mesoamerica? Thankyousoverymuch. The Mayan writings we do have show no direct connection to the BoM. Yes, I was aware the Catholics destroyed virtually all the Mayan scrolls with the exception of about 4 thank you very much. The Mayans did have math, but they were not the first to use math in the Americas. Their culture was inconsistent with that of the BoM, and its height was after the BoM. Mayan temples were not like the description in the BoM, and their use ie human sacrifice was also inconsistent. The height of the BoM culture was the 200 years after Christ came. I believe the Mayans did benefit from "Hopewell" culture. After the Hopewell we see things like wheels on axles(even if on toys), etc. We do see some "loan" words or maybe also ideas in Mayan culture, but these things were probably derived from the Hopewell. Youareverywelcome. 1
cinepro Posted March 3, 2016 Posted March 3, 2016 2 hours ago, cdowis said: I have see this claim many times. Please help me understand what you are saying. Let's suppose that we are excavating a city in the BOM time period and discover a jade necklace. Please help us to know how to identify whether this is from the Nephites/Lamanites, or some other culture. OK, we are now taking a tour of this excavated city, so I want to know whether it is related to the Book of Mormon. Here we have an entire city, many buildings, lots of artifacts. now YOU tell us how we can identify whether this is a BOM city? Am I looking for a crucifix, or an icon of the Blessed Mary, a building with the Angel Moroni steeple? You see, your statement is garbage, nonsense, unless you can identify what we are looking for. There are thousands of artifacts in museums, and prove that NONE of these are Nephite/Lamanite. In case you are unaware, virtually ALL of the written records (codices) were destroyed by the Spanish, so that severely limits our understanding of their culture. We discover these people have written records, a sophisticated calendar, towers used in religious worship, human sacrifice, extensive warfare, multiple cultures, cement cities. And yet none of these things are found in mesoamerica? Thankyousoverymuch. I can't speak for RevTestament, but if you can't tell whether or not it's Nephite/Lamanite, then it isn't evidence of the Book of Mormon. If you're the one saying there were ancient pre-Christian and Christian civilizations that had the things described in the Book of Mormon and did the things described in the Book of Mormon and believed the things described in The Book of Mormon, then it's up to you to provide the evidence for those claims. If you can't, then that means there is no evidence for those claims. And having evidence that is indecipherable is the same thing as not having any evidence. 1
cinepro Posted March 3, 2016 Posted March 3, 2016 To expand on that point, suppose I wrote a book claiming that in 1740, a group of aliens from another galaxy assumed human form and came and lived in New York City. Their purpose was to study human cultures, and they lived there for over 50 years, and even intermingled and had children with the humans. My book describes the appearance, language and habits of these aliens. Now, being the skeptical sort, you ask me what kind of evidence I might have for the existence of these "aliens". I explain that there is a ton of evidence, but unfortunately these aliens were living just as the humans of the time lived, so all the evidence looks just like regular artifacts and records from New York in the 1740s. And what you don't understand is that when the record talks about alien technology like laser guns, flying saucers and holographic records, it's actually referring to black-powder rifles, horse-drawn carriages and books (it's amazing how accurately my book reflects the culture of the time in that regard!) Would you accept that as "evidence"? 1
cdowis Posted March 4, 2016 Posted March 4, 2016 2 hours ago, RevTestament said: You did not accurately quote me. What I said is this: "There is essentially no hard evidence to put the events of the Book of Mormon there." meaning in Guatemala. Now that didn't stop me from answering, did it. There is nothing in the Book of Mormon to suggest anything about jade. It is an inconsistent finding. The BoM talks about gold, silver, copper, iron, and some other items called non-English names. Please show one that is consistent with jade. Jade was valued by Asiatic cultures esp the Chinese. OK, so a jade necklace means it was not a BOM city. That narrows down the field. And that is what we find in Olmec society - people still there with Asiatic genes, and with period sculpures of the people which look quite Asian including the eyefold, etc. Thank goodness. The Jaredites were not Jews, and came to America before Abraham was born. Where are the Olmec coins? or money such as shiblum and shiblon? Further, Olmec society was there before the Nephites. Where are coins mentioned in the BOM. Check the index and give us the chapter and verse. Shiblum and shiblon were measures of value or weight. May I suggst that you educated yourself by reading Nibley. That is pretty basic if you want to claim that you know anything about the BOM. There were no cross symbols in the Americas. There were some fairly universal sun symbols which have a symmetric cross enclosed in a circle. It is found all over the world. My statement is not garbage tho. Trying to convince people that rock pyramids have anything to do with the BoM is garbage however. You STILL have not answered my question. You demand that there must be BOM artifacts, but you are very very shy on telling us what we should be looking for == don't look for crosses, don't look for jade necklaces. Come on, TELL US HOW TO IDENTIFY THEM. Otherwise you are asking an impossible question and you know it. Here is the type of thing which should tip one off: http://www.econ.ohio-state.edu/jhm/arch/efw.html that was surveyed by the Corps of Engineers. Unfortunately, it is now probably under a damned lake. OK, so these are Nephite sites, right???? Is that what you are saying. I think that is the silliest thing I have ever heard, but whatever floats your boat. The Mayan writings we do have show no direct connection to the BoM. Yes, I was aware the Catholics destroyed virtually all the Mayan scrolls with the exception of about 4 thank you very much. At least you admit there are only 4 surviving codices, out of hundreds or thousands that were destroyed. And you complain that these megre four show "no" relationship with the BOM people, which is factually incorrect. The Popul Vu, for example, shows a creation story similar to what we find in the Bible. The Mayans did have math, but they were not the first to use math in the Americas. Their culture was inconsistent with that of the BoM, and its height was after the BoM. Mayan temples were not like the description in the BoM, and their use ie human sacrifice was also inconsistent. The height of the BoM culture was the 200 years after Christ came. I believe the Mayans did benefit from "Hopewell" culture. After the Hopewell we see things like wheels on axles(even if on toys), etc. We do see some "loan" words or maybe also ideas in Mayan culture, but these things were probably derived from the Hopewell. And where did I say that the Mayans were supposed to be the Nephites? As you may be unaware, there were MANY cultures in mesoamerica, and, to this point, LDS scholars are not in agreement on which cultures can be directly tied to the Nephites. The Lamanite culture was not as sophisticated, and scholars are agreed that the Lamanites consisted of many different cultures. We do not expect to see direct, consistent ties to BOM culture. Indeed, as you say, their culture continued centuries after the destruction of the Nephites, as is consistent with the text of the BOM. Youareverywelcome. I noticed that you did not answer my question. Let me put it simply, finding BOM artifacts is not an issue, but IDENTIFYING THEM is the major problem. 1
RevTestament Posted March 4, 2016 Posted March 4, 2016 (edited) 15 hours ago, cdowis said: OK, so a jade necklace means it was not a BOM city. That narrows down the field. No, please don't put words in my mouth. Jade is not consistent. It is not something which can be used as evidence of the veracity of the BoM. Now could a jade necklace be traded and show up in a Nephite city? perhaps. However, if it was so valuable, the BoM is strangely quiet on it. Quote Thank goodness. The Jaredites were not Jews, and came to America before Abraham was born. And the Jaredites became the Nephites? The Nephites had obviously lived in a separate area. Olmec civilization was consistently present according to archaeologists. And BTW I thought the Jaredites died out (although I am willing to believe outliers survived). Quote Where are coins mentioned in the BOM. Check the index and give us the chapter and verse. Shiblum and shiblon were measures of value or weight. May I suggst that you educated yourself by reading Nibley. That is pretty basic if you want to claim that you know anything about the BOM. Well to some extent I agree. There were no minted coins, but there was a medium of exchange, and it was taxed. Don't see that in Mayan society nor Olmec. Quote You STILL have not answered my question. You demand that there must be BOM artifacts, but you are very very shy on telling us what we should be looking for == don't look for crosses, don't look for jade necklaces. Come on, TELL US HOW TO IDENTIFY THEM. Otherwise you are asking an impossible question and you know it. I gave you a link to the type of thing we should consider. That is what you asked for. That ruin seems to encompass an oil lamp as well as the compass and square. Three different people surveyed it. It also seems to have a form of Menorah. Why would it have 9 branches tho? The Hebrews of that time did not recreate the 7 branched menorah outside of the temple out of deference to it. Therefore many menorah had added branches, and most have 9. Didn't Lehi have a vision that Jerusalem was destroyed? Would they have used the same convention as other Hebrews who knew the temple was destroyed? Big hint there. Quote OK, so these are Nephite sites, right???? Is that what you are saying. I think that is the silliest thing I have ever heard, but whatever floats your boat. Why? Because ruins must be visually massive and impressive? Don't know why you think that ruin is silly. I think it is a smoking gun - an unfortunately destroyed site. Doing a professional archaeological dig there would be highly probative I think. Quote At least you admit there are only 4 surviving codices, out of hundreds or thousands that were destroyed. And you complain that these megre four show "no" relationship with the BOM people, which is factually incorrect. The Popul Vu, for example, shows a creation story similar to what we find in the Bible. There are a lot of creation stories "similar" to the Bible. Just because they adapted one from elsewhere doesn't make them Nephites. And those 4 codices aren't all the surviving writing. There was a substantial amount of writing left in stone. So? Does that make them Nephites? No Nephite or Lamanite king names etc. Quote And where did I say that the Mayans were supposed to be the Nephites? As you may be unaware, there were MANY cultures in mesoamerica, and, to this point, LDS scholars are not in agreement on which cultures can be directly tied to the Nephites. The Lamanite culture was not as sophisticated, and scholars are agreed that the Lamanites consisted of many different cultures. We do not expect to see direct, consistent ties to BOM culture. Indeed, as you say, their culture continued centuries after the destruction of the Nephites, as is consistent with the text of the BOM. You have not shown any in the dirt archaeology consistent with the BoM despite griping at me about it. How about some smelting furnaces, or slag, or copper molds in the right time period? How about a consistent agriculture? I did mention panpipes. Google Hopewell panpipes. Where in the world are panpipes first revealed in history? I'll give you a hint - it wasn't Asia. Who were the first to build roads? The Hopewell or the Maya? How about "cement" houses like in the BoM - google wattle and daub Hopewell. Highly consistent - unlike anything mesoAmerican you have brought up. You are the one who questioned my doubt about in-the-dirt archaeology in Mesoamerica not being consistent with the BoM. Are you going to show any or just gripe about me? Cheers. Edited March 4, 2016 by RevTestament
cdowis Posted March 4, 2016 Posted March 4, 2016 (edited) I do not pretend that I can prove the authenticity of the BOM. Those who claim there is "no" archaeological evidence for the BOM are mistaken. I can demonstrate that they are misinformed, that they are placing impossible barriers for evidence, and they used flawed assumptions and logic in their conclusions. I asked you a very simple fundamental question, and you are still unable or unwilling to answer it. Dirt archaeology in mesoamerica is not the only evidence that LDS scholars are examining related to the authenticity of the BOM. I can only conclude that this is just another barrier that you have placed to block any serious evidence from your mind. Can I assume any other evidence must be published in peer-reviewed journals as well. That you assume that any compelling evidence for the BOM cukltures would be wildly and enthusiastically received by the scientific community, and, lacking that, it is clear that there is no evidence at all. You obviously with obdurance ignore any evidence that does not fall into that category. Finally, an observation. Professional archaeologists (non-LDS) are very ignorance of the text of that "book delivered by an angel." Even Dr. Coe is woefully unfamiliar with its contents, has not done a survey of potential "dirt archaeology" artifacts to verify its contents. They are unaware of any evidence presented in favor of this "angelic book". The National Academy has specifically stated that any research project regarding this book will be rejected for any grant, and the Smithsonian has stated the policy that there is nothing of scientific value in the book, and is only a religious book. CASE CLOSED Edited March 4, 2016 by cdowis 1
RevTestament Posted March 4, 2016 Posted March 4, 2016 47 minutes ago, cdowis said: I do not pretend that I can prove the authenticity of the BOM. Those who claim there is "no" archaeological evidence for the BOM are mistaken. I can demonstrate that they are misinformed, that they are placing impossible barriers for evidence, and they used flawed assumptions and logic in their conclusions. I asked you a very simple fundamental question, and you are still unable or unwilling to answer it. Dirt archaeology in mesoamerica is not the only evidence that LDS scholars are examining related to the authenticity of the BOM. I can only conclude that this is just another barrier that you have placed to block any serious evidence from your mind. Again you keep mischaracterizing what I originally said which was: "There is essentially no hard evidence to put the events of the Book of Mormon there. That is the problem with C. America - there is no on the ground archeology which supports the BoM." I am NOT saying that there is "no archaeological evidence for the BOM." Indeed, I am saying there is a lot - there is just no "in-the-dirt archeology" to support it in C. America. That is what you initially challenged. I'm not sure if you are expecting me to prove a negative somehow. And I have answered your "simple" question several times. You brought up jade necklaces - not me. But if it was a pearl necklace I would say Zing! Yeah that is what you look for - something consistent with the BoM, I gave you a list of other things to look for in a Nephite city, and yet you keep saying I didn't answer your simple question. Will i answer it if I make the list longer yet? Quote Can I assume any other evidence must be published in peer-reviewed journals as well. That you assume that any compelling evidence for the BOM cukltures would be wildly and enthusiastically received by the scientific community, and, lacking that, it is clear that there is no evidence at all. You obviously with obdurance ignore any evidence that does not fall into that category. No, I am merely talking about "in-the-dirt archeology" but you keep moving the goal posts. Quote Finally, an observation. Professional archaeologists (non-LDS) are very ignorance of the text of that "book delivered by an angel." Even Dr. Coe is woefully unfamiliar with its contents, has not done a survey of potential "dirt archaeology" artifacts to verify its contents. They are unaware of any evidence presented in favor of this "angelic book". The National Academy has specifically stated that any research project regarding this book will be rejected for any grant, and the Smithsonian has stated the policy that there is nothing of scientific value in the book, and is only a religious book. CASE CLOSED Well, it is a religious book. It is not about science - neither is the Bible. The Bible is full of parables and symbolism, that I believe many times get interpreted all too literally. All I am saying is that there is archeology consistent with the BoM, but I don't see any "in-the-dirt archeology" in C. America which does so. Science is not consistent with traditional interpretations of the Bible either. I believe archeology does and in the future will support what the BoM says - that doesn't make it a scientific book. Period.
cinepro Posted March 4, 2016 Posted March 4, 2016 5 hours ago, cdowis said: Where are coins mentioned in the BOM. Check the index and give us the chapter and verse. Shiblum and shiblon were measures of value or weight. May I suggst that you educated yourself by reading Nibley. That is pretty basic if you want to claim that you know anything about the BOM Alma 11 is describing weights and measures of metal that were consistent and identifiable by sight and given unique names. Which, until recently, was the definition of a "coin". I don't know if the coins had little pictures of Nephi engraved on them, but if they weren't uniform and uniquely identifiable, then Alma 11 makes no sense.
deli_llama Posted March 4, 2016 Posted March 4, 2016 17 hours ago, Gray said: Proof is for mathematics, not archaeology/anthropology. Ahhh, 'hard' science and 'soft' science, there's a difference? To be fair, there are some aspects of anthropology where some empirical research can, or might, be performed. But even that is still debated. Still, I can't think of anything in the video that was proof of anything. And, and, then there is the time you woke up and realized that you must be in Bizzaro World. A world where one of the 'hard-est' sciences had flopped and was 'softer' than anthropology. For example: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/science-faction-is-theoretical-physics-becoming-softer-than-anthropology/ . So, maybe the video is proof of something in Bizzaro World?
cdowis Posted March 4, 2016 Posted March 4, 2016 (edited) 4 hours ago, cinepro said: Alma 11 is describing weights and measures of metal that were consistent and identifiable by sight and given unique names. Which, until recently, was the definition of a "coin". I don't know if the coins had little pictures of Nephi engraved on them, but if they weren't uniform and uniquely identifiable, then Alma 11 makes no sense. "coin" == a flat, typically round piece of metal with an official stamp, used as money. "money" == something generally accepted as a medium of exchange, a measure of value, or a means of payment I actually checked you out by looking in the dictionary. The weights and measures described in the BOM does not require that they be "coins", e.g. a packet or poke of metal. Indeed, again looking in the dictionary, "packet" == (British) the money paid regularly to a person for labor or services. Cinepro, it really does make sense. They were not coins, but units of money. This is really tiresome. You could have looked this up for yourself. Edited March 4, 2016 by cdowis
flameburns623 Posted March 4, 2016 Posted March 4, 2016 On 3/3/2016 at 10:19 PM, VideoGameJunkie said: Either will work for me. I must know there is proof out there, but I'd love to either watch or read. Out of curiosity, why "must" you have "proof"? Why not settle for "inspired/inspiring" allegory? That was the space I settled on for much of my time as an LDS. Of course, I was an ACTIVE Mormon for smething just shy of three years; and a mostly-inactive one for the remaining fifteen or thereabouts. Excluding short bursts of attempts to reactivate myself, mainly during times that I wasn't working irregular rotatng shifts. So I might cincede that a rarified, cerebral Approach to the Book of Mormon perhaps predisposes one more to tepidity than to zealous dedication. But . . . the question stands, in view of your categorically stated imperative?
Recommended Posts