Unrealistic generational gaps in the Book of Mormon?

[canard78]

50 minutes ago, Thinking said:

Did you even read the article?

19 heads would be 0.5¹⁹ or 0.0000019.

Haha... Snap! Or jinx...

That's on a 50% probability. A single generational gap of 55-60 is not 50% of course, so the example of heads or tails is barely comparable to the even smaller chance of this gap over 19 generations.

[thesometimesaint]

Every single flip is just 50%.

Ps; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_maternal_age

Edited April 25, 2016 by thesometimesaint

[bcuzbcuz]

32 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

Every single flip is just 50%.

Ps; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_maternal_age

True, but only in a reality with two options, heads or tails. When doing genealogy for my family, only certain areas have two and only two choices, male-female, siblings-no siblings, etc. When looking at ages, the options range from hours, days, weeks, years, 1 year to 100 years...at least in my family. So far, going back 5 generations, I don't have a single relative that lived the same number of years. Other families may differ, with posibly a multitude of forefathers that lived exactly 70 years. 

So what are the chances of 5 generations all living exactly 70 years?

[USU78]

1 hour ago, canard78 said:

Haha... Snap! Or jinx...

That's on a 50% probability. A single generational gap of 55-60 is not 50% of course, so the example of heads or tails is barely comparable to the even smaller chance of this gap over 19 generations.

How do we avoid GIGO results when an average/mean age at death, unless I'm terribly mistaken, takes infant deaths, childhood deaths and mischance/accident/homicide/suicide/wartime deaths into consideration in arriving at the average/mean.  If infant mortality during BoM times roughly equal today's Maya figures, it accounted for 19%+ of deaths.  Add to that the likely high incidence of spontaneous abortion and the likely poverty of the majority of the population, you can get a very low average life expectancy while still having some percentage living to ripe old ages.  And that's only accounting for infant mortality.  Poverty, war, drought, all of which are documented in the BoM, could also account for short, brutal, miserable lives, while still allowing for long-lived elites and priestly classes.

How do you rule out this GIGO problem, '78?

 

[JarMan]

The Book of Mormon never uses the words grandfather or grandson. And there are several obvious uses of the word father to refer to somebody who is a grandfather. So I really don't see the issue here. Obviously father sometimes means grandfather and son sometimes means grandson. 

[canard78]

30 minutes ago, JarMan said:

The Book of Mormon never uses the words grandfather or grandson. And there are several obvious uses of the word father to refer to somebody who is a grandfather. So I really don't see the issue here. Obviously father sometimes means grandfather and son sometimes means grandson. 

Can you cite some examples?

I'd be interested in a comparison of the times we know for certain that they're talking about a (great) grandfather (like Lehi) vs times it's ambiguous. 

If you're right it means that nearly all of the father/son relationships are actually grandfather/grandson relationships. 

Does Jacob as Lehi's grandson fit the narrative? Or Alma and Alma? Are Ammon and co actually the grandsons of Mosiah. 

The interesting thing about defending the Book of Mormon is it seems that every time evidence against it is presented, those who already believe just shift their paradigm. It's not hemispheric, it's a limited geography. It's not the principal ancestors, it's among the ancestors. It's not horse, it's a tapir. It's not even gold plates, it's some sort of alloy/mix.

Now it's not plates that pass from father son, it's from grandfather to grandson. 

Of course you have every right to do that. I know some of the participants on this board would say that's right and proper. Even on this thread there have been comments that every time an issue comes up they take it as an opportunity to learn a little more about the life and times of the Nephites. 

[canard78]

12 hours ago, thesometimesaint said:

Every single flip is just 50%.

Ps; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_maternal_age

1. Go and get a coin

2. Flip it 19 times and record how many heads and how many tails. 

3. Repeat #2 until you get 19 heads in the sequence.

4. Divide "1" by the number of sequences at step #2. Multiply by 100 if you prefer probability as a percentage instead of 0 to 1.

5. Come back and report the number at #4.

That's your probability test of getting a 50% likelihood event to happen 19 times in a row. 

Now repeat the process with 3 dice. This time your objective is to do the same as the coin toss, but to get 3 sixes, 19 times in a row. This will get you closer to the probability of having 19 generations with an average 50-60+ year generational gaps. Alternatively roll 4 dice and get an average from 19 rolls of 21-24.

Then come back and tell me we've got a small sample size. 

Edited April 26, 2016 by canard78

[JarMan]

Searching for "fathers" in my gospel app brings up 90 results. I browsed through most of them and the vast majority seem to refer to multiple generations of male ancestors. Similarly, the word "parents" is also used several times to refer to ancestors clearly more than a generation removed. 

[canard78]

11 hours ago, USU78 said:

How do we avoid GIGO results when an average/mean age at death, unless I'm terribly mistaken, takes infant deaths, childhood deaths and mischance/accident/homicide/suicide/wartime deaths into consideration in arriving at the average/mean.  If infant mortality during BoM times roughly equal today's Maya figures, it accounted for 19%+ of deaths.  Add to that the likely high incidence of spontaneous abortion and the likely poverty of the majority of the population, you can get a very low average life expectancy while still having some percentage living to ripe old ages.  And that's only accounting for infant mortality.  Poverty, war, drought, all of which are documented in the BoM, could also account for short, brutal, miserable lives, while still allowing for long-lived elites and priestly classes.

How do you rule out this GIGO problem, '78?

 

So... my input was the text of the Book of Mormon... and you're worried about garbage output? Works for me

To your question, life expectancy isn't always calculated at birth. You're right that a culture or country with high infant mortality will have a skewed lower overall life expectancy. 

The way I read the NYT article was that people rarely lived beyond 50, not that pre-Colombian America had a life expectancy, at birth, of 50 years. 

[canard78]

3 hours ago, longview said:

I have commented on dating systems in previous threads over the last few years.  The various dating systems (carbon-14, strata, etc) are all heavily dependent on making many assumptions in order to make it work.  But I would agree with you that not everything in the scriptures are completely accurate (see below).

Most "epics" are based in one form or another on the "original" events" described in the Bible (insofar as it was translated correctly).  I can accept the fact that the patriarchs lived for several hundred years simply because Joseph Smith confirmed this truth.  He was in the process of "refining" the Book of Moses (in our current Pearl of Great Price).  He did not translate it in one fell swoop.  He made several iterative passes over it adding corrections and new information.  At the time of his death, he left at least two drafts.  The earlier draft remained with Brigham Young which was made into our Book of Moses.  The newer draft was retained by Emma Smith which then remained in custody of the RLDS.   This new draft indicated the ages of both Adam and Methuselah to have been 999 years and 6 months (this information is NOT in the Book of Moses).

You really believe Adam and Methuselah died several months before their 1000th birthday? How could a human body, without modern medicine and corrective surgery, reasonably continue functioning 10x longer than it's every been known to function. No human remains have ever been found, from any era of earth's history that would even come close to supporting this myth.

Do you consider the JST of the bible to be a more accurate rendition of it? How about the times when the Book of Mormon and KJV match, but the JST changes the KJV passage? If the BoM is the "most correct," why would the JST have to effectively correct passages in the BoM?

[longview]

3 hours ago, canard78 said:

You really believe Adam and Methuselah died several months before their 1000th birthday?

Yes.  I trust Joseph Smith more than I do the metaphysical evolutionists.  I think it silly for several people on this board to discount the power of God.  His ability to "command the dust."

3 hours ago, canard78 said:

How could a human body, without modern medicine and corrective surgery, reasonably continue functioning 10x longer than it's every been known to function.

The Garden of Eden was in a Terrestrial State, meaning no death, no decay.  Then the Fall happened in which "all nature fell."  Thus introducing chaos, opposition and ever increasing decay.  As I stated in my previous post, there was more of a "pristine" condition and "newness" in the time period between the Fall and the Flood.

3 hours ago, canard78 said:

No human remains have ever been found, from any era of earth's history that would even come close to supporting this myth.

Again, you have to question the assumptions that are used to prop up the Dating Systems.

3 hours ago, canard78 said:

Do you consider the JST of the bible to be a more accurate rendition of it?

Of course.  JS has clarified confusing verses to help us gain a much better understanding.  Why would you think otherwise?  From the "Guide to the Scriptures:"

JOSEPH SMITH TRANSLATION (JST)
See also Smith, Joseph, Jr.
A revision or translation of the King James Version of the Bible in English, which the Prophet Joseph Smith began in June 1830. He was commanded by God to make the translation and regarded it as part of his calling as a prophet.

Although Joseph completed most of the translation by July 1833, he continued until his death in 1844 to make modifications while preparing a manuscript for publication. Though he published some parts of the translation during his lifetime, it is possible that he would have made additional changes had he lived to publish the entire work. The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints published the first edition of Joseph Smith’s inspired translation in 1867. They have published several editions since that time.

The Prophet learned many things during the translation process. Several sections of the Doctrine and Covenants were received because of his translation work (such as D&C 76, 77, 91, and 132). Also, the Lord gave Joseph specific instructions for the translation, which were recorded in the Doctrine and Covenants (D&C 37:1; 45:60–61; 76:15–18; 90:13; 91; 94:10; 104:58; 124:89). The book of Moses and Joseph Smith—Matthew, now included in the Pearl of Great Price, were taken directly from the Joseph Smith Translation.

The Joseph Smith Translation has restored some of the plain and precious things that have been lost from the Bible (1 Ne. 13). Although it is not the official Bible of the Church, this translation does offer many interesting insights and is very valuable in understanding the Bible. It is also a witness for the divine calling and ministry of the Prophet Joseph Smith.

3 hours ago, canard78 said:

How about the times when the Book of Mormon and KJV match, but the JST changes the KJV passage?

I have noticed that.  My conclusion is that the BoM passages was taken from the Brass Plates which represented the "state" of the Old Testament records/scriptures CIRCA 600 B.C.  Thus indicating the Brass Plates already contained mistakes, errors and omissions made by uncareful scribes and/or wicked men by that time.

4 hours ago, canard78 said:

If the BoM is the "most correct," why would the JST have to effectively correct passages in the BoM?

The BoM prophets was teaching and quoting from the Brass Plates that was obtained by Nephi son of Lehi from the house of Laban.  Are you arguing that JS should have corrected those passages that the BoM prophets failed to make "inspired revisions" for?

[SeekingUnderstanding]

18 minutes ago, longview said:

I have noticed that.  My conclusion is that the BoM passages was taken from the Brass Plates which represented the "state" of the Old Testament records/scriptures CIRCA 600 B.C.  Thus indicating the Brass Plates already contained mistakes, errors and omissions made by uncareful scribes and/or wicked men by that time.

The BoM prophets was teaching and quoting from the Brass Plates that was obtained by Nephi son of Lehi from the house of Laban.  Are you arguing that JS should have corrected those passages that the BoM prophets failed to make "inspired revisions" for?

3 Nephi 13:12 and Matthew 6:13 read: "And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil." The JST renders this verse "And suffer us not to be led into temptation, but deliver us from evil." Clearly more is going on here than copying errors from the Brass Plates...

[longview]

38 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

3 Nephi 13:12 and Matthew 6:13 read: "And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil." The JST renders this verse "And suffer us not to be led into temptation, but deliver us from evil." Clearly more is going on here than copying errors from the Brass Plates...

Very interesting.  I took the time to put up 3 notepads:  first for the JST, second for KJV, third for BoM.  There are a number of differences between all three.  Take particular note of verses beginning with 25th and following.  I will need to ponder and continue to study.  Thank you.

[bcuzbcuz]

On 25 April 2016 at 6:36 PM, longview said:

The various dating systems (carbon-14, strata, etc) are all heavily dependent on making many assumptions in order to make it work. 

Most "epics" are based in one form or another on the "original" events" described in the Bible (insofar as it was translated correctly).  I can accept the fact that the patriarchs lived for several hundred years simply because Joseph Smith confirmed this truth.  He was in the process of "refining" the Book of Moses (in our current Pearl of Great Price).  He did not translate it in one fell swoop.  He made several iterative passes over it adding corrections and new information.  At the time of his death, he left at least two drafts.  The earlier draft remained with Brigham Young which was made into our Book of Moses.  The newer draft was retained by Emma Smith which then remained in custody of the RLDS.   This new draft indicated the ages of both Adam and Methuselah to have been 999 years and 6 months (this information is NOT in the Book of Moses).

Not sure about your C-14 reference. As far as I know, C-14 has nothing to do with any information about the BofM because there is nothing to test C-14 of.

You then reference to Joseph Smith's  "refining" of the Books of Moses (otherwise known as the Torah). Yes, he didn't get very much done and he used no original texts, but rather the KJV of the Bible as a reference. So when he indicates the ages of Adam and Methuselah, our only conclusion must be: He either got it right or he got it wrong.

We do know, from Egyptian finds, from a people who did keep accurate records, that the majority of people did not reach realitively older ages. Very high infant mortality lowered the average life span to 19 years. But if a person survived past 4 years of age, they could expect a life span of about 40 years. The pharaohs, on occasion, reached older ages. They, afterall, did not have to do manual labour. Rameses II outlived most of his enormous numbers of offspring. But when he died, he suffered from a number of old age problems, one of the most troubling was his thoroughly rotten teeth. He lived to be around 90 years of age. 

The Egyptian records of the various kingdoms both prior to the supposed time of Noah and after the time of Noah have no data at all that anyone there lived longer than 90 years of age.

The skeletons that have been found of common folk, herdsmen, shepherds, potters, etc, all have skeletal decay, often of such damage due to their work. Their teeth reveal even what they ate. Grains, coarsely ground, danaged the enamel of their teeth. Anyone living to 70 would have few teeth left and would probably needed their food in the form of mush.

[Hashbaz]

Keep in mind that the Nephite record keepers were from the ruling lineage, and anciently elites tended to have longer life spans because they had access to better quality food and they didn't wear their lives out with physically taxing work the way non-elites did. We only have data for both the birth dates and death dates of 17 Classic period Maya rulers, and their average age at death is 64.7 years. Some of the longest lived Maya kings were Itzamnaaj B'alam II of Yaxchilan was between 94.8 and 98.5 years old when he died, Calakmul's king Yukno'om the Great lived to be 85, Chan Imix K'awiil of Copan was about 83 when he died, a ruler of El Cayo named Chak Lakamtuun lived to 82, K'inich Janaab' Pakal from Palenque was 80, Aj Wosal of Naranjo was at least 78, and K'an Joy Chitam (also from Palenque) lived until he was 74. 

[longview]

9 hours ago, bcuzbcuz said:

The Egyptian records of the various kingdoms both prior to the supposed time of Noah and after the time of Noah have no data at all that anyone there lived longer than 90 years of age.

Do you think there are any records left by the first offsprings of Ham and Egyptus?  See Abraham 1:21-27.