Archaeological Evidences for the Book of Mormon?

[TOmNossor]

1. Cultural
   a) There are multiple instances of a Nephite description of the Lamanites as lazy and uncivilized. These descriptions occur simultaneous with other descriptions of Lamanite cities that appear more powerful than the Nephites. Rather than authorial error, this is an accurate replication of typical in-group prejudices known for most human populations. This pejorative catalog even gets repeated by Mormon when it is obviously incorrect. However the presence of the pejorative characterization is anthropologically accurate for time and place.
   b) The events surrounding the Anti-Lehi-Nephies are nonsensical in any context except Mesoamerica for that time period and the particular data supplied (including the reason for the associated attack on Ammonihah).
   c) Emphasis on kin as organizational principle
2. Declarations of genealogy upon meeting a stranger
3. Consistent use of kin inheritance in both political and religious leadership roles
4. Amulek’s description of his household fits a Mesoamerican home compound, including multi-generations and collateral kin
5. When Nephi’s (of 3 Nephi) compound is described, it fits the description of a powerful person living in the city center - including personal pyramid (“tower”), walled court, and location near the street leading to a main market (multiple markets are known in single cities).
6. Political
   a) The Book of Mormon describes a political situation that fits Mesoamerica, but which is not universal to other areas of the world (though it is not completely unknown). Mesoamerican cities had their own governments, but they were typically grouped into spheres of influence. In particular, we have descriptions of kings over kings among the Lamanites. This is the precise relationship of Mesoamerican cities as the king-forms were developing. The various fissions and fusions of the Book of Mormon hegemonies accurately reflect the nature of Mesoamerican politics.
   b) The shift from King to judges had parallels in several Maya communities, with a later example of a possible full-blown parallel in Chichen Itza. Nevertheless, the underlying model is found much earlier.
   c) Descriptions of city-state interactions, and spheres of influence are similarly absent from the modern world, but accurately reflective of the situation in Mesoamerica at the proper time.
   d) Inter-city-state interactions: There are two levels of interaction. One is between affiliated city-states, and the other between conflicting city-states. Among the affiliated states, the Book of Mormon descriptions of various cities with rather independent rule, yet beholding to a center city is an accurate depiction of the Mesoamerican situation at the time of the Book of Mormon (and continuing thereafter). These relationships allowed for common good, and areas linked to, and labeled by the center city (city of Zarahemla, land of Zarahemla, in the Book of Mormon - Tikal and subsidiaries among the Maya) but nevertheless with differences. Thus within the sphere of Zarahemla there could be entire cities that only nominally accepted Zarahemla’s domination, but rejected the Zarahemla religious form. These cities could easily break away and re-establish themselves as aligned with the Lamanites. This accurately describes the Mesoamerican situation at this time in history. It does not reflect anything in the US. Joseph’s historical reference might be colonies, but those were still unified territories rather than affiliated cities. The Book of Mormon’s description applies to a much older institution.
7. Warfare
   a) Descriptions of warfare fit the Mesoamerican model. This includes: seasonality of fighting, weaponry, tactics, defensive structures, body armament, and the nature of the conclusion of the warfare.
   b) The seasons of warfare match with the types of seasonality in Mesoamerica
   c) Defensive armament is correctly described
8. helmets
9. breastplates
10. ”Thick clothing” as armor
11. Wounds on the legs - i.e. no grieves
    d) Descriptions of the deployment and types of weapons
12. relationship of projectile to shock weapons
    e) Tactic
13. Rarity and surprise of night movements
14. hiding in foxholes
15. battle between champions
16. defeat of the king is the defeat of the army
17. War on a tribute model rather than a conquest model.
18. Timing and nature of the increase and alteration in military tactics around AD 400. Increase in reported militarism at the same time period as Mesoamerica increased militarism in the target area.
19. Fortifications described that fit with developing Mesoamerican fortifications - appearing at approximately the same time period.

Hope that is interesting. As I keep saying, I think Nahom and Teotihuacan are remarkable by themselves. I also think the Volcano info is remarkable by itself. I do not think textual evidence for Kish the BOM and Olemec king is remarkable by itself. But, I think a lot of the above integrated together is impressive.
Charity, TOm

 

[RebeccaJ]

Tom, can you provide peer reviewed evidence for each of those points you listed?

 

[Stephen168]

I am a faithful LDS who has studied about past LDS statements and the source of binding doctrine within the CoJCoLDS. Folks like EVERY NON-LDS on this thread, Simon Southerton, and surely many others seem to demand that I embrace a position that they find easy to dismiss via science. I rejected this position along with numerous thinking LDS (I vaguely recall articles from the 1930’s and there are statements from Joseph Smith and one of Brigham Young’s sons).

You are rejecting the position of Joseph Smith; the founder of Mormonism. Because you can not defend Joseph Smith’s lie, you must reject it. Yet, it is still the lie that is the foundation of Mormonism.

To say the Book of Mormon is true/proven, we must first define what true is. Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is true if we claim it is 19th century American fiction. Joseph Smith claimed the BoM is the source of the American Indians. It is this claim that is a lie. Now the Mormon Church wanted to change its claim about how the BoM is true. They what the BoM to be about just a few American Indians. This is what Simon Southerton was talking about, “In 600 BC there were probably several million American Indians living in the Americas. If a small group of Israelites, say less than thirty, entered such a massive native population, it would be very hard to detect their genes today. However, such a scenario does not square with what the Book of Mormon plainly states and with what the prophets have taught for 175 years.”
So when put against the claim of the founder of Mormonism, you are wrong. There is no pro-BoM case. There is zero chance the Book of Mormon is true.

 

[TexanKnight]

All,
I have seen repeated attempts to define what I must believe on this thread. I am the world authority on what I do believe.

Not true. You have seen us explain what YOUR church has taught, or what YOUR church cannot prove and we have watched you wiggle, deflect and ignore.

It is what I do believe and how I think it fits well within the LDS paradigm that I compare with the Catholic Church and find the Catholic Church to fit less well with the available data.

Yet you cannot provide any of the data that is needed for such a choice

**Now, I would have hoped some Catholic might defend me against those on this forum who wish to define my beliefs for me. After all, this is so frequently done to Catholics in so many corners of the internet.

Sadly, when you follow false prophets who have verified teachings, what you have seen is Catholics who will constantly remind of what YOUR leaders have taught. That you feel the need to distance yourself from those teachings speaks volumes **

I believe the author of the BOM had in mind a consistent geography that maps to a real place. Over 500 geographic tidbits exist within the BOM. Joseph Smith never evidence he had any concept of this geography or this place. He IMO was not the author. As I prophet I do not look to Joseph Smith or Thomas Monson for advice on rebuilding my carbonator and not for their geography knowledge either.

Sadly, for someone who claims such vast studies and knowledge, you are unable to answer simple questions about the geography. Nor can you find a consensus among mormons who can agree to the location of anything. That says all you need to know the geography of the b of m

From President Harold B. Lee in 1973:
If anyone, regardless of his position in the Church, were to advance a doctrine that is not substantiated by the standard Church works, meaning the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price, you may know that his statement is merely his private opinion. The only one authorized to bring forth any new doctrine is the President of the Church, who, when he does, will declare it as revelation from God, and it will be so accepted by the Council of the Twelve and sustained by the body of the Church. And if any man speak a doctrine which contradicts what is in the standard Church works, you may know by that same token that it is false and you are not bound to accept it as truth.

If only that was true. It is not “doctrine” if it changes. I can list a plethora of “DOCTRINE” from BY that the lds “church” now claims was never doctrine, which, by the way, means that BY was a liar. It is harsh to discount past prophets so easily.

So, I do not believe that the Hill Cumorah spoken of in the BOM is in NY. Let me list a few places in the BOM I think are will defined.

Finally. Of course, that means js and several other lds leaders are liars and false prophets. I have finally gotten that admission from you. Thank you

Jerusalem, Nahom, Bountiful. They fit extraordinarily well with Lehi’s journey. How did the author of the BOM know this if he didn’t have supernatural access to some ancient record?

lol…I love how you group a known geographical and historical city with fictional locations no one can find

 

[TexanKnight]

“The great and last battle, in which several hundred thousand Nephites perished was on the hill Cumorah, the same hill from which the plates were taken by Joseph Smith, the boy about whom I spoke to you the other evening.” (Talk given by Apostle Orson Pratt, Feb. 11, 1872 Journal of Discourses Vol. 14, pg. 331)

“These records were carried by Ether from the hill Ramah, afterwards called Cumorah, where the Jaredites were destroyed, as well as the Nephites.” (Talk given by Apostle Orson Pratt, May 18, 1873 Journal of Discourses Vol. 16, pg. 50

“Thirty-six years prior to this time his nation was destroyed in in what we term the State of New York, around about a hill, called by that people the Hill of Cumorah, when many hundreds of thousands of the Nephites-men, women and children, fell, during the greatest battle that they had had with the Lamanites.” (Talk given by Apostle Orson Pratt, Aug. 25, 1878 Journal of Discourses Vol. 20, pg. 62)

"It will be, next Thursday night, 54 years since the Prophet Joseph Smith, then but a lad, was permitted by the angel of the Lord to take the gold plates of the Book of Mormon from the hill Cumorah, as it was called in ancient times, located in the State of New York. " (Talk given by Apostle Orson Pratt, Sept. 18, 1881 Journal of Discourses Vol. 22, pg. 224)

“Finally, they became so utterly wicked, so fully ripened for destruction, that one branch of the nation, called the Nephites, gathered their entire people around the hill Cumorah, in the State of New York , in Ontario County; and the Lamanites, the opposite army, gathered by millions in the same region. The two nations were four years in gathering their forces, during which no fighting took place; but at the end of that time, having marshalled all their hosts, the fighting commenced, the Lamanites coming upon the Nephites, and destroying all of them, except a very few, who had previously deserted over to the Lamanites.” (Talk given by Apostle Orson Pratt, April 6, 1874 Journal of Discourses Vol. 17, pg. 24)

"The passages which I have quoted from the Book of Mormon and the more extended discussion of this subject by Elder B. H. Roberts which was published in The Deseret News of March 3, 1928, definitely establish the following facts: That the Hill Cumorah, and the Hill Ramah are identical; that it was around this hill that the armies of both the Jaredites and Nephites, fought their great last battles; that it was in this hill that Mormon deposited all of the sacred records which had been entrusted to his care by Ammaron, except the abridgment which he had made from the plates of Nephi, which were delivered into the hands of his’ son, Moroni. We know positively that it was in this hill that Moroni deposited the abridgment made by his father, and his own abridgment of the record of the Jaredites, and that it was from this hill that Joseph Smith obtained possession of them. " (President Anthony W. Ivins, Conference Report, April 1928-Morning Session)

“Cumorah, the artificial hill of north America, is well calculated to stand in this generation, as a monument of marvelous works and wonders. Around that mount died millions of the Jaredites; yea, there ended one of the greatest nations of this earth. In that day, her inhabitants spread from sea to sea, and enjoyed national greatness and glory, nearly fifteen hundred years. – That people forsook the Lord and died in wickedness. There, too, fell the Nephites, after they had forgotten the Lord that bought them. There slept the records of age after age, for hundreds of years, even until the time of the Lord.” (The Latter-day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate, Vol.2, No.2, p.221)
“The hill, which was known by one division of the ancient peoples as Cumorah, by another as Ramah, is situated near Palmyra in the State of New York .” (Apostle James E. Talmage, Articles of Faith , chapter 14)

"It is known that the Hill Cumorah where the Nephites were destroyed is the hill where the Jaredites were also destroyed. This hill was known to the Jaredites as Rama. It was approximately near to the waters of Ripliancum, which the Book of Ether says, “by interpretation, is large, or to exceed all.” Mormon adds: “And it came to pass that we did march forth to the land of Cumorah, and we did pitch our tents round about the hill Cumorah; and it was in a land of many waters, rivers, and fountains; and here we had hope to gain advantage over the Lamanites.”

"It must be conceded that this description fits perfectly the land of Cumorah in New York, as it has been known since the visitation of Moroni to the Prophet Joseph Smith, for the hill is in the proximity of the Great Lakes and also in the land of many rivers and fountains. Moreover, the Prophet Joseph Smith himself is on record, definitely declaring the present hill called Cumorah to be the exact hill spoken of in the Book of Mormon.

“Further, the fact that all of his associates from the beginning down have spoken of it as the identical hill where Mormon and Moroni hid the records, must carry some weight. It is difficult for a reasonable person to believe that such men as Oliver Cowdery, Brigham Young, Parley P. Pratt, Orson Pratt, David Whitmer, and many others, could speak frequently of the Spot where the Prophet Joseph Smith obtained the plates as the Hill Cumorah, and not be corrected by the Prophet, if that were not the fact. That they did speak of this hill in the days of the Prophet in this definite manner is an established record of history…” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation , Vol.3, Bookcraft, 1956, p.232-43.)

 

[TexanKnight]

"In the western part of the state of New York near Palmyra is a prominent hill known as the “hill Cumorah.” On July twenty-fifth of this year, as I stood on the crest of that hill admiring with awe the breathtaking panorama which stretched out before me on every hand, my mind reverted to the events which occurred in that vicinity some twenty-five centuries ago—events which brought to an end the great Jaredite nation .

[Editor’s Note: About 20 short paragraphs later this speaker says the following]

“This second civilization to which I refer, the Nephites , flourished in America between 600 B.C. and A.D. 400. Their civilization came to an end for the same reason, at the same place, and in the same manner as did the Jaredites’” (Talk given by President Marion G. Romney in General Conference, October 4, 1975, Ensign Nov. 1975 pg. 35)

Apostle LeGrand Richards, in A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, chapter 7, also stated that Cumorah is in New York.
"Both the Nephite and Jaredite civilizations fought their final great wars of extinction at and near the Hill Cumorah (or Ramah as the Jaredites termed it), which hill is located between Palmyra and Manchester in the western part of the State of New York.

“Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery and many of the early brethren, who were familiar with all the circumstances attending the coming forth of the Book of Mormon in this dispensation, have left us a pointed testimony as to the identity and location of Cumorah or Ramah.”(Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, page 174-175, Bookcraft 1966)

"This time it will have to do with so important a matter as a war of extinction of two peoples, the Nephites and the Jaredites, on the self same battle site, with the same ‘hill’ marking the axis of military movements. By the Nephites this ‘hill’ was called the ‘Hill Cumorah,’ by the Jaredites the ‘Hill Ramah’; it was that same ‘hill,’ in which the Nephite records were deposited by Mormon and Moroni, and from which Joseph Smith obtained the Book of Mormon, therefore the ‘Mormon Hill,’ of today—since the coming forth of the Book of Mormon—near Palmyra, New York. (B.H. Roberts, Studies of the Book of Mormon, p.277)

 

[TexanKnight]

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
Office of the First Presidency
Salt Lake City, Utah 84150

October 16, 1990

Bishop Darrel L. Brooks
Moore Ward
Oklahoma City Oklahoma South Stake
1000 Windemere
Moore, OK 73160

Dear Bishop Brooks:

I have been asked to forward to you for acknowledgment and handling the enclosed copy of a letter to President Gordon B. Hinckley from Ronnie Sparks of your ward.  Brother Sparks inquired about the location of the Hill Cumorah mentioned in the Book of Mormon, where the last battle between the Nephites and Lamanites took place.

The Church has long maintained, as attested to by references in the writings of General Authorities, that the Hill Cumorah in western New York state is the same as referenced in the Book of Mormon.

The Brethren appreciate your assistance in responding to this inquiry, and asked that you convey to Brother Sparks their commendation for his gospel study.

Sincerely yours,
(signed)
F. Michael Watson
Secretary to the First Presidency

 

[TexanKnight]

I am so glad Tom calls ALL of thse prophets and leaders wrong. I am glad the lack of any evidence has caused the lds church to back away from such definitive proclamations regarding Cumorah.

If there was nothing else that proves the lds "church is led by false prophets, this is it.

And Tom ties it all up for us very nicely.

 

[TOmNossor]

You are rejecting the position of Joseph Smith; the founder of Mormonism. Because you can not defend Joseph Smith’s lie, you must reject it. Yet, it is still the lie that is the foundation of Mormonism.

The lie that is the foundation of your rejection of the evidence I provided is ridiculous.
It goes like this:
· Joseph Smith is the author of the BOM (not true).
· If Joseph Smith was the author the consistent geography presented in the book must correspond to some consistent geography Joseph Smith would know. (a reasonable thought).
· Joseph Smith evidence MOST of the time that he thought the BOM took place in North and South America with the Hill Cumorah being in NY. (a true statement when “MOST” is added).
· Therefore if we cannot find the BOM fitting the hemispheric geography then it is not true and we needn’t look any further (built upon the above).

The problem is that Joseph Smith was not the author of the BOM. No 18th century man could have written about Mesoamerica and Ancient Israel. The fact that Joseph Smith was ignorant of how BOM geography fits into the world, just shows he was not the author. The fact that the evidence I provide is compelling leads you to dismiss it out of hand. I do not dismiss it and I find it is precisely what this thread asks for “Archeological Evidence for the BOM.”

And, Joseph Smith and all LDS prophets have consistently embraced the Old World geography and archeological evidence I offer. I will repeat three things for you (the first being Old World geography).

Jerusalem, Nahom, Bountiful. They fit extraordinarily well with Lehi’s journey. They are located on the Frankincense trail. The presence of the Valley of Lemuel and the River of Laman on the voyage from Jerusalem to Bountiful. The presence of Nahom with alter inscription. Then the “turn east” and ultimate arrival at the fertile place, Bountiful. It should be noted that Jerusalem and Nahom are the only places Lehi doesn’t name on his own, but the valley, river, and lush green place are exactly where they should be relative to Jerusalem and Nahom. How did the author of the BOM know this if he didn’t have supernatural access to some ancient record?

The BOM also speaks rather directly of a city that used cement, in the presence of lots of water and in the absence of trees Helaman 3:9-11. This, once thought to be an anachronism (albeit an anachronism unlikely to have been produced by an 1830’s fellow from upstate NY), has a rather precise point of contact with Mesoamerica. Teotihuacan. How would some 1830’s fellow (or fellows) in NY know this?

Finally, the description of a specific type of volcanic activity that occurred in the right place and the right time. Nobody in NY would know much about volcanos or their presence in Mesoamerica. How did this get in the book?

The rest of Gartner’s list is interesting too, I just pick out these three.
Charity, TOm

 

[JHow]

After 1815 Tambora eruption people in NY would definitely know something about the effects of volcanoes.

 

[TOmNossor]

After 1815 Tambora eruption people in NY would definitely know something about the effects of volcanoes.

The volcanic description in the BOM are far more detailed than the experience in NY from “the year without a summer.” While 10 year old Joseph would have heard of volcanos, it is unlikely he would have come in contact with detailed description.
Even if he had come in contact with detailed descriptions of the Tambora’s eruption, it was not similar in a number of ways described in the BOM. If Tambora was a model for BOM volcanic activity, the descriptions would be very different than they are even if Joseph Smith was an eye witness of Tambora.
See here for the specific “ring of fire” volcanic events present in Mesoamerica and described in the BOM:
byustudies.byu.edu/PDFViewer.aspx?title=hidden&linkURL=37.3KowallisThirty-834b7be4-2825-4ef9-9c33-fbc1b620e6dd.pdf
There have also been “Ice Core” studies to date a large volcanic eruption to the correct time from the BOM.

So, I am certain Joseph Smith knew what a volcano was. What I suggest is that the detailed description is beyond the experience of him or anyone living in upstate NY. And even if some Tambora fellow moved to NY, the placing of the “ring of fire” volcano activity in the right place and right time in the BOM is more than just describing volcano’s in general (and specifically an experience of Tambora).

Charity, TOm

 

[Stephen168]

The lie that is the foundation of your rejection of the evidence I provided is ridiculous.
It goes like this:
• Joseph Smith is the author of the BOM (not true).
• If Joseph Smith was the author the consistent geography presented in the book must correspond to some consistent geography Joseph Smith would know. (a reasonable thought).
• Joseph Smith evidence MOST of the time that he thought the BOM took place in North and South America with the Hill Cumorah being in NY. (a true statement when “MOST” is added).
• if we cannot find the BOM fitting the hemispheric geography then it is not true and we needn’t look any further (built upon the above).
The problem is that Joseph Smith was not the author of the BOM. No 18th century man could have written about Mesoamerica and Ancient Israel. The fact that Joseph Smith was ignorant of how BOM geography fits into the world, just shows he was not the author.

No I’ll repeat:

Of course, you don’t think he lied and I never claimed Smith to be the author.

1. Joseph Smith claimed the BofM was the story of the origin of the American Indians
2. Anthropology and biology prove Joseph Smith was wrong.
3. Joseph Smith created the lie or is repeating the lie.
4. Joseph Smith knew the origins of the Book of Mormon.
5. Therefore Joseph Smith created the lie as part of his claim as a ‘prophet’

1,2,4) are facts. In the 1970’s, I think Mormons could hold out for the ‘proof they haven’t found.’ But know there is just too much proof against the Book of Mormon being true; as claimed by Joseph Smith.

Pearl of Great Price:

He said there was a abook deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang.

Source means where something starts, originates, comes from. Joseph Smith claims the Book of Mormon tells the story of the origin of the people of America. It is not a story about some of them, but the origin, the source.
The Wentworth Letter by Joseph Smith:

In this important and interesting book the history of ancient America is unfolded, from its first settlement by a colony that came from the Tower of Babel at the confusion of languages to the beginning of the fifth century of the Christian era. We are informed by these records that America in ancient times has been inhabited by two distinct races of people. The first were called Jaredites and came directly from the Tower of Babel. The second race came directly from the city of Jerusalem about six hundred years before Christ. They were principally Israelites of the descendants of Joseph. The Jaredites were destroyed about the time that the Israelites came from Jerusalem, who succeeded them in the inheritance of the country. The principal nation of the second race fell in battle towards the close of the fourth century. The remnant are the Indians that now inhabit this country.

The is all an anthropologist needs to know about the BoM to know it is not true; as defined by Joseph Smith.

Coe wrote, “The bare facts of the matter are that nothing, absolutely nothing, has ever shown up in any New World excavation which would suggest to a dispassionate observer that the Book of Mormon, as claimed by Joseph Smith, is a historical document relating to the history of early migrants to our hemisphere.”

 

[TOmNossor]

I am so glad Tom calls ALL of thse prophets and leaders wrong. I am glad the lack of any evidence has caused the lds church to back away from such definitive proclamations regarding Cumorah.

If there was nothing else that proves the lds "church is led by false prophets, this is it.

And Tom ties it all up for us very nicely.
TK,
I have no idea why Catholics on this site do not ask you to stop misrepresenting me and speaking of the leaders of my church the way you do.
But…
Let me say, I will not look to the prophets of the CoJCoLDS for knowledge on the interplay of magnetron voltages used to excite a plasma and cure Lithographic resists (I actually thought about using my previous job in nuclear power, but I would seek Richard G. Scott’s opinion on that).
I will look to LDS prophets for a message at least 2 times a year concern what God wants me to focus on with respect to improving my Christian walk.

The disconnect between the prophet who describes the stopping of the Sun and Moon’s travel in the sky poorly or the geography of the BOM poorly AND the prophet who teaches me about my Christian walk has never been troubling to me.

I am sorry this has caused you to look away from God’s messengers, but I understand your position.
Charity, TOm

 

[PaulDupre1]

Tom,

If the BoM story happened in a limited geography in Mesoamerica, then why did the Nephites and Lamanites travel thousands of miles to have a battle at the hill Cumorah?

If you say that the Cumorah in New York is not the Cumorah where the Jaredite and Nephite/Lamanite battles took place in the BoM, then please explain why Moroni traveled thousands of miles to bury the plates there?

Thanks,
Paul

 

[TexanKnight]

Tom: The lie that is the foundation of your rejection of the evidence I provided is ridiculous.
It goes like this:
· Joseph Smith is the author of the BOM (not true).

Agreed. He used several sources to copy from and several people to help him

Tom: · If Joseph Smith was the author the consistent geography presented in the book must correspond to some consistent geography Joseph Smith would know. (a reasonable thought).

Not true. People wrote fiction all the time. And since no one is sure where the land is he wrote about, it is a moot point

Tom: · Joseph Smith evidence MOST of the time that he thought the BOM took place in North and South America with the Hill Cumorah being in NY. (a true statement when “MOST” is added).
· Therefore if we cannot find the BOM fitting the hemispheric geography then it is not true and we needn’t look any further (built upon the above).

The fact no one has any clue where this abundant land is located and where all these hundreds of thousand of people were killed speaks for itself. Res Ipsa Loquiter

Tom: The problem is that Joseph Smith was not the author of the BOM. No 18th century man could have written about Mesoamerica and Ancient Israel.

And how can you prove that? You can’t. But guess what? He wrote about Isreal using the Bible and there is no proof he wrote about Mesoamerican since we have no idea where the land is and most of he claimed never esisted when he claimed it did. Your point is simply fallacious

Tom: The fact that Joseph Smith was ignorant of how BOM geography fits into the world, just shows he was not the author. The fact that the evidence I provide is compelling leads you to dismiss it out of hand. I do not dismiss it and I find it is precisely what this thread asks for “Archeological Evidence for the BOM.”

Ah…so if you can;t prove your point, then you MUST claim the point does not really exist. Nice try.

And again, you have been, on this thread, thoroughly refuted

 

[Stephen168]

TK,
I have no idea why Catholics on this site do not ask you to stop misrepresenting me and speaking of the leaders of my church the way you do.
But…
Let me say, I will not look to the prophets of the CoJCoLDS for knowledge on the interplay of magnetron voltages used to excite a plasma and cure Lithographic resists (I actually thought about using my previous job in nuclear power, but I would seek Richard G. Scott’s opinion on that).
I will look to LDS prophets for a message at least 2 times a year concern what God wants me to focus on with respect to improving my Christian walk.

The disconnect between the prophet who describes the stopping of the Sun and Moon’s travel in the sky poorly or the geography of the BOM poorly AND the prophet who teaches me about my Christian walk has never been troubling to me.

I am sorry this has caused you to look away from God’s messengers, but I understand your position.
Charity, TOm

Ezra Taft Benson:

In conclusion let us summarize this grand key, these “Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet”, for our salvation depends on them.

1. The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.
2. The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works.
3. The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.
4. The prophet will never lead the church astray.
5. The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time.
6. The prophet does not have to say “Thus Saith the Lord,” to give us scripture.
7. The prophet tells us what we need to know, not always what we want to know.
8. The prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning.
9. The prophet can receive revelation on any matter, temporal or spiritual.
10. The prophet may advise on civic matters.
11. The two groups who have the greatest difficulty in following the prophet are theproud who are learned and the proud who are rich.
12. The prophet will not necessarily be popular with the world or the worldly.
13. The prophet and his counselors make up the First Presidency—the highest quorum in the Church.
14. The prophet and the presidency—the living prophet and the First Presidency—follow them and be blessed—reject them and suffer.

 

[TexanKnight]

I have no idea why Catholics on this site do not ask you to stop misrepresenting me and speaking of the leaders of my church the way you do.

LOLOLOL…let me get this straight…YOU say the NY Cumorah is not THE Cumorah…I post many quotes from YOUR leaders that say it is…and I am somehow misrepresenting you? You call them wrong and I am misrepresenting you. That is awesome!

But…
Let me say, I will not look to the prophets of the CoJCoLDS for knowledge on the interplay of magnetron voltages used to excite a plasma and cure Lithographic resists (I actually thought about using my previous job in nuclear power, but I would seek Richard G. Scott’s opinion on that).

Yeah…why would God, when He speaks to them, ever tell them the truth about this stuff? Either your “prophets” talk to God, or they don’t. You cannot have it both ways. You can’t say js did not have any knowledge of the things he wrote in b of m, but that he wrote it anyway, then claim that since they did not know about all your geological info then they are allowed to misrepresent God when they make claims about Cumorah. If you want to call your prophets wrong I am all for it. Thank you

I will look to LDS prophets for a message at least 2 times a year concern what God wants me to focus on with respect to improving my Christian walk.

Ah…NOW we are getting somewhere. IN the lds church, you just wanna pick and choose what you will accept from your “prophets”? Further proof it is a false church. Thank you

The disconnect between the prophet who describes the stopping of the Sun and Moon’s travel in the sky poorly or the geography of the BOM poorly AND the prophet who teaches me about my Christian walk has never been troubling to me.

Ah…the usual last resort of the lost…compare the alleged prophets who spoke English living in this culture with those thousands of years ago in a different language and culture. I am fine with you admitting your alleged prophets have no clue and what they say can’t be trusted

I am sorry this has caused you to look away from God’s messengers, but I understand your position.

lol…I am the only one in this dialogue between us who actually listened to God. You listen to alleged prophets…or, at least you do when you want to…the rest of the time, they are just wrong.

Charity, TOm

 

[TexanKnight]

Stephen, Tom will just say that Benson was wrong and he does not have to listen to him…

 

[TOmNossor]

No I’ll repeat:

Source means where something starts, originates, comes from. Joseph Smith claims the Book of Mormon tells the story of the origin of the people of America. It is not a story about some of them, but the origin, the source.

Of course, you don’t think he lied and I never claimed Smith to be the author.

1. Joseph Smith claimed the BofM was the story of the origin of the American Indians
2. Anthropology and biology prove Joseph Smith was wrong.
3. Joseph Smith created the lie or is repeating the lie.
4. Joseph Smith knew the origins of the Book of Mormon.
5. Therefore Joseph Smith created the lie as part of his claim as a ‘prophet’

1,2,4) are facts. In the 1970’s, I think Mormons could hold out for the ‘proof they haven’t found.’ But know there is just too much proof against the Book of Mormon being true; as claimed by Joseph Smith.

The is all an anthropologist needs to know about the BoM to know it is not true; as defined by Joseph Smith.
I think you provide some solid reasoning with only a few holes.
First, in 1970 numerous LDS scholars had already dismissed the view of the BOM you espouse. Brigham Young’s son rejected that view and Joseph Smith in 1842 offer thoughts that were inconsistent with that view.
The rejection of the view you and Joseph Smith most frequently offered preceded 1970 and was born of reading the BOM not the advance of science.

Your #1. I think is a true statement. There were times when I think Joseph Smith was quite convinced of #1.
If your #2 is taken to mean that anthropology and biology prove that all of the ancestry of all of the Indians in North and South America trace to a migration of 30 or so folks in 600BC from Jerusalem, it is also true (and as I acknowledge in #1, I think Joseph sometimes thought that was what was the case, even though I think the BOM does not teach this and thus Joseph Smith misunderstood some of the geographical and anthropological data in the BOM). There are less bold claims that would be true too. However a very limited claim that is true too, “Anthropology and biology do not prove that 30 or so folks migrated from Jerusalem and inserted themselves into a population of many hundreds of thousands of folks already in South America.” This is a fact that Southerton the most famous biologist who has spoken on this acknowledges.
Your #3 could only be true if Joseph Smith or those who created your version of #1&#2 KNEW they were spreading a falsehood. This is beyond the scope of an archeology discussion, but I do not think there is evidence that they thought they were lying.
Your #4 is interesting. Joseph Smith knew that he dictated to scribes the BOM. Fraud or not, Joseph Smith knew something of the source of the dictation. That does not mean that Joseph Smith had intimate knowledge of the pre-Joseph Smith source of the BOM.
And due to my problems with 1-4 I do not think your conclusion 5 is proven.

But, how does 1-5 explain:
Jerusalem, Nahom, Bountiful. They fit extraordinarily well with Lehi’s journey. They are located on the Frankincense trail. The presence of the Valley of Lemuel and the River of Laman on the voyage from Jerusalem to Bountiful. The presence of Nahom with alter inscription. Then the “turn east” and ultimate arrival at the fertile place, Bountiful. It should be noted that Jerusalem and Nahom are the only places Lehi doesn’t name on his own, but the valley, river, and lush green place are exactly where they should be relative to Jerusalem and Nahom. How did the author of the BOM know this if he didn’t have supernatural access to some ancient record?

The BOM also speaks rather directly of a city that used cement, in the presence of lots of water and in the absence of trees Helaman 3:9-11. This, once thought to be an anachronism (albeit an anachronism unlikely to have been produced by an 1830’s fellow from upstate NY), has a rather precise point of contact with Mesoamerica. Teotihuacan. How would some 1830’s fellow (or fellows) in NY know this?

Finally, the description of a specific type of volcanic activity that occurred in the right place and the right time. Nobody in NY would know much about volcanos or their presence in Mesoamerica. How did this get in the book?

In light of the above three things and many others I think the alternate readings of 1-4 are better fits for the data.
Charity, TOm

 

[JHow]

Isn’t ETB firmly in the dead prophet category now? Ergo, easily dismissed?