Book of Mormon Evidence: Cement
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 янв 2022
- The use of cement as a building material in ancient Mesoamerica is consistent with the reported timing and (according to some geographical theories) the location of its use and development in the Book of Mormon.
evidencecentral.org/recency/e...
Just to add to the confusion…..As a young child growing up back in the 1950’s in southeastern Arizona I remember the old timers mentioning that the early pioneers in the area found old cement pipes that were superior in quality to anything they had seen before.
Cement, chemically speaking, is a product that includes lime (DOES NOT HAVE TO INCLUDE LIME) as the primary binding ingredient, but is far from the first material used for cementation. The Babylonians and Assyrians used bitumen to bind together burnt brick or alabaster slabs. In Ancient Egypt, stone blocks were cemented together with a mortar made of sand and roughly burnt gypsum (CaSO4 · 2H2O), which often contained calcium carbonate (CaCO3). Cement may also include a process of coating one material with another like in metallurgy where one metal material is cemented onto another material (metal or other material) to give it strength or durability. We might even discover someone anciently used a form of polymer cementation in their builds.
The Book of Mormon was written by Ethiopians. Helaman 3 is describing a migration North from Ethiopia to Egypt.
Lehi was in Egypt on Elephantine Island when he got Jeremiah 44 claiming Jews will be destroyed in Egypt.
He had the Tree of Life vision that commanded he follow the Nile River up stream to the source of the river in Ethiopia. This is the Garden of Eden according to Genesis 2:13 and therefore where the Tree of Life is.
The Nephites were destroyed for migrating back to Egypt (again, this is documented in Helaman 3). This was prophesized in Jeremiah 44.
The "treeless" land where they build with "cement" and "ship" timber is Egypt as described by Ethiopians. This land is North of Ethiopia. There is no evidence of shipping in Ancient America. Egypt is well known for shipping Lebanon Cedar.
1:32 just because something hasn’t been found, doesn’t mean it never existed.
Where is any reference in the BoM that they built pyramids out of stone or cement as depicted in your thumb nail? I don't know of any. Please reply with some chapters/verses. Tks kindly.
The BoM says that they built towers. The pyramids of Egypt and meso America were the tallest structures of the time. Anyone who is informed living in the 1800s would have most likely been envisioning pyramids when they hear the word tower as skyscrapers made of steel were not invented yet. And if pyramids did not pass as towers back then, than what would?
The problem is that the Helaman verse says there were no trees. Burning lime for cement takes a huge amount of timber.
not that much. I've seen videos of limestone burning, which is then added to water for it to breakdown.
also, maybe they used coal.
Oh, there was plenty of wood, just no "timber" for construction. Anyone who visits this area of the world knows that it's so fertile you can hardly keep things from growing, and there is always plenty of wood for burning. Apparently during this particular period there was simply a shortage of the kind of trees that can be harvested for construction.
It says that they had become "exceedingly expert" in making cement. Necessity is the mother of invention... they may have found ways that would have required less fuel.
Here in the Yucatán, we make cement easily without wood because we have so much limestone here.
Thanks for bringing up this point so others don't get confused by it. Here's the verse: Helaman 3:6 And now no part of the land was desolate, save it were for timber; but because of the greatness of the destruction of the people who had before inhabited the land it was called desolate.
So right away it say no part was desolate except for timber which is primarily used for building. So it's probably a very fertile place, just not with an abundance of useful trees for construction. That's not to say there was no wood. Then we read on for a couple seconds and we find all the answers we need: 10 And it came to pass as timber was exceedingly scarce in the land northward, they did send forth much by the way of shipping. 11 And thus they did enable the people in the land northward that they might build many cities, both of wood and of cement.
Crazy. Who could have thought that they could have all the resources they needed by just shipping it? They truly were a fascinating people.
The fact is it didn't happen in mesoamerica the timeline doesn't match, but yet if you look to the Heartland model it matches perfectly where it really happened in America! You meso American theories, cause so much problems, when all you have to do, it's look to the north, with the heartland model!
Help please! I’m a little confused. So the Mayans used “cement”? I don’t remember reading about the Mayans in the Book of Mormon. Are you saying Nephite or Lamanite civilizations where actually the Mayans? I’m confused why you’re using Mayan artifacts to support the BoM. I thought Nephites and Lamenties were of Israeli decent? Mayans are from Asia.
Also, you mention “many scholars believe the primary events of the BoM took place” in mesoamerica”. By many scholars … do you mean lds AND non-lds scholars?
I’m not sure who to trust … the leaders of the church for centuries maintain that BoM events took place in western New York, such as the big battle at the Hill Cumorah. Do we believe scholars or the prophets of the church?
I hear so many different theories … scholars say meso-America, church leaders say New York, anti-Mormons say none of it happened …
Can anyone definitively tell me what happened, and where BoM events took place?
Finally, you ended the video by suggesting that only a prophet of god could have known in the 19th century that cement was used in meso America. But wouldn’t a prophet know about other anachronisms found in the BoM? Or do you argue that there are no anachronisms?
Any insight into these matters would be greatly appreciated. I struggle with all this and it gets confusing.
The video isn't claiming a certain people, it is claiming a general timeline.
The argument was "no one back then knew about cement" and the evidence clearly shows that yes "at least some people back then knew about cement". If one group in a general area had a technology there is a logical argument that other people in the same general area had similar technology.
SOME scholars say Meso-America, SOME church leaders say North America. The official position of the church is "...the Church’s only position is that the events the Book of Mormon describes took place in the ancient Americas." So there is no "scholar vs leader" issue. Neither opinion is revelation.
No one can tell you exactly where the events of the Book for Mormon took place.
As for other anachronisms, several have been shown to not be such. It seems that the further we get from the publication of the boook the more anachronisms are cleared up.
@@LukeHopkin - The video specifically claims the Maya used cement. It says it at the 2:20 mark. And yes you are right, the video says that Maya used it around 100BC.
Do you not see the real issue. The real issue isn’t if cement was or was not used, or if anyone knew or didn’t know if cement was used … rather the real issue is that the BoM never mentions Mayans or any other natives other than Nephites/Lamenites using cement. That’s what we should be looking for. Quote an archeologist (like the video did) that corroborates what the BoM actually claims. Show me that Nephites used cement. The problem is we can’t find evidence of a people group existing called nephites and we don’t know where they existed. So instead, the church sees another proven ancient civilization (Mayans in this case) using cement and somehow use that to say, “see!!! Only a prophet could have known that”! Known what exactly?? Joseph Smith nor Helamen said Mayans or any other know civilizations used cement … the claim is that Nephites used it.
Do you not find it odd that the church uses artifacts from other civilizations and claim it as proof for BoM claims? It doesn’t make any sense to me. Am I missing something??
As far as LDS scholars vs LDS leaders are concerned, I’ll just let you continue to research that. The official position of the church leaders is that BoM events took place in Palmyra NY like Joseph Smith said. So why would meso-American natives travel to New York’s Hill Cumorah to fight an epic battle? The church hosted Hill Cumorah pageants in NY since 1937 and claims that is the location of the epic battle. The church stopped the pageant by the way. Do your research please.
Don’t you find it odd that there existed this robust historical civilization in the BoM and “no one can tell you exactly where BoM events took place? You say that so easily as if it’s no big deal. Why not? There are 1000s of historical events that we know where it happened. I know where the battle of Gettysburg was. I know the sermon on the mount Jesus gave was given at the Sea of Galilee … we can go there today and see where this event took place ourselves. We can go to Greece and see temples that existed in 800 BC. We know some events that took place in Egypt and we have pyramids we can go see today. So why can’t we find anything at all that corroborates Jaradite‘s, Nephites, Lamanite civilizations? Instead the church hijacks Mayan civilization and projects it onto BoM events. It’s simply dishonest. How can you make the statement that you made without it turning on your critical brain?
An finally about anachronisms … I love how you mentioned several anachronisms have been shown to not be … as if that somehow wipes away many many blatant and obvious anachronisms that render the BoM untrue. Explain to me how a Koine Greek word like “Jesus Christ” was used by people who spoke Hebrew, but wrote in reformed Egyptian, 1000s of years before the language itself was ever used? Some how ancient BoM prophets were using Koine Greek words like “Jesus Christ” and “baptisms” before the language ever existed. That’s is just 1 of 100 anachronisms in the BoM that cannot be explained away. So please do tell me how we came to find out that there in fact were horses in the Americas during BoM times and so now we can simply ignore all the anti-Mormons who say there are anachronisms.
I see that your faith is important to you but your grasping and holding in to whatever you can to not lose your faith.
How about you just believe that the moral lessons in the BoM are true? I can give you that. But please don’t say that the BoM is actual factual history.
I will start listening when you can show me actual evidence that supports what BoM claims. I believe the Bible because you can corroborate the events that took place. The people were real, the places existed, etc.
@@zmig7793 Yes, I am sorry but you are missing something.
The idea isn't to say "see here are Nephites using cement". The idea is to say "folks claimed cement didn't exist back then, but it did." You are claiming more than the video is.
The official position of the church is "the Americas". That is literally on the website and has been for sometime. So you are missing that. People make not knowing where the BOM took place into a big deal. This is hypocritical when they get all excited about new, non religious related, discoveries take place. But in addition to this, not knowing kind of makes sense. For example, the book itself tells us how the primary record keeping people were conquered and destroyed. History shows us that the conqorers often destroy the evidence of the conquered. We can expect that happened in the this case.
You are also missing why researching one group of people can help understand another. This isn't a "church" practice. This is something that is part of both archeology and anthropology studies.
You are also missing how the Book of Mormon was translated and why it would use words that didn't exist in the original writers time. Joseph was given what to write through spiritual means, not academic means, so the words he was given to use don't have to match what a word-for-word translation would be. So no, the Nephites didn't write "baptism" but whatever word they wrote would be "baptism" in Joseph's day.
You are also missing a bunch of reasons why we have more evidence from early United States history, or near eastern history, verses what we would expect to have from Pre-Columbian American history. For example the difference in time and recording methods between Gettysburg and 400 AD America's. Comparing ancient America to Gettysburg is absurd. But also, the difference in the amount of work done in the old world vs the new. Heck a 15 year old kid found an entire Mayan city in 2016 using Google Earth. Very little work has been done in the Americas compare to the old world.
Yeah, I am sorry, but you are missing a lot.
I won't bother with your personal of faith attacks, they don't merit any answers.
@@zmig7793
"The real issue isn’t if cement was or was not used, or if anyone knew or didn’t know if cement was used … rather the real issue is that the BoM never mentions Mayans or any other natives other than Nephites/Lamenites using cement."
You are looking beyond the mark. The book of mormon makes claims about cement, those claims have been verified. Where exactly in the new world the book of mormon took place is irrelevant. The point is that the practice was not out of time or an anachronism. If the Mayans used cement, the nephites may have been close by and the practice may have traveled between people. If a people we know about in ancient America had practices that corroborate the practices in the book of mormon, it is evidence that the practices in the book of mormon are authentic, and thus evidence that the book is authentic. *If we have a practice all over the ancient american continent that took place before and during book of mormon times, and the book of mormon also describes that practice, the other civilizations corroborate what the book of mormon says. *
"Do you not find it odd that the church uses artifacts from other civilizations and claim it as proof for BoM claims? "
Unless you know of an official church source i dont, this video is not any kind of statement from the Church, its just members showing evidences that support the book of momron. It does not act as proof, but simply evidence that the book of mormon was written by a people that actually existed.
The dating by archaeologists of this technological advance to the precise time mentioned in the book of Helaman seems far from knowable to anyone in the world in 1829.
"The official position of the church leaders is that BoM events took place in Palmyra NY like Joseph Smith said."
There is no offical position from the lds church on any location or event mentioned in the book of mormon. You are either lying or ignorant.
"I know the sermon on the mount Jesus gave was given at the Sea of Galilee"
The actual location of the Sermon on the Mount is not certain, and knowing where it took place does nothing to prove jesus rose from the dead. None of the religious truths taught in the bible are confirmable by archeology. You can not prove jesus rose from the dead with archeology.
"So why can’t we find anything at all that corroborates Jaradite‘s, Nephites, Lamanite civilizations?"
I mean this is explicitly false, you are commenting on a video that explicitly corroborates the civilizations, and other things also do so. Have you not studied any of this?
"I love how you mentioned several anachronisms have been shown to not be … as if that somehow wipes away many many blatant and obvious anachronisms that render the BoM untrue"
Time consistently vindicates the book of Mormon and the prophet joseph smith. things people thought were anachronisms have been shown not to be. It stands to reason they will continue to do so. There exists no anachronism that disproves the book of mormon.
"Explain to me how a Koine Greek word like “Jesus Christ” was used by people who spoke Hebrew, but wrote in reformed Egyptian, 1000s of years before the language itself was ever used? ... and “baptisms” "
An angel reveals the name to nephi. The name is not used prior to the revelation from the angel. What ever word the angel used, when translated via the gift and power of god, comes out to jesus christ in english.
2 nephit 25:19 For according to the words of the prophets, the Messiah cometh in six hundred years from the time that my father left Jerusalem; and according to the words of the prophets, and also the word of the angel of God, his name shall be Jesus Christ, the Son of God.
The first time the word baptize shows up is from Lehi and he learns it via revelation.
"That’s is just 1 of 100 anachronisms in the BoM that cannot be explained away"
Well i wouldn't say they've been "explained away" more like your arguments are bad and wrong and you should rethink your views on the book of momron.
"How about you just believe that the moral lessons in the BoM are true? I can give you that. But please don’t say that the BoM is actual factual history."
Alright Satan. No. If the book of mormon isn't both spiritually and literally true, it is false and following it would lead away from god.
"I will start listening when you can show me actual evidence that supports what BoM claims. I believe the Bible because you can corroborate the events that took place. The people were real, the places existed, etc."
The video explicitly gives you that evidence. You are willing ignorance on yourself if you think otherwise. Not all biblical events have been corroborated, so do you not believe the ones that havent been? Even if events are corroborated, that can not prove Jesus was the son of god or that he rose from the dead. You are applying a double standard.
@@LukeHopkin - No … the idea is in fact to say “see here are Nephites using cement” because it literally says it in the BoM. That, along with many others, is the claim that is being refuted by critics of the BoM. This critical analysis of the BoM is what led the creators of this RUclips channel to put out its content. Critics say there is no evidence, and this channel counters and attempts to show evidence for the BoM.
Instead of actually providing evidence for the BoM claim that Nephites used cement, they instead show how Mayans used cement. Unless you’re saying that Mayans and Nephites are one in the same, then evidence of another people group using cement is NOT evidence that Nephites used cement which is what the BoM claims.
I understand what you’re saying the video being about addressing “folks saying cement didn’t exist back then when it actually did” … but that’s the problem with the video that I’m trying to bring up. Refuting that statement does not qualify as evidence for the BoM claim that Nephites used cement. This is a classic example of strawman and red herring arguments and you’re falling for it.
I don’t see the point arguing about the churches official position. If you want to think that church leaders and church scholars are on the same page with each other then fine.
Not knowing the location of BoM events is a HUGE deal!! Finding new discoveries is awesome. I would be just as excited if we discovered anything at all that taught us where or how nephites lived. I can’t wait for that to happen!! If we discovered the BoM took place in American Northeast, then there goes the whole cement story in mesoAmerica video. So location matters and you’re naïve to think otherwise.
I agree and understand why researching one people group can helps us understand another. I’m not missing on that at all. Yes archaeologists and anthropologists do that all the time. But the church does it to learn about a people group that no one but LDS believe exist. Please point me to 1 archaeologist or anthropologist that has evidence to say a people group called Jaradites, Nephites, or Lamanites ever existed. There is no writings, no drawings, no oral traditions, no artifacts that prove these BoM people are real … none. But the church is really good at talking about actual natives and relating it to how BoM peoples are as if they actually existed … and that IS typical LDS church practice.
I’m happy to see you admitting there is no evidence, because according to you … the reason there is no evidence is because history has shown that the conquerors destroy the evidence of the conquered. On one hand you’re supporting this video as evidence for the BoM ,and on the other hand, you’re saying there is no evidence because the evidence was destroyed. Funny how this video supports Mayans living in the same place and at the same time as nephites, and we find Mayan stuff everywhere but mysteriously only Nephite artifacts disappeared along with their DNA.
I really don’t care how you define the spiritual vs academic translation process. Joseph Smith made it very clear that God revealed to him character by character what was written on this golden tablet. He said God would not move on to the next character unless the previous character was recorded correctly. The argument isn’t about word choice. The argument is that the words Jesus Christ and/or Baptisms were derived by a language that had not ever been spoken during BoM times. There was never such a thing as baptisms, because baptisms had not been invented during BoM times. So whatever word you think was written doesn’t matter because there wasn’t a word for baptisms … because there was no such thing as baptisms … or Jesus Christ for that matter. I don’t think you’re getting any of this are you? And then to top it all off you say that the words don’t have to match!! If you believe that then you can believe anything. The BoM could say cell phones were used, and you can just say “who cares that Joseph wrote down cell phones … the words don’t have to match”. And no one could ever argue with you because the original BoM in its original language floated up to heaven and we can never know exactly what was written.
I gave you an example of recent history (Gettysburg), an example of history in the 1st century sermon on the mount Sea of Galilee, an example of Greek temples in 800BC, and finally an example of Egyptian Pyramids in 2500BC. My point is that no matter how recent or how long ago it was, a huge civilization like the ones described in the BoM would have left evidence of their existence. But once again you missed the point.
I don’t mean to attack personal faith. No need to go there. I apologize and it does not merit a response. I respect what you believe and anyone can believe whatever they want. I was only challenging what is or is not truth, not belief. LDS tell me all the time they believe in the BoM and I cant take that away from them. But as soon as they say it’s a true historical account of native America then we have something to discuss.
As pointed out in other comments, cement production takes huge amounts of timber to produce due to the fires required to burn the lime, so Helaman is at best lying about the reason cement was used because a lack of timber wasn't it. In fact, it's thought the Maya collapse around AD 900 was at least partially brought about because they had used so much timber over the centuries to create lime for their stucco that it caused a local environmental disaster as there were so few trees left that the rainforests could no longer produce the moisture needed to generate the storms that watered the Maya fields. Notice the date on that. The collapse happened in AD 900, several centuries after the civilizations in the Book of Mormon were supposed to have collapsed and nearly a millennium after Helaman is supposed to have taken place.
It also needs to be pointed out that the average Mesoamerican home was made from wood. The great buildings that we see today are the remains of the centers of huge metropolises, and those buildings were made of stone that was then covered over with large amounts of stucco, so they weren't made of cement in the way that Helaman describes, and even the great stone pyramids and palaces utilized timber in them as evidenced by the wooden lintels and panels from Tikal. The surrounding areas, were populated by middle and lower classes who used wood to build their homes.
Not only does Helaman's description not fit they civilizations of Mesoamerica, but also neither does the timeline of events or the cultures of Mesoamerica for which we have a fairly detailed record fit the people described in the Book of Mormon. Indeed, there is no group at all that has the combination of genetics, names of people and places, timeframe, and requirements for written records, metal production, and animal husbandry described in the Book of Mormon.
Helaman isn't at "best lying" he is at worst lying.
But that doesn't make sense because the lie doesn't give the writer any advantage. There is simply no reason to do it. It is more likely that Helaman would be misinformed about the situation or simply misunderstood. It appears that Helaman is having this reported to him, instead of witnessing it himself. It could simply be that he had the cause and effect swapped from bad information.
But it is even more likely that he is correct and we just aren't taking everything into account. Other facts that he mentions are that: they participated in conserving trees for future use. They also lived in tents. That they received "much" timber by way of shipping. That they built houses of both wood and cement.
With that information, it is completely possible that the majority of people lived in tents at first. Then slowly, over time, they created more and more buildings of cement as resources allowed.
It's easy to assume that Helaman is saying that the people showed up, found no trees, and magically started making cement. However, the fact that Helaman is reporting this after they had already grown to "many cities" tells us that this is something that likely happened over time.
I do like that you point to the collapse of the Mayan's being related to lack of trees. Helaman does say that "no part of the land was desolate, save it were for timber". So the land was usable land of some type. Obviously not rainforest anymore, if it was before, but he indicates that it was usable land. I am not sure how the date of the Mayan collapse relates in this case.
Helaman's description does fit the mesoamerican civilizations because he says they lived in tents, houses of wood, and houses of cement. Cement was very likely the least common of the three. He does not however say that everyone had a house of cement.
Cement is a verified Book of Mormon claim. Cope harder.
@@LukeHopkin The only people who lived in tents were the nomadic people of the plains far far to the north of Mesoamerica, and they never built cities out of stone or used cement. Mesoamericans as far back as the archaeological record shows lived in houses made out of wood in a wattle and daub fashion. You're stretching the text to make a lot of assumptions to attempt to turn Helaman into anything other than the fictional character in the fictional book that he is.
I don't know if you're being serious about not understanding why I brought up the date of the Maya collapse, but I'll make it abundantly clear. The Maya collapsed around AD 900, 8-9 centuries after Helaman takes place, due to environmental change brought about due to a lack of forests to sustain the rains the Maya relied on for their crops. If those forests had been cleared when Helaman takes place, the Maya would have collapsed much earlier. The fact is that Mesoamsrica was certainly heavily forested in the 1st centuries BC and AD, which does not fit Helaman's description at all. Not only this, but the tale in the Book of Mormon relates that the Nephites, the more advanced of the major groups in the text, collapsed in the 4th-5th centuries. That's centuries earlier than what we know to be the fact of Mesoamerican civilizations. This is because Helaman and the Book of Mormon are 99% fictitious. The only historical event in the Book of Mormon that actually happened was the fall of Jerusalem in the early 6th century BC.
@@NOOBKILLER052 The Book of Mormon is a work of fiction and Joseph Smith was a fraud. Cope harder.
@@flintheadofTN I'm really not stretching anything, Helaman literally says that they lived in tents. "And the people who were in the land northward did dwell in tents,...". If you are being honest in analyzing the text then you have to take that into account.
What exactly is the archeological evidence left if people live in tents? You mention the nomadic people of NA. So let's use the Shoshone, who lived in teepees, which are very similar to tents. What mark did "living in tents" leave behind that could be used as archeological evidence centuries later? Almost nothing. Teepee rings can be found, in some areas, sometimes, and not in great numbers. This, from an area that is largely still in the same condition as it was when the Shoshone lived in teepees, and in a time that happened up until just over a century ago. Helaman states that they grew into cities. Even less evidence of people living in tents would remain after a settlement was established and grew to be a city. Most cities around the world would have started with temporary living accommodations and then grew from there - erasing evidence of the temporary accommodations. You'd have a hard time finding archeological evidence of pilgrims living in tents in Plymouth, for example.
I see your point with the timeline, it does matter if you are working under the model which puts Nephites in the same location as the Mayans, which is one of the theories. The people we are talking about left the majority population and went "northward" in about 50 B.C. The Mayan's started up around 1800 B.C. and peaked around 600 A.D. So if they were in the same area then the timeline does matter. Exact geography, the amount of forest cleared, size of populations, intercultural relationships, etc would all matter.
What does Mayan culture have to do with the Book of Mormon?
Did you not watch the video?
Why are we talking about Mayans?
They have Asian heritage where as the BoM tribes came from Jerusalem, and according ti the book of mormon the land was reserved for the BoM tribes, implying they didn't trade or come into contact with the Mayans.
If we believe the words of the BoM, this evidence stacks up the same as if I claimed the indigenous Australians had guns because we found gun powder in China dating back millennia.
The Book of Mormon makes no such implications that lineages represented by the Book of Mormon never traded or came in contact with indigenous peoples or tribes. Keep in mind that the term "Maya" is a modern word never used by any particular people or tribe. Still today there are at least 30 living languages representing peoples who are sometimes thrown under the umbrella of being "Mayan". This is likely a small percentage of the number of languages and cultures that would have been represented anciently.
@@revelationnow2344 the existence of Mayans doesn't prove the existence of nephites.
If they are different groups all together, why are we talking about the Mayans as evidence?
@@getharryonsax Because the Book of Mormon history did take place among the Mayans. Too many things fall into place to well for it all to be a coincidence. And also by the way the BoM does actually make mention of people coming over from other countries. Read II Nephi 1:5 last sentence it says YEA, THE LORD HATH COVENANTED THIS LAND UNTO ME, AND TO MY CHILDREDN FOREVER, AND ALSO ALL THOSE WHO SHOULD BE LED OUT OF OTHER COUNTRIES BY THE HAND OF THE LORD.
@@jeffreysmith7542 the church has publically stated that the mayans are not related to the jaredites, nephites or lehites as they are not of jewish heritage.
Mayans artefacts and archeology is not also evidence for Nephites/jaredites.
The only way this could be true is if in any of these artefacts there was reference to the BoM tribes or people, which there is none.
I could write a book and describe mayan artefacts being used among a fictional people and claim that the mayan archeology is evicence of my people being real too...
@@getharryonsax I don't think I have ever heard the church itself actually make an official statement one way or another. When and where has the church actually made this statement that you are speaking of?
Also there are many artifacts found among the Mayans that line up with book of Mormon historical claims. Such as bows, spears, throwing arrows, darts, slings, clubs, idols, and swords. I understand these things do not prove indefinitely that the BoM is true. But, they do line up with Mayan history. So if these do not count as artifacts than what would?
I can not think of a single artifact that could possibly be found that would prove Nephite existence in a way that would satisfy the sign seekers. Unless it was something with actual writing on it. But, the BoM made if very clear that the Nephites were wiped out completely and history has shown in such cases so are all there writings of any history to go with it. And even if by some slim chance a piece of Nephite writing was to survive the Lamanite onslaught of the Nephites. They would have most likely have been destroyed during the Spanish conquest along with the many other Mayan writings that were destroyed. Remember that the Lamenites hated the Nephites and they would have done everything they could deliberately to make sure anything left of Nephite history would be destroyed and erased.
Incredible evidence… blown away!!!!
Based
So sadly lacking. This is not evidence.
No one piece of physical evidence will ever prove indefinitely that the BoM is true because there will always be a way to refute any physical evidence. The same also is true with the bible. All you can do with either book is see if the history confirms it. However this is one of many dozens of examples where the BoM has been proven right about a historical claim when science of the past has got it wrong.
Did the Hopewell Native Americans use Cement as well? Does anyone know. I primarily believe that the events mentioned in the Book Of Mormon took place in North America.
Someone's been listening to the crackpot theories of the quack known as Wayne May
There is very little evidence that North American peoples like the Adana or the Hopewell (these are modern scientific designations, by the way, and not the names such people used among themselves) practiced a widespread use of cement on a scale that is in any way comparable to Mesoamerica. Or comparable to the ancient peoples of South America, for that matter.
Yes seen that was found in the Mounds of the Hopewell, especially in the Ohio area by Newark Ohio, many of those Mounds, have been dug into and cement has been found, and there also was a highway found in Ohio
Still waiting for those chariots, concepts like the wheel, body armor, metallurgy and horses to be dug up.
The Book of Mormon was written by Ethiopians. Helaman 3 is describing a migration North from Ethiopia to Egypt.
Lehi was in Egypt on Elephantine Island when he got Jeremiah 44 claiming Jews will be destroyed in Egypt.
He had the Tree of Life vision that commanded he follow the Nile River up stream to the source of the river in Ethiopia. This is the Garden of Eden according to Genesis 2:13 and therefore where the Tree of Life is.
The Nephites were destroyed for migrating back to Egypt (again, this is documented in Helaman 3). This was prophesized in Jeremiah 44.
The "treeless" land where they build with "cement" and "ship" timber is Egypt as described by Ethiopians. This land is North of Ethiopia. There is no evidence of shipping in Ancient America. Egypt is well known for shipping Lebanon Cedar.
The Maya went by a different name anciently.
Yes, they did. In fact, even today the people's we lump together as "Maya" constitute dozens of tribes and many different languages. That term is used in the video in keeping with academic tradition. There was also no such empire known as "Aztec." Moctezuma was the emperor of the "Mexica" (which is, again, a phonetic and Anglicized replication of the ancient name.). So I've offered what I hope is helpful information, but I'm not quite sure what point Karl is making.
The Mesoamerican team is a little full of themselves. Both Incas in the South and Native Americans in New York both used cement. I don't have a dog in the fight for the location of the Book of Mormon. The mesoamerican scholars only hurt their case when they ignore the research done in other areas. The video should have stopped with we found cement in Mesoamerica. The "only" part was a jab at the other two models, which was factually incorrect and totally unnecessary.
I’ve got a dog in the fight, one that I share with Joseph Smith. The Heartland Model is as confirmed as you can get.
The Book of Mormon was written by Ethiopians. Helaman 3 is describing a migration North from Ethiopia to Egypt.
Lehi was in Egypt on Elephantine Island when he got Jeremiah 44 claiming Jews will be destroyed in Egypt.
He had the Tree of Life vision that commanded he follow the Nile River up stream to the source of the river in Ethiopia. This is the Garden of Eden according to Genesis 2:13 and therefore where the Tree of Life is.
The Nephites were destroyed for migrating back to Egypt (again, this is documented in Helaman 3). This was prophesized in Jeremiah 44.
The "treeless" land where they build with "cement" and "ship" timber is Egypt as described by Ethiopians. This land is North of Ethiopia. There is no evidence of shipping in Ancient America. Egypt is well known for shipping Lebanon Cedar.
Porky Pig and Daffy Duck would not have looked out of place in this cartoon like presentation!
38 book of Mormon cities have disappeared without archeological trace, cement and all.!
Is there any credible evidence that the book of Mormon is true,? as Porky would say,
" Th-th-th-: that's all folks".
Mormons aren't Christians. You are not just shunned by the Catholic and Orthodox communities but even by the majority of Protestant communities.
How would that be unique from other periods in history when a new religion or a new take on an existing religion occurs? Chances are it would be rejected by the existing establishment. This is not an argument for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints except to say that if it is rejected by the "majority", it's in good company with every other religious reformation.
Sure thing, buddy
Well Jesus did make a prophecy to his apostles that they would be hated by the world because he was hated by the world. If the Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day saints is his true church than not being excepted by the other religions of the world is exactly to be expected. If anything it would be more bothersome if the church was excepted by the other world religions. Because then it would make Jesus a liar and false prophet.
Luckily you, and others who say LDS are not Christians are not the authority on what a Christian is!
Paul Gregersen demonstrates that Joseph Smith was right, the Egyptologists were wrong. What is your response?
Book of Mormon geography is not in central or south america. It was in North America,