How come archeologists cannot find a trace of..?

[ricko]

Critical thinking varies according to the motivation underlying it. When grounded in selfish motives, it is often manifested in the skillful manipulation of ideas in service of one’’s own, or one’s groups’’, vested interest. As such it is typically intellectually flawed, however pragmatically successful it might be. When grounded in fairmindedness and intellectual integrity, it is typically of a higher order intellectually, though subject to the charge of “idealism” by those habituated to its selfish use.

I believe the above is the critical thinking you are applying. If the BOM is true, it can stand on its own merits. However, it proves nothing to compare it to another publication, in this case the bible and say that because some things can’t be proved in the bible then it’s ok not to have to prove things in the BOM. If conditions for the existence of the bible and the BOM were exactly the same then you might have a point but they are not. They have nothing in common at all. If we used your flawed logic that because one thing is wrong then the other thing (BOM) does not have to stand up to scrutiny. Using that logic we could not put anything to the test for truth if something else failed or may fail the truth test.

 

[Jerusha]

The Book of Mormon fails the test. It can be compared to these readings, which are truly old:
gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl.html

That does not mean it contains nothing of value. It just means that it contains some things of value. It requires considerable discernment and research to extract what is of value.

 

[Stephen168]

Post 112 summarizes various Old Testament anachronisms I’ve talked about, chronology in order the Bible gives for events plus archaeology for these events. There’s actually much more, so when I get back later today I’ll include more, and also add references for all the ones I’ve pointed out so far.

Post 116 shows genetics as an anachronism to the specific genealogy in years given in Genesis 5 & 11, plus the “New Testament” genealogies of Christ presented as a history in Luke 3:23-38 and Matthew 1:1-17.

The post I just posted for Paul also has a youtube video for a History Channel showing of archaeology on the Old Testament; it’s worth watching (if you want to know why I’m making comparisons with the Bible and Book of Mormon; after David’s time it’s no longer fair to compare, but you get the point).

I don’t see any anachronism in any of your posts. Your one sentence shotgun approach is not clear.

An anachronism (from the Greek “ana” “ανά”, “against, anti-”, and “chronos” “χρόνος”, “time”) is an error in chronology, especially a chronological misplacing of persons, events, objects, or customs in regard to each other. The item is often an object, but may be a verbal expression, a technology, a philosophical idea, a musical style, a material, a custom, or anything else so closely associated with a particular period in time that it seems odd when placed outside its origins.

It would be best if you would pick one from the Old Testament and one from the New Testament and carefully explain how they are of place; just like I tried to do in post #83.

Horses in the Book of Mormon are an anachronism because the author tells a story with horses in it claiming the time and place to be: 100BC in North America. There were no horses in North America in 100BC. No proof of an event is not an anachronism, it means there is no proof that it happened: like the Book of Mormon.

 

[PaulDupre]

If conditions for the existence of the bible and the BOM were exactly the same then you might have a point but they are not. They have nothing in common at all.

That is the part that Mormons are not able to see. If the bible were the product of one man in the 1800s who claimed to have “translated” it from a single ancient source document (in a language that was never known to have existed) that no one ever saw or had the opportunity to corroborate, then the burden of proof would be the same for each of the books. But it is not.

At the very least, we know that the bible is a collection of authentically ancient writings about people, places and cultures that, with a few exceptions in the OT (so far), have been proven to really exist. Biblical archaeology is finding more and more proof every year of the bible’s historical accuracy. Just recently, a lost city has been discovered near Jerusalem containing a wealth of evidence about the Davidic Kingdom. Over the next several years, as this evidence is analyzed, we will know a great deal about King David and his kingdom that will further corroborate the biblical accounts.

There are no such findings for the BOM. So there is no external evidence of any kind that supports the BOM’s claim to be an ancient document rather than a fanciful invention of 19th century men.

 

[Jerusha]

There are no such findings for the BOM. So there is no external evidence of any kind that supports the BOM’s claim to be a document from Biblical times rather than a fanciful invention of 19th century men.

 

[sambos671]

I understand where you’re coming from. Where’s the evidence? Whether you agree with my reasoning or not, this is the critical thinking that I use:

Both Exodus and Numbers mentions that the Israelites had 600,000 men of age who left Egypt, not including the women and children; typically scholars estimate 2 million altogether but most say at least over a million Israelites in the Exodus is a very safe estimate. The land of Canaan was an Egyptian province until about 1200 B.C., and you had to get permission from the to settle, or even make an economic decision. Since they kept records of those who settled and there is no record from sources outside the Bible (including the Egyptians) of the Israelites settling the land of Canaan before 1200 B.C. (plus the Bible says almost 500 years passed between the Exodus and Solomon), secular archaeologists do not believe. The Egyptians had military posts all over the Sinai Peninsula and kept records of those who passed through. Since they were able to track all these others down, and they weren’t able to notice “over a million” Israelites passing through, that’s what archaeologists think of that. In the past 150 years, archaeologists also have not been able to track down archaeological evidence of a route of over a million Israelites; after many years of searching. Archaeologists also say if “over a million slaves” left Egypt, Egypt would have noticed their economy and something in their records would have noticed. A History Channel showing of Old Testament archaeology is found at YouTube. It’s in a 10 part series, and part 2 of the History Channel show talks about the Exodus (and some of those Exodus points I just mentioned) and is only 8:52, which specifically talks about this youtube.com/watch?v=v2HqrIwz0Pw&NR=1 Paul, if you don’t mind, will you watch this, so you’ll at least know what I’m comparing to for the Jaredites?

The first book of Matthew gives the genealogy from Abraham to Jesus, as a history. The third book of Luke gives the genealogy from Adam to Jesus, as a history; so it doesn’t give the impression the lineage of the Old Testament is a metaphor (and if it does, why not think Joseph Smith was speaking metaphorically when he said the Book of Mormon is a history?).

So my critical thinking tells me, “If the Exodus can still be true after no trace of over a million Israelites sneaking past all that stuff, why can’t the Jaredites?” Do you see where my thinking is leading me?

You could always read Archer’s book Encyclopedia of Bible difficulties. The fact is there aren’t entire cultures of people who have not been accounted for by the bible. You can discuss transcription errors all you want but thats pretty much what you find with the bible. Book of Mormon perputrates fantasy on their believers. Using critical thinking should put you closer to reliance on the bible rather than the BOM. No matter if you have a burning in your bussom or not.

 

[ricko]

When archeologists go looking for ancient items, it’s called a “dig” because after over a thousand years dirt will accumulate over the items causing them to be several feet underground. But when Joseph Smith goes on a “dig” for golden plates all he has to do is brush off a little bit of dirt. What a guy!

 

[mfbukowski]

Did they leave any artifacts behind?

Of course they did. Don’t you get this? I am saying the Olmecs were probably the descendents of the Jaredites.

 

[mfbukowski]

And yet they left behind such a treasure-trove of artifacts and fossils that we have a vivid picture of what their culture and civilization was all about.

By contrast, there is absolutely no trace of the 5-million-plus Jaredites. Nothing. Nada. Is that reasonable? No.

Likewise, there is not a trace of the high-tech Nephites, their 38 concrete cities, their chariots, their highways, their horse stables, their steel works and steel weapons, their gold and silver mines, their silk farms, their grape vineyards and wineries, their bee hives, their elephants, the pollen from their wheat, barley and flax farms…

Nothing. Nada. ???

You guys are incredible. I have said this a million times, others have said it a million times. Nephites+Lamanites=Mesoamerican civilizations.

Evidence for Mesoamerican civilizations = evidence for Nephites, Lamanites and Jaredites

OK? clear enough?

There is evidence for all you mention when you also factor in Joseph translating the BOM into terms he, and others, were familiar with. It is just a waste of time talking to you.

 

[mfbukowski]

fairlds.org/apol/ai105.html

When you show evidence of having read these articles and want to discuss them in an intelligent manner I will respond. There is no point in my cutting and pasting.

If you have legitimate questions, read the answers first and then we can discuss it further. But I won’t waste time playing games with your repeating childish arguments.

 

[mfbukowski]

You could always read Archer’s book Encyclopedia of Bible difficulties. The fact is there aren’t entire cultures of people who have not been accounted for by the bible. You can discuss transcription errors all you want but thats pretty much what you find with the bible. Book of Mormon perputrates fantasy on their believers. Using critical thinking should put you closer to reliance on the bible rather than the BOM. No matter if you have a burning in your bussom or not.

I don’t know how to get it through your heads that all cultures have names for themselves that are not the same in our languages.

The first time I went to Europe, I had a map of Germany which was labeled “Deutschland”. I wanted to find where Munich was. I looked in vain because it was called “Munchen” (mit umlaut, which I don’t know how to make here). Then I went to Italy and tried to find Florence, and couldn’t find it either because the name of the city in Italian is “Firenzie”.

You are not going to find “Zarahemla” on a map, so you believe that there is no evidence of Nephite civilization. If Germans were an ancient civilization, and you had one of their maps, it would be just as absurd as concluding that there were no Germans because there is no evidence of a city called “Munich” on their maps, nor for that matter can you even find a reference to any one called “German”.

"All these people are called “Deutsch” there were no “Germans”!

“There is no evidence of a German civilization! It is fantasy!”

“That proves your religion is wrong!”

That is the quality of your argument. And I will discuss it no further.

 

[LAMBOFGODGIRLY]

Alisha, I’m not saying that I don’t believe in God or the New Testament or Bible. I was pointing out that the same criticisms of plagiarism are made with the New Testament, because of many parallels between Jesus Christ and the Greek Dionysus, Persian Mithras, and Egyptian Horus, with those pagan gods dating before the time of Christ.

If these parallels don’t disprove the New Testament, etc, etc from the other Bible parallels I’ve pointed out, then why does that mean parallels with the Book of Mormon disproves? I’m not saying it proves the Book of Mormon; you can still believe it’s not true. I’m just saying I don’t believe that’s a fair way to falsify!

Ok, fair enough, but at least the bible has thousands of other proofs that most of the events that took place, really did take place. The BOM can’t say that, not even 1 thing. Do you see where I’M coming from also? Thousands of facts versuses 0.

 

[sambos671]

I don’t know how to get it through your heads that all cultures have names for themselves that are not the same in our languages.

The first time I went to Europe, I had a map of Germany which was labeled “Deutschland”. I wanted to find where Munich was. I looked in vain because it was called “Munchen” (mit umlaut, which I don’t know how to make here). Then I went to Italy and tried to find Florence, and couldn’t find it either because the name of the city in Italian is “Firenzie”.

You are not going to find “Zarahemla” on a map, so you believe that there is no evidence of Nephite civilization. If Germans were an ancient civilization, and you had one of their maps, it would be just as absurd as concluding that there were no Germans because there is no evidence of a city called “Munich” on their maps, nor for that matter can you even find a reference to any one called “German”.

"All these people are called “Deutsch” there were no “Germans”!

“There is no evidence of a German civilization! It is fantasy!”

“That proves your religion is wrong!”

That is the quality of your argument. And I will discuss it no further.

I’ve lived all over the world. I understand what you’re saying still there are no cultures in the bible that cannot be identified as the bible describes. The BOM describes things that there is no archeological support. No pots, buried roads, or collapsed walls. The fact that there is no such evidence to support the BOM is what makes your book a fantasy. Look we even had evidence of a culture in the Mediteranian Sea that we really don’t know what they called themselves and so we name them after a Greek myth the Minoans. I’m certain they didn’t call themselves that. However, we have evidence of their existance not these “lost peoples” of ancient america that originally come from the middle east. Joseph Smith was imagnitive I’ll give him that. But thats it.

 

[mfbukowski]

I’ve lived all over the world. I understand what you’re saying still there are no cultures in the bible that cannot be identified as the bible describes. The BOM describes things that there is no archeological support. No pots, buried roads, or collapsed walls. The fact that there is no such evidence to support the BOM is what makes your book a fantasy.

I will try it exactly ONE more time. Every buried pyramid, every brick on top of one another, every pot that is found in Mesoamerica, everything “Mayan”, “Inca” “Aztec”, “Olmec” is evidence of what the BOM calls “Nephite and Lamanite” civilization. If you cannot get that, I totally give up. Did you even look at the links I posted?

It would be as if we found the scriptures of the Minoan civilization but you said that such a civilization never existed because the only ones on Crete at that time were called “Minoans” when these people are called “xyz” in their own scriptures.

I cannot cannot cannot say it more plainly. It is becoming clear that you all are so far into denial that you refuse to even understand what I am saying. Disagree if you like, but you don’t even understand the point I am making. It is like I am speaking Chinese. Very frustrating.

 

[RebeccaJ]

I will try it exactly ONE more time. Every buried pyramid, every brick on top of one another, every pot that is found in Mesoamerica, everything “Mayan”, “Inca” “Aztec”, “Olmec” is evidence of what the BOM calls “Nephite and Lamanite” civilization. If you cannot get that, I totally give up. Did you even look at the links I posted?

It would be as if we found the scriptures of the Minoan civilization but you said that such a civilization never existed because the only ones on Crete at that time were called “Minoans” when these people are called “xyz” in their own scriptures.

I cannot cannot cannot say it more plainly. It is becoming clear that you all are so far into denial that you refuse to even understand what I am saying. Disagree if you like, but you don’t even understand the point I am making. It is like I am speaking Chinese. Very frustrating.

The problem is, that archaeology is not just finding old stuff and proclaiming AHA! Nephites and Lamanites!

The artifacts must be tied to a civilization. The artifacts found in ancient ruins of the Americas do not tie to the civilizations described in the BoM. And the described artifacts in the BoM do not tie to the ancient ruins of the Americas. For whatever reason, Mormons cannot seem to understand this.

The civilizations themselves, do not match what is described in the BoM. Cultural beliefs and social practices. There is no match.

Not to mention DNA. And if you tell me it is about 12 people, I’ll find you and kick you in the shins. You know very well that the BoM describes millions of descendants of the few people who came to the Americas. For there to be no DNA is to say that they and all of their descendants died off, completely. Which does not match at all to anything your church has ever taught about WHO the BoM is about.

 

[CJ_Nick]

Not to mention DNA. And if you tell me it is about 12 people, I’ll find you and kick you in the shins. .

Dear friends ( Catholic and LDS )

Just a reminder to all as to rule 45 B section D of the " Catholic Answers Forum " rule book.

Rule 45 B Section D clearly states :

CAF members will not be able to kick the shins of another member. This rule is for members of ALL faiths and should be followed without exception. If anyone is caught in said kicking, they will be kicked in their shins by the moderating staff.

Just a friendly reminder

Peace,
CJ

 

[sambos671]

I will try it exactly ONE more time. Every buried pyramid, every brick on top of one another, every pot that is found in Mesoamerica, everything “Mayan”, “Inca” “Aztec”, “Olmec” is evidence of what the BOM calls “Nephite and Lamanite” civilization. If you cannot get that, I totally give up. Did you even look at the links I posted?

It would be as if we found the scriptures of the Minoan civilization but you said that such a civilization never existed because the only ones on Crete at that time were called “Minoans” when these people are called “xyz” in their own scriptures.

I cannot cannot cannot say it more plainly. It is becoming clear that you all are so far into denial that you refuse to even understand what I am saying. Disagree if you like, but you don’t even understand the point I am making. It is like I am speaking Chinese. Very frustrating.

So you are saying the Mayan, the Incas, the Aztecs, and the Olmecs are the Nephite and Lamanite? If that is the case what are their connections? You know these were different peoples with different cultures. The Aztec stole a lot from the Mayans but they were different peoples and their is no connection of them to the description found in the BOM. None. There is no evidence that these people migrated at some point from the middle east (most likely eastern Asia). There are no connections. Compare the description no evidence. Also look at where Joseph Smith told us these “cities” were located. Not in the places where the Aztecs or the Inca’s lived. Particularily the Incas. Unless you’re talking about the planet Cobal.

So let me try this one more time. There is no archeological evidence that the BOM is correct. I don’t know how I’m going to get it into your head.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Dear friends ( Catholic and LDS )

Just a reminder to all as to rule 45 B section D of the " Catholic Answers Forum " rule book.

Rule 45 B Section D clearly states :

CAF members will not be able to kick the shins of another member. This rule is for members of ALL faiths and should be followed without exception. If anyone is caught in said kicking, they will be kicked in their shins by the moderating staff.

Just a friendly reminder

Peace,
CJ

bukowski knows I kid.

 

[ReligiousQuest]

I don’t see any anachronism in any of your posts. Your one sentence shotgun approach is not clear.

It would be best if you would pick one from the Old Testament and one from the New Testament and carefully explain how they are of place; just like I tried to do in post #83.

Horses in the Book of Mormon are an anachronism because the author tells a story with horses in it claiming the time and place to be: 100BC in North America. There were no horses in North America in 100BC. No proof of an event is not an anachronism, it means there is no proof that it happened: like the Book of Mormon.

Likewise, I don’t see one anachronism from the Book of Mormon. Not even a SINGLE ONE! My reasoning, if not one of these Bible anachronisms is an anachronism, why should any of YOUR Book of Mormon “anachronisms” be anachronisms?

If the Bible says Joshua came after Abraham, and that Joshua destroyed Ai, Jericho, Hazor during a lifetime and after Abraham, and Abraham left the Ur of the Chaldeans before Jericho destroyed these places, and Abraham and Isaac interacted with the Philistines before Joshua conquered these cities, how is that not anachronisms?

Archaeologists say the Chaldeans didn’t exist until about 1000 B.C., with Ur being under their control to be called “Ur of the Chaldeans” until the 600’s B.C. The Philistines didn’t exist until 1100’s B.C. The city of Jericho was carbon dated to be destroyed 1500 B.C. (which comes before 1100’s/600’s B.C.). The city of Ai was carbon dated to be abandoned 2200 B.C., Hazor by fire 1250 B.C. (obviously not within a human lifetime of Joshua, and way before the peoples/cities mentioned for Abraham). The Bible mentions the Israelites leaving the city of Ramesees, who didn’t exist until the 1200’s B.C., way after Jericho and Ai.

That just doesn’t make any sense whatsoever how those are not anachronisms in chronology and time periods for any of those particular Old Testament stories to make any sense archaeologically, but then the Book of Mormon “anachronisms” are real anachronisms? The New Testament’s Luke chapter 3 and Matthew chapter 1 give the genealogy of the Old Testament as a real history, not metaphor, and why would a metaphor say Joshua came way after Abraham’s time, when it was really trying to say the exact reverse?

Explain???

 

[ReligiousQuest]

You could always read Archer’s book Encyclopedia of Bible difficulties. The fact is there aren’t entire cultures of people who have not been accounted for by the bible. You can discuss transcription errors all you want but thats pretty much what you find with the bible. Book of Mormon perputrates fantasy on their believers. Using critical thinking should put you closer to reliance on the bible rather than the BOM. No matter if you have a burning in your bussom or not.

Secular archaeologists say they don’t agree with Bible apologists responses with Bible difficulties, because archaeology is supposed to be falsifiable with publicly verifiable research; they say Bible apologists make it unfalsifiable by how they reason. The Bible apologists don’t set up predictions saying, “If this really isn’t a problem for the Bible, we prediction we’ll find this observation archaeologically later down the road; if we don’t find the prediction then that means that part of the Bible is false.” Bible apologists don’t do that, and so secular archaeologists call them pseudoarchaeologists.

Likewise, Book of Mormon apologists come up with similar reasons why things aren’t anachronisms, just like the Bible apologists do.

That’s part of my critical thinking. If the Book of Mormon needs to stand on it’s own with archaeology, well the Bible as a whole sure doesn’t. Big segments of it may, but as a whole it doesn’t. Everything before King David’s time doesn’t, parts off and on throughout the Old Testament after that conflict with archaeological evidence. The nativity event from the New Testament has some serious problems (Matt says Herod was around at the time of Jesus’ birth; Luke says all the world was taxed or registered; those who study history say Herod died 10 years before the event of all the world being registered; etc.)