More simple, but profound damage to the BoM fiction

[By Grace]

In all of the Old Testament, there are 19 verses that mention the beard. Five of them are in Leviticus, and for this post, I will look at two:
.
Leviticus 19: 27 Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard
Leviticus 25:5 They shall not make baldness upon their head, neither shall they shave off the corner of their beard, nor make any cuttings in their flesh.
6 They shall be holy unto their God, and not profane the name of their God: for the offerings of the LORD made by fire, and the bread of their God, they do offer: therefore they shall be holy

Notice that the PURPOSE of a beard for men was to be holy and not profane the name of their God. As a result, the Jewish male of the time of Moses looked somewhat similar to the contemporary Hassidic Jew, in regard to facial hair. You can see an example below.

Hassidic Jewish male

However, when it comes to the Native American population, there is a remarkable absence of facial hair, as can be seen in the pictures of three famous Chiefs of the Native Americans:

Cochise

Running Bull

Sitting Bull

So where are their beards?

The mopologists are infamous for their denial of the Smithsonian statement about the closeness of the ancient Jews and the native Americans, and they will use pseudo science to "prove that". But here is a genetic attribute that "disappeared" for some strange reason. As a matter of fact, anyone can see the resemblance of the lack of facial hair in Asian males, and the Native Americans easily.

Of course, we are talking about a period of < (less than) 1000 years between the purported "migration" from the port city of Bountiful to the discoveries by the Spaniards, so that is far too short of a time, according to evolution theory for such a massive genetic change from a bearded people to a non-bearded people..I ask again the same simple question: So where are the beards?

 

[Tabz]

I find it strange how you find flaws in the BoM in order to show it to be false, but there are numerous flaws in the Bible and yet you maintain that it is divinely inspired.

 

[Matthew G]

I find it strange how you find flaws in the BoM in order to show it to be false, but there are numerous flaws in the Bible and yet you maintain that it is divinely inspired.

First of all, welcome to CF.net. Second of all, just as a friendly heads-up - If you want to be taken seriously around here, you really should provide some sort of evidence to support your stance.

No offense is intended. I just figured I'd let you know, because honestly I'm curious why you disagree that the Bible is divinely inspired, and what the numerous flaws that you mentioned are.

Looking forward to your reply, and welcome again.

 

[By Grace]

I find it strange how you find flaws in the BoM in order to show it to be false, but there are numerous flaws in the Bible and yet you maintain that it is divinely inspired.

Welcome to CF net!

This thread is about the book of Mormon, not about the Bible. Iif you want to discuss "flaws" in the Bible, perhaps you could find one,and we can discuss it on another thread, OK?

In all seriousness, do you understand the significance of the "beardless Native Americans" vis-à-vis to the Book of Mormon? I could explain it to you if you like.

 

[proveallthings]

In all of the Old Testament, there are 19 verses that mention the beard. Five of them are in Leviticus, and for this post, I will look at two:
So where are their beards?

The mopologists are infamous for their denial of the Smithsonian statement about the closeness of the ancient Jews and the native Americans, and they will use pseudo science to "prove that". But here is a genetic attribute that "disappeared" for some strange reason. As a matter of fact, anyone can see the resemblance of the lack of facial hair in Asian males, and the Native Americans easily.

Of course, we are talking about a period of < (less than) 1000 years between the purported "migration" from the port city of Bountiful to the discoveries by the Spaniards, so that is far too short of a time, according to evolution theory for such a massive genetic change from a bearded people to a non-bearded people..I ask again the same simple question: So where are the beards?

By Grace,
I wouldn't go so far as to call your conclusions, "pseudo science", but your conclusions are obviously influenced by your anti-Mormon bias. If you would have dug a little deeper, you would have discovered that there is indeed, abundant proof that white-skinned races existed among the ancestors of native tribes of Central America. Paintings and murals dating to ancient times in the temple at Chichen Itza and other places, as well as pottery and sculptures, clearly portray people who appear to be Caucasian. In addition to white people, the same murals and bas reliefs show people who wear beards. The portrayal of bearded figures suddenly stops at the year 385–which matches the approximate date that the Nephites perished from the pages of the Book of Mormon. I have seen several photos of these artifacts. This is real.

 

[By Grace]

By Grace,
I wouldn't go so far as to call your conclusions, "pseudo science", but your conclusions are obviously influenced by your anti-Mormon bias.

Have you considered the fact that the Spaniard Conquistadors had beards? I can also see pictures on the Internet of men with beards. HOWEVER do you not think that it is strange to have the beards shaped and trimmed, but that is not the case with the Hassidic Jews today, or the observant Jews during the times of Jesus. And no, I do not have a "bias" as you allege. I look at the facts as they are, and I let them lead.

If you would have dug a little deeper, you would have discovered that there is indeed, abundant proof that white-skinned races existed among the ancestors of native tribes of Central America. Paintings and murals dating to ancient times in the temple at Chichen Itza and other places, as well as pottery and sculptures, clearly portray people who appear to be Caucasian.

You are talking about the Bonampak murals, a joint project of Yale University and FARMS. If you look at the literature on that from professional sources, as I just did, you will not find your statement that I made bold red. Only a TBM without academic experience would make such a claim, and we both know that they have already done so.

In addition to white people, the same murals and bas reliefs show people who wear beards. The portrayal of bearded figures suddenly stops at the year 385–which matches the approximate date that the Nephites perished from the pages of the Book of Mormon. I have seen several photos of these artifacts. This is real.

The facts do not substantiate your wishful thinking, as I mentioned above.

I ask again the same simple question: So where are the beards?

 

[proveallthings]

Have you considered the fact that the Spaniard Conquistadors had beards? I can also see pictures on the Internet of men with beards.

By Grace,
I am having a hard time understanding what pictures of Conquistadors with beards have to do with what we are talking about here. All the paintings and carvings I am referring to date several hundred years before the Spaniards came to the Americas.

You are talking about the Bonampak murals, a joint project of Yale University and FARMS. If you look at the literature on that from professional sources, as I just did, you will not find your statement that I made bold red. Only a TBM without academic experience would make such a claim, and we both know that they have already done so.

Alright. You got me here. You show your superior search skills again. I wonder if you could share the link to this "literature on that from professional sources". It must really be very convincing to cause you to ignore the evidence of literally hundreds of carvings and paintings portraying bearded people during the Book of Mormon period in Mesoamerica. Is it enough to counter the research of the well respected researcher, Alexander von Wuthenau, a German and very much not Mormon expert on ancient Mesoamerican cultures. Here is a quote from his findings.
"I began an intensified study of pre-Columbian terracotta heads. What I was
looking for were typical 'Indian' heads. It was not long, however, before I discovered that
in the early, lower levels these 'genuine Indians' were not to be found. The earliest
figures encountered were those with Mongoloid characteristics, and all kinds of white
people, especially Semitic types with and without beards. What is considered to be
genuine Indian only developed, so far as I am able to judge on the strength of these
terracotta representations, in early and middle Classic times, and probably derived from
earlier types." (Wuthenau 1969: 42)

Notice he emphasizes that there were "all kinds of white people, especially Semitic types with and without beards. This seems pretty cut and dried to me, but who am I but just an ignorant TBM.

 

[By Grace]

Nope, not taking the bait.
The facts do not substantiate your wishful thinking, as I mentioned above.

I ask again the same simple question: So where are the beards?