Ouagadougou Posted November 28, 2018 Posted November 28, 2018 Are there any non-LDS (not paid by the church) archeologists who maintain/support the BoM being a historical, ancient text? Likewise, are there any non-LDS (not paid by the church) egyptologists who accept Joseph Smith's translation of the BoA as legitimate? Are there any organizations outside the LDS Church that support/maintain the historicity of either the BoM or BoA?
sunstoned Posted November 28, 2018 Posted November 28, 2018 You pose some good questions. I think if there were we would be hearing a lot about them on boards like this and in church publications. 1
Duncan Posted November 28, 2018 Posted November 28, 2018 12 minutes ago, Ouagadougou said: Are there any non-LDS (not paid by the church) archeologists who maintain/support the BoM being a historical, ancient text? Likewise, are there any non-LDS (not paid by the church) egyptologists who accept Joseph Smith's translation of the BoA as legitimate? Are there any organizations outside the LDS Church that support/maintain the historicity of either the BoM or BoA? I am not sure, but I don't keep track of what Archaeologists personally believe and i've never heard of any academic peer reviewed Archaeology Journals attacking the Book of Mormon either 1
clarkgoble Posted November 28, 2018 Posted November 28, 2018 (edited) 35 minutes ago, Ouagadougou said: Are there any non-LDS (not paid by the church) archeologists who maintain/support the BoM being a historical, ancient text? Likewise, are there any non-LDS (not paid by the church) egyptologists who accept Joseph Smith's translation of the BoA as legitimate? Are there any organizations outside the LDS Church that support/maintain the historicity of either the BoM or BoA? Why would we expect there to be? There's clearly no public evidence for such. Maybe in the future such evidence might appear but there's certainly nothing there right now and various things that would lead any non-Mormon scholar to think them 19th century productions. Edited November 28, 2018 by clarkgoble 2
The Nehor Posted November 28, 2018 Posted November 28, 2018 36 minutes ago, Ouagadougou said: Are there any non-LDS (not paid by the church) archeologists who maintain/support the BoM being a historical, ancient text? Likewise, are there any non-LDS (not paid by the church) egyptologists who accept Joseph Smith's translation of the BoA as legitimate? Are there any organizations outside the LDS Church that support/maintain the historicity of either the BoM or BoA? Yes, yes, and yes. Most of them come from offshoots of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
Ouagadougou Posted November 28, 2018 Author Posted November 28, 2018 (edited) 28 minutes ago, The Nehor said: Yes, yes, and yes. Most of them come from offshoots of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. CFR. BTW, I'm referring to non-LDS experts (not including any offshoots) who are not paid by the church or work for the church. You are saying there are non-LDS egyptologists who accept Joseph Smith's translation of the BoA as being legitimate? Please provide a source for this. Edited November 28, 2018 by Ouagadougou
clarkgoble Posted November 28, 2018 Posted November 28, 2018 2 minutes ago, Ouagadougou said: CFR. I assume he's making a joke about offshoots like the Bickertonites. Although I don't know if there are any Bickertonites or Community of Christ (RLDS) archaeologists or anthropoligists working in say mesoamerica who also accept historicity. There may be for all I know though.
Ouagadougou Posted November 28, 2018 Author Posted November 28, 2018 13 minutes ago, clarkgoble said: I assume he's making a joke about offshoots like the Bickertonites. Although I don't know if there are any Bickertonites or Community of Christ (RLDS) archaeologists or anthropoligists working in say mesoamerica who also accept historicity. There may be for all I know though. Ok. LDS or any schisms.
Popular Post mfbukowski Posted November 28, 2018 Popular Post Posted November 28, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Ouagadougou said: Are there any non-LDS (not paid by the church) archeologists who maintain/support the BoM being a historical, ancient text? Likewise, are there any non-LDS (not paid by the church) egyptologists who accept Joseph Smith's translation of the BoA as legitimate? Are there any organizations outside the LDS Church that support/maintain the historicity of either the BoM or BoA? Are there any non-Christian archaeologists who support that Jesus is the Christ? Obviously not or they would be Christians. Your question is similar. Historic facts are not evidence for spiritual truths. Being an eyewitness to the crucifixion did not make people Christians. Why would it? I recently read a wonderful quote from Galileo in a wonderful paper. Galileo said that Scriptures are for teaching us how to go to heaven, not how heaven goes. The Book of Mormon teaches us how to get to heaven, not how the heavens go or how they went historically. Edited November 28, 2018 by mfbukowski 8
Ouagadougou Posted November 28, 2018 Author Posted November 28, 2018 2 minutes ago, mfbukowski said: Are there any non-Christian archaeologists who support that Jesus is the Christ? Obviously not or they would be Christians. Your question is similar. Historic facts are not evidence for spiritual truths. Being an eyewitness to the crucifixion did not make people Christians. Why would it? I recently read a wonderful quote from Galileo in a wonderful paper. Galileo said that Scriptures are for teaching us how to get to heaven, not how heaven goes. The Book of Mormon teaches us how to get to heaven, not how the heavens go or how they went historically. Ok. So your simple answer is just no...there are none.
Duncan Posted November 28, 2018 Posted November 28, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Ouagadougou said: Are there any non-LDS (not paid by the church) archeologists who maintain/support the BoM being a historical, ancient text? Likewise, are there any non-LDS (not paid by the church) egyptologists who accept Joseph Smith's translation of the BoA as legitimate? Are there any organizations outside the LDS Church that support/maintain the historicity of either the BoM or BoA? those who live by the sword of archaeology die by the sword of archaeology, just because you can't find it doesn't mean no one else will and doesn't mean it never existed or you could be looking for the wrong thing altogether or have stuff that you don't know what it is and your interpretation is correct Edited November 28, 2018 by Duncan 2
mfbukowski Posted November 28, 2018 Posted November 28, 2018 5 minutes ago, Ouagadougou said: Ok. So your simple answer is just no...there are none. No my answer was that your point was irrelevant. Perhaps you should look up some of the previous hundred or so threads which have already discussed this question rather than re-inventing the wheel. Perhaps Fairmormon would be a good place for you to start. I think most here would just find your question boring, since it has been answered so often before. Just trying to be helpful. 3
Ouagadougou Posted November 28, 2018 Author Posted November 28, 2018 7 minutes ago, Duncan said: do you know any "paid for" archaeologists who work for the Church? i've never heard of any https://byustudies.byu.edu/content/book-mormon-archaeology-and-anthropology-0 BYU Studies https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/01/how-mormon-lawyer-transformed-archaeology-mexico-and-ended-losing-his-faith NWAF http://nwaf.byu.edu https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Book_of_Mormon/Archaeology/Thomas_Stuart_Ferguson
Duncan Posted November 28, 2018 Posted November 28, 2018 1 minute ago, Ouagadougou said: https://byustudies.byu.edu/content/book-mormon-archaeology-and-anthropology-0 BYU Studies https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/01/how-mormon-lawyer-transformed-archaeology-mexico-and-ended-losing-his-faith NWAF http://nwaf.byu.edu https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Book_of_Mormon/Archaeology/Thomas_Stuart_Ferguson Looks like Ferguson was a lawyer and why don't you email the person at the nwaf.byu.edu, he might know?
Ouagadougou Posted November 28, 2018 Author Posted November 28, 2018 1 minute ago, mfbukowski said: No my answer was that your point was irrelevant. Perhaps you should look up some of the previous hundred or so threads which have already discussed this question rather than re-inventing the wheel. Perhaps Fairmormon would be a good place for you to start. I think most here would just find your question boring, since it has been answered so often before. Just trying to be helpful. I don't use Fairmon because the name "Mormon" is a tool of Satan. Also, you didn't even answer the questions; rather, you just deflected and referred back to the bible and faith. I posed a few questions that are easy to answer--and it looks like the answer is...no...there are non non-LDS egyptologists or archeologists who accept the historicitiy of either the BoM or BoA. If there is a credible non-LDS egyptologist who accepts Joseph Smith's translation of the BoA as legitimate, then I would like to see his/her name.
Ouagadougou Posted November 28, 2018 Author Posted November 28, 2018 4 minutes ago, Duncan said: Looks like Ferguson was a lawyer and why don't you email the person at the nwaf.byu.edu, he might know? My question is about non-LDS affiliated researchers. I'm sure I could email 100 experts around the world in egyptology, and I would bet my money they would say Joseph Smith's translation of the BoA is an absolute failure, based on the papyri we have today.
Duncan Posted November 28, 2018 Posted November 28, 2018 3 minutes ago, Ouagadougou said: I don't use Fairmon because the name "Mormon" is a tool of Satan. Also, you didn't even answer the questions; rather, you just deflected and referred back to the bible and faith. I posed a few questions that are easy to answer--and it looks like the answer is...no...there are non non-LDS egyptologists or archeologists who accept the historicitiy of either the BoM or BoA. If there is a credible non-LDS egyptologist who accepts Joseph Smith's translation of the BoA as legitimate, then I would like to see his/her name. You assume too much. You're assuming non LDS specialists have read the BOA or BOM, you assume that they are familiar with it's content enough to make comparisons to artifacts discovered, you assume that people know where the BOM took place, you assume that every site is has been dug up and artifacts correctly identified and every specialist agrees with others, Why do you make these assumptions? 3
Duncan Posted November 28, 2018 Posted November 28, 2018 5 minutes ago, Ouagadougou said: My question is about non-LDS affiliated researchers. I'm sure I could email 100 experts around the world in egyptology, and I would bet my money they would say Joseph Smith's translation of the BoA is an absolute failure, based on the papyri we have today. provided they know what you are talking about
Ouagadougou Posted November 28, 2018 Author Posted November 28, 2018 Just now, Duncan said: You assume too much. You're assuming non LDS specialists have read the BOA or BOM, you assume that they are familiar with it's content enough to make comparisons to artifacts discovered, you assume that people know where the BOM took place, you assume that every site is has been dug up and artifacts correctly identified and every specialist agrees with others, Why do you make these assumptions? Even the church essay says the following concerning the BoA (not assuming): "None of the characters on the papyrus fragments mentioned Abraham’s name or any of the events recorded in the book of Abraham. Mormon and non-Mormon Egyptologists agree that the characters on the fragments do not match the translation given in the book of Abraham, though there is not unanimity, even among non-Mormon scholars, about the proper interpretation of the vignettes on these fragments.27 Scholars have identified the papyrus fragments as parts of standard funerary texts that were deposited with mummified bodies. These fragments date to between the third century B.C.E. and the first century C.E., long after Abraham lived."https://www.lds.org/topics/translation-and-historicity-of-the-book-of-abraham?lang=eng Moreover' "Ten centuries ago a handful of Norse sailors slipped into Newfoundland, established small colonies, traded with local natives, then sailed back into the fog of history. In spite of the small scale of their settlements and the brevity of their stay, unequivocal evidence of their presence has been found. Just six centuries earlier the Book of Mormon tells us, a climactic battle between fair-skinned Nephites and dark-skinned Lamanites ended a millennial dominion by a literate, Christian, Bronze Age civilization with a population numbering in the millions. Decades of serious and honest scholarship have failed to uncover credible evidence that these Book of Mormon civilizations ever existed. No Semitic languages, no Israelites speaking these languages, no swords or steel to make them. They remain a great civilization vanished without a trace, the people along with their genes." Simon Southerton, Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church, 2004. Ether 15: 2 He saw that there had been slain by the sword already nearly two millions of his people, and he began to sorrow in his heart; yea, there had been slain two millions of mighty men, and also their wives and their children.
carbon dioxide Posted November 28, 2018 Posted November 28, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Ouagadougou said: Are there any non-LDS (not paid by the church) archeologists who maintain/support the BoM being a historical, ancient text? Likewise, are there any non-LDS (not paid by the church) egyptologists who accept Joseph Smith's translation of the BoA as legitimate? Are there any organizations outside the LDS Church that support/maintain the historicity of either the BoM or BoA? Why would an archaeologist who believes the BOM to be a historical, ancient text not be LDS? It would seem to me that any archaeologist who came to that conclusion if they are not LDS, would soon be baptized and be LDS. Given all the new stuff they are discovering with Lidar technology, perhaps we are not too many years before lots of evidence is found. It is not like the archaeologists have a tons of reliable information on the people living here over 2000 years ago. Most of the stuff they have is post book of Mormon times and even then the books may need to be rewritten on the Mayans ect. Edited November 28, 2018 by carbon dioxide 2
Duncan Posted November 28, 2018 Posted November 28, 2018 1 minute ago, Ouagadougou said: Even the church essay says the following concerning the BoA (not assuming): "None of the characters on the papyrus fragments mentioned Abraham’s name or any of the events recorded in the book of Abraham. Mormon and non-Mormon Egyptologists agree that the characters on the fragments do not match the translation given in the book of Abraham, though there is not unanimity, even among non-Mormon scholars, about the proper interpretation of the vignettes on these fragments.27 Scholars have identified the papyrus fragments as parts of standard funerary texts that were deposited with mummified bodies. These fragments date to between the third century B.C.E. and the first century C.E., long after Abraham lived."https://www.lds.org/topics/translation-and-historicity-of-the-book-of-abraham?lang=eng Moreover' "Ten centuries ago a handful of Norse sailors slipped into Newfoundland, established small colonies, traded with local natives, then sailed back into the fog of history. In spite of the small scale of their settlements and the brevity of their stay, unequivocal evidence of their presence has been found. Just six centuries earlier the Book of Mormon tells us, a climactic battle between fair-skinned Nephites and dark-skinned Lamanites ended a millennial dominion by a literate, Christian, Bronze Age civilization with a population numbering in the millions. Decades of serious and honest scholarship have failed to uncover credible evidence that these Book of Mormon civilizations ever existed. No Semitic languages, no Israelites speaking these languages, no swords or steel to make them. They remain a great civilization vanished without a trace, the people along with their genes." Simon Southerton, Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church, 2004. Ether 15: 2 He saw that there had been slain by the sword already nearly two millions of his people, and he began to sorrow in his heart; yea, there had been slain two millions of mighty men, and also their wives and their children. and while you're emailing all these people ask them their opinion about this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egyptian_race_controversy and there's some belief the Chinese came to Cape Breton in the 1400's https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/cape-bretons-great-wall-chinese-found-east-coast-in-1500s-author-says what does that prove?
Ouagadougou Posted November 28, 2018 Author Posted November 28, 2018 13 minutes ago, Duncan said: and while you're emailing all these people ask them their opinion about this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egyptian_race_controversy and there's some belief the Chinese came to Cape Breton in the 1400's https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/cape-bretons-great-wall-chinese-found-east-coast-in-1500s-author-says what does that prove? https://oi.uchicago.edu/sites/oi.uchicago.edu/files/uploads/shared/docs/Research_Archives/Translation%20and%20Historicity%20of%20the%20Book%20of%20Abraham%20final-2.pdf "With the Book of Abraham now confirmed as a perhaps well-meaning, but erroneous invention by Joseph Smith, the LDS church may well devote some reflection to the status of the text. The former Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, since 2001 renamed the Community of Christ, avoids this issue by treating the Book of Abraham as speculative writing by Smith, not as a document of historical truth." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_K._Ritner "Ritner received his BA in psychology from Rice University in 1975, and his Ph.D. (with honors) in Egyptology from the University of Chicago in 1987. His dissertation was The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice. Between 1991 and 1996, Ritner held the position of Marilyn M. Simpson Assistant Professor of Egyptology in the Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations at Yale University. In 1996, he was recruited to the University of Chicago's Oriental Institute and Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations."
Duncan Posted November 28, 2018 Posted November 28, 2018 Just now, Ouagadougou said: https://oi.uchicago.edu/sites/oi.uchicago.edu/files/uploads/shared/docs/Research_Archives/Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham final-2.pdf "With the Book of Abraham now confirmed as a perhaps well-meaning, but erroneous invention by Joseph Smith, the LDS church may well devote some reflection to the status of the text. The former Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, since 2001 renamed the Community of Christ, avoids this issue by treating the Book of Abraham as speculative writing by Smith, not as a document of historical truth." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_K._Ritner "Ritner received his BA in psychology from Rice University in 1975, and his Ph.D. (with honors) in Egyptology from the University of Chicago in 1987. His dissertation was The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice. Between 1991 and 1996, Ritner held the position of Marilyn M. Simpson Assistant Professor of Egyptology in the Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations at Yale University. In 1996, he was recruited to the University of Chicago's Oriental Institute and Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations." I can copy and paste too, what does that prove? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gee 1
Ouagadougou Posted November 28, 2018 Author Posted November 28, 2018 20 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said: Why would an archaeologist who believes the BOM to be a historical, ancient text not be LDS? It would seem to me that any archaeologist who came to that conclusion if they are not LDS, would soon be baptized and be LDS. Given all the new stuff they are discovering with Lidar technology, perhaps we are not too many years before lots of evidence is found. It is not like the archaeologists have a tons of reliable information on the people living here over 2000 years ago. Most of the stuff they have is post book of Mormon times and even then the books may need to be rewritten on the Mayans ect. Once again, I am asking the question to see, and it appears there are none by all accounts. Furthermore, the Book of Mormon ended around ~400 A.D. and, IMO, there isn't a shred of real archeological evidence to support its historicity. I don't know of any major scientific/research institution (outside of what the church funds) that would support the Book of Mormon being a historical, ancient text. All the stuff they are discovering with new technology today, IMO, doesn't support the Book of Mormon narrative. They find evidence dating back an estimated 80,000 years of other civilizations, but still nothing to support the MILLIONS killed in the Book of Mormon. https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2018/04/saudi-arabia-finger-human-migration-homo/
Ouagadougou Posted November 28, 2018 Author Posted November 28, 2018 7 minutes ago, Duncan said: I can copy and paste too, what does that prove? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gee I'm just providing references of an expert Egyptologist who says the Book of Abraham is a failed translation by JS; the church's essay, in some many words, says the same thing. But once again, you deflect my questions, so it appears it is a big NO to all three questions I asked in my post.
Recommended Posts