'Unprecedented' Native American burial site discovered

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Okay, it is fine. Please share your figures.

Okay, please tell me how you came to the conclusion that Noah's flood happened at the end of the last ice age.

I did not say that I had reached any such conclusion.  I said repeatedly that some scholars (such as non-Mormon William F. Albright) had concluded that.  You cited the Black Sea Flood.  Those are not my suggestions or figures.

1 hour ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

 5,000 BC is the earliest for Adam's Fall, the Fall happened between 5,000 BC and 4,000 BC.  Noah's Flood dates between 4,000 BC to 2,500 BC.  According to Book of Mormon timeline the Jaradites date after 2,500 BC. 

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1976/09/book-of-mormon-chronology-chart?lang=eng

Nowhere in the Book of Mormon does it give any date for the Great Tower and Jaredite trek north.  Not even an approximate date.  That chart in the Ensign is not based on scholarship, but upon wild guessing.  I know of no reason to place the Great Tower and Jaredite exit from Mesopotamia ca. 2500BC.  Seems pretty reckless to me.  Same applies to the 600BC date for Lehi leaving Jerusalem.  Since the first year of King Zedekiah of Judah began precisely in 597BC, one must begin the Nephite count right there.

[SamuelTheLamanite]

16 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I did not say that I had reached any such conclusion.  I said repeatedly that some scholars (such as non-Mormon William F. Albright) had concluded that.  You cited the Black Sea Flood.  Those are not my suggestions or figures.

Why do some scholars date Noah's flood to the end of the last ice age? Do they have good reasons? How do Biblical genealogies go far back to end of the last ice age? 

16 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Nowhere in the Book of Mormon does it give any date for the Great Tower and Jaredite trek north.  Not even an approximate date. 

 Mormon intellectuals say the Jaradites "participated in Olmec culture."  According to the scholars the Olmec civilization existed from 1200 BCE to c. 400 BCE. Do you believe the Jaredites came to the Americas thousands of years before the rise of the Olmec civilization? If so, then the Jaredite civilization would have been most dominant  at the time.

Robert, I see a lot of problems dating Noah's flood to the end of the last ice age. Dating it all the way back wouldn't be consistent with a lot of the scholarship.

Edited March 4, 2018 by SamuelTheLamanite

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Why do some scholars date Noah's flood to the end of the last ice age? Do they have good reasons?

Robert, I see a lot of problems dating Noah's flood to the end of the last ice age. Dating it all the way back wouldn't be consistent with a lot of the scholarship.

Scholars do not date the Noachic Flood to the end of the last ice age, so much as they date the worldwide flood stories to that period -- because of the great Pluvial rains, the like of which we have not had since.  the biblical flood story is only one of many worldwide, some of them much earlier than the biblical account, yet being directly related to the biblical account. Many of them have key features in common, suggesting that they have had one common origin.

Do you know of any other scholarly suggestion which fits your notion of the date and kind of flood Noah experienced?  Do you prefer the Black Sea flood?

1 hour ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

How do Biblical genealogies go far back to end of the last ice age? 

Do they?  I haven't heard anyone suggest that they do.  On the other hand, some of the Mesopotamian genealogies certainly go back that far.  Which set of genealogies do you prefer?

1 hour ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

 Mormon intellectuals say the Jaradites "participated in Olmec culture."  According to the scholars the Olmec civilization existed from 1200 BCE to c. 400 BCE. Do you believe the Jaredites came to the Americas thousands of years before the rise of the Olmec civilization? If so, then the Jaredite civilization would have been most dominant  at the time.

Actually, the date of 1200BC represents the florescence of Olmec culture in the Gulf Coast area of Veracruz & Tabasco.  They had already existed for centuries before that, and even had trade with the Chavin and Mochica cultures of South America. Some scholars suggest that they originated along the Pacific Coast.  Grennes-Ravitz long ago found a rather interdependent assemblage of Olmec and pre-Olmec elements throughout the Central Mexican Symbiotic Region (CMSR), and not merely in the Olmec Gulf-coast heartland – where Olmec II suddenly appears full-blown (Tres Zapotes/La Venta/San Lorenzo phase) in about 1200BC.*

The late Betty Meggers (of the Smithsonian) suggested that they came originally from China,** while Michael Coe currently prefers Southeast Asia.

The Olmec, who invented the unique Mesoamerican calendar, begin their dating system with August 3114BC, the same system later used by the Maya and other Mesoamericans, and which is reminiscent of the Hindu Kaliyuga (which begins on January 23, 3102BC, Gregorian).

 *  R. Grennes-Ravitz in N. Hammond, ed., Mesoamerican Archaeology: New Approaches (Univ. of Texas at Austin, 1974), 101-106; on the cylinder seals present in Morelos in the La Juana phase (1550-1400 B.C.), see David Grove in Hammond, ed., Mesoamerican Archaeology, 113,121 – many with non-Olmec designs.

**  Meggars, “The Transpacific Origin of Mesoamerican Civilization,” American Anthropologist, 77 (1957), 1-27.

 

[SamuelTheLamanite]

12 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Scholars do not date the Noachic Flood to the end of the last ice age, so much as they date the worldwide flood stories to that period -- because of the great Pluvial rains, the like of which we have not had since.  the biblical flood story is only one of many worldwide, some of them much earlier than the biblical account, yet being directly related to the biblical account. Many of them have key features in common, suggesting that they have had one common origin.

You are confusing me. Are you saying the Noachic Flood comes from older stories? If true, then perhaps the Book of Mormon also comes from older stories.  Robert, do the oldest flood stories date to the end of the last ice age?  If the Biblical story comes from older Flood stories, then why don't the older flood stories mention Noah? Do you believe in a historical Noah? 

[SamuelTheLamanite]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

 Many of them have key features in common, suggesting that they have had one common origin.

Is the common origin Noah's account?

[Robert F. Smith]

9 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Is the common origin Noah's account?

Noah is one of the latest accounts, but the Greek version (Deucalion) is even later.  The Sumerian and Akkadian accounts are much earlier, each having a different name for the Noah-figure.  All of them, including Noah have the same origin, whatever that was, and whatever language it was first composed in (Hebrew did not exist then).

[Robert F. Smith]

10 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

You are confusing me. Are you saying the Noachic Flood comes from older stories? If true, then perhaps the Book of Mormon also comes from older stories. 

Yes to both suggestions.  The Israelites read the story in Hebrew ("Noah" is a Hebrew name), the Babylonians read it in Babylonian, and the Sumerians read it in Sumerian, with some differing details in each account.  The Name of the ship's captain differs in each account: Ziusudra, Utnapistim, Atrakhasis, Deucalion, etc.

10 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Robert, do the oldest flood stories date to the end of the last ice age?  If the Biblical story comes from older Flood stories, then why don't the older flood stories mention Noah? Do you believe in a historical Noah? 

Some scholars suggest that such ancient flood stories would come down through time first as oral traditions, later being written down, but that would as likely apply to the Black Sea flood as well.  The name of the captain would naturally differ from one tradition to the other.

[SamuelTheLamanite]

17 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Noah is one of the latest accounts, but the Greek version (Deucalion) is even later.  The Sumerian and Akkadian accounts are much earlier, each having a different name for the Noah-figure. 

The Sumerian flood story dates to 1600 BC which is thousands of years after the last ice age ended.

17 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Some scholars suggest that such ancient flood stories would come down through time first as oral traditions, later being written down, but that would as likely apply to the Black Sea flood as well.  The name of the captain would naturally differ from one tradition to the other.

If Genesis comes from oral traditions and older stories, then Genesis would mostly be fiction. Genesis is not mostly fiction so it cannot come from oral traditions and older stories. Oral traditions are not very reliable Robert, let alone traditions that go for thousands of years.  

17 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes to both suggestions. 

You mean the Book of Mormon comes from stories that are thousands of years older?

[Robert F. Smith]

6 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

The Sumerian flood story dates to 1600 BC which is thousands of years after the last ice age ended.

The Sumerian account you refer to is actually thousands of years older than that.  You are merely giving the date of that particular cuneiform document, at a time when the Sumerian were already extinct.  Worldwide flood stories circulated in oral form long before the invention of writing

6 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

If Genesis comes from oral traditions and older stories, then Genesis would mostly be fiction. Genesis is not mostly fiction so it cannot come from oral traditions and older stories.

Yokels equate oral tradition with fiction, and yokels also imagine that liturgy is meant to be read as history.  Yokels are unaware of the strong parallels among ancient Creation and Garden Stories, Flood Stories, etc., and they make their own shallow understanding of history normative for everyone -- dragging everyone down to their level of ignorance.  Yokels think that the Parables of Jesus are stories about historical events, and they likewise believe that poetry is history, that symbolism is meant to be taken as scientific  fact, etc.

6 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Oral traditions are not very reliable Robert, let alone traditions that go for thousands of years. 

Oral traditions are not very reliable for yokels, that is true, because yokels don't know how to memorize and pass on such stories.  This is particularly true of presentists.  Presentists always imagine that everyone is as ignorant as they are, and that history tells us nothing.

6 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

You mean the Book of Mormon comes from stories that are thousands of years older?

Of course.  There are BofM stories which take place thousands of years earlier, in a different society, in a different language, and which are transmitted down through time, being translated and edited by those passing the stories on.

[SamuelTheLamanite]

36 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The Sumerian account you refer to is actually thousands of years older than that

Okay, how old are the oldest Flood texts?

36 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

  Worldwide flood stories circulated in oral form long before the invention of writing

And that would make them unreliable and mostly fiction. Oral traditions and stories circulating for thousands of years wouldn't be accurate.

36 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yokels equate oral tradition with fiction, and yokels also imagine that liturgy is meant to be read as history. 

So the ancients didn't believe their stories were literally true? Please give me a reference. Did the ancient Jews believe Genesis was just a metaphor? or a parable?

36 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Of course.  There are BofM stories which take place thousands of years earlier, in a different society, in a different language, and which are transmitted down through time, being translated and edited by those passing the stories on.

Okay. So did the story of Lehi in Arabia come from older stories and traditions? Was the last battle of Cumorah a myth? Was the story of Samuel the Lamanite based on more ancient traditions dating thousands of years?

36 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

 Yokels think that the Parables of Jesus are stories about historical events, and they likewise believe that poetry is history, that symbolism is meant to be taken as scientific  fact, etc.

So what is parable and what is history? Are all the five books of Moses just a parable? Is the Nativity just a parable? Is the resurrection just a parable?

Edited March 6, 2018 by SamuelTheLamanite

[SamuelTheLamanite]

Robert, is the resurrection of Jesus a parable? Is the entire Book of Mormon a parable? Is the First Vision account a parable? How do you tell the difference between history and parables?

[Josh Khinder]

On ‎2‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 5:43 PM, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Today the news articles are reporting that an ancient burial site was discovered beneath the Gulf of Mexico. I really had no idea. I was mocked for my Gulf of Mexico Flood theory, but literally 24 hours later a significant discovery was announced and reported. I don't know if it was inspiration, but I am so glad I now have some evidence for my prediction. My theory is that most Book of Mormon cities are hidden somewhere deep in the gulf of Mexico.  

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2018/02/28/unprecedented-native-american-burial-site-discovered-in-gulf-mexico-off-florida.html

 

The article tells us they have found the signature of the Prophet Isaiah yet haven't found one sign of the Book of Mormon civilization 

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Robert, is the resurrection of Jesus a parable? Is the entire Book of Mormon a parable? Is the First Vision account a parable? How do you tell the difference between history and parables?

For yokels it isn't possible to distinguish historical narrative from parable.  They are unable to use common sense, and did poorly in school.  They have no idea what the phrase "Once upon a time" might indicate.  Instead of a fairy tale, they imagine that it is meant to be actual history.  Yokels can't tell whether there is really any such thing as green eggs and ham, Sam.  Unfortunately, your childish comments here indicate that you are a confirmed yokel.  Sincerity is very important, Sam.  When will you adopt that belief?

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, Josh Khinder said:

The article tells us they have found the signature of the Prophet Isaiah yet haven't found one sign of the Book of Mormon civilization 

A non sequitur, Josh.  You need some reality therapy.

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Okay, how old are the oldest Flood texts?

Probably began being written down soon after the invention of writing, which would be at least by the early 3rd millennium BC, after a long oral tradition.

Quote

And that would make them unreliable and mostly fiction. Oral traditions and stories circulating for thousands of years wouldn't be accurate.

For yokels, yes.  Yokels are poor students, never learning to memorize or practice self-discipline.  Yokels are the reason for the failure of most civilizations.

Quote

So the ancients didn't believe their stories were literally true? Please give me a reference. Did the ancient Jews believe Genesis was just a metaphor? or a parable?

Ancient peoples often couched their received technical knowledge in forms which helped memorization, and you can read about that in Giorgio de Santillana & Hertha von Dechend, Hamlet's Mill: An Essay on Myth and the Frame of Time.  It has always been crucial that people distinguish between myth and the purpose of the myth, between parable and the purpose of the parable.  Yokels cannot tell the difference.  For a yokel, a figurative expression, symbol, or metaphor is a lie.  For the ignoramus, green eggs and ham really exist.  

Quote

Okay. So did the story of Lehi in Arabia come from older stories and traditions? Was the last battle of Cumorah a myth? Was the story of Samuel the Lamanite based on more ancient traditions dating thousands of years?

For a yokel, any of those things might be true.  For an intelligent person, on the other hand, it is clear that the book of Ether tells of events thousands of years in the past, transmitted through several language translations and edited by Moroni.  The Great Tower event and the confusion of tongues takes place at the beginning of the Jaredite experience, and we even have Sumerian and biblical versions of that Confusion of Tongues -- in addition to the one in Ether.  A sincere student would immediately have thought of that.

Quote

So what is parable and what is history? Are all the five books of Moses just a parable? Is the Nativity just a parable? Is the resurrection just a parable?

For a yokel, it is impossible to distinguish between parable and history.  For the insincere person, a discussion such as this is an occasion for game playing instead of learning.  Shame on you, Sam.

Edited March 6, 2018 by Robert F. Smith

[SamuelTheLamanite]

18 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Ancient peoples often couched their received technical knowledge in forms which helped memorization, and you can read about that in Giorgio de Santillana & Hertha von Dechend, Hamlet's Mill: An Essay on Myth and the Frame of Time.  It has always been crucial that people distinguish between myth and the purpose of the myth, between parable and the purpose of the parable.
 

Did the ancient Jews see Genesis as a myth or history?

18 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

For a yokel, it is impossible to distinguish between parable and history.  For the insincere person, a discussion such as this is an occasion for game playing instead of learning.  Shame on you, Sam.

Most members believe Genesis is History.

18 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

For yokels, yes.  Yokels are poor students, never learning to memorize or practice self-discipline.  Yokels are the reason for the failure of most civilizations.

Oral traditions for thousands of years are accurate?

[Robert F. Smith]

8 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Did the ancient Jews see Genesis as a myth or history?

The question for someone reading Genesis in Hebrew would be, Which parts are poetic, which parts are metaphor, and which parts are narrative history?  Of course ancient Israelites did not use such terminology, and they had no sophisticated view of their traditional holy texts.  Most of them couldn't read anyhow.  Today, scholars like Anglican Bishop Tom Wright know that Genesis 1 - 4 is a "temple story," the Garden of Eden a temple built by God.  Mormons agree and they practice that liturgy regularly in their own temples.  You are clearly frightened by that reality, Sam, and you pointedly ignore it -- perhaps hoping that it will simply go away.  The same applies to your discomfort with the statements by the Brethren that much of what takes place in the Garden is figurative or symbolic.  Since you only believe that everything is history and only history, your ability to read Scripture coherently is doomed.  As the late non-Mormon scholar Frank Moore Cross Jr., said:

Quote

    The patriarchal traditions were an integral element in Israel’s early epic (although it must be said that the history of the patriarchs has been vastly expanded by later accretions before achieving its present agglutinative mass).  Much of the patriarchal lore is very old, some of it reaching back, perhaps, into the Middle Bronze Age.  As an epic cycle it evidently existed prior to the epic materials recounting exodus, covenant, and conquest.  There is, on the other hand, no reason to believe that the bundle of exodus, Sinai, and conquest themes ever existed detached from or separated from patriarchal epic tradition – save in its purely mythic prototype.  Cross, From Epic to Canon: History and Literature in Ancient Israel (Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1998), 47.

                        

8 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Most members believe Genesis is History.

LDS members who go to the temple will recognize Gen 1 - 4 as liturgy, not history.  Other parts of Genesis they may assign to a variety of categories, but I am not aware of any poll that has been conducted.  Perhaps you could enlighten us.

8 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Oral traditions for thousands of years are accurate?

Sure.  Why not?  However, many such accounts get written down before thousands of years have gone by.  Which traditions do you have in mind?

[SamuelTheLamanite]

15 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

 Today, scholars like Anglican Bishop Tom Wright know that Genesis 1 - 4 is a "temple story," the Garden of Eden a temple built by God.  Mormons agree and they practice that liturgy regularly in their own temples.  You are clearly frightened by that reality, Sam, and you pointedly ignore it -- perhaps hoping that it will simply go away.  The same applies to your discomfort with the statements by the Brethren that much of what takes place in the Garden is figurative or symbolic.  Since you only believe that everything is history and only history, your ability to read Scripture coherently is doomed.

Are temple stories history or fiction Robert?   According to Old Testament professor John D. Currid "Why does Genesis 1-3 contain so many elements that appear to be literal history?".Is the story of Noah just a symbolic fiction? Is the Resurrection of Jesus just symbolic? Is the nativity and Virgin birth just symbolic?  Please help me understand Robert. It is very easy to read Genesis as just symbolic, but did the authors see it as a symbolic fiction?

16 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

 LDS members who go to the temple will recognize Gen 1 - 4 as liturgy, not history. 

Please give me a reference.  For members Gen 1 -4 is symbolic history, not a symbolic fiction. 

[Calm]

"history or fiction"

You need to ask the right question if you want to get a real answer.

Can you think of another category besides history or fiction?

[SamuelTheLamanite]

6 minutes ago, Calm said:

"history or fiction"

You need to ask the right question if you want to get a real answer.

Can you think of another category besides history or fiction?

No idea. Stories?  For me fiction is something that didn't happen. What is the right question?

[Calm]

1 hour ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

No idea. Stories?  For me fiction is something that didn't happen. What is the right question?

Sleep on it.

Maybe this can help:

Is this black or white?

[Robert F. Smith]

6 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Are temple stories history or fiction Robert?   According to Old Testament professor John D. Currid "Why does Genesis 1-3 contain so many elements that appear to be literal history?".Is the story of Noah just a symbolic fiction? Is the Resurrection of Jesus just symbolic? Is the nativity and Virgin birth just symbolic?  Please help me understand Robert. It is very easy to read Genesis as just symbolic, but did the authors see it as a symbolic fiction?

Please give me a reference.  For members Gen 1 -4 is symbolic history, not a symbolic fiction. 

 

6 hours ago, Calm said:

"history or fiction"

You need to ask the right question if you want to get a real answer.

Can you think of another category besides history or fiction?

As Calm points out to you, if the only genres or categories of literature you can think of are "history or fiction," your thinking is crippled from the outset,Sam.  You need at least a couple of semesters of College English (since H.S. English apparently didn't "take").  Yokels can't imagine that there might be other categories and genres.

Currid is especially helpful in eliciting meaning in the Hebrew text from ancient Egyptian culture.  Since Israel came out of Egypt after spending centuries there, many of their words, technical and religious terms, and motifs are taken from ancient Egypt.  The design of the Tabernacle in the desert, for example, is an Egyptian design, with Egyptian art and symbolism, although the later Temple of Solomon is a Phoenician design.

I said that "LDS members who go to the temple will recognize Gen 1 - 4 as liturgy, not history."  The reason this is true is because the LDS endowment ceremony is liturgy.  Since you don't have any idea what "liturgy" is, Sam, naturally that doesn't make any sense to you -- leading you to rephrase it in an invidious way (something Satan loves to do).   You likely also do not understand that the LDS Prayers over the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper are liturgy, not history.

[Marginal Gains]

6 hours ago, Calm said:

Sleep on it.

Maybe this can help:

Is this black or white?

Clearly it is neither black, nor white but a combination of both.

But let’s try another analogy - one can be pregnant, one can be not pregnant, so what’s the inbetween position of that? Or one can be alive, or dead - is there a middle position that I’m unaware of.

You seem to be trying to create a space between fiction and non-fiction (history) which I don’t believe exists. A whole story can have bits of non-fiction and bits of fiction within it, but when talking about things like the flood of Noah, the Church doesn’t allow for you to be half pregnant. For instance:

Quote

There is a third group of people—those who accept the literal message of the Bible regarding Noah, the ark, and the Deluge. Latter-day Saints belong to this group. In spite of the world’s arguments against the historicity of the Flood, and despite the supposed lack of geologic evidence, we Latter-day Saints believe that Noah was an actual man, a prophet of God, who preached repentance and raised a voice of warning, built an ark, gathered his family and a host of animals onto the ark, and floated safely away as waters covered the entire earth. We are assured that these events actually occurred by the multiple testimonies of God’s prophets.

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1998/01/the-flood-and-the-tower-of-babel?lang=eng

And

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/67912-elder-holland-declares-goe-in-missouri-noahs-flood-covered-the-whole-planet-pangea-separated-after-noahs-flood-jaredites-first-to-populate-the-new-world/

Are those quotes ‘grey’?

[Gray]

2 hours ago, Marginal Gains said:

Clearly it is neither black, nor white but a combination of both.

But let’s try another analogy - one can be pregnant, one can be not pregnant, so what’s the inbetween position of that? Or one can be alive, or dead - is there a middle position that I’m unaware of.

You seem to be trying to create a space between fiction and non-fiction (history) which I don’t believe exists. A whole story can have bits of non-fiction and bits of fiction within it, but when talking about things like the flood of Noah, the Church doesn’t allow for you to be half pregnant. For instance:

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1998/01/the-flood-and-the-tower-of-babel?lang=eng

And

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/67912-elder-holland-declares-goe-in-missouri-noahs-flood-covered-the-whole-planet-pangea-separated-after-noahs-flood-jaredites-first-to-populate-the-new-world/

Are those quotes ‘grey’?

The church doesn't allow? What happens if a member of the church disagrees with Donald W. Parry or Elder Holland on that issue? Are they going to be kicked out of the church?

If disagreeing with a general authority isn't "allowed" we might as well shut the whole thing down. There is not a single member of the church (leaders included) that agrees with everything ever put out by an apostle, prophet, or church publication.

[Marginal Gains]

38 minutes ago, Gray said:

The church doesn't allow? What happens if a member of the church disagrees with Donald W. Parry or Elder Holland on that issue? Are they going to be kicked out of the church?

If disagreeing with a general authority isn't "allowed" we might as well shut the whole thing down. There is not a single member of the church (leaders included) that agrees with everything ever put out by an apostle, prophet, or church publication.

Can you point me in the direction of an Apostle disagreeing with the published Church position that the flood was literal, global, and wiped out the entirety of humanity except for 8 people on the ark? 

Publicly disagreeing with a general authority on a matter of doctrine is certainly not “allowed”. Just ask Jeremy Runnells.

Edited March 8, 2018 by Marginal Gains