Where did the Book of Mormon take place?

[MyRdmrLvs]

I am afraid my point was obscured by the fact, unknown to me, that Mormons think that the geographical location of Eden has been revealed. The modern geographical location of Eden is revealed in neither Catholic Tradition nor Scripture. But why do we need to know what God hasn’t revealed? Of course, we don’t.

The Latter-day Saints can as correctly say that God hasn’t revealed the modern locations of events in the Book of Mormon. They are in the same position which we claim with regards to the Garden of Eden. It is no problem at all from an LDS or Catholic perspective that God has left some things unknown to us. This omission of information is not significant to truth claims.

Rory

the difference is that no archeological evidence would be found for eden but a massive civilization leaves behind something.

 

[MyRdmrLvs]

Catechism of the Catholic Church states:

2866 "By a tradition handed down from the apostles which took its origin from the very day of God created man, the Church celebrates the mystery of the Garden of Eden, which day is the first day of the week appropriately called the Lord’s Day or Sunday. By tradition the Church has always taught that the Garden of Eden is located in Central Texas.36

36 Stanmaxkolbe; Encyclical on Garden of Eden cira 2008.

(xavierlives made me do it)

Is that how we got the song God Blessed Texas?

 

[twopekinguys]

Twopekinguys,
This past Thursday I watched segments of the interviews I had written about, but had misunderstood about what those interviews indicated. They talked about two divergent views about the Native Americans, and that artifacts that showed an existence of an advanced culture were not taken seriously, since John Wesley Powell had an agenda to promote regarding the Native Americans needing to be assimilated into the American culture as the “natural progression” from a “primitive” stage of their society and culture. The mathematical and astronomical designs of such things as the mounds and calendars did not contribute to that opinion, so no serious attention was paid to those remnant architectures and artifacts. Some artifacts showed close similarity to Hebrew cultural symbols such as the symbol for God and for heaven–but no way would John Wesley Powell allow those kinds of artifacts to be brought forward and placed into prominent view in museums. So your comment about “hearsay” was partly correct. Thanks.

So we’re talking misinterpretation then…hmmmmm

Do you have a link of some sort to these interviews?

 

[zaffiroborant]

Twopekinguys,
Thanks for posting the link. The Woodland period group would be roughly the match, and you will note that 90% of the artifacts that were around in the 1800’s have been taken or destroyed. I actually have heard that some Smithsonian people of the early days of the United States deliberately had some of the artifacts and the mounds in the Ohio river valley destroyed. One wonders why in the world they would have done that.

Twopekinguys,
This past Thursday I watched segments of the interviews I had written about, but had misunderstood about what those interviews indicated. They talked about two divergent views about the Native Americans, and that artifacts that showed an existence of an advanced culture were not taken seriously, since John Wesley Powell had an agenda to promote regarding the Native Americans needing to be assimilated into the American culture as the “natural progression” from a “primitive” stage of their society and culture. The mathematical and astronomical designs of such things as the mounds and calendars did not contribute to that opinion, so no serious attention was paid to those remnant architectures and artifacts. Some artifacts showed close similarity to Hebrew cultural symbols such as the symbol for God and for heaven–but no way would John Wesley Powell allow those kinds of artifacts to be brought forward and placed into prominent view in museums. So your comment about “hearsay” was partly correct. Thanks.

So we’re talking misinterpretation then…hmmmmm

Do you have a link of some sort to these interviews?

Rather large misinterpretation there turning “refusing prominent display” into “deliberate destruction”.

 

[ParkerD]

So we’re talking misinterpretation then…hmmmmm

Do you have a link of some sort to these interviews?

Here you go:

youtube.com/watch?v=UTEJXeZcS0Y

Also:

youtube.com/watch?v=FF1O4NsCKOg

 

[twopekinguys]

Here you go:

youtube.com/watch?v=UTEJXeZcS0Y

Also:

youtube.com/watch?v=FF1O4NsCKOg

Thanks for the links.

I did make these observations though.

In the first one, there is one individual from the Smithsonian that speaks for appoximately 15 seconds, and merely states they didn’t know the “immensity” of these mound communities.

In the second one, the same gentleman from the Smithsonian speaks for 10 seconds, and doesn’t mention anything about them sanctioning the destruction of anything.

The only one to mention destruction of artifacts in either video was the lady from Harvard. Others spoke of how many museums have many many artifacts in storage. That’s quite a discrepency don’t you think?

I also didn’t see or hear any mention of Powell, and his agenda that you referred to in an earlier post.

Zaffiroborant,
One would need to do some research about **Baden Powell **and his approach to the whole story of the ancient American inhabitants and how advanced their civilizations were. I have a brother-in-law (seriously) who has seen interviews with Smithsonian retirees who told of events in the 1800’s where architecture and artifacts were deliberately destroyed.

Thanks, Jerusha, for noting that such a thing could actually happen.

I also find it interesting that we went from a brother in law who saw the interviews, to you seeing the interviews, to youtube.

This past Thursday I watched segments of the interviews I had written about

Is it me, or do you see all of the inconsistencies and misinformation in your posts?

 

[ParkerD]

Thanks for the links.

I did make these observations though.

In the first one, there is one individual from the Smithsonian that speaks for appoximately 15 seconds, and merely states they didn’t know the “immensity” of these mound communities.

In the second one, the same gentleman from the Smithsonian speaks for 10 seconds, and doesn’t mention anything about them sanctioning the destruction of anything.

The only one to mention destruction of artifacts in either video was the lady from Harvard. Others spoke of how many museums have many many artifacts in storage. That’s quite a discrepency don’t you think?

I also didn’t see or hear any mention of Powell, and his agenda that you referred to in an earlier post.

I also find it interesting that we went from a brother in law who saw the interviews, to you seeing the interviews, to youtube.

Is it me, or do you see all of the inconsistencies and misinformation in your posts?

Sorry about my memory being wrong about the Powell name. John Wesley Powell was the one who had a position at the Smithsonian, and he followed the line of thinking of Lewis Henry Morgan. The film I watched had more of the interviews than the links, but yeah I should not have brought any of that up since I didn’t personally interview any of the people, nor have I personally seen any of the mounds. Information from third-hand sources can easily have been misunderstood, as shown by this example.

'Tell you what–just disregard the whole subject. It makes absolutely not a tiny bit of difference to me.

 

[twopekinguys]

Sorry about my memory being wrong about the Powell name. John Wesley Powell was the one who had a position at the Smithsonian, and he followed the line of thinking of Lewis Henry Morgan. The film I watched had more of the interviews than the links, but yeah I should not have brought any of that up since I didn’t personally interview any of the people, nor have I personally seen any of the mounds. Information from third-hand sources can easily have been misunderstood, as shown by this example.

'Tell you what–just disregard the whole subject. It makes absolutely not a tiny bit of difference to me.

Now Parker, don’t be that way.

I have noticed you use the “it doesn’t matter to me” statement more than once when your assertions have been debunked.

I hate to say it, but, it is becoming a “I’m taking my marbles and going home” kind of mantra.

All of this appeared to make a difference to you at some point, or you wouldn’t have posted on the thread to begin with. Right?

 

[averagejoe84]

Have any of you read B.H. Roberts’ ‘Studies of The Book of Mormon’?

It’s a fascinating insight into the lack of evidence for the BOM and where it took place, made more fascinating because the author is a general authority writing essentially an internal report that concludes that the BOM is dubious. The internal thing is important, because it provides for candid honesty rather than spinning a line. Anyone with a serious interest in BOM origins and geography should have a look.

A link to the synopsis: signaturebooks.com/studies.htm

 

[Anna_Scott]

Zaffiroborant,
One would need to do some research about Baden Powell and his approach to the whole story of the ancient American inhabitants and how advanced their civilizations were. I have a brother-in-law (seriously) who has seen interviews with Smithsonian retirees who told of events in the 1800’s where architecture and artifacts were deliberately destroyed.

Thanks, Jerusha, for noting that such a thing could actually happen.

Twopekinguys,
I took the website to mean that if architecture was destroyed, then the artifacts within the architecture were not carefully and painstakingly preserved. But, you win if you wish.

Were these documented interviews?

I have no doubt that there may have been rogue individuals that destroyed artifacts/architecture, but I find it hard to believe that this was sanctioned. Especially by the Smithsonian.

With regard to the mounds being destroyed. Many of these mounds are located in areas close to large rivers and lakes. Nature itself has destroyed many of them, and man just finished the process. The mounds near Ashland Ky, are a prime example of this.

Also, many of these mounds are on privately owned land, and controlled by their owners, and not a museum or park service.

“Most of the mounds in Mississippi, however, are on privately owned land. As a result, many mounds have been irreparably damaged or completely destroyed by modern development and looting.”

or

“Of the 23 mounds originally present, four were destroyed and several others reduced to remnants by agriculture and excessive grazing prior to the site’s acquisition as a state park.”
nps.gov/nr//travel/mounds/textonly.htm

and

Another regional site is the Forest Home Farm Site Complex in South Portsmouth, Kentucky about 33 miles west of Ashland, Kentucky. It is across the river from Portsmouth, Ohio in Greenup and Lewis Counties, Kentucky. This site is located on a family owned farm. You must have permission to visit it."
library.thinkquest.org/CR0212160/Regional%20History.htm

Again, I don’t doubt that these things have been destroyed, that is obvious. What isn’t obvious is that it was sanctioned in any way by the Smithsonian.

If these “interviews” weren’t documented, they are just hearsay, and carry little to no weight at all.

Twopekinguys,
This past Thursday I watched segments of the interviews I had written about, but had misunderstood about what those interviews indicated. They talked about two divergent views about the Native Americans, and that artifacts that showed an existence of an advanced culture were not taken seriously, since John Wesley Powell had an agenda to promote regarding the Native Americans needing to be assimilated into the American culture as the “natural progression” from a “primitive” stage of their society and culture. The mathematical and astronomical designs of such things as the mounds and calendars did not contribute to that opinion, so no serious attention was paid to those remnant architectures and artifacts. Some artifacts showed close similarity to Hebrew cultural symbols such as the symbol for God and for heaven–but no way would John Wesley Powell allow those kinds of artifacts to be brought forward and placed into prominent view in museums. So your comment about “hearsay” was partly correct. Thanks.

So we’re talking misinterpretation then…hmmmmm

Do you have a link of some sort to these interviews?

Here you go:

youtube.com/watch?v=UTEJXeZcS0Y

Also:

youtube.com/watch?v=FF1O4NsCKOg

Thanks for the links.

I did make these observations though.

In the first one, there is one individual from the Smithsonian that speaks for appoximately 15 seconds, and merely states they didn’t know the “immensity” of these mound communities.

In the second one, the same gentleman from the Smithsonian speaks for 10 seconds, and doesn’t mention anything about them sanctioning the destruction of anything.

The only one to mention destruction of artifacts in either video was the lady from Harvard. Others spoke of how many museums have many many artifacts in storage. That’s quite a discrepency don’t you think?

I also didn’t see or hear any mention of Powell, and his agenda that you referred to in an earlier post.

I also find it interesting that we went from a brother in law who saw the interviews, to you seeing the interviews, to youtube.

Is it me, or do you see all of the inconsistencies and misinformation in your posts?

Sorry about my memory being wrong about the Powell name. John Wesley Powell was the one who had a position at the Smithsonian, and he followed the line of thinking of Lewis Henry Morgan. The film I watched had more of the interviews than the links, but yeah I should not have brought any of that up since I didn’t personally interview any of the people, nor have I personally seen any of the mounds. Information from third-hand sources can easily have been misunderstood, as shown by this example.

'Tell you what–just disregard the whole subject. It makes absolutely not a tiny bit of difference to me.

ParkerD,

I’ve been reading through this Thread, and I am trying to figure out what is going on.

Are we to disregard all of your posts on the topic?

Is there archeological evidence to help the question of this Thread one way or another?

Anna

 

[ParkerD]

Twopekinguys,
The following was my original post on this thread, to Catholic20064 who has family who are LDS:

Notwithstanding you have received a few replies that demonstrate that some readers of the Bible (if they really have read it) do not believe that God could actually mean what He had prophets say about the scattering of Israel being to all nations, I believe that God did mean what He said and had a purpose in that scattering of Israel, to ultimately bless all nations.

In answer to your first question, can you p(name removed by moderator)oint precisely where your ancestors lived from 600 BC - 400 AD, and do you have records or archeological evidence that demonstrate conclusively to you that the precise location you know is the correct one?

In answer to your second question, I surmise that some may have lived in areas of Guatemala and Mexico, and that a significant group migrated north and there is evidence of groups who lived in the Ohio river valley and in the Great Lakes region. But these groups only numbered in the thousands, not the millions, and as their numbers were decimated by conquering peoples their artifacts were also significantly pillaged, although there is evidence of a group of “mound people” who had a fairly advanced civilization in the Ohio river valley area.

I hope you and your family are well. Have a good year.

My interest in responding to him was to let him at least have the opportunity to understand that he need not dismiss the Book of Mormon as completely out of the realm of a possibility, more in the interest of giving his family some peace than any other reason, since he has made a firm decision for himself and that is just fine.

I responded to you when you asked more about the Ohio mounds and posted the link which I had appreciated your having done, but I was really not interested in pressing the matter and thus, for example, I didn’t call my sister to make sure I got the “Powell” name right. (My memory was faulty due to the BSA name of Baden Powell which I had heard at some point during my youth.) You asked for some links, and I have given you those. The full interviews are not on a link (either oral or written), nor is the film I watched on a link–just those two brief introductory lead-in segments from various interviews with people I have never met personally.

As I’ve stated, my real interest in posting here was so that Catholic20064 could let his family alone over the plausibility of the Book of Mormon. If he happens to watch the two segments and look at the link you posted, he can at least see that there was an advanced civilization in the Ohio valley area who used mounds and had artifacts, and that scholars during the 1800’s may not have pursued the matter with sincere intellectual curiosity due to bias against the Native Americans.

I also find that there is a difference in the kinds of questions and responses between those sincerely curious and seeking knowledge and those seeking to debunk with no interest in gleaning any more knowledge than when they started. That’s when I see no point in belaboring a conversation. It becomes a question of invested time versus any sort of return on the investment of time.

 

[ParkerD]

ParkerD,

I’ve been reading through this Thread, and I am trying to figure out what is going on.

Are we to disregard all of your posts on the topic?

Is there archeological evidence to help the question of this Thread one way or another?

Anna

Hi, Anna,
You can watch the Youtube segments (very brief) and decide for yourself. (I didn’t make them or place them on Youtube.) My only interest has been in demonstrating plausibility, not showing where Book of Mormon people specifically lived. My interest was in Catholic20064 for the reason I have noted just minutes ago. Having already crossed that bridge, I had accomplished my intent and was merely attempting to give brief responses so that the intellectually curious could do their own research.

I have only a mild interest in such research and its findings, and obviously anyone can “take it or leave it”, as always. I think it is fairly safe to conclude that some ancient civilization lived in the Ohio river valley, and showed an advanced culture.

 

[catholic-rcia]

I just read these postings. I think the real question here is can you honestly, in your heart and minds accept Spiritual truth? Or try to fit everything into what you currently believe on this journey of life. I never ever thought I would think that I would stand in a Church and say this is it…this is truth. 11 years later I cannot find any reason not to say it.
What is to be gained if one opened up to the possibility that what they have been taught is wrong? I became Catholic at 40 years old. I could have gone in any directions. As I learned the Catholic faith it all made perfect sense. I feel as if I don’t have to manipulate anything anymore in order to make it fit where I have a desire for it to fit, in order not to change everything that I know. . I can speak about everything our faith has to offer without any fear at all in the answers. I tribute this to the Hpoly Spirit, nothing to do with me, just a witness to it.
(Lucky/Blessed)

I believe things can change when you have a direct personal relationship with Jesus, the reality of Him in your life. You choose truth because in the end it’s for Jesus. For giving you your life, the opportunity to come out of complete nothingness, latch yourself to Him and live this life and the next always in awe.

Once we strip ourselves from self, then we can see that He is the only real thing important in this life. Once you come to Jesus there is no other place to progress to in this life or in the next. This is hard for us Americans to accept as we always feel the need to improve in so many ways. As trinity believers, Trinity in the Christian sense we know that love does not come from us, that it will never come from us as love is of God solely. And this love makes up the God head that we worship and give all praise and glory to, leaving our pride behind when we get caught up into the Sacraments of the Church. The fantastic part of all this is that God gives us the ability within the family, out to our extended families to share in His divine love as created beings.

In my own life I have found that the LDS, God bless their souls have been tricked into believing to much about themselves, what they can achieve and how they can achieve it. Yet all God asks of us is that we understand the separation from Him and desire to return to Him. Surrendering yourself, a sinner into the life of the Blessed Trinity. Learning how to decipher what His will is for us, no matter how much it may hurt we choose His over are own.

Parker, I believe you have read many of the Churches beliefs such as prayer to Saints, Purgatory, Eucharist, Confession, Crucifix, Cross, Jesus, the Godhead, Holy Spirit, the fall of mankind, stations of the Cross, the Rosary, revelation, etc…etc…I would bet that deep down it all makes sense to you as well. I am saying this believe it or not out of love for you in Christ Jesus.

We had a young women become Catholic about 5 years ago who’s father was an LDS Bishop. He told her at first that she would loose her eternal family if she chose this path,…I remember her tears. As time got closer to her Baptism in Christ he said “can’t you just stop for the family?” even if you don’t believe can you just suck it up for the family?” To make a long story short she still loves her dad, her dad still loves her dearly. Jesus worked it all out for all of them.

I will end with this.
What makes us a Church is our weakness not our strength. Our Confessions is what binds us. We cannot reach up to God in any way shape our form. We can only choose to let Him reach down from the Cross and pull us aboard.

 

[SnakeMauler]

Some Mormons say the Great Lakes area. Some Mormons limit it to Central America. Why can’t the Mormons tell us where the Book of Mormon peoples lived? Where do you as a Mormon think they lived?

Simple answer: The events in the book of Mormon didn’t take place at all.

In any case, it is an entertaining fan fiction of the New Testament.

 

[twopekinguys]

Twopekinguys,
The following was my original post on this thread, to Catholic20064 who has family who are LDS:

My interest in responding to him was to let him at least have the opportunity to understand that he need not dismiss the Book of Mormon as completely out of the realm of a possibility, more in the interest of giving his family some peace than any other reason, since he has made a firm decision for himself and that is just fine.

I responded to you when you asked more about the Ohio mounds and posted the link which I had appreciated your having done, but I was really not interested in pressing the matter and thus, for example, I didn’t call my sister to make sure I got the “Powell” name right. (My memory was faulty due to the BSA name of Baden Powell which I had heard at some point during my youth.) You asked for some links, and I have given you those. The full interviews are not on a link (either oral or written), nor is the film I watched on a link–just those two brief introductory lead-in segments from various interviews with people I have never met personally.

As I’ve stated, my real interest in posting here was so that Catholic20064 could let his family alone over the plausibility of the Book of Mormon. If he happens to watch the two segments and look at the link you posted, he can at least see that there was an advanced civilization in the Ohio valley area who used mounds and had artifacts, and that scholars during the 1800’s may not have pursued the matter with sincere intellectual curiosity due to bias against the Native Americans.

I also find that there is a difference in the kinds of questions and responses between those sincerely curious and seeking knowledge and those seeking to debunk with no interest in gleaning any more knowledge than when they started. That’s when I see no point in belaboring a conversation. It becomes a question of invested time versus any sort of return on the investment of time.

So what you were doing was prosteltyzing.

You also neglected to include the first paragraph of your post which is very classic you. Making little off handed remarks insinuating that people do not know the Bible as well as you. (Bolding mine)

Hi, Catholic20064,
Notwithstanding you have received a few replies that demonstrate that some readers of the Bible (if they really have read it) do not believe that God could actually mean what He had prophets say about the scattering of Israel being to all nations, I believe that God did mean what He said and had a purpose in that scattering of Israel, to ultimately bless all nations.

You then made an assertion trying to connect the mound people of the Ohio valley with those of Mexico and Guatamala. I am assuming because you were trying to connect the LDS claim that the Lamenites, and Nephites originated there. (Which there is no scientific evidence of)

I then provided you with a link to some of those sites, which clearly does not support your assumption.

Then you saw interviews, then your brother in law did, then we got youtube videos. All of which clearly show you were blowing smoke. Remember on another thread where you made a post of “I heard”.

I find it extremely funny when you state “I also find that there is a difference in the kinds of questions and responses between those sincerely curious and seeking knowledge and those seeking to debunk with no interest in gleaning any more knowledge than when they started.”

It is clearly you that doesn’t want to glean knowledge. When presented with information (documentation provided) that you don’t like, or goes against what you “think” is true, then you decide that the subject is no longer worth your effort.

You are simply here to present the mormon side, and not take any truth away with you. That is truly sad.

 

[Anna_Scott]

. . . .I believe things can change when you have a direct personal relationship with Jesus, the reality of Him in your life. You choose truth because in the end it’s for Jesus. For giving you your life, the opportunity to come out of complete nothingness, latch yourself to Him and live this life and the next always in awe.

. . .Once we strip ourselves from self, then we can see that He is the only real thing important in this life. Once you come to Jesus there is no other place to progress to in this life or in the next. . . .

. . .In my own life I have found that the LDS, God bless their souls have been tricked into believing to much about themselves, what they can achieve and how they can achieve it.

. . .Yet all God asks of us is that we understand the separation from Him and desire to return to Him. Surrendering yourself, a sinner into the life of the Blessed Trinity. Learning how to decipher what His will is for us, no matter how much it may hurt we choose His over are own.

. . . .What makes us a Church is our weakness not our strength. Our Confessions is what binds us. We cannot reach up to God in any way shape our form. We can only choose to let Him reach down from the Cross and pull us aboard.

catholic-rcia,

Indeed, we are to “strip ourselves from self.” The Christian focus is on Christ. We are nothing without him. We are to yield all that we are, and all that we have to Christ.

Our “new self,” through Christ, is created after the likeness of God, being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator. Our “new self” does not become god.

Romans 6 (ESV): 6 We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin.

**Ephesians 4: **20 But that is not the way you learned Christ!— 21assuming that you have heard about him and were taught in him, as the truth is in Jesus, 22 to put off your old self, which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful desires, 23 and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds, 24 and to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.

Colossians 3: 9 Do not lie to one another, seeing that you have put off the old self with its practices 10 and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator.

The fall of mankind was rooted in the promise to be “like God.” We all know that Satan often tempts man with half-truths, as Genesis demonstrates. Satan’s lie was revealed, as Eve’s sin did bring death. Though her eyes were opened to know good and evil, she did not actually become “like God.”

Genesis 3: 4 But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. 5 For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

The story of Adam and Eve reveals the fact that sin separates us from God. It also has much to say about empty promises. Satan played on the pride and self-centered nature of mankind–dangling the promise to become like God.

Mormonism dangles the possibility of becoming god. Is this not the epitome of self elevation? Doesn’t this promise sound familiar?

Anna

 

[catholic-rcia]

catholic-rcia,

Indeed, we are to “strip ourselves from self.” The Christian focus is on Christ. We are nothing without him. We are to yield all that we are, and all that we have to Christ.

Our “new self,” through Christ, is created after the likeness of God, being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator. Our “new self” does not become god.

The fall of mankind was rooted in the promise to be “like God.” We all know that Satan often tempts man with half-truths, as Genesis demonstrates. Satan’s lie was revealed, as Eve’s sin did bring death. Though her eyes were opened to know good and evil, she did not actually become “like God.”

The story of Adam and Eve reveals the fact that sin separates us from God. It also has much to say about empty promises. Satan played on the pride and self-centered nature of mankind–dangling the promise to become like God.

Mormonism dangles the possibility of becoming god. Is this not the epitome of self elevation? Doesn’t this promise sound familiar?

Anna

Absolutely Anna. It is all about the fall…severing the Chord of life. The empty promise to become a god apart from Trinity.

We all have this sin in our lives, I do believe as Christians who get it, we at least know the spin Satan produces. We know when we attempt to be a god in our daily lives. Being close to Jesus helps us to see this even as it occurs, then the choice is before us. Because of our actions forgiveness and reconciliation takes center stage.

The fall of mankind is one of my favorite subjects. You have to face the fact that you have cancer in order to take the steps to healing. If one says I have never lied, or I don’t ever gossip, or I have never been impure with myself, I have never hated anyone, I have never sinned. Than they will never really know the love of God, what took place on the Cross. He will never be needed the way we as Christians need Him.

In Christ

 

[pismopal]

I was watching a TV special about an archeological search for evidence of a people who were supposed to live in the subject area. An archeologist was asked if it were possible for a people to have lived in an age and there be no evidence of it. I remember his answer was " No…it is impossible".
Not a single mormon claim regarding ancient history has been corroborated…none and they don’t waste money looking anymore.

 

[Jerusha]

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e4/L%27Anse_aux_Meadows_map.png/590px-L%27Anse_aux_Meadows_map.png

L’anse aux Meadows

 

[Jerusha]

http://www.mnh.si.edu/vikings/voyage/subset/vinland/photo.jpg