Mormom belief: Jesus was in the Americas.

[LivingWaters7]

Read my post again. I didn’t say that it was commonly agreed that the Garden of Eden was in the same place, I said that it is commonly agreed that the Euphrates River is in the same location as it always has been. We know that the river that ran through Eden branched out into the four rivers that are mentioned in Genesis and we know that those four rivers are nowhere near Missouri, not even on the same continent. This isn’t rocket science.

Sorry, your post was not clear as to what “its” referred to at the end of the first paragraph.

So if your post was not concluding that the Garden of Eden was in the same place as these rivers are today, then what is the relevance of noting that the Euphrates is in the same location today as it was during the Garden of Eden time period? Which then goes back to the point I was making, that in a quick Google search on this, I see that many talk about whether the Pre-Flood world may have not been the same as the Post-Flood world (do archaeologists even accept the Biblical account of the Flood?), redepositing of sediment (do the minerals in the rivers of each time period match if they’re the same river?), etc, that point to a less than cut and dry conclusion on that.

No, it isn’t “rocket science”, but the issue certainly is more complex.

This article sums up what I’m trying to get at with my less-than-scholarly understanding of the issue:

icr.org/article/1208/

 

[LivingWaters7]

A “re-depositing of sediment”? Try a re-depositing of entire continents. It is really difficult for me to be believe that any rational human being could believe such a thing.

Again, I’m not talking about Missouri, nor citing such things as evidence of that belief (I never subscribed to it, nor thought about it much, though I was aware of it).

As far as rational human beings believing things, well, I’m sure the atheists wonder such things many times .

 

[SteveVH]

Sorry, your post was not clear as to what “its” referred to at the end of the first paragraph.

So if your post was not concluding that the Garden of Eden was in the same place as these rivers are today, then what is the relevance of noting that the Euphrates is in the same location today as it was during the Garden of Eden time period? Which then goes back to the point I was making, that in a quick Google search on this, I see that many talk about whether the Pre-Flood world may have not been the same as the Post-Flood world (do archaeologists even accept the Biblical account of the Flood?), redepositing of sediment (do the minerals in the rivers of each time period match if they’re the same river?), etc, that point to a less than cut and dry conclusion on that.

No, it isn’t “rocket science”, but the issue certainly is more complex.

This article sums up what I’m trying to get at with my less-than-scholarly understanding of the issue:

icr.org/article/1208/

Why are you making this so difficult? Yes, the conclusion to be drawn is that if we know where the rivers mentioned in Genesis are and know that their headwaters ran through the Garden, then it would be reasonable to conclude that the Garden of Eden is certainly not in Missouri. Beyond that I make no conclusions.

 

[Nicea325]

Why are you making this so difficult? Yes, the conclusion to be drawn is that if we know where the rivers mentioned in Genesis are and know that their headwaters ran through the Garden, then it would be reasonable to conclude that the Garden of Eden is certainly not in Missouri. Beyond that I make no conclusions.

I’'ll make this short & sweet. I have learned to take everything with a grain of salt when these wacky beliefs from Mormons pop-up.

 

[LivingWaters7]

When I was a missionary, that was our BIG WOW-EM TOTALLY BLOW THEIR MIND doctrine.

But then, why didn’t he go to Australia also? or Africa? or even the North Pole?

Yeah…why the America’s? Why not Europe?

From my understanding, Mormons believe that it certainly is possible that Jesus went to visit His “other sheep” all over the world. They also say that scriptures from these other groups could very well be revealed in time. Could you imagine if the LDS prophets and apostles suddenly announced at General Conference that the gold plates of the Israelites in China have been found and translated by the President of the Church at the time? I can’t.

 

[LivingWaters7]

Why are you making this so difficult? Yes, the conclusion to be drawn is that if we know where the rivers mentioned in Genesis are and know that their headwaters ran through the Garden, then it would be reasonable to conclude that the Garden of Eden is certainly not in Missouri. Beyond that I make no conclusions.

I am not making it difficult at all. The point, if you read the article linked to, is that we may not know where the rivers mentioned in Genesis are (i.e. pre-Flood), at least from what I read by Googling the matter, so I was interested in what are the sources you’ve found that support your position. That’s all. I’m not saying you’re wrong, since I’m not well read on the topic. I just would like to know what you’ve been reading on the issue. This isn’t “rocket science”, as you say.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Sorry, your post was not clear as to what “its” referred to at the end of the first paragraph.

So if your post was not concluding that the Garden of Eden was in the same place as these rivers are today, then what is the relevance of noting that the Euphrates is in the same location today as it was during the Garden of Eden time period? Which then goes back to the point I was making, that in a quick Google search on this, I see that many talk about whether the Pre-Flood world may have not been the same as the Post-Flood world (do archaeologists even accept the Biblical account of the Flood?), redepositing of sediment (do the minerals in the rivers of each time period match if they’re the same river?), etc, that point to a less than cut and dry conclusion on that.

No, it isn’t “rocket science”, but the issue certainly is more complex.

This article sums up what I’m trying to get at with my less-than-scholarly understanding of the issue:

icr.org/article/1208/

Catholics are not required to believe Eden is a literal place, or that a world-wide flood actually occurred. Some Catholics believe so, I view them as stories that convey truth via allegory.

LDS tend to be young-earth creationists, meaning, they think the Garden literally existed c.4000BC. A position that is untenable considering earth sciences and the archaeological record. The Euphrates river existed, as a combined Tigris-Euphrates river, in the pleistocene age. It hasn’t moved half way around the world in the last 12000 years, let alone the last 6000 years.

 

[RebeccaJ]

I am not making it difficult at all. The point, if you read the article linked to, is that we may not know where the rivers mentioned in Genesis are (i.e. pre-Flood), at least from what I read by Googling the matter, so I was interested in what are the sources you’ve found that support your position. That’s all. I’m not saying you’re wrong, since I’m not well read on the topic. I just would like to know what you’ve been reading on the issue. This isn’t “rocket science”, as you say.

electronic-earth-discuss.net/1/167/2006/eed-1-167-2006-print.pdf

5 Conclusions

The discovery of Euphrates gravel, capped and preserved by basalt, dated to 9 Ma [9 million years ago], constrains the evolution of the River Euphrates in northern Syria during the Late Miocene ~5 million years ago]. In the early Middle Miocene ~11 million years ago], the ancestral Euphrates reached the sea near 15 Kahramanmaras¸ in southern Turkey (1, Fig. 1). Regional uplift in the Late Miocene caused the coast to retreat south and east, and the river thus lengthened downstream to the vicinity of Raqqa in northern Syria (2, Fig. 1). Continuing regional uplift in the Pliocene ~2.5-5.3 million years ago] caused the coast to retreat farther southeast, and the river extended to the
eastern margin of the modern Arabian Platform uplands (3, Fig. 1).

 

[SteveVH]

I am not making it difficult at all. The point, if you read the article linked to, is that we may not know where the rivers mentioned in Genesis are (i.e. pre-Flood), at least from what I read by Googling the matter, so I was interested in what are the sources you’ve found that support your position. That’s all. I’m not saying you’re wrong, since I’m not well read on the topic. I just would like to know what you’ve been reading on the issue. This isn’t “rocket science”, as you say.

What I have been reading on the issue is in Genesis. I combine that with modern science and human reason and conclude that if the rivers mentioned in Genesis, which we can still identify today, were in the proximity of the Garden of Eden, as Scripture tells us, then the Garden is not located on another continent. The flood did not move continents, it covered them. I am really sitting here shaking my head. This seems like something that one might have to explain to a six year old.

 

[pablope]

I am not making it difficult at all. The point, if you read the article linked to, is that we may not know where the rivers mentioned in Genesis are (i.e. pre-Flood), at least from what I read by Googling the matter, so I was interested in what are the sources you’ve found that support your position. That’s all. I’m not saying you’re wrong, since I’m not well read on the topic. I just would like to know what you’ve been reading on the issue. This isn’t “rocket science”, as you say.

I saw an archeological program years ago…either on Nat Geo or History Channel…on the two other rivers…Pishon and Gishon.

Archeologists think they have discovered these two rivers…which are dry now…as far as I can remember from the program.

The area of these two dry beds is somewhere in the Turkey/Iran/Iraq area.

 

[zaffiroborant]

I saw an archeological program years ago…either on Nat Geo or History Channel…on the two other rivers…Pishon and Gishon.

Archeologists think they have discovered these two rivers…which are dry now…as far as I can remember from the program.

The area of these two dry beds is somewhere in the Turkey/Iran/Iraq area.

I remember that (from when I had cable) it must have been History Channel because I never had NatGeo.

 

[TheIrishman]

Irish,

How can people be Members of the The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints and not be bothered when Christ is talked about less than Joe? I mean come on people! How gullible can you be? Shouldn’t it be The Church of Joseph Smith of Latter day Saints. When he can keep a religion together better than Jesus! I know where there’s smoke there’s fire, doesn’t anybody smell the smoke?

The one thing I would love is for someone to answer this question. When Jesus said “On this rock I shall build my church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.” Either Jesus way lying or the 200 yr old LDS faith is full of smoke blowers. My bet is on the 2nd choice. Christ being the second person of the Blessed Trinity, I would think he knows what he is talking about.

Well obviously I’m bothered by it lol and i’m sure there are millions also who are bothered by it also. That’s why so many members are leaving the church or becoming inactive.

The LDS church is very subtle with it’s manipulations. They do tons of great work and charitable work that shows the world just how Christ-like they are and how much good they are doing. But also has a darker side that they try to keep under wraps.

It’s all glory no honor when it comes to the church IMO.

For your second statement, here is the standard answer and teaching of the LDS faith.

Christ never lied because the “rock” is not “Peter” but is the “rock of revelation” from the Holy Ghost which has never left the earth entirely. The gates of hell did not prevail because Joseph Smith “received a revelation” to restore the church of Christ. Christ never failed, His church lives on.

I want it noted that this is what the church teaches, it in no wise promotes or defines my beliefs on the subject. Thank you.

 

[TheIrishman]

however, to get this thread back on topic, I was suddenly reminded of the story of Quetzalcoatl.

What are your guys thoughts on the ancient “white god” of the native american’s

P.s. my Grandma on my fathers side is Cherokee so i’ve heard this story many a times. for those who don’t know the story here is a link.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/487168/Quetzalcoatl

 

[RebeccaJ]

however, to get this thread back on topic, I was suddenly reminded of the story of Quetzalcoatl.

What are your guys thoughts on the ancient “white god” of the native american’s

P.s. my Grandma on my fathers side is Cherokee so i’ve heard this story many a times. for those who don’t know the story here is a link.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/487168/Quetzalcoatl

The feathered serpent was worshipped as a deity by the Olmec, c.1400-400 BC, long before the Book of Mormon claims Jesus visited the American continent. It is believed by anthropologists that some of the Olmec deities were adopted by later cultures, including the Aztec (Quetzalcoatl) and Maya (Kukulkan). The feathered serpent deity was worshiped at Teotihuacan, c.200BC-700AD, also pre-dating Christ.

It is a pagan god, not Jesus Christ.

 

[TheIrishman]

The feathered serpent was worshipped as a deity by the Olmec, c.1400-400 BC, long before the Book of Mormon claims Jesus visited the American continent. It is believed by anthropologists that some of the Olmec deities were adopted by later cultures, including the Aztec (Quetzacoatl) and Maya (Kukulkan). The feathered serpent deity was worshiped at Teotihuacan, c.200BC-700AD, also pre-dating Christ.

It is a pagan god, not Jesus Christ.

This is creepy, you basically said the exact same thing I said to one of my companions…are you sure you’re not Elder Trujillo disguised i’m just messin.

But I completely agree, I believe this is a pagan god and not Jesus Christ, my grandmother feels the same way, but she is also pagan and not Christian.

I just find it interesting that I had many missionaries and members alike try and use Quetzalcoatl as evidence of Jesus being in the America’s. To say the least, I was flabbergasted.

 

[lynnettejane]

Well obviously I’m bothered by it lol and i’m sure there are millions also who are bothered by it also. That’s why so many members are leaving the church or becoming inactive.

The LDS church is very subtle with it’s manipulations. They do tons of great work and charitable work that shows the world just how Christ-like they are and how much good they are doing. But also has a darker side that they try to keep under wraps.

It’s all glory no honor when it comes to the church IMO.

For your second statement, here is the standard answer and teaching of the LDS faith.

Christ never lied because the “rock” is not “Peter” but is the “rock of revelation” from the Holy Ghost which has never left the earth entirely. The gates of hell did not prevail because Joseph Smith “received a revelation” to restore the church of Christ. Christ never failed, His church lives on.

I want it noted that this is what the church teaches, it in no wise promotes or defines my beliefs on the subject. Thank you.

Hi Irishman, the rock is a play on words I guess with Peter’s name, and he was undoubtedly the chosen leader of the church, but the rock is not the rock of revelation but what had been revealed to Peter, that Jesus was the Christ, that is what the church is truly built upon

 

[TheIrishman]

Hi Irishman, the rock is a play on words I guess with Peter’s name, and he was undoubtedly the chosen leader of the church, but the rock is not the rock of revelation but what had been revealed to Peter, that Jesus was the Christ, that is what the church is truly built upon

I know it is, that’s why I put that note on the bottom of my post to make sure people didn’t mistake me for believing in the rock of revelation. But thank you for your clarification all the same

 

[LivingWaters7]

electronic-earth-discuss.net/1/167/2006/eed-1-167-2006-print.pdf

5 Conclusions

The discovery of Euphrates gravel, capped and preserved by basalt, dated to 9 Ma [9 million years ago], constrains the evolution of the River Euphrates in northern Syria during the Late Miocene ~5 million years ago]. In the early Middle Miocene ~11 million years ago], the ancestral Euphrates reached the sea near 15 Kahramanmaras¸ in southern Turkey (1, Fig. 1). Regional uplift in the Late Miocene caused the coast to retreat south and east, and the river thus lengthened downstream to the vicinity of Raqqa in northern Syria (2, Fig. 1). Continuing regional uplift in the Pliocene ~2.5-5.3 million years ago] caused the coast to retreat farther southeast, and the river extended to the
eastern margin of the modern Arabian Platform uplands (3, Fig. 1).

Thanks Rebecca, this is exactly the sort of thing I’m interested in.

 

[LivingWaters7]

What I have been reading on the issue is in Genesis. I combine that with modern science and human reason and conclude that if the rivers mentioned in Genesis, which we can still identify today, were in the proximity of the Garden of Eden, as Scripture tells us, then the Garden is not located on another continent. The flood did not move continents, it covered them. I am really sitting here shaking my head. This seems like something that one might have to explain to a six year old.

I too am sitting here shaking my head that you cannot understand my simple request for the “modern science” you have been reading to substantiate your understanding (perhaps its because I’m published in chemistry and pharmacology that I look for such a standard when discussing scientific matters). I see now it was too much to ask (thanks Rebecca for your help). If you read the article I linked to multiple posts ago, you would understand the beginnings of why I found your statement problematic. It has nothing to do with other continents, the flood moving continents, etc (nor have I said or implied such). That’s what you’re reading into my statements.

Carry on.

 

[RebeccaJ]

This is creepy, you basically said the exact same thing I said to one of my companions…are you sure you’re not Elder Trujillo disguised i’m just messin.

But I completely agree, I believe this is a pagan god and not Jesus Christ, my grandmother feels the same way, but she is also pagan and not Christian.

I just find it interesting that I had many missionaries and members alike try and use Quetzalcoatl as evidence of Jesus being in the America’s. To say the least, I was flabbergasted.

I traveled all touristy throughout the Yucatan, several times. I have a great charcoal drawing on leather of Kukulkan, done by a Mayan artist. I read a lot about Mayan deities at the time, which is very fascinating! But no, Kukulcan, the feathered serpent, is not remotely a version of Jesus.

Ask Our Lady of Guadalupe to pray for you.