LDS II: The Mormons

[Slowvehicle]

I am under the impression that these are not ancient Hebrew literary writing styles, but instead the type of English writing that Smith would have access to from the existing Translations of the Old and New Testaments all around him, and being uneducated, would have assumed that was the way God speaks (rather than how the translators liked to make it sound). In fact, a better educated person would have recognized this and would not have made this error..

^^this^^

Verily; why shouldst it "come to pass" that 'god's' "special language" be bad Victorian English; that the foibles of the KJV turneth out to be 'god's' chosen idiom?

(note the chiasm: verily, this post must be "holy stuff")

 

[skyrider44]

. . .and Your perfervid hope that, someday, evidence of such things may be found is just that--and empty hope.

You appear to be uninformed about recent discoveries that support passages in the Book of Mormon. Note, for example:

"Bones of domesticated cattle (Bos taurus) have been reported from different caves in the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico. In one instance these bones were found with those of an extinct horse, Equus conversidens. It is especially interesting that along with these cow and horse remains, human artifacts were found in association with them. The indication is that domesticated cattle and the horse co-existed with humans in pre-Columbian times." (You can access the source by entering into your search engine "Bones of domesticated cattle have been reported from different caves in the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico." Then click on "Source: Miller and Roper: Animals in the Book of Mormon." I suggest this approach because the direct link doesn't work.)

 

[Slowvehicle]

You appear to be uninformed about recent discoveries that support passages in the Book of Mormon. Note, for example:

"Bones of domesticated cattle (Bos taurus) have been reported from different caves in the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico. In one instance these bones were found with those of an extinct horse, Equus conversidens. It is especially interesting that along with these cow and horse remains, human artifacts were found in association with them. The indication is that domesticated cattle and the horse co-existed with humans in pre-Columbian times." (You can access the source by entering into your search engine "Bones of domesticated cattle have been reported from different caves in the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico." Then click on "Source: Miller and Roper: Animals in the Book of Mormon." I suggest this approach because the direct link doesn't work.)

Thank you so much for your honesty in providing a source.

While I go do your homework for you, consider Hitchens' Aphorism.

Do you ever intend to vouchsafe your opinion of when the exciting stories in the BoM are to be supposed to have taken place, and where the exciting stories in the BoM are to be supposed to be located?

 

[John Jones]

You contradict yourself. I accept your claim that you have never said you know everything about the PC Americas, but with a proviso. Based on your statements, including the one hereon, you know everything about the PC Americas as it relates to the Book of Mormon. Your repeated declarations that there is no evidence re. specific passages in the book inexorably leads one to believe that you know everything about those passages in the context of the PC Americas.

This appears to be a weasel-worded attempt to back-off from your previous, and apparently deliberate false statements about Slowvehicle's position.

As far as I can see, he never claimed to know everything about anything. He said there was no evidence to support critical claims in the BoM, and invited you to provide some.

He has done a far better job of making his point than his interlocutor(s).

 

[John Jones]

You appear to be uninformed about recent discoveries that support passages in the Book of Mormon. Note, for example:

"Bones of domesticated cattle (Bos taurus) have been reported from different caves in the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico. In one instance these bones were found with those of an extinct horse, Equus conversidens. It is especially interesting that along with these cow and horse remains, human artifacts were found in association with them. The indication is that domesticated cattle and the horse co-existed with humans in pre-Columbian times." (You can access the source by entering into your search engine "Bones of domesticated cattle have been reported from different caves in the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico." Then click on "Source: Miller and Roper: Animals in the Book of Mormon." I suggest this approach because the direct link doesn't work.)

Published in Interpreter A Journal of Mormon Scripture.

 

[Slowvehicle]

Published in Interpreter A Journal of Mormon Scripture.

First-level search seems to indicate that the Hatt find includes clearly Pleistocene E. conversidens bones "found with" bones of species (including B. taurus) "introduced" by the Spanish. Whether through enthusiasm, incompetence, or disingenuousness, it is seldom reported that the E. conversidens bones are in a different layer than the B. taurus bones; the "with" boils down to no more than Pleistocene horse bones and teeth being found in the same cave as post-columbian Spanish cattle.

http://www.mormonthink.com/backup/horses.htm
http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com/horses.html

There is, in fact, an interesting find about 800 miles from the demesne: In 2005, in a cueva near the Agua Hedonia lagoon (near Carlsbad, CA), the bones of a domestic horse and a burro were unearthed. Carbon dating indicated that the horse, at least, died somewhere between 1605 and 1725 C.E., or some 50 years before el Missión de San Diego de Alcala (the first of the Spanish missions in Ca) was established.

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2005/jul/17/centuries-old-bones-of-horses-unearthed-in/
http://www.lrgaf.org/origins.htm
http://www.hannah-steenbock.de/did-wild-horses-survive-in-america-after-all-probably-not/

Do notice, however, the horse and burro were unshod, and appear to have been solitary; that even the earliest possible date is post-colombian (indeed, well after the Diné, for instance, are recorded to have engaged in horse trading); and that el Missión de San Diego de Alcala is not the first Spanish expedition to the area, only the first established settlement.

Not to mention, merely finding one anomalous horse skeleton does not support the idea of a mighty horse culture "covering the land" for "thousands of years"; unless you would have us believe in some sort of "Smith Family (Jadeite) Robinson" encountering the last remnant of the horse (and the burro) in isolation.

But thank you for a diverting half-hour of reading.

When do you think that the mighty civilization, "covering the land" for "thousands of years" (as described in the BoM) is to be supposed to have taken place, and where do you think it is to be supposed to have been located?

 

[Pacal]

Regarding remains of horses found Yucatan in allegedly pre-Columbian times see http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com/horses.html.

The article concludes that the caves the horses were found in was subject to a fair degree of disturbance, mainly by rodents and has such provide no evidence for the horse being in use in Mesoamerica in Book of Mormon times.

 

[Slowvehicle]

Regarding remains of horses found Yucatan in allegedly pre-Columbian times see http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com/horses.html.

The article concludes that the caves the horses were found in was subject to a fair degree of disturbance, mainly by rodents and has such provide no evidence for the horse being in use in Mesoamerica in Book of Mormon times.

Yeah, that's the Hatt "find". Pleistocene horse, Spanish-introduced cattle.

 

[Olowkow]

...(You can access the source by entering into your search engine "Bones of domesticated cattle have been reported from different caves in the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico." Then click on "Source: Miller and Roper: Animals in the Book of Mormon." I suggest this approach because the direct link doesn't work.)

Direct Link
http://en.fairmormonevidence.org/Category:Book_of_Mormon/Animals/Cattle

I wonder why the only support for disputed archaeological and historical claims seems to come uniquely from Mormon sources.

Note: If you use Firefox, left click in the URL address bar highlighting the entire address, right click, then click "copy". Paste this into the text box, and the "http://" will be included.

 

[JaysonR]

skyrider44,

I imagine that you are fairly busy responding to all of the addresses to you, yet, I would still appreciate a citation of an alleged Hebrew idiom in anything alleged to have been written by Joseph Smith which itself does not already exist in like form as an idiom within the standard Christian Bible.

I would also appreciate reading your explanations for why Greek idioms are also preserved in derivative form in these same writings.

 

[Pup]

When do you think that the mighty civilization, "covering the land" for "thousands of years" (as described in the BoM) is to be supposed to have taken place, and where do you think it is to be supposed to have been located?

Thank you for the further explanation! (edited to add: wish I could help with better context with the archaeological stuff, but when we get back to Smith in the context of early 19th century American culture, I can hopefully contribute more. But it's very cool to see a wider archaelogical perspective around a Mormon-centrict one and understand why non-Mormons aren't jumping on these discoveries as overturning what we think we know about early horses. It reminds me of the old joke: what do you all alternative medicine that's been proven to work? Medicine. What do you call pro-Mormon archaelogy that's been proven to be accurate? Archaelogy.)

I suspect the answer to the above is: whenever and wherever evidence of such a thing is found (in the distant future if it ever is).

 

[halleyscomet]

When I look in a stall and don't see a horse I conclude there is no horse in there you are looking in the stall and insisting that we examine every square inch and catalog every part of the stall before you will conclude there is no horse.

It's worse than that.

If there were a stall, he could at least make the theoretical claim that a horse was once there. There is no stall. There is no barn. There's no evidence that anyone in the region KNEW how to even BUILD a horse barn. There are no horse trails, no pictures of horses and no evidence of a single piece of horse tack or horse shoes.

There aren't even LEGENDS about horses OR horse stalls.

There's literally more evidence of pre-Colombian ThunderBirds than there are of domesticates horses, because there are at least cultural references to Thunder Birds in the legends. What culture domesticates horses and yet lacks even a SINGLE mention of them in religion, culture or legend for THOUSANDS of years of history?

 

[halleyscomet]

My point was that if the LDS Church can be characterized as engaging in superstition, why are the Church and its doctrine worthy of discussion? Why spend time on it? Do you spend time discussing Satanism?

Satanism:

Satanism no, because most Satanists tend to be relatively reasonable people more interested in "live and let live" than anything else. Most of the "blood and guts sacrifice" crowd aren't so much "satanists" in any organized manner, but either rebellious teenagers mimicking the fear mongering stereotypes they get from Sunday school and movies, or mentally disturbed individuals who would be killing and maiming anyway, but take on a veneer of "satanism" absorbed through cultural indoctrination.

Smith vs Potter:

As for why discuss LDS doctrine in the first plate, we discuss it because it's an interesting topic. (Most) Harry Potter fans know full well that the entire series is a work of fiction, but that doesn't stop people from debating if Lavender Brown dies in the books.

Blue Laws in Utah:

The fact that the Mormon church is trying to force it's views on non-Mormons, through things such as financial support for Prop 8 in California, further drives interest in the cult. As a homebrewer, I've been following the Utah blue laws for years. There are towns in Utah where it's STILL illegal to brew your own beer because the town councils are lying through their teeth and claiming homebrew beer and wine can make yo go blind.

You twist my meaning. If you're going to insist that the BoM is wrong because it includes what SV (and others) is fond of calling anachronisms, then you should be prepared to know—with certitude—that, at a minimum, there is nothing more to learn re. said anachronisms. Hence, it's a settled matter.

There was no Inca or Aztec Mr. Ed:

And it is a settled matter. Suck it up and deal with it buttercup. There were no domesticated horses in pre-Columbian America. It's not just a matter of a lack of evidence FOR the horses, but this very thread has listed a good deal of evidence AGAINST there having been domesticated horses. Domestication of horses causes a long list of cultural and environmental changes that are not present in the archeological record. Claiming the pre-Columbain Americans had domesticated horses and we just need to find the evidence is like claiming they also had nuclear powered aircraft and we just need to find the evidence. A nuclear powered aircraft and the infrastructure needed to manufacture it would leave a MASSIVE cultural and environmental thumbprint that would be detectable even if the aircraft itself was missing.

Why not simply post links to all of the evidence that points to a fabulous civilization that "covered the land" for "thousands of years", and featured the horse, and bovine kine, and compasses, and autochtonous steelmaking, and cultivation of european grains, and minted coinage...?

Want come cream with that comment?

Because there is none and he knows it. All he has left are insults and lies.

<snip>

The problem is that you move from repeated statements re. "no evidence" to a conclusion that is unavoidable: the BoM is a fraud.

It really isn't all that complicated, is it?

Faith vs Reality:

It's not just a matter of their being "no evidence" to support the BoM, but there being vast swaths of evidence AGAINST it. All the evidence we have about the culture, technology and economics of the pre-Colombian Americas is AT ODDS WITH the claims in the Book of Mormon. The BoM describes a culture that could not exist alongside the evidence we DO have of the various native American cultures.

 

[halleyscomet]

Direct Link
http://en.fairmormonevidence.org/Category:Book_of_Mormon/Animals/Cattle

I wonder why the only support for disputed archaeological and historical claims seems to come uniquely from Mormon sources.

Note: If you use Firefox, left click in the URL address bar highlighting the entire address, right click, then click "copy". Paste this into the text box, and the "http://" will be included.

It boils down to religious apologists lying about how science works. To the religious, "Scientists" are constantly reinforcing the "accepted dogma" no matter how much evidence they stumble across to contradict it. Scientists do this to "protect" some vaguely described "something" that they value more than the truth.

In reality, nobody gets funding to re-prove something we already know. People get funding to try to overturn existing ideas or expand on them. Science is a highly contentious environment where people are fighting tooth and nail, and the religious apologists who dip their toes in real science get scared off, confusing the natural debate and contention with religious persecution.

Apologists libel scientists and claim they'd lose their careers if they found evidence that contradicted what's commonly accepted. In the real world legitimate disruptive discoveries MAKE careers and attract MORE funding. An actual archeologist who found REAL evidence of pre-Colombian domesticated horses would have a meal ticket for life and dozens of institutions would be rubber-stamping her or his grant proposals.

 

[Pixel42]

It's not just a matter of their being "no evidence" to support the BoM, but there being vast swaths of evidence AGAINST it. All the evidence we have about the culture, technology and economics of the pre-Colombian Americas is AT ODDS WITH the claims in the Book of Mormon. The BoM describes a culture that could not exist alongside the evidence we DO have of the various native American cultures.

It's hard to see how the evidence could be any more clear cut. The conclusion that Smith simply didn't realise how many of the animals, crops and artefacts he saw around him had been brought from the old world, and consequently made the mistake of writing them into his stories set in the same location thousands of years earlier, is inescapable. It amazes me that anyone can genuinely believe that any case to the contrary, let alone a convincing one, can be made. The pressure being placed on members of the cult to believe regardless of the evidence must be enormous.

 

[Slowvehicle]

It boils down to religious apologists lying about how science works. To the religious, "Scientists" are constantly reinforcing the "accepted dogma" no matter how much evidence they stumble across to contradict it. Scientists do this to "protect" some vaguely described "something" that they value more than the truth.

In reality, nobody gets funding to re-prove something we already know. People get funding to try to overturn existing ideas or expand on them. Science is a highly contentious environment where people are fighting tooth and nail, and the religious apologists who dip their toes in real science get scared off, confusing the natural debate and contention with religious persecution.

Apologists libel scientists and claim they'd lose their careers if they found evidence that contradicted what's commonly accepted. In the real world legitimate disruptive discoveries MAKE careers and attract MORE funding. An actual archeologist who found REAL evidence of pre-Colombian domesticated horses would have a meal ticket for life and dozens of institutions would be rubber-stamping her or his grant proposals.

Imagine, if you will, the stampede: "There's HORSES in them thar hills...!"

Nobels all 'round.

 

[John Jones]

Apologists libel scientists and claim they'd lose their careers if they found evidence that contradicted what's commonly accepted. In the real world legitimate disruptive discoveries MAKE careers and attract MORE funding. An actual archeologist who found REAL evidence of pre-Colombian domesticated horses would have a meal ticket for life and dozens of institutions would be rubber-stamping her or his grant proposals.

Indeed. Science reserves its highest accolades for those who overturn the prevailing paradign. Look at Einstein and Niels Bohr.

 

[halleyscomet]

Imagine, if you will, the stampede: "There's HORSES in them thar hills...!"

Nobels all 'round.

I don't think it would necessarily qualify as a Nobel worthy discovery, but the impact on modern archeology and anthropology would be substantial. Actual evidence supporting any of the anachronisms from the BoM would entail a significant to major reworking of our understanding of the history of the Americas.

For example, if the ancient Americans were manufacturing steel, then what caused them to not only lose the technology completely, but destroy all evidence of the mining, smelting and manufacturing infrastructure needed to sustain it? One of the more humiliating aspects of China's "Great Leap Forward" was the catastrophic failure of the efforts to move steel manufacturing to a small, localized scale. It's easy for idiots to underestimate the complexity and infrastructure needed to manufacture steel. It's not just a matter of lobbing some ore into a home made furnace.

If horses were domesticated in the ancient Americas and chariots were used in warfare, then WHY is there NO extant evidence of the cultural and infrastructure impact of such? Something would have had to happen to not only cause the natives to destroy all the evidence of horses, but destroy all the bones and remains as well. You'd need to not only have a massive, two continent movement to systematically DESTROY all cultural evidence of domesticated horses, but then destroy all evidence of the movement that destroyed the evidence of horses!

Thunderbirds weren't even REAL yet we have numerous totems, works of art and oral traditions describing them. A completely legendary bird left a cultural imprint yet horses left none?!?!?

Imagine for a moment the reaction of modern Native Americans to credible evidence that some of their ancestors routinely smelted steel and used it to forge tools and weapons.

Indeed. Science reserves its highest accolades for those who overturn the prevailing paradign. Look at Einstein and Niels Bohr.

Yet apologists would have us believe scientists are terrified of new discoveries.

One wonders what motivates a person to become, and remain, a scientists if all a scientist sis allowed to do is reinforce existing ideas.

 

[halleyscomet]

It's hard to see how the evidence could be any more clear cut. The conclusion that Smith simply didn't realise how many of the animals, crops and artefacts he saw around him had been brought from the old world, and consequently made the mistake of writing them into his stories set in the same location thousands of years earlier, is inescapable. It amazes me that anyone can genuinely believe that any case to the contrary, let alone a convincing one, can be made. The pressure being placed on members of the cult to believe regardless of the evidence must be enormous.

I think we can see the result of that pressure in some of the practicing Mormons on this forum. We've had an ongoing exchange with a person who claims to be a member of a moral religion, yet freely lies about the positions of other people to try and support the debunked, threadbare lie of steel working and domesticated horses in the Americas before Europeans invaded.

Just look at the fictions and fabrications Mormons convince themselves of even today. Some of the pages that have been linked to in this thread are shocking in their disconnect from reality. You need to essentially perform something of an ongoing mental lobotomy to accept the whoppers the con man Joseph smith sold his followers.

 

[Giordano]

Of course religion requires a "double think:" a way of somehow not applying the knowledge and logic that are routinely used in other areas of one's life to the religious stories that so many people believe: invisible beings, miracles, etc. It is often the very illogical nature of these stories that is meant to set them apart and we are told that believing in them despite the illogic is a test of our faith. It is an intriguing window into the workings of the human brain that so many people do accept these impossible stories, even though different people accept wildly different impossible stories.

Unfortunately for the LDS Church, the beginnings of their religion date to historic times, and and least a portion of their claims can be compared to what is know from history, archeology, and verbal accounts. This makes a belief in these claims even harder. We may suspect (or worse) that it is unlikely that Moses spoke to a burning bush, but at least the Old Testament did not claim that the burning bush was a modern Monsanto version of cultivated corn or that Moses led the Hebrews out of Egypt in 1855. Of course all the evidence that we do have is that the Hebrews were never slaves in Egypt, but the proposed date for the Exodus makes finding this evidence harder than finding the evidence that disputes many more of the more recent LDS claims.

I would also add that if we look at how quickly the Native Americans in the Plains added the horse to their culture after the Spanish arrived, it alone makes the idea that they once had domesticated horses, but stopped using them, even more amazing.