Rajah Manchou Posted April 19, 2016 Posted April 19, 2016 7 hours ago, mfbukowski said: The lifespans are unreasonably wrong, therefore the BOM and all the truths it contains are false. I don't blame you for not getting it either. the lifespans are unreasonably wrong, in mesoamerica. Its possible they wouldn't be wrong in other places.
canard78 Posted April 21, 2016 Author Posted April 21, 2016 On 4/18/2016 at 9:18 PM, mfbukowski said: -snip- If there was a book teaching that freedom was a good thing, but also saying that some people lived to be 900 years old, would you throw out the idea of freedom because of the scientific problem? Would or do you throw out the golden rule and all morality because there is a talking donkey in the bible? No, and I have never suggested that's needed. Fiction can still contain truths. If the truths are "sweet" and make your life better when applied then they are true principles. That's the only reasonable way to test a principle for being true. Having said that, what works and is sweet for one person might be bitter and not work for another. As such, truth is relative, given it's personal. Why bother evaluating the ages of people in the Book of Mormon? Because I find the historicity of the Book of Mormon interesting. My willingness to take Mosiah 2-4 to heart and try to apply it is not dependent on whether King Benjamin ever lived or was just the invention of someone's imagination. The question, "are we not all beggars" is a brilliantly pithy and rings in my ears every time I walk down Oxford Street in London. I don't always listen to the question, but when I do, I know I feel good when I listen and respond. The other day I had a great chat with a beggar after buying him breakfast, a mug of tea and giving him an extra £5 for lunch (or beer, if he preferred). I felt good, he felt good, King Benjamin was vindicated and my conviction that his statement is a true principle was strengthened. But just because the principle that was attributed to King B was proved true, it doesn't make his historical existence any more credible. Fiction and myths can just as easily contain true principles (take parables for example). Quote Upon what principle of logic would YOU retain the belief in the golden rule while retaining the notion that donkeys don't talk? What is YOUR justification for such inconsistency? Or better yet, skipping that step, what is your justification for any ethical beliefs whatsoever? Certainly atheists are generally moral, so those beliefs must be justified in their minds- they are "sweet" to an atheist just as they are to us. So then are atheists believers in Alma because they agree that it feels good to BE good? Why is that illogical or inconsistent? Donkeys don't talk. I have never heard one talk, not have I heard of one ever talking (Shrek doesn't count ), therefore I believe the account of the talking Donkey to be a myth. That doesn't mean I reject all principles and morality in the book that mentions the talking donkey. I'm sure there are plenty of atheists who agree with the principle of "suck it and see." If it works, carry on. 1
canard78 Posted April 21, 2016 Author Posted April 21, 2016 On 4/18/2016 at 9:31 PM, USU78 said: How old was postmenopausal Sarai/Sarah when she had Isaac? What's one more biological miracle in the context of all the miracles going on in 1 Nephi-Jacob? Are you claiming that the obvious and intended parallels between Genesis and 1 Nephi-Jacob (and between Judges and 1 Nephi-Jacob) could find no place for a comparison/homage involving Sarai/Sarah and Sarahyahu/Sariah? How many times does scripture reference the miracle that was Sarah's conception of Isaac? Yes, it's a miraculous story and, as such, gets lots of mentions. Isn't it significant that with so many apparent postmenopausal births in the Book of Mormon (with people being born 60+ years after their father's birth) that no-one ever mentions it? Given pre-colombian life expectancy was 35-50 in the americas, isn't it odd that no-one ever commented on their miraculous ages in the Book of Mormon? If Nephite men and women were consistently having children in their 50s and 60s and living to the age of 80-120 and doing so repeatedly for the best part of a millenium (when every other community around them lived to around 35)... don't you think someone would have commented on the miracle?
ERayR Posted April 21, 2016 Posted April 21, 2016 On 4/18/2016 at 9:18 AM, canard78 said: You can work out the average by having a start and end point and a count of generations. We have the approximate date of Jacob's birth (Around 599 to 593BC... so take 595BC as a mid-point). We can then count generations down to the last available birth date: Mormon, born 310AD. Total years between their births = 905. Approximate generations = 16. 905 / 16 = 57 The times of birth and ages are approximations and IMNSHO have an error of plus or minus more than fifty years.
canard78 Posted April 21, 2016 Author Posted April 21, 2016 On 4/18/2016 at 9:42 PM, mfbukowski said: The lifespans are unreasonably wrong, therefore the BOM and all the truths it contains are false. I don't blame you for not getting it either. MFB, I know this wasn't at me, but sometimes you put words in people's mouths. There's a difference between "based on a true story/based on actual events" and "contains true principles." It's possible to have one without the other. I doubt that the Book of Mormon is based on actual historical events. I think it is likely that Nephi and co never actually existed. On the other hand, I am certain that the Book of Mormon contains true principles.
stemelbow Posted April 21, 2016 Posted April 21, 2016 Here is Omni: And it came to pass that two hundred and seventy and six years had passed away, and we had many seasons of peace; and we had many seasons of serious war and bloodshed. Yea, and in fine, two hundred and eighty and two years had passed away, and I had kept these plates according to the commandments of my fathers; and I conferred them upon my son Amaron. And I make an end. Omni was the great grandson of Jacob, at least as far as we can tell in the record. Jacob was born sometime after 600 BC, about the time Lehi left Jerusalem, within a few short years that is. It's impossible to have a great grandfather who lived 280 before. Each of the fathers before would have had children when they were in their 80s. So either we're completely mixed up with the timeline of the scriptures and are being misled by some wrong calculations or something, or we don't have a very detailed record of lineage, as the record seems to indicate. meaning, maybe there were two Enos' in a row. Jarom indicates his father was enos, but maybe it wasn't the same Enos. Enos for instance, doesn't say he's leaving the record with his son Jarom. He just announces he's going to pass soon. But even inserting another enos in there doesn't make the math work. This is a big problem. Not like it's they aren't scripture problem, but a problem because we simply don't know. 1
canard78 Posted April 21, 2016 Author Posted April 21, 2016 33 minutes ago, ERayR said: The times of birth and ages are approximations and IMNSHO have an error of plus or minus more than fifty years. Was Jacob born +/- fifty years? Was Mormon +/- fifty years when he said he was 10 years old? For the sake of it, let's bring Mormon's birth forward 50 years, as you suggest (I don't see how we could push Jacob's forward 50 years... Lehi was long since dead). If there's 855 years between the birth of Jacob and Mormon, instead of 905 years then there's still a generational gap of 57 years (instead of 60). Still an unlikely age gap between Nephite father and son. Does it go both way though? Are you happy adding or subtracting 50+ years to Alma the Elder? That would make him either under 30 at his death or over 120. That's a meaningless range. And what's your evidence that someone's age in the BoM is an approximation? Is your age an approximation?
canard78 Posted April 21, 2016 Author Posted April 21, 2016 36 minutes ago, stemelbow said: Here is Omni: Omni was the great grandson of Jacob, at least as far as we can tell in the record. Jacob was born sometime after 600 BC, about the time Lehi left Jerusalem, within a few short years that is. It's impossible to have a great grandfather who lived 280 before. Each of the fathers before would have had children when they were in their 80s. So either we're completely mixed up with the timeline of the scriptures and are being misled by some wrong calculations or something, or we don't have a very detailed record of lineage, as the record seems to indicate. meaning, maybe there were two Enos' in a row. Jarom indicates his father was enos, but maybe it wasn't the same Enos. Enos for instance, doesn't say he's leaving the record with his son Jarom. He just announces he's going to pass soon. But even inserting another enos in there doesn't make the math work. This is a big problem. Not like it's they aren't scripture problem, but a problem because we simply don't know. To bring the generational gap back to a more reasonable level (30 years) we actually have to double the number of generations. Currently we've got 15 generational gaps between Jacob and Mormon, spanning 905 years. An average generational gap is 30 years. That means we need twice as many generations (30 in total). In other wor In this list, I'd be interested to see where an extra 15 generations could be inserted. Essentially we'd need every person on this list to be handing the gold plates to their grandsons: Jacob First born in the wilderness Brother of Nephi 2 595 BC Enos Son 3 Jarom Son 4 Omni Son 5 Amaron Son 6 Chemish Brother 6 Abinadom Son 7 Amaleki Son 8 Benjamin Peer 8 Mosiah Son 9 154 BC Alma (1) Peer 9 173 BC Alma (2) Son 10 Helaman Son 11 Shiblon Brother 11 Helaman (2) Nephew (Helaman's Son) 12 Nephi (2) Son 13 Nephi (3) Son 14 Amos (1) Son 15 Amos (2) Son 16 Ammaron Brother 16 Mormon Peer 17 310AD (4 Ne 1:48 & Mormon 1:3) 1
ERayR Posted April 21, 2016 Posted April 21, 2016 (edited) 14 minutes ago, canard78 said: Was Jacob born +/- fifty years? Was Mormon +/- fifty years when he said he was 10 years old? For the sake of it, let's bring Mormon's birth forward 50 years, as you suggest (I don't see how we could push Jacob's forward 50 years... Lehi was long since dead). If there's 855 years between the birth of Jacob and Mormon, instead of 905 years then there's still a generational gap of 57 years (instead of 60). Still an unlikely age gap between Nephite father and son. Does it go both way though? Are you happy adding or subtracting 50+ years to Alma the Elder? That would make him either under 30 at his death or over 120. That's a meaningless range. And what's your evidence that someone's age in the BoM is an approximation? Is your age an approximation? The dates at the bottom of the pages are nothing more than approximations. You are using them as hard fast dates. In addition the relational lists, to my understanding, are hierarchical (line of authority) lists and not necessarily genealogical lists. Edited April 21, 2016 by ERayR add info
stemelbow Posted April 21, 2016 Posted April 21, 2016 8 minutes ago, canard78 said: To bring the generational gap back to a more reasonable level (30 years) we actually have to double the number of generations. Currently we've got 15 generational gaps between Jacob and Mormon, spanning 905 years. An average generational gap is 30 years. That means we need twice as many generations (30 in total). In other wor In this list, I'd be interested to see where an extra 15 generations could be inserted. Essentially we'd need every person on this list to be handing the gold plates to their grandsons: Jacob First born in the wilderness Brother of Nephi 2 595 BC Enos Son 3 Jarom Son 4 Omni Son 5 Amaron Son 6 Chemish Brother 6 Abinadom Son 7 Amaleki Son 8 Benjamin Peer 8 Mosiah Son 9 154 BC Alma (1) Peer 9 173 BC Alma (2) Son 10 Helaman Son 11 Shiblon Brother 11 Helaman (2) Nephew (Helaman's Son) 12 Nephi (2) Son 13 Nephi (3) Son 14 Amos (1) Son 15 Amos (2) Son 16 Ammaron Brother 16 Mormon Peer 17 310AD (4 Ne 1:48 & Mormon 1:3) You are exactly correct. It must be concluded the lineages aren't well defined. The way we have it in the text is impossible. A great grandfather that lived 280 years before the great grandson? Not possible. We have to be missing a ton in order for it to work and missing that with some level of contradiction in the text. Oh well, no one said the Book was without error, only that is more correct than any other book, huh?
canard78 Posted April 21, 2016 Author Posted April 21, 2016 6 minutes ago, ERayR said: The dates at the bottom of the pages are nothing more than approximations. You are using them as hard fast dates. In addition the relational lists, to my understanding, are hierarchical (line of authority) lists and not necessarily genealogical lists. The dates at the bottom of the pages is not what I'm using to calculate the gap. I'm using them for reference, but not to calculate the years between. There are plenty of references in the text to establish the following: Lehi left Jerusalem 600 years before the birth of Christ Jacob was born first and born in the wilderness (where they wondered for 8 years)... therefore Jacob was born somewhere between 599 and 592 years before Christ Mormon receives the plates aged 10, around 300 years after the birth of Christ. Do you dispute those dates? If we agree that there is somewhere between 850 and 950 years between Jacob and Mormon (regardless of what the actual calendar year was) then there should be around 25-35 generations between them, based on average cycles of having children. The Book of Mormon only mentions 15 or 16 generations between them, depending on how you count "peers" who were given the plates. In order to make the generational gap realistic, you need an extra 14-15 generations. Can you suggest where they are? 1
ERayR Posted April 21, 2016 Posted April 21, 2016 How do you know how many generations between what you call peers. How do you know how many generations between what the BoM lists as a descendant of.
canard78 Posted April 21, 2016 Author Posted April 21, 2016 12 minutes ago, stemelbow said: You are exactly correct. It must be concluded the lineages aren't well defined. The way we have it in the text is impossible. A great grandfather that lived 280 years before the great grandson? Not possible. We have to be missing a ton in order for it to work and missing that with some level of contradiction in the text. Oh well, no one said the Book was without error, only that is more correct than any other book, huh? Perhaps Jacob is actually Nephi's son and when Lehi said "my firstborn in the wilderness" he actually meant "my family's first grandson in the wilderness." Perhaps Enos had a son called Enos and the Enos at the end of Jacob 7 is not the same person as the Enos in the book of Enos. Two or more Enoses. Or Enosi? The Omni and 4 Nephi record keepers could have made the plates a family heirloom and just passed it to their grandsons. That gives us an extra 9 generations. Any suggestions on where the other 6 could come from? Is Alma the Younger actually Alma the Much Younger? Maybe Nephite Kings actually passed their "crown" from father to grandson: Mosiah > (unnamed son) > Benjamin (unnamed son) > Mosiah). The problem with all that is you need to allow for a culture where people behaved very differently to what the text describes. When Benjamin calls his son in, to gather the people, and then bestows the kingdom on Mosiah, is there any indication that he's talking to his grandson? There isn't. The alternative conclusion is that this is evidence of a mathematical slip up on the part of the author.
Peppermint Patty Posted April 24, 2016 Posted April 24, 2016 I found this article that's relevant to life expectancy. A team of over 50 researchers studied approximately 12500 (more than half pre-Columbian) skeletal remains from 65 sites in North and South America going back thousands of years. They found that the average life expectancy was around 35 years. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/29/science/don-t-blame-columbus-for-all-the-indians-ills.html?pagewanted=all
canard78 Posted April 24, 2016 Author Posted April 24, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, Peppermint Patty said: I found this article that's relevant to life expectancy. A team of over 50 researchers studied approximately 12500 (more than half pre-Columbian) skeletal remains from 65 sites in North and South America going back thousands of years. They found that the average life expectancy was around 35 years. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/29/science/don-t-blame-columbus-for-all-the-indians-ills.html?pagewanted=all Thanks. If people were living 35-50 years in the Americas, how were the nephites managing to live 80-120 years and still siring children at these ages? Mightn't we expect that people might comment on the miracle of Nephites living 2-3 times longer than their neighbours? On top of that: Quote Farming tended to limit the diversity of diets, and the congestion of towns and cities contributed to the rapid spread of disease. In the widening inequalities of urban societies, hard work on low-protein diets left most people vulnerable to illness and early death. Urbanisation and agriculture lead to illness and death? So much for Nephites prospering... Edited April 24, 2016 by canard78 Formatting
canard78 Posted April 24, 2016 Author Posted April 24, 2016 On 21 April 2016 at 4:50 PM, ERayR said: How do you know how many generations between what you call peers. How do you know how many generations between what the BoM lists as a descendant of. At the moment I'm taking the book at its word. I'm counting a son as a son. As for peers, we only have peers 3 times. We could add another 3 generations in there if it makes you feel better. You'd still be 12-13 short.
mikegriffith1 Posted April 24, 2016 Posted April 24, 2016 Looking at it logically, assuming you are correctly characterizing what the BOM says about the generational gaps, if anything, I think it is rather impressive that the generational gaps are consistent, regardless of their length. That's not something that a forger/plagiarizer would have been likely to have even considered.
rodheadlee Posted April 24, 2016 Posted April 24, 2016 (edited) On 4/21/2016 at 8:22 AM, canard78 said: To bring the generational gap back to a more reasonable level (30 years) we actually have to double the number of generations. Currently we've got 15 generational gaps between Jacob and Mormon, spanning 905 years. An average generational gap is 30 years. That means we need twice as many generations (30 in total). In other wor In this list, I'd be interested to see where an extra 15 generations could be inserted. Essentially we'd need every person on this list to be handing the gold plates to their grandsons: Jacob First born in the wilderness Brother of Nephi 2 595 BC Enos Son 3 Jarom Son 4 Omni Son 5 Amaron Son 6 Chemish Brother 6 Abinadom Son 7 Amaleki Son 8 Benjamin Peer 8 Mosiah Son 9 154 BC Alma (1) Peer 9 173 BC Alma (2) Son 10 Helaman Son 11 Shiblon Brother 11 Helaman (2) Nephew (Helaman's Son) 12 Nephi (2) Son 13 Nephi (3) Son 14 Amos (1) Son 15 Amos (2) Son 16 Ammaron Brother 16 Mormon Peer 17 310AD (4 Ne 1:48 & Mormon 1:3) Nevermind Edited April 24, 2016 by rodheadlee
Tacenda Posted April 24, 2016 Posted April 24, 2016 4 hours ago, canard78 said: Thanks. If people were living 35-50 years in the Americas, how were the nephites managing to live 80-120 years and still siring children at these ages? Mightn't we expect that people might comment on the miracle of Nephites living 2-3 times longer than their neighbours? On top of that: Urbanisation and agriculture lead to illness and death? So much for Nephites prospering... I know the Bible times are not the BOM times, but could have they lived a lot longer? I swear I remember hearing in Sunday school that in the Bible they lived to be like 900. But I realize their calendar system could have been off or something.
Thinking Posted April 24, 2016 Posted April 24, 2016 If we accept a mean generation length of 35 years and recognize that nearly all generation lengths would be between 15 and 55 years, using the 68-95-99.7 rule, the standard deviation of the generation length would be about 6.67. This assumes the distribution is approximately normal, which is reasonable. The probability that a sample of 19 generations would have a mean generation length that far above 35 would be P(z > (50-35)/(6.67/sqrt19)) = P(z > 9.8) = 5.6x10-23 or 0.000000000000000000000056 1
Peppermint Patty Posted April 24, 2016 Posted April 24, 2016 13 minutes ago, Thinking said: If we accept a mean generation length of 35 years and recognize that nearly all generation lengths would be between 15 and 55 years, using the 68-95-99.7 rule, the standard deviation of the generation length would be about 6.67. This assumes the distribution is approximately normal, which is reasonable. The probability that a sample of 19 generations would have a mean generation length that far above 35 would be P(z > (50-35)/(6.67/sqrt19)) = P(z > 9.8) = 5.6x10-23 or 0.000000000000000000000056 So, you're saying there could still be a chance? 3
thesometimesaint Posted April 24, 2016 Posted April 24, 2016 It is still comparing apples to rutabagas. With such a small sample size mean and extreme are irrelevant.
CV75 Posted April 24, 2016 Posted April 24, 2016 On 4/21/2016 at 11:22 AM, canard78 said: To bring the generational gap back to a more reasonable level (30 years) we actually have to double the number of generations. Currently we've got 15 generational gaps between Jacob and Mormon, spanning 905 years. An average generational gap is 30 years. That means we need twice as many generations (30 in total). In other wor In this list, I'd be interested to see where an extra 15 generations could be inserted. Essentially we'd need every person on this list to be handing the gold plates to their grandsons: Jacob First born in the wilderness Brother of Nephi 2 595 BC Enos Son 3 Jarom Son 4 Omni Son 5 Amaron Son 6 Chemish Brother 6 Abinadom Son 7 Amaleki Son 8 Benjamin Peer 8 Mosiah Son 9 154 BC Alma (1) Peer 9 173 BC Alma (2) Son 10 Helaman Son 11 Shiblon Brother 11 Helaman (2) Nephew (Helaman's Son) 12 Nephi (2) Son 13 Nephi (3) Son 14 Amos (1) Son 15 Amos (2) Son 16 Ammaron Brother 16 Mormon Peer 17 310AD (4 Ne 1:48 & Mormon 1:3) Nice work! Here's what I've done with it, making 3 assumptions: 1) during the "settlement" years, men were having children into their later years, or the small plates skipped generations ("Son +"), with 50-ish year generation gaps. 2) during the years of peace and plenty after the Lord's visit, people were living longer and having larger families ("Son ++"), with 41-year generation gaps. 3) any peer or nephew would be stretched to a generation later, with 60-year generation gaps: Name Relation Born Gen Lehi Father 640 1 Jacob Son 595 2 Enos Son + 545 4 Jarom Son + 490 6 Omni Son + 440 8 Amaron Son 410 9 Chemish Brother 350 11 Abinadom Son 290 12 Amaleki Son 260 13 Benjamin Peer 200 15 Mosiah Son 154 16 Alma (1) Peer 173 18 Alma (2) Son + 123 19 Helaman Son 93 20 Shiblon Brother 33 22 Helaman (2) Neph -27 23 Nephi (2) Son ++ -68 24 Nephi (3) Son ++ -109 25 Amos (1) Son ++ -150 26 Amos (2) Son ++ -191 27 Ammaron Brother -251 29 Mormon Peer -311 31 Moroni Son + -341 32
CV75 Posted April 24, 2016 Posted April 24, 2016 As i compare this chart with the timeline https://seminary.lds.org/bc/content/seminary/materials/english/student-resources/book-of-mormon-times-at-a-glance-charteng.pdf it doesn't seem that any author wrote his record outside of a reasonable lifespan at least!
canard78 Posted April 24, 2016 Author Posted April 24, 2016 40 minutes ago, CV75 said: As i compare this chart with the timeline https://seminary.lds.org/bc/content/seminary/materials/english/student-resources/book-of-mormon-times-at-a-glance-charteng.pdf it doesn't seem that any author wrote his record outside of a reasonable lifespan at least! Today, a reasonable lifespan is 70-80 years with a few exceptions reaching 100-110. If someone today claimed to know someone who was 160 or even 220, would you be a bit sceptical? Pre-Colombian life spans reached 40-50. Is it therefore odd that people in the Book of Mormon were 80-120?
Recommended Posts