Cumorah

  • Thread starter Thread starter SirThomasMore
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
dianaiad said:
Because of the nature of the Book of Mormon, nobody is going to be offering anything that MIGHT support it as proof of it in any peer reviewed jounal.
Click to expand...
You mean the nature of it having been written by Joseph Smith with no basis in fact whatsoever? At least we agree on that, then.
dianaiad said:
Sorry, but no, it’s not. there is no proof to the contrary. There simply is little proof positive FOR it. Certainly not to the extent of proving that the BoM is a validly true archeological guide book to the ancient Americas.
Click to expand...
I agree here; the New Testament continually referenced in a book written some 2,200 years before the one that it appears to be quoting, the fact that no such langauge as “Deformed Egyptian” has ever existed outside of Mormonism, that no correlation (language, culture, or religion) between the Nephites and Lamanites and any Meso-American or Native American culture has ever been found, that the BOM clearly contradicts modern Mormonism on several important points, and that Joseph Smith never once got a single prophecy correct really are proof for Mormonism being correct. Silly anti-Mormons.
 
lax16 said:
  1. Parker - When I read this comment, it says to me that you have to believe that people who enjoy or are enriched through Biblical archaeology are somehow lacking in a true understanding of God and should somehow be looked down upon.
    How about people who feel God when hiking in the mountains or bird watching? Are they lacking something too?
1.5) We have all heard of people who have had a conversion due to visiting the holy sites in Israel, reading the ECF, had a near-death experience…God knows we are all different in our learning styles and in what inspires us. Don’t you think God put those experiences into the lives of people so that they would grow closer to him?
  1. But Parker, you are using the BoM to defend the BoM. Let’s face it, anyone can interpret scripture to defend their position!
  2. That is one way to look at it. But try looking at it from another angle. Don’t you think God is trying to bring His people to Him, not trying to figure out ways to trick them?
  3. **Is somebody currently conducting DNA and linguistics studies on every single tribal group in the New World? If so, please provide the information showing that the LDS church is actively pursuing this. **
Click to expand...
Lax16,
  1. No–I made an either/or observation. Answering the either/or from a personal perspective would mean a person really looks into their heart and checks their motives and their rationale. When Peter said he knew Jesus is the Christ, the Savior said he knew it because the Father had told him. That is what personal revelation is all about, and it did not require an archeological find by Peter to know that Jesus is the promised Messiah. (But he had studied the writings of earlier prophets, and thus knew the prophecies and knew what his inner soul was telling him as he listened to Jesus.) People who seek knowledge from God, don’t need archeology to get an answer from Him.
Some people draw closer to God by observing nature, and hopefully when they do that they are also meditating on the meaning of life, and hopefully loving God and the world around them and thus God can speak to them with personal insights if they’re “listening”. But everyone who goes out in nature doesn’t necessarily “find God”. They have to be in the right frame of mind, and hopefully have brought a sense of humility and faith with them if they want a spiritual experience.

1.5) No, actually–I don’t.
  1. The Bible is a means of God “speaking” to humankind. If you want a Biblical source for figuring out that God does not build faith by providing physical evidences, read 1 Corinthians 2 thoroughly.
What those passages showed is that God uses the earth, which He created, for His purposes. In other words, the earth itself is cooperative with the purposes of God.
  1. If a person reads the New Testament looking for the most important qualities God wants humankind to develop in order to draw closer to Him and to be more like Christ in their actions, then I don’t think they will have a hard time figuring out that just because God may not answer their every whim or desire for physical evidence of His communication and love for humankind, does not mean He is “trying to trick them.” How about that He is trying to teach them, but not by an easy “proof” or by a forced “now you’ve got to believe because of the strong and irrefutable evidence”? How about that He may have greater motives than whether someone joins a particular church?
  2. I didn’t mean the LDS church is pursuing that, at all. Some people (not LDS, but with genuine interest in these matters) have tried to do that over the years, but have found it was far too complicated and have never been successful. You can read about some studies on the internet through Google searches.
 
Which brings us back to the central question of the thread:

If the Hill Cumorah area in New York is the one and only geographical spot that the LDS church knows for sure had lots of Jaredite/Nephite/Lamanite activity and millions of people died in battle thereabouts, then WHY don’t they excavate?

They don’t have to hang around waiting for their god to stop hiding the evidence, they can dig it up for themselves. WHY DON’T THEY DO IT?

We excavate bible sites and it does not destroy anyone’s faith. In fact it gives great understanding of the historical and cultural milieu in which the events took place, increasing our bond with the ancient faithful. That is good for faith.

There is absolutely no valid excuse for the LDS not excavating the Cumorah area.

Unless, of course, their leaders already know that there is nothing to find. 😉
 
Javl said:
Sorry Parker, but “cursing the land” is a weak excuse and does not hold water. Our God “cursed the land” of Sodom and Gommorah ( Gen 19:24-29 ) by utterly destroying them, and yet archaeology has discovered that these were actual cities that were totally destroyed by some cataclysmic event.

Shalom Aleichem
Click to expand...
JAVL,
Yes, but people who just need “proof” that God exists or that those Old Testament events happened, have what they need and thus have what they want and are at the level of spirituality that they have desired in their life.

The Book of Mormon is provided only for those with a desire to learn about other kinds of “proofs” than physical evidences of God and His communication to humankind. For some people, they don’t want that–they are content with what they have. Fine–they have a perfect match between their desires and what they receive, just as Jesus promised they would (“seek and ye shall find”). The Bible gives them all the truths they need and want. For them, the Book of Mormon could still be untouched and untranslated and still be buried in the ground, and Isaiah 29:18 would have no meaning to them–and they would be completely content with their knowledge of God and of His purposes in their life. That is their choice. It is not an “all-or-nothing” circumstance.
 
ParkerD said:
JAVL,
Yes, but people who just need “proof” that God exists or that those Old Testament events happened, have what they need and thus have what they want and are at the level of spirituality that they have desired in their life.
Click to expand...
And those Mormons who just want to check their brains at the door have what they want.
 
MormonHero said:
Jesus told us to go and spread the Gospel, not to go and become archaeologists. (Not that there’s anything wrong with becoming an archaeologist.)
Click to expand...
So spreading the Gospel and archaeology are mutually exclusive?
 
MormonHero said:
Jesus told us to go and spread the Gospel, not to go and become archaeologists. (Not that there’s anything wrong with becoming an archaeologist.)
Click to expand...
You don’t need to be in an intellectual vacuum to spread the gospel, nor do you need to bury your talent (your brain) in the ground to be a believer.
 
MormonHero said:
Archaeology is great, which is why there is nothing wrong with it.
Click to expand...
Therefore your response to “WHY don’t they excavate?” doesn’t address the issue (since it’s clear that spreading the Gospel and archaeology are not mutually exclusive).

So we’re back to the question.
 
CatholicGuyNY said:
Therefore your response to “WHY don’t they excavate?” doesn’t address the issue (since it’s clear that spreading the Gospel and archaeology are not mutually exclusive).
Click to expand...
Spreading the gospel and colonizing Greenland are not mutually exclusive either, but I doubt Greenland is of much concern.
 
MormonHero said:
Spreading the gospel and colonizing Greenland are not mutually exclusive either, but I doubt Greenland is of much concern.
Click to expand...
Except we’re not talking about archaeology as some vague entity, but specifically archaeology as it relates to the Book of Mormon.

Therefore, your attempted analogy is not relevant.
 
MormonHero said:
Which Indian tribes are mentioned in the BoM?
Click to expand...
None at all. The intro, however, used to state that the Lamanites were the ‘principle’ ancestor of the American Indian, and it now states that they are ‘among the ancestors.’ Small change, but a big shift in the church’s position.
 
ParkerD said:
Lax16,
  1. No–I made an either/or observation. Answering the either/or from a personal perspective would mean a person really looks into their heart and checks their motives and their rationale. When Peter said he knew Jesus is the Christ, the Savior said he knew it because the Father had told him. That is what personal revelation is all about, and it did not require an archeological find by Peter to know that Jesus is the promised Messiah. (But he had studied the writings of earlier prophets, and thus knew the prophecies and knew what his inner soul was telling him as he listened to Jesus.) People who seek knowledge from God, don’t need archeology to get an answer from Him.
**There are many ways for people to come about having a personal revelation. And absolutely, people have come to know God through archaeology and other discoveries. I know staunch non-believers who are very intrigued by the Shroud of Turin.
I am humbled by seeing the church used by early Christians that needed a tunnel to escape because of persecution. I know of a man who is very skeptical about religion and recently went on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land. His wife reports he got more out of the trip than she did and feels he is beginning to get in touch with his spirituality. **

Some people draw closer to God by observing nature, and hopefully when they do that they are also meditating on the meaning of life, and hopefully loving God and the world around them and thus God can speak to them with personal insights if they’re “listening”. But everyone who goes out in nature doesn’t necessarily “find God”. They have to be in the right frame of mind, and hopefully have brought a sense of humility and faith with them if they want a spiritual experience.

I never meant that everyone out in nature finds God. My point is, there is one guy who can feel closer to God while on a hike and another guy who likes to stay home and watch t.v. and might see something on EWTN that moves him to get to know God better.
We are all different and God knows it.

1.5) No, actually–I don’t.

I think you would if they became Mormon.
  1. The Bible is a means of God “speaking” to humankind. If you want a Biblical source for figuring out that God does not build faith by providing physical evidences, read 1 Corinthians 2 thoroughly.
What those passages showed is that God uses the earth, which He created, for His purposes. In other words, the earth itself is cooperative with the purposes of God.

**Yes, the Bible is ONE of the ways God speaks to mankind. But, let’s face it, Parker not everyone loves reading the Bible as much as you and God knows that! **
  1. If a person reads the New Testament looking for the most important qualities God wants humankind to develop in order to draw closer to Him and to be more like Christ in their actions, then I don’t think they will have a hard time figuring out that just because God may not answer their every whim or desire for physical evidence of His communication and love for humankind, does not mean He is “trying to trick them.” How about that He is trying to teach them, but not by an easy “proof” or by a forced “now you’ve got to believe because of the strong and irrefutable evidence”? How about that He may have greater motives than whether someone joins a particular church?
Like I said before, many people are not Bible readers. However, they like to travel, meet new people, read good literature, cycle, etc etc etc. What if someone comes to Christ after reading C.S. Lewis? Is that good enough?
Parker, I would agree with you if God had not already provided all of us with so much evidence of the Old and New Testaments.
God’s only motive is that He wants us to be one together in His Church that He started 2000 years ago.
  1. I didn’t mean the LDS church is pursuing that, at all. Some people (not LDS, but with genuine interest in these matters) have tried to do that over the years, but have found it was far too complicated and have never been successful. You can read about some studies on the internet through Google searches.
Click to expand...
As aggressive as Mormons are with their missionary program, there is no way in heck they would not use DNA and archaeology to promote their efforts. If it would boost converts and the proof was there, the LDS church would be putting billions into excavating and DNA tracing instead of a shopping district across from the Salt Lake Temple.
 
CatholicGuyNY said:
Except we’re not talking about archaeology as some vague entity, but specifically archaeology as it relates to the Book of Mormon.
Click to expand...
I’m sure archaeologists in North America have had, and still have, plenty of opportunities to look for empirical data. It’s not as if Cumorah was the only inhabited region.
 
MormonHero said:
I’m sure archaeologists in North America have had, and still have, plenty of opportunities to look for empirical data. It’s not as if Cumorah was the only inhabited region.
Click to expand...
You’re right, but it’s a very important site for Mormonism, not only because some 2.5 million, yes million, people died there, but because it gives us a landmark from which to work.

Modern apologists want to play the hokey-pokey with it and pretend it’s here or there, but church elders who are in the know have definitively indicated where it is, which then doesn’t make any sense with the events described in the BOM being in Meso-America.
 
MormonHero said:
I’m sure archaeologists in North America have had, and still have, plenty of opportunities to look for empirical data. It’s not as if Cumorah was the only inhabited region.
Click to expand...
Cumorah is of course the topic of this thread.

Which brings us back to the question (that you seem to be ignoring with the deflections of the last few posts)-“WHY don’t they excavate?” Your original response, “Jesus told us to go and spread the Gospel, not to go and become archaeologists. (Not that there’s anything wrong with becoming an archaeologist.)” does not address that question, as we have seen.
 
ParkerD said:
JAVL,
Yes, but people who just need “proof” that God exists or that those Old Testament events happened, have what they need and thus have what they want and are at the level of spirituality that they have desired in their life.

**Is that because you believe we have already existed before and have earned our place in this world from our prior life? So people who have little or no faith are pre-destined to a life of no relationship with God?
That’s just creepy. **

The Book of Mormon is provided only for those with a desire to learn about other kinds of “proofs” than physical evidences of God and His communication to humankind. For some people, they don’t want that–they are content with what they have. Fine–they have a perfect match between their desires and what they receive, just as Jesus promised they would (“seek and ye shall find”). The Bible gives them all the truths they need and want. For them, the Book of Mormon could still be untouched and untranslated and still be buried in the ground, and Isaiah 29:18 would have no meaning to them–and they would be completely content with their knowledge of God and of His purposes in their life. That is their choice. It is not an “all-or-nothing” circumstance.
Click to expand...
God’s message is for all! It is not some sort of exclusive club - he came for sinners!!!
Many, many people do not have a Bible Parker or do not know Jesus because they come from a broken situation…and they did not choose it in another life.
Why does God tell us to go and be fishers of men if it was all pre-determined?

I hate to say this, but you are sounding…judgmental.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top