How come archeologists cannot find a trace of..?

[Jerusha]

Dang. I guess that makes me a prophet.

.

Obviously, since you are the most liberal LDS here, and occasionally are critical of LDS culture, you would fit that.

I need to do more research on the Olmec thing. I would not accept Wiki as an authority on the subject. You know perfectly well that there is a power struggle on LDS-related issues at Wiki.

 

[Stephen168]

Can anyone draw up how the Olmecs, Inca’s, Aztecs, and Mayans are related in any fashion to the stories in the BoM?

It seems the answer is no. A fiction can not be proved.

What actual data do you have other than “we’ll they are an ancient american civilization” or “they were on the same continent”?

It seems you have described the sum total of the evidence.

 

[Jerusha]

Even if the windigo were purely myth, one cannot deny that that myth was integrated into the BOM. We do know that there was a Norse colony on Greenland, which many geographers believe to be part of North America. I have discovered a timeline in the BOM that firmly links it with the chronology of the Norse colony.

 

[mfbukowski]

Obviously, since you are the most liberal LDS here, and occasionally are critical of LDS culture, you would fit that.

I need to do more research on the Olmec thing. I would not accept Wiki as an authority on the subject. You know perfectly well that there is a power struggle on LDS-related issues at Wiki.

Most liberal? Are you kidding me? Man, you wouldn’t believe it if we met. I know nobody more TBM than me.

 

[PaulDupre]

Concerning the dna evidence, the flap about that I think was because someone said all Indians were related to the Jews. As far as I can tell there is no one in authority who ever claimed that.

I already quoted Joseph Smith on the matter (see my post #302), but we would do well to hear from a more recent prophet, to make sure that this teaching was not confined to the 19th century. In a 1971 Ensign magazine article, Spencer W. Kimball declared:

“The term Lamanite includes all Indians and Indian mixtures, such as the Polynesians, the Guatemalans, the Peruvians, as well as the Sioux, the Apache, the Mohawk, the Navajo, and others… they are in all of the states of America from Tierra del Fuego all the way up to Point Barrows, and they are in nearly all the islands of the sea from Hawaii south to southern New Zealand… There are three stakes in Samoa and another is to be organized in those small Samoan islands. Four more stakes with Lamanite leaders… There are three stakes of Zion in Mexico City with Mexican leaders—Lamanite leaders. The stake presidencies, the bishops, the high council, the auxiliary leaders—everybody, with one or two exceptions— are Lamanites. In Monterrey, Mexico, in Guatemala, in Lima, in New Zealand, and elsewhere we have stakes of Zion with all their appropriate leaders.”

• “Of Royal Blood,” Ensign, July 1971, p.7.

 

[Jerusha]

Most liberal? Are you kidding me? Man, you wouldn’t believe it if we met. I know nobody more TBM than me.

LOL!! Well, it certainly takes a lot of dedication to your faith to know as much of the truth about it as you do, and still remain in it.

 

[PaulDupre]

I hope a Mormon will respond to my post #343.

 

[ricko]

Paul, your post #343 is unbelievable!!!

Mormons, please respond to post #343

 

[phantasm]

How come archeologists cannot find a trace of one single civilization that the Mormon prophet claimed was given to him on the golden [and self destructing] tablets??

Not a single piece of pottery. Not a single dwelling place, not a single burial, not a trace - not a bit of anything that he claimed ever existed.

Care to explain that anyone?

Nor can they find any evidence of the Jews wandering the desert for 40 years.

People who live in glass houses, shouldn’t throw stones.

 

[Stephen168]

Nor can they find any evidence of the Jews wandering the desert for 40 years.

People who live in glass houses, shouldn’t throw stones.

You have just summarized the Mormon position; which is why they are a heartbeat away from being atheists, like you.
It would also seem that you have not read any of the thread before you posted.

 

[mfbukowski]

I already quoted Joseph Smith on the matter (see my post #302), but we would do well to hear from a more recent prophet, to make sure that this teaching was not confined to the 19th century. In a 1971 Ensign magazine article, Spencer W. Kimball declared:

There is nothing to respond to. Yes, those are “Lamanites” in the BOM usage of the term. So? You are not getting this at all are you? You should listen more and argue less.

Notice that I have been saying that evidence of Lamanites includes evidence of the Maya Aztecs Incas Olmecs etc? They are “Indians” which is no longer a PC term, surplanted by Native Americans. Native Americans are mixtures of both Nephites and Lamanites as well as asians, vikings, africans, and who knows what else. In other words they are humans. If you knew your genealogy you would be surprised. Every one of us is made up of countless lines of nationalities etc. Your point?

The quote says nothing like: “all Lamanites are direct descendents of Jews” You guys are so quick to jump at stuff that you don’t or can’t think about what it says. And if it did say that, I would say that he was mistaken. So? Since when is Spencer Kimball a population geneticist?

That is why this whole thread is a joke. It’s a thread on how there is no arcaeological evidence for pre-columbian peoples. I think it is clear the whole premise is a joke but none of you even get that. It is like the tracts on this site: “Oh- we’ve got em now!” when they are just shams and strawmen. It’s just dumb

 

[mfbukowski]

You have just summarized the Mormon position; which is why they are a heartbeat away from being atheists, like you.

Nah, what you don’t understand is that all religion requires faith. Atheism requires more faith than anyother religion actually, because you can’t prove a negative. Proof of the proposition “God does not exist” requires total faith because it can never ever ever be proven. Atheists just put their faith in what they think is science, but faith is faith: Belief in what is unprovable.

The problem is that Catholics are often looking for evidence that isn’t there instead of relying on faith and what God reveals to them personally.

 

[LAMBOFGODGIRLY]

Paul does not say that baptisms for the dead are either bad or good. He just uses it as a way to make an argument for the resurrection. If someone says that they don’t believe Christ died for us, I could ask them why they drink grape juice or water and bread at Church. That doesn’t prove or disprove that the eating of bread and water/grape juice is bad. It’s just used to make a point.

Basically, it’s continued revelation. Paul includes revelations in his epistles to various peoples that are not found in the four Gospels with direct dialogue from Jesus, nor found in the Old Testament. Latter-day Saints believe in the same concept from modern day prophets. Deut. 4:2 of the Old Testament says not to add or take away from. Does that mean God can’t expand or clarify in the New Testament? Of course not.

The reason behind baptisms for the dead is Latter-day Saints believe we are saved by the Atonement and Grace of Jesus Christ, but that we need to do our part by having faith and making an effort to do what God wants, and also to be baptized. If a bushman in Africa dies without having a chance and would have accepted if he/she did have a chance, since God is both merciful and just, that’s what baptisms for the dead are for. Contrary what some say, it’s not forced on you if you die. It’s actually an offer that you can accept or reject.

I personally don’t think they would be able to get into contact with me for that discussion. I think God has a handle on things once you die. He doesn’t need us to step in on his behalf. The only thing we should be doing is praying that their souls go to heaven, and offering up our sufferings for the people in purgatory. But we don’t make contact with them, we simply let God, Jesus, saints, and Mary know what our intentions are for our suffering offer, and then ask that they pray for them as well.

 

[sambos671]

There is nothing to respond to. Yes, those are “Lamanites” in the BOM usage of the term. So? You are not getting this at all are you? You should listen more and argue less.

Notice that I have been saying that evidence of Lamanites includes evidence of the Maya Aztecs Incas Olmecs etc? They are “Indians” which is no longer a PC term, surplanted by Native Americans. Native Americans are mixtures of both Nephites and Lamanites as well as asians, vikings, africans, and who knows what else. In other words they are humans. If you knew your genealogy you would be surprised. Every one of us is made up of countless lines of nationalities etc. Your point?

The quote says nothing like: “all Lamanites are direct descendents of Jews” You guys are so quick to jump at stuff that you don’t or can’t think about what it says. And if it did say that, I would say that he was mistaken. So? Since when is Spencer Kimball a population geneticist?

That is why this whole thread is a joke. It’s a thread on how there is no arcaeological evidence for pre-columbian peoples. I think it is clear the whole premise is a joke but none of you even get that. It is like the tracts on this site: “Oh- we’ve got em now!” when they are just shams and strawmen. It’s just dumb

Well, the BOS 6:71 states emphatically that the american natives were not decended from the Jews or the Vikings but were of Asian decent that migrated across the land bridge to Alaska and settled throughout the Contenant.

6:71 Yea, of olde hath the East People went unto a new place. Verily, I saith unto thee that even they found their way across the ice and many torments and established the land across the greatest sea. They sought not God but the great spirit of their immagination. They worshiped the sun, the dog, and were lovers of blood. At the time of their consumation the Lord would plague them with Men of the West and lo …

Now I get why Joseph Smith did it. It’s a lot of fun. I wonder if I could earn some cash along the way…

 

[PaulDupre]

There is nothing to respond to. Yes, those are “Lamanites” in the BOM usage of the term. So? You are not getting this at all are you?

I think you are the one who is not getting it. The BOM usage of the term Lamanite is those who descended from Laman (and Lemuel) the son of Lehi, and perhaps some Nephites who defected to the Lamanites. There is absolutely no evidence in the BOM for any non-Lehite ever being called a Lamanite, or the existence of any non-Lehites in the Americas at that time.

I have asked you for this internal evidence repeatedly, but you have been unable to provide a single passage that speaks of any other civilizations or cultures existing at the same time as the Nephites/Lamanites. All you keep giving is this opinion, that you pulled out of some orifice, that the people of Lehi must have intermarried with indiginous peoples. But there is nothing in the BOM to indicate that. You and the other desperate revisionists just made that up so as to have some rejoinder to the DNA evidence and now you believe it is really in the BOM (though you can’t say where). The self-deception practiced by Mormons is mind-boggling.

 

[Jerusha]

Well, the BOS 6:71 states emphatically that the american natives were not decended from the Jews or the Vikings but were of Asian decent that migrated across the land bridge to Alaska and settled throughout the Contenant. Now I get why Joseph Smith did it. It’s a lot of fun. I wonder if I could earn some cash along the way…

I think the whole bunch of them had fun with it. Solomon spalding included!!

 

[PaulDupre]

Well, the BOS 6:71 states emphatically that the american natives were not decended from the Jews or the Vikings but were of Asian decent that migrated across the land bridge to Alaska and settled throughout the Contenant.

Now I get why Joseph Smith did it. It’s a lot of fun. I wonder if I could earn some cash along the way…

If you want a better (and far more entertaining) explanation of why the Amerindians are descended from Asians, read The Book of Zelph: Another Testament of the Book of Mormon.

 

[ricko]

My Mormon friends, you keep gasping for any straw to prove the BOM. Ski, you’re right. It’s impossible to prove a negative. How do you prove to a Mormon that the cities of the BOM never existed? If only I could find that golden book that says, “The cities and peoples of the Book of Mormon never existed”

 

[Stephen168]

Nah, what you don’t understand is that all religion requires faith. Atheism requires more faith than anyother religion actually, because you can’t prove a negative. Proof of the proposition “God does not exist” requires total faith because it can never ever ever be proven. Atheists just put their faith in what they think is science, but faith is faith: Belief in what is unprovable.

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913):

Fool - 1. One destitute of reason, or of the common powers of understanding; an idiot; a natural.

 

[sambos671]

If you want a better (and far more entertaining) explanation of why the Amerindians are descended from Asians, read The Book of Zelph: Another Testament of the Book of Mormon.

That was actually very funny. I like his “critics” comments.