Nephi's steel bow difficult to replicate at BYU competition

[imkingdad]

How about the era of Samuel, or 2 Kings?

After all, it seems that in both cases it turned out that they were NOT all that practical. They both…ahem…broke.

On the other hand, it seems that the Indians (in India…) made steel bows; I gather that they were rather practical for use in war from horseback–easy to store and quick to use, though not so much for hunting. Mostly they were considered warrior’s weapons.

I understand (though I can’t read German, and could only see the illustration) that there was a “curious Sioux steel bow” referenced in “Traditionell Bogenschiessen” magazine, in its three part series on steel bows in history. I would truly like to know what that’s all about.

---

While a steel bow is an interesting aside, it truly is a moot point from an LDS pov.
Since the only evidence ever produced about the “2 Lost Tribes of Isreal” is in the Book of Mormon. stories that have no historical substantiation whatsoever. Nothing more than a fairytale. So who really cares?

 

[benidict]

---

While a steel bow is an interesting aside, it truly is a moot point from an LDS pov.
Since the only evidence ever produced about the “2 Lost Tribes of Isreal” is in the Book of Mormon. stories that have no historical substantiation whatsoever. Nothing more than a fairytale. So who really cares?

hi imingdad. be that as it may, and i have made it clear that i dont believe its a true story at all, it still has good values in it. if you are fortunate enough to have an actual mormon like diana and zerinus help you thru the apparent redundencies of it. is not a bad read. and the excuse your using is the same thing atheist use to avoid reading the bible. but maybe its not to your taste. thats ok too. actually i like books by robert jordan, or terry goodkind.peace be to you and yours and a very blessed thanksgiving.

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

Wow; an article about BYU engineering students attempting to build steel bows like their prohpet Nehi…and this is proof of the BOM veracity???

I guess ‘2012’ is proof that the world is going to end, then.

Or, even better: claiming that the Church became ‘apostate’ some time back when Saint John was still running around (late middle ages, maybe??) is GOLD in every court in Utah.

Robert

 

[why_me]

How did they succeed? Did they have a bow that would fire? Yes. Was it comperable to other traditional bows? No. Would it have been practicle or even possible in the era in quesiton? No.

This was a project initiated by professors and students at BYU. They are students attempting to replica a bow from the book of mormon. I think that they did a good job. Lets look at it this way: First, they attempted to do it. Second, they did not coil with fear about doing such a project. And third; they believed that it could be done because they know that the book of mormon is true. All three give the article a positive twist. And that was my point.

Personally, I would think that all catholics should be routing for the book of mormon to be true and proved to be true. Why? because it would confirm the existence of god. And that would not be such a bad thing for this day and age.

 

[Catholic20064]

This was a project initiated by professors and students at BYU. They are students attempting to replica a bow from the book of mormon. I think that they did a good job. Lets look at it this way: First, they attempted to do it. Second, they did not coil with fear about doing such a project. And third; they believed that it could be done because they know that the book of mormon is true. All three give the article a positive twist. And that was my point.

Personally, I would think that all catholics should be routing for the book of mormon to be true and proved to be true. Why? because it would confirm the existence of god. And that would not be such a bad thing for this day and age.

No use wasting time rooting for the impossible.

 

[ralphinal]

The King James is one of the few Bible translations to use steel. I wonder why? Because steel was not used for that.

Those verses cited make more sense as brass than iron or steel, based on when they were written and basic understanding of weapons. Brass bends and is flexable, to an extent. These bows would have been wooden bows with brass over them, to make them stronger. The wood does the actual work of the bow. Iron does not flex. Neither does steel. That is why they are better for sword making. No one wants a sword to bend during battle.

The Bronze age lasted until about 1000 B.C. THe Iron age was next. The first steel weapons are from about the 5th century B.C. THey were all edged weapons. No steel bows have been found.

The Welsh Long Bow is considered one of the most dominant weapons of its day. In fact, it is placed up there with rifled gun barrels and high explosives for changing the nature of battle. They were used well into the age of gunpowder. The only steel or iron would be on the arrowheads.

 

[Catholic20064]

The King James is one of the few Bible translations to use steel. I wonder why? Because steel was not used for that.

Those verses cited make more sense as brass than iron or steel, based on when they were written and basic understanding of weapons. Brass bends and is flexable, to an extent. These bows would have been wooden bows with brass over them, to make them stronger. The wood does the actual work of the bow. Iron does not flex. Neither does steel. That is why they are better for sword making. No one wants a sword to bend during battle.

The Bronze age lasted until about 1000 B.C. THe Iron age was next. The first steel weapons are from about the 5th century B.C. THey were all edged weapons. No steel bows have been found.

The Welsh Long Bow is considered one of the most dominant weapons of its day. In fact, it is placed up there with rifled gun barrels and high explosives for changing the nature of battle. They were used well into the age of gunpowder. The only steel or iron would be on the arrowheads.

Please stop confusing the issue with facts.

 

[dianaiad]

---

While a steel bow is an interesting aside, it truly is a moot point from an LDS pov.
Since the only evidence ever produced about the “2 Lost Tribes of Isreal”

“Lost 2 Tribes of Isreal?”

is in the Book of Mormon. stories that have no historical substantiation whatsoever. Nothing more than a fairytale. So who really cares?

Well…

I do.

Given that I AM a Mormon and all…

 

[dianaiad]

Wow; an article about BYU engineering students attempting to build steel bows like their prohpet Nehi…and this is proof of the BOM veracity???

I guess ‘2012’ is proof that the world is going to end, then.

Or, even better: claiming that the Church became ‘apostate’ some time back when Saint John was still running around (late middle ages, maybe??) is GOLD in every court in Utah.

Robert

Actually, the OP was using it as “proof” that the BoM was wrong. It’s not that, either.

 

[Xavierlives]

Personally, I would think that all catholics should be routing for the book of mormon to be true and proved to be true. Why? because it would confirm the existence of god. And that would not be such a bad thing for this day and age.

But then they would be bringing about the demise of their faith, since the first church was the Catholic Church.

 

[Spirithound]

I won’t consider them to have succeeded until someone enters an archery competition with a steel bow and doesn’t lose.

I didn’t get the point either until I read the posts from our LDS members. Nephi’s bow didn’t work, so pretty well anything that we could produce today would be an improvement.

 

[imkingdad]

hi imingdad. be that as it may, and i have made it clear that i dont believe its a true story at all, it still has good values in it. if you are fortunate enough to have an actual mormon like diana and zerinus help you thru the apparent redundencies of it. is not a bad read. and the excuse your using is the same thing atheist use to avoid reading the bible. but maybe its not to your taste. thats ok too. actually i like books by robert jordan, or terry goodkind.peace be to you and yours and a very blessed thanksgiving.

---

I live about 10 miles west of Palmyra NY, I know more about Mormonism than you do sir from a very upclose & personal view ( details of which are none of your business) I have seen and read many of the mentioned Mormon posters explanations & some are accurate & some are just a flat out cover-up & denial of past & current Mormon teachings.

Given that fact that these & other mormons come here proselytizing I see no reason to give them a free pass. Truth is just that the TRUTH & that is what we are called to share & preach. If that means rebuting some Mormon teachings then so be it.

 

[dianaiad]

---

I live about 10 miles west of Palmyra NY, I know more about Mormonism than you do sir from a very upclose & personal view ( details of which are none of your business) I have seen and read many of the mentioned Mormon posters explanations & some are accurate & some are just a flat out cover-up & denial of past & current Mormon teachings.

Given that fact that these & other mormons come here proselytizing I see no reason to give them a free pass. Truth is just that the TRUTH & that is what we are called to share & preach. If that means rebuting some Mormon teachings then so be it.

Hold it.

I am NOT here ‘proselytizing.’ I’ve posted considerably over 3000 posts, and not one of them has attempted to prove that my beliefs are true, or written for the purpose of converting anybody. I write simply and only to let people know what they really ARE.

I came here originally because I ran onto a post from CAF on the internet…from someone who was presenting my beliefs in a highly inaccurate and inflammatory way. So I chimed in; not to convert, but simply to correct. If you are going to attack my beliefs, I say…go ahead–but you could at least attack the beliefs we actually HOLD, not some strawman construct that bears no resemblance to LDS doctrine.

By the way, if a Mormon tells you that we believe this thing, or that thing, then that’s what at least THAT Mormon believes. YOU don’t get to tell him what his beliefs ‘really’ are, because that’s…just ludicrous.

Consider; what if I were to tell you that you pray to statues? If you tell me that no, that’s not what is happening, what if I said “well, you really do, and those who say they don’t are covering up or lying…because Catholics REALLY pray to statues?” What if I said to you that Catholics are cannibals…and you respond with what you really believe in terms of transubstantiation. What if, then, I claim that you are lying about it, or covering up your true beliefs, or that YOU might believe what you say you do, but that Catholicism does not?

Wouldn’t you get a little frustrated?

Well, that’s what you are doing. You do NOT get to tell us that we are covering up anything. You don’t get to tell us that we don’t know what our beliefs really are. Just as Catholics know what they believe in regard to the symbology of statues and transubstantiation better than any of their detractors, Mormons really do know what they believe.

What the believer says goes. Every single time.

Whether YOU like that or not.

 

[ralphinal]

It dawned on me this morning that if they really wanted to avoid the issue, they would say that the bow in question was a crossbow

 

[Xavierlives]

Hold it.

I am NOT here ‘proselytizing.’ I’ve posted considerably over 3000 posts, and not one of them has attempted to prove that my beliefs are true, or written for the purpose of converting anybody. I write simply and only to let people know what they really ARE.

I came here originally because I ran onto a post from CAF on the internet…from someone who was presenting my beliefs in a highly inaccurate and inflammatory way. So I chimed in; not to convert, but simply to correct. If you are going to attack my beliefs, I say…go ahead–but you could at least attack the beliefs we actually HOLD, not some strawman construct that bears no resemblance to LDS doctrine.

ooo… a logical fallacy!

By the way, if a Mormon tells you that we believe this thing, or that thing, then that’s what at least THAT Mormon believes. YOU don’t get to tell him what his beliefs ‘really’ are, because that’s…just ludicrous.

That’s rich.

Consider; what if I were to tell you that you pray to statues? If you tell me that no, that’s not what is happening, what if I said “well, you really do, and those who say they don’t are covering up or lying…because Catholics REALLY pray to statues?” What if I said to you that Catholics are cannibals…and you respond with what you really believe in terms of transubstantiation. What if, then, I claim that you are lying about it, or covering up your true beliefs, or that YOU might believe what you say you do, but that Catholicism does not?

Wouldn’t you get a little frustrated?

Well, that’s what you are doing. You do NOT get to tell us that we are covering up anything. You don’t get to tell us that we don’t know what our beliefs really are. Just as Catholics know what they believe in regard to the symbology of statues and transubstantiation better than any of their detractors, Mormons really do know what they believe.

What the believer says goes. Every single time.

Whether YOU like that or not.

And remember THAT is what the individual believes, not what other Mormons may or may not believe.

 

[dianaiad]

It dawned on me this morning that if they really wanted to avoid the issue, they would say that the bow in question was a crossbow

could be. The crossbow HAS been around since the 5th century BC, after all.

 

[dianaiad]

ooo… a logical fallacy!

Yes, as a matter of fact, a strawman IS a logical fallacy. Good job identifying that, Xavier.

That’s rich.

No, that’s ‘ludicrous.’ “Rich” means something quite different, Xavier.

And remember THAT is what the individual believes, not what other Mormons may or may not believe.

Yep…and an individual Mormon will, automatically, be the expert on the entirety of Mormonism over any non-Mormon, just as an individul Catholic will be the expert on the entirety of Catholicism over any non-Catholic.

 

[flameburns623]

Some observations:

1. I don’t think the BoM says that Nephi made his own ‘steel’ bow. I think he owned one, which broke, after which he was compelled to make himself an ordinary wooden bow (I Nephi 16: 18, 23).
2. The word ‘steel’ is used in the KJV and does not necessarily refer to the metal of which we are familiar today. In fact, the KJV refers to ‘steel bows’ in several places. In older English, the word ‘steel’ frequently meant ‘strengthened’ or ‘reinforced’, particularly with metal.
3. Speculation is that Nephi’s bow was made of brass or bronze, or were ornamented with such. In the KJV it is possible that the Hebrew ‘*nechushah’ *was erroneously translated as ‘steel’ and is related instead to the shape of the bow (‘snake-like’ being a possible descriptor of a double-convex bow). This explanation, even if true, does not help us to understand why the passage in Nephi, supposedly translated not from Hebrew but from ‘Reformed Egyptian’ would contain this translation.

See the following for elaboration:

bycommonconsent.com/2006/02/20/on-nephis-steel-bow/

 

[why_me]

But then they would be bringing about the demise of their faith, since the first church was the Catholic Church.

That is true. But my point is valid. If the book of mormon was conclusively proven true, it would mean the existence of god. And we all should be rooting for that. At the moment, all we have in christianity is faith unproven and that is not good at all for this secular age.

Instead what we have are catholics and protestants rooting that the book of mormon is false. Does it make sense to root for it being false?

 

[why_me]

---

I live about 10 miles west of Palmyra NY, I know more about Mormonism than you do sir from a very upclose & personal view ( details of which are none of your business) I have seen and read many of the mentioned Mormon posters explanations & some are accurate & some are just a flat out cover-up & denial of past & current Mormon teachings.

Given that fact that these & other mormons come here proselytizing I see no reason to give them a free pass. Truth is just that the TRUTH & that is what we are called to share & preach. If that means rebuting some Mormon teachings then so be it.

I only see catholics preaching their faith on this forum. The rest of the people are basically defending their faith against what catholics post about that faith. Do you disagree?