Why Not Engage the Evidence for Historicity?

[ALarson]

4 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Depends on how wedded you are to the word "influx," and whether you are committed to the standards of normative anthropology (which includes archeology), history, and linguistics.  Plenty of books and essays have been repeatedly cited on this board, only to be pointedly ignored.  After all, as jkwilliams points out, does it really matter? 

Yeah....I get that, thanks Robert.

It just seems like a whole lot of arguing over evidence that doesn't exist (or hasn't been found if it does exist).  I'm open to look at what Scott or Smac have if they can provide some links.

[kllindley]

8 hours ago, smac97 said:

I can't help but wonder if Vogel (and Dehlin) use recordings, rather than text, to discourage substantive critique of the arguments they are making.  You aren't the only one who doesn't have time to peruse dozens of videos (or, in Dehlin's case, hundreds of audio/video recordings, consisting of hundreds - thousands? - of hours of content).

Difficulty in perusing content tends to discourage substantive scrutiny of such content.  

Thanks,

-Smac

I have had the same suspicion for several years. 

[kllindley]

8 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

Quite possibly although everyone always expects the unexpected with confirm their expectations somehow

Quite true!

[jkwilliams]

Just now, kllindley said:

I have had the same suspicion for several years. 

Can’t we just talk about the issues without going after people’s character?

[Scott Lloyd]

5 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

No, I’m saying there isn’t any evidence, and the approach seems to be to come up with reasons why we shouldn’t be looking for evidence. 

I’m with Mark: people don’t believe in the Book of Mormon because of archaeological or linguistic evidence. 

I never said they did. But refuting attacks — such as there not being evidence for an imaginary “influx of Hebrew culture in the America’s" — leaves space for them to accept it on faith. 

Edited June 26, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Scott Lloyd said:

I never said they did. But refuting attacks — such as there not being evidence for an imaginary “influx of Hebrew culture in the America’s — leaves space for them to accept it on faith. 

That’s not an attack. The text asserts an influx of Hebrews, and the video says the immigrants quickly led the development of a great civilization. There’s no evidence of that. How is that an attack?

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, ALarson said:

Have you provided any actual evidence?  I think that's the point here, isn't it?  If you have, can you link to it?

Mormon’s Codex by John Sorensen has enough to keep you going for a while. 

Here you go:

https://www.fairmormon.org/conference/august-2012/reading-mormons-codex

Edited June 26, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[Analytics]

44 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The Garden of Eden was in Jackson County, Missouri, which lies just east of the Edinu "Great Plains."  A regional flood in the Carolinas put Noah afloat and he drifted to the Middle East, coming to rest on a mound somewhere up the Euphrates or Tigris Rivers.  Hebrew 'aretz can mean "earth" or "land."  It can be regional or worldwide.  One must read for context. John A. Widtsoe suggested that the baptism of the Earth took place via the torrential rains which produced the Great Deluge, not that every mountain on Earth was submerged.  The same applies to the figurative baptism of the people of Israel as they crossed the Red Sea dryshod -- it was only "as if" they had been baptized, not that they had been literally baptized.  Those unable to read texts miss those points and draw absurd conclusions.

I'm trying to imagine this. How would a regional flood in the Carolinas affect Jackson County Missouri, which is a thousand miles away on the other side of the Appalachian Mountains and the other side of the Mississippi River?

I really can't tell if you are serious or not. If you are, when did this happen? Presumably between 4,000 BC and 10,000 BC? If so, what is the relationship between Adam and the humans who had already been living all around the world for tens of thousands of years?

[Scott Lloyd]

Just now, jkwilliams said:

That’s not an attack. The text asserts an influx of Hebrews, and the video says the immigrants quickly led the development of a great civilization. There’s no evidence of that. How is that an attack?

 

The video you linked to said there was already a complex civilization in place. 

How closely did you watch that video anyway?

[JulieM]

9 hours ago, smac97 said:

I can't help but wonder if Vogel (and Dehlin) use recordings, rather than text, to discourage substantive critique of the arguments they are making.  You aren't the only one who doesn't have time to peruse dozens of videos (or, in Dehlin's case, hundreds of audio/video recordings, consisting of hundreds - thousands? - of hours of content).

Difficulty in perusing content tends to discourage substantive scrutiny of such content.

I prefer the written copy too, but I’d think an actual video of them speaking is actually harder for them to deny saying something or being misrepresented in any way.

Vogel has written quite a few books too, so he’s not afraid to put things in writing.  

So, he does both.  I think you shouldn’t accuse him of doing something if you don’t know that’s why he prefers to put some videos out (books take a tremendous amount of time to produce so it could be just that).  Anyway, it’s not real fair to do what you’re doing here, IMO.

Edited June 26, 2018 by JulieM

[JulieM]

8 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I never said they did. But refuting attacks — such as there not being evidence for an imaginary “influx of Hebrew culture in the America’s — leaves space for them to accept it on faith. 

But this thread is about the actual evidence, isn’t it?  

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Scott Lloyd said:

 

The video you linked to said there was already a complex civilization in place. 

How closely did you watch that video anyway?

Sigh. They posit that Nephi came in and organized this already existing civilization, leading to great development of that civilization. That’s just great, but there’s no evidence one way or the other. Whether Nephi was there or not, he doesn’t seem to have affected the development of Kaminaljuyu one way or the other. So, in what way is this anything other than pure speculation? It’s not evidence. 

That was my point, your comments about my reading comprehension notwithstanding. 

[smac97]

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

I’m not sure where to go with this, smac, other than to say I think we agree on the main point here—the burden was not met.  

Not really.  The question was facile.  Unreasonable.  Essentially unanswerably in any meaningful way.

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

The claim is bom historicity, there is not evidence for the claim as the Jenkins/hamblin back and forth demonstrated.  

I disagree.  The back and forth really didn't accomplish much, except to demonstrate Jenkins' lack of familiarity with scholarship about the Book of Mormon, his unreasonable expectations, and his refusal to change either of these things.

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

In a sense though I agree with hamblin.  If the Nephites really were and we have no evidence for their existence,

That's not what he is saying.  There may very well be "Nephite" artifacts in museums and such.  We just don't know enough to recognize them as such.  What does a Nephite artifact look like?

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

we might as well believe anything found might have at one time been something sitting in the hands of a nephrite, we simply can’t make that connection with our limited tools and such.  It’s all believers in historicity can count on.  Maybe someday something will surface to help make a solid connection or two.  But to be clear, as you say the burden has not been met.  

I didn't sa the burden has not been met.  I'm saying Jenkins' request was facile and unreasonable.

Thanks,

-Smac

[jkwilliams]

Just now, JulieM said:

But this thread is about the actual evidence, isn’t it?  

I almost forgot that. 😂

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, smac97 said:

Not really.  The question was facile.  Unreasonable.  Essentially unanswerably in any meaningful way.

I disagree.  The back and forth really didn't accomplish much, except to demonstrate Jenkins' lack of familiarity with scholarship about the Book of Mormon, his unreasonable expectations, and his refusal to change either of these things.

That's not what he is saying.  There may very well be "Nephite" artifacts in museums and such.  We just don't know enough to recognize them as such.  What does a Nephite artifact look like?

I didn't sa the burden has not been met.  I'm saying Jenkins' request was facile and unreasonable.

Thanks,

-Smac

So, a request for evidence for a text that makes specific cultural and technological claims is facile and unreasonable? OK. 

[Scott Lloyd]

3 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Sigh. They posit that Nephi came in and organized this already existing civilization, leading to great development of that civilization. That’s just great, but there’s no evidence one way or the other. Whether Nephi was there or not, he doesn’t seem to have affected the development of Kaminaljuyu one way or the other. So, in what way is this anything other than pure speculation? It’s not evidence. 

That was my point, your comments about my reading comprehension notwithstanding. 

When did I mention your reading comprehension?

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Scott Lloyd said:

When did I mention your reading comprehension?

My mistake. It was my ability to comprehend a video that you commented on. 

[smac97]

5 minutes ago, JulieM said:

I prefer the written copy too, but I’d think an actual video of them speaking is actually harder for them to deny saying something or being misrepresented in any way.

Vogel has written quite a few books too, so he’s not afraid to put things in writing.  

So, he does both.  I think you shouldn’t accuse him of doing something if you don’t know that’s why he prefers to put some videos out (books take a tremendous amount of time to produce so it could be just that).  Anyway, it’s not real fair to do what you’re doing here, IMO.

I was more voicing a thought than making an accusation.

And you're right about Vogel.  He has put much of his content into written form.

My suspicion about Dehlin remains, though.  

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

5 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

So, a request for evidence for a text that makes specific cultural and technological claims is facile and unreasonable? OK. 

No, a request that is essentially unanswerable is facile and unreasonable.

Again, what does a Nephite artifact look like?

Thanks,

-Smac

[jkwilliams]

10 minutes ago, JulieM said:

I prefer the written copy too, but I’d think an actual video of them speaking is actually harder for them to deny saying something or being misrepresented in any way.

Vogel has written quite a few books too, so he’s not afraid to put things in writing.  

So, he does both.  I think you shouldn’t accuse him of doing something if you don’t know that’s why he prefers to put some videos out (books take a tremendous amount of time to produce so it could be just that).  Anyway, it’s not real fair to do what you’re doing here, IMO.

One thing I would say about Dan is that he is a man of integrity. Considering the abuse he’s received from a lot of people, he is remarkably fair and kind. 

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, smac97 said:

No, a request that is essentially unanswerable is facile and unreasonable.

Again, what does a Nephite artifact look like?

Thanks,

-Smac

For one thing, it would show some sign that high heat technology was introduced. I don’t see why this is so difficult. 

[JulieM]

7 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I was more voicing a thought than making an accusation.

And you're right about Vogel.  He has put much of his content into written form.

My suspicion about Dehlin remains, though.  

Thanks,

-Smac

Well, I don’t know much about Dehlin.  He does seem to prefer interviewing people and doing podcasts.  We can’t really know why he doesn’t put things in writing (I’m assuming he doesn’t put out a transcript of the interview?  That’s what I’d prefer.)

[smac97]

24 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

For one thing, it would show some sign that high heat technology was introduced. I don’t see why this is so difficult. 

Are we're conflating Jaredites and Nephites now?  What am I missing?

The Jaredites were ostensibly wiped out as a civilization sometime between 600 and 300 B.C., or 2,300 to 2,600 years ago.  Ancient technology that is specifically identifiable as Jaredite or Nephite is many things, but easy ("I don't see why this is so difficult") is not one of them.

John L. Sorenson has a brief note on the history of metallurgy in pre-Columbian Mesoamerica.  Some excerpts:

Quote

In America there is little archaeological evidence for metallurgy in the Book of Mormon period. Fragmentary evidence is available for certain metallurgical activities in Peru as early as 1700 bc, but it took many centuries there before the craft noticeably flourished. It may be that that area was an intermediate source for some of Mesoamerica’s metallurgy. Orthodox archaeologists insist that no metals were used in Mesoamerica before about ad 900. However, scores of specimens have been identified that seem to date earlier.14

Decisive data for an earlier date come from words for metal (or for bell)15 that appear in five proto-languages that have been reconstructed from surviving daughter tongues:

Proto-Mayan. Descended from Proto-Mayan (estimated at 2200 bc), Proto-Tzeltal-Tzotzil, with a word for metal, dates to about ad 500.16 Yet Huastecan, a Mayan language, also has such a word17 and is considered to have split from the main Mayan group by 2000 bc.

Proto-Mixtecan. A reconstructed Proto-Mixtecan word for metal, or bell, has been dated to about 1500 bc.18

Proto-Mixe-Zoquean. A widely cited study identifies Proto-Mixe-Zoquean as probably a (or the) tongue spoken by inhabitants of the Olmec area before 1000 bc,19 and this proto-language included a word for metal.

Proto-Huavean and Proto-Otomanguean.  Words for metal in these two proto-languages are of uncertain date but in any case date to before ad 900.20

In recent decades, the continued discovery and analysis of metal artifacts both in the Near East and in Mesoamerica have changed our picture of technological history. The expectation that the history will change further in years to come is entirely realistic. Those who try to relate the Nephite record to archaeological and historical facts with regard to metals have improved the strength of their position with recent finds. It will be important to clarify that relationship as the years go on by being critically and reliably informed about new discoveries. Incomplete scholarship will not help those who love truth. 

FAIR has a pretty good handout on this as well.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited June 26, 2018 by smac97

[kllindley]

1 hour ago, jkwilliams said:

Can’t we just talk about the issues without going after people’s character?

I didn't mean in any way to comment on anyone's character, and I didn't read smac97's comment that way. 

My comment was more specifically about Dehlin, but also about video/audio only messages in general. I see Rush Limbaugh and most talk radio this way. It's not the way serious academic argument is done. 

[jkwilliams]

Just now, smac97 said:

Are we're conflating Jaredites and Nephites now?  What am I missing?

The Jaredites were ostensibly wiped out as a civilization sometime between 600 and 300 B.C., or 2,300 to 2,600 years ago.  Ancient technology that is specifically identifiable as Jaredite or Nephite is many things, but easy ("I don't see why this is so difficult") is not one of them.

John L. Sorenson has a brief note on the history of metallurgy in pre-Columbian Mesoamerica.  Some excerpts:

d

I’m not conflating anything. Two cultures spanning thousands of years, both with high heat technology. Any evidence for that? Nope. Sorensen uses metallurgy as synonymous to smelting/high heat. Only the “metallurgy” he’s talking about is metalworking, which does not involve smelting and high heat. 

It really isn’t that difficult. High heat smelting has a ripple effect in material culture, and that effect isn’t seen in Mesoamerica. 

What am I missing?