Where is the archeological evidence for the Book of Mormon?

[Sparko]

well?

[Bill the Cat]

You will probably receive quotes from Nibley, the Ashtons, or Sorenson. I look forward to seeing the same ol same ol...

[RBerman]

well?

Like the golden plates, it's long gone.

[rogue06]

Like the golden plates, it's long gone.

It's real easy to find. You just have to look down into this hat...

[DigitalInkling]

I think Later Day Saints are still looking. Absence of evidence does not serve as evidence?

Look at this exciting series called the Nephite Explorer:

http://nephiteexplorer.com

I would expect these modern day Indiana Jones groups will eventually find the evidence we are all looking for.

[Sparko]

we have evidence of many civilizations that existed in meso america, and not one shred of evidence of the Nephites or that they interacted with any of those other civilizations. Nada. So, no, I don't think they will eventually find evidence for the BoM. They might manufacture it, but they will never find it.

[Bill the Cat]

I think Later Day Saints are still looking. Absence of evidence does not serve as evidence?

Look at this exciting series called the Nephite Explorer:

http://nephiteexplorer.com

I would expect these modern day Indiana Jones groups will eventually find the evidence we are all looking for.

I hope you are being sarcastic. Those guys are the jokes of the Mesoamerican Archaeology world...

[DigitalInkling]

Sarcasm

I hope you are being sarcastic. Those guys are the jokes of the Mesoamerican Archaeology world...

Sarcasm... me? nah. There website speaks for itself. This is science baby.

[seven7up]

Recently, on a Atheist/Agnostic forum.

I had a discussion with a person who claimed that Jesus of Nazereth, did not exist.

Not only did he deny that Jesus was the Messiah. He claimed that the entire person of Jesus was made up from scratch. Nothing could convince him otherwise.

I only bring this up because his mocking and sarcastic attitude was the same as the attitudes seen so far on this thread. And equally as foolish.



In the early 1900s, the President of the LDS Church, Heber J. Grant, relayed a discussion with a man (who held an impressive doctorate) who had ridiculed him for believing in the Book of Mormon. The "scholar" referenced the mention of "cement" in the Book of Mormon as an obvious lie "because the people in that early age knew nothing about cement." the young Grant, said:

"That does not affect my faith one particle. I read the Book of Mormon prayerfully and supplicated God for a testimony in my heart and soul of the divinity of it, and I have accepted it and believe it with all my heart." I also said to him, "If my children do not find cement houses, I expect that my grandchildren will." He said, "Well, what is the good of talking with a fool like that?" - Grant 1929

As we all should know, since that conversation took place, many forms of cement have been found in South, Central and North America.

God will provide some evidence, and He has. And for those who are honestly seeking the truth, there will be balance with room for both belief and doubt. Those who seek guidance directly from God will be led to truth, and those who "seek the arm of the flesh" will be open to be deceived.

How will you all go about it? Trust in the arm of the flesh I suppose.


-7up

[Sparko]

Recently, on a Atheist/Agnostic forum.

I had a discussion with a person who claimed that Jesus of Nazereth, did not exist.

Not only did he deny that Jesus was the Messiah. He claimed that the entire person of Jesus was made up from scratch. Nothing could convince him otherwise.

I only bring this up because his mocking and sarcastic attitude was the same as the attitudes seen so far on this thread. And equally as foolish.



In the early 1900s, the President of the LDS Church, Heber J. Grant, relayed a discussion with a man (who held an impressive doctorate) who had ridiculed him for believing in the Book of Mormon. The "scholar" referenced the mention of "cement" in the Book of Mormon as an obvious lie "because the people in that early age knew nothing about cement." the young Grant, said:

"That does not affect my faith one particle. I read the Book of Mormon prayerfully and supplicated God for a testimony in my heart and soul of the divinity of it, and I have accepted it and believe it with all my heart." I also said to him, "If my children do not find cement houses, I expect that my grandchildren will." He said, "Well, what is the good of talking with a fool like that?" - Grant 1929

As we all should know, since that conversation took place, many forms of cement have been found in South, Central and North America.

God will provide some evidence, and He has. And for those who are honestly seeking the truth, there will be balance with room for both belief and doubt. Those who seek guidance directly from God will be led to truth, and those who "seek the arm of the flesh" will be open to be deceived.

How will you all go about it? Trust in the arm of the flesh I suppose.


-7up

Summary of the above: "Yeah well there might not be any evidence at all right now but I have faith that we will have it one day."


Conclusion: There is no archaeological evidence for the Nephite civilization ever having existed.

[Bill the Cat]

Recently, on a Atheist/Agnostic forum.

I had a discussion with a person who claimed that Jesus of Nazereth, did not exist.

Not only did he deny that Jesus was the Messiah. He claimed that the entire person of Jesus was made up from scratch. Nothing could convince him otherwise.

I only bring this up because his mocking and sarcastic attitude was the same as the attitudes seen so far on this thread. And equally as foolish.

What is simply hilarious with your stupid claim here is that there is ample evidence for the existence of Jesus of Nazareth. All but the very fringe atheists believe He was an actual person. In contrast, only the very fringe of archaeologists believe in any of the events described in the fictional Book of Mormon. So, Jesus = only a fringe deny, and BOM = Only a fringe believes.

In the early 1900s, the President of the LDS Church, Heber J. Grant, relayed a discussion with a man (who held an impressive doctorate) who had ridiculed him for believing in the Book of Mormon. The "scholar" referenced the mention of "cement" in the Book of Mormon as an obvious lie "because the people in that early age knew nothing about cement." the young Grant, said:

"That does not affect my faith one particle. I read the Book of Mormon prayerfully and supplicated God for a testimony in my heart and soul of the divinity of it, and I have accepted it and believe it with all my heart." I also said to him, "If my children do not find cement houses, I expect that my grandchildren will." He said, "Well, what is the good of talking with a fool like that?" - Grant 1929

As we all should know, since that conversation took place, many forms of cement have been found in South, Central and North America.

Jeff Lindsay admits that "The key to making cement is the conversion of calcium carbonate to calcium oxide (lime) in a process called calcination. It requires fire, and the ancient producers of cement in Mexico needed a lot of flammable material to sustain the cement industry." Cement is able to be made because you have a lot of wood. If you don't have a lot of wood, you can't make cement, period. Yet the fictional "Helaman" said they made cement because they had little wood.

Helaman 3:7 And there being but little timber upon the face of the land, nevertheless the people who went forth became exceedingly expert in the working of cement; therefore they did build houses of cement, in the which they did dwell.

The Book of Mormon here mentions "houses of cement." Cement is very weak, and only was used as a binder for stone or brick constructions. By itself, cement has no strength to function as a sustainable structure, and is basically useless as a building's sole material. And concrete is not cement, nor is adobe, neither of which require heat to make.

God will provide some evidence, and He has.

Those who maintain a heavy investment in Mormonism need to believe these trivial twisted "evidences".

And for those who are honestly seeking the truth, there will be balance with room for both belief and doubt. Those who seek guidance directly from God will be led to truth,

Which posits that you have the ability to discern what messages are from God and which ones are from satan. Joseph Smith himself never claimed that ability.

In discussing the "Canadian Copyright Caper" B. H. Roberts quotes an entire passage from David Whitmer in Comprehensive History of the Church Vol. 1 pp. 162-66
So just how do we know what revelations are from God, from the devil or from the heart of man if even the Prophet Joseph Smith couldn't tell?

The last line of the quote is significant:

When a man enquires of the Lord concerning a matter, if he is deceived by his own carnal desires, and is in error, he will receive an answer according to his erring heart, but it will not be a revelation from the Lord.

and those who "seek the arm of the flesh" will be open to be deceived.

So, Joseph was seeking the arm of the flesh when he received a revelation via the seer stone in his hat and told told Hiram Page and Oliver Cowdery to go to Toronto to sell the copyright to the Book of Mormon?

How will you all go about it? Trust in the arm of the flesh I suppose.

You don't even know what that term means. It is used once in 2 Chr 32:8 to refer to Sennacherib's massive human and thoroughly pagan army that supported him without the help of God in contrast to God who supported King Hezekiah. Archaeological evidence is not human, so can not be devoid of God, so it is not to be considered "the arm of the flesh".

[seven7up]

What is simply hilarious with your stupid claim here is that there is ample evidence for the existence of Jesus of Nazareth. All but the very fringe atheists believe He was an actual person. In contrast, only the very fringe of archaeologists believe in any of the events described in the fictional Book of Mormon. So, Jesus = only a fringe deny, and BOM = Only a fringe believes.

IF the Book of Mormon is true, then you essentially have to believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet. Then you essentially have to believe in Mormonism. On the other hand, people can believe that Jesus of Nazereth existed, yet deny that He was Deity.

Jeff Lindsay admits that "The key to making cement is the conversion of calcium carbonate to calcium oxide (lime) in a process called calcination. It requires fire, and the ancient producers of cement in Mexico needed a lot of flammable material to sustain the cement industry." Cement is able to be made because you have a lot of wood. If you don't have a lot of wood, you can't make cement, period. Yet the fictional "Helaman" said they made cement because they had little wood.

You have to keep reading Bill:

"...making cement does not require high-quality timber suitable for making buildings, but merely material that can burn. There can be a shortage of high-quality trees yet plenty of flammable material that can support cement making. However, based on what scholars have learned about the region in southern Mexico where cement was used anciently, it appears that the deforestation problem mentioned in the Book of Mormon was at least partly caused by the high demand for wood to support the manufacture of cement. On this interesting topic, Brant Gardner has an excellent essay on Helaman chapter 3 and the issue of cement manufacture...." - Jeff Lindsay

Are you going to deny that cement existed in the Americas?
- David S. Hyman, A Study of the Calcareous Cements in Prehispanic Mesoamerican Building Construction (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, 1970), ii, sec. 6, p. 7.
- George Kubler, The Art and Architecture of Ancient America, 2nd ed. (Baltimore: Penguin, 1975), 201, emphasis added.
- Tatiana Proskouriakoff, An Album of Maya Architecture (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1963), xv.

The critics were wrong about cement existing in the Americas. This is just one example.

Those who maintain a heavy investment in Mormonism need to believe these trivial twisted "evidences".

I am not "heavily invested". I did not grow up in Mormonism. Had no Mormon friends. Did not serve a mission. I converted as an adult (well, in my early 20s while in college).

You Bill, are the one who is heavily invested in your creedal version of Christianity. You are unwilling to humble yourself to God and consider the possibility that your religious views may be wrong.

-7up

[Bill the Cat]

IF the Book of Mormon is true, then you essentially have to believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet. Then you essentially have to believe in Mormonism. On the other hand, people can believe that Jesus of Nazereth existed, yet deny that He was Deity.

So, you see the difference then, good.

You have to keep reading Bill:

"...making cement does not require high-quality timber suitable for making buildings, but merely material that can burn. There can be a shortage of high-quality trees yet plenty of flammable material that can support cement making. However, based on what scholars have learned about the region in southern Mexico where cement was used anciently, it appears that the deforestation problem mentioned in the Book of Mormon was at least partly caused by the high demand for wood to support the manufacture of cement. On this interesting topic, Brant Gardner has an excellent essay on Helaman chapter 3 and the issue of cement manufacture...." - Jeff Lindsay

Jeff is merely speculating here with no evidence to even support the area he is claiming as the supposed BOM lands.

Are you going to deny that cement existed in the Americas?

Of course not. It was used, as I stated, as binding material

- David S. Hyman, A Study of the Calcareous Cements in Prehispanic Mesoamerican Building Construction (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, 1970), ii, sec. 6, p. 7.

Which states the cement was used as "binding mortar" for the actual building material, as he references the sample taken from the "Quetzalbutterfly" Temple. Hyman makes no claim that the structure is made of cement.

- George Kubler, The Art and Architecture of Ancient America, 2nd ed. (Baltimore: Penguin, 1975), 201, emphasis added.

Who also says that the cement was used as binding or strengthening material for adding balance to the cantilevered stones that made up the corbelled vaults. Kubler does not make any such claim that the structures were actually made of cement.

- Tatiana Proskouriakoff, An Album of Maya Architecture (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1963), xv.

She makes absolutely no claim of them using cement. In fact, the word "cement" is not even in the book. She mentions "burnt lime" mortar twice, once as a "stuccoe-like finish" over the existing load bearing stones to reduce the need for exact fits, and once in the midst of older rubble to provide footing and support for new stone constructions. She never claims that the structures were made of cement.

The critics were wrong about cement existing in the Americas. This is just one example.

Perhaps you should actually read what you are citing instead of snatching quotes repeatedly without attribution.

I am not "heavily invested". I did not grow up in Mormonism. Had no Mormon friends. Did not serve a mission. I converted as an adult (well, in my early 20s while in college).

Yet here you are here defending Mormonism against any and all comers.

You Bill, are the one who is heavily invested in your creedal version of Christianity.

Not as strongly as you think I am. Do I believe it is right? Of course. Will I change my mind if I discover an error? You betcha!

You are unwilling to humble yourself to God and consider the possibility that your religious views may be wrong.

Which is why I am no longer a dispensationalist. Because I think I am infallibly right...

[Cow Poke]

How will you all go about it? Trust in the arm of the flesh I suppose.


-7up

I just got back from Israel. I touched the Western Wall. I heard Jews who do not believe that Jesus was Messiah explaining where he walked and how he lived. I visited cities where Jesus ministered. I waded in the Jordan River where Jesus was baptized.

I didn't NEED that to know that Christ was who He said He was, but it sure was nice being able to see ACTUAL THINGS that spoke of Jesus' existence and to visit places where Jesus actually walked.

Your goofy "trust in the arm of flesh" is just sour grapes on your part.

[Cow Poke]

You are unwilling to humble yourself to God and consider the possibility that your religious views may be wrong.

-7up

I was totally willing to consider that Mormonism was true when I was in my late teens, early 20's.
Even visited the Temple at Kirtland. (Which, subsequently, I learned was the home of the Bank Scandal Smith foisted on his own trusting people)
I spent "Family Home Evenings" with a Mormon family.
I was given a BoM, and prayed the prayer more than a few times.
I read the BoM through TWICE, and partially a third time.

I never got a "peace" that Smith was a prophet, let alone a "burning in the bosom".
I never got a sense that the BoM was anything more than a copy-cat Bible.

I used to be a little embarrassed when my friends here would outright call Mormonism a "cult", and Smith a "fraud".

It was, finally, Smith's GOOFY "revelation" that God would destroy his otherwise faithful wife if she didn't go along with his polygamy scam that finally did it.

Smith is a fraud. The BoM is the invention of his wild imagination, along with a heavy dose of plagiarism of other works. Those who follow Smith and the BoM are deceived.

I was willing to consider my "religion" was wrong, and BoM was true. The Holy Spirit of the Living God convinced me otherwise.