Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The most damaging evidences of the fraud of the Book of Mormon (redux)

By Grace

Member
The most damaging evidences of the fraud of the Book of Mormon

Because my original thread has become something far different than I intended, I re-post the opening post as an effort to avoid some derailing issues of the previous thread.

WHEEL
a circular frame of hard material that may be solid, partly solid, or spoked and that is capable of turning on an axle.

A Sumarian (Erech) pictograph, dated about 3500 [SIZE=-1]BC[/SIZE], shows a sledge equipped with wheels. The idea of wheeled transportation may have come from the use of logs for rollers, but the oldest known wheels were wooden disks consisting of three carved planks clamped together by transverse struts.

Spoked wheels appeared about 2000 [SIZE=-1]BC[/SIZE], when they were in use on chariots in Asia Minor. Later developments included iron hubs (centerpieces) turning on greased axles, and the introduction of a tire in the form of an iron ring that was expanded by heat and dropped over the rim and that on cooling shrank and drew the members tightly together.

The use of a wheel (turntable) for pottery had also developed in Mesopotamia by 3500 [SIZE=-1]BC[/SIZE]....
from:
wheel. (2008). Encyclopædia Britannica. Deluxe Edition. Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica.

Ganadogan is the location of a major 17th-century Seneca town and palisaded granary. Three hundred years ago, near Ganondagan, the French led an army from Canada against the Seneca to annihilate them and eliminate them as competitors in the international fur trade. The Seneca refer to Ganondagan as the Town of Peace and revere and protect the burial site of the Mother of Nations here. Illustrated signs mark the three trails where visitors can learn about the significance of plant life to the Seneca, about Iroquois customs and beliefs, and about the features of Fort Hill (the granary) and the events that occurred there. A traditional Seneca longhouse has been completed and open to the public. Please call the site for details.
from http://www.nysparks.com/historic-sites/26/details.aspx
Please see the pictures on this site.
.
Using Google Earth the distance from Palmayra NY to Victor, NY is 15+ miles. and the distance is measured as two legs, the base and altitude of a right triangle. If one were to travel the hypotenuse, the distance would be less..
Ganondagan (ga•NON•da•gan) State Historic Site in the town of Victor, 30 miles southeast of Rochester, NY sits on a hill where a once vibrant Native American community of the Seneca people stood. While the village where thousands lived is long gone, the spirit remains. That is, what makes Ganondagan so unique is its resonating spirit.

The Seneca’s were keepers of the western gate for the... Iroquois and five nations.

Ganondagan is called a Town of Peace after the Peacemaker, a prophet that united the Haudenosaunee and brought peace. The Peacemaker gave the Haudenosaunee the Great Law of Peace that would later serve as a basis for the USA constitution.

The site consists of 300 primarily wooded acres with several hiking trails. There is a visitor’s center with educational information and a video about Ganondagan. A replica of a bark longhouse allows visitors to experience first hand how life once was. There is also a garden conducive to meditation.

A strong sense of the positive and peace permeates the air. There are highly charges spots where one can feel the hair on the arms stand on end. What makes this even more unique is that the Seneca village that once stood there was wiped out over 300 years ago in 1687 by the New French over the fur trade. The fact that such positive energy still exists is a testament to the residents of Ganondagan who lived by “the right mind.â€

from http://www.jubileeinitiative.org/sacredganondagan.html

What then is the connection between the posts from the two places and the wheel article from Britannica? This place represented the high water mark of the Native Americans, and in particular the Five Civilized [Native American] Nations; they were decimated by the French in the French and Indian War in 1673, or so. So if these were pinnacle of any civilization, then there would be records, or relics of this happening, and theer are. I remember when I was in 6th grade, living outside Philadelphia, in a suburb that I studied these tribal nations. I was fascinated that the first Constitution of the United States, more accurately The Articles of Confederation were taken from this group. I wanted to see the bark-sided long house in person, and never dreamed that one day I would be able to live near that site. When I saw it I was amazed.

Historical documents of the wheel's existence state that the spoked wheel was first introduced in a Sumarian pictograph. In case you did not know, Sumaria was part of the area called the Fertile Crescent, and Abraham, the Father of the Jews came from another city called UR in the Fertile Crescent. Therefore, even though the word "wheel" is not mentioned in the Bible, the fact that the wheel existed can be demonstrated to be pre-Moses c 1300 BC and in the the Asia Minor (present day Turkey) in 2000 BC. The fact that the Bible DOES mention chariots several times, and of course the Egyptians had them demonstrates that the wheel was well used as a tool in the days before Christ in the Middle East area.

The legend of the Book of Mormon is that around 600 BC (late Iron Age) a group of Jews fled the Middle East area, and sailed on boats, down one side of Africa, and across the South Atlantic and the North Atlantic, into the Caribbean and began their civilization somewhere in the Caribbean lands, or South America. Somehow along the journey, they forgot to read Hebrew, they forgot to obey the Laws of Moses, they forgot how to write, they forgot how to smelt copper, or anything like that, they forgot how to build ships, and OF COURSE THEY FORGOT HOW TO CREATE A WHEEL.

In other words, a civilization based in the Middle East during the Iron age took a very long ocean voyage and then suddenly reverted into stone age camps of hunter-gatherers. And that describes the civilization level of the Native Americans until after the US Civil War area.

Archeologists can find examples of the usage of the wheel in the Middle East, and later throughout the world, but NO ONE has found the usage of the wheel FOR TRANSPORTATION anywhere in the Western Hemisphere. The absence of any sort of evidence for the wheel is surely the evidence of its absence in the "New World". Therefore, its absence is the single, most damaging evidence against the tales of the Book of Mormon.​
 
It is amazing that something that is so simple as the wheel not existing in the North Americas as a form of transportation absolutely makes the mormons incapable of having a reasonable discussion about its absence. since they can't use the other tactics, like ridicule, or question the SOURCE of the information, but not the FACTS of the information, the fact that they are silend means that their trainers have not given them silly stuff to memorize as an insipid apologetic.

If there is nothing at FARMS, or Maxwell, or Jeff Lindsay, or Daniel Peterson to parrot about the missing wheel, then I respectfully suggest that you guys and gals consider that this inconvenient truth be investigated further.



  • Alma 20:6 Now when Lamoni had heard this he caused that his servants should make ready his horses and his chariots.

  • 2 Nephi 12:7 Their land also is full of silver and gold, neither is there any end of their treasures; their land is also full of horses, neither is there any end of their chariots.
  • 3 Nephi 21:14 Yea, wo be unto the Gentiles except they repent; for it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Father, that I will cut off thy horses out of the midst of thee, and I will destroy thy chariots;
  • Alma 18:12 And it came to pass that when Ammon had made ready the horses and the chariots for the king and his servants, he went in unto the king, and he saw that the countenance of the king was changed; therefore he was about to return out of his presence.

And no, this is not gloating, but an attempt to help Mormons think about the degree that you trustingly learn form the elders explanations that explain nothing. Take for example the above verses from the BoM and D & C. Not only do they all speak of chariots, which presuppose the invention of the wheel as a form of transportation in the Western Hemisphere, they also presuppose the introduction of the horse, and of the donkey. Both the horse and donkey were required to make a mule, which is mentioned several times.

From dictionary.com is this definition of a mule:
the sterile offspring of a female horse and a male donkey, valued as a work animal, having strong muscles, a body shaped like a horse, and donkey-like long ears, small feet, and sure-footedness.

For sure, you have "answers" to the issue of the introduction of the horse to the Western Hemisphere. Unfortunately those "answers" can not get around the fact that they came on boats with the Spaniards. But what is impossible to find is the record of the introduction of the donkey to the Western Hemisphere, and the knowledge of animal husbandry that permitted the cross breeding of two different species like the horse and donkey to make a mule.

Can you NOT see how crucial the simple matter of the wheel is to the Book of Mormon?



  1. The wheel is necessary for the chariots
  2. The chariots need to be pulled by a speedy animal.
  3. The speedy animal can not be a bovine; it must be a horse.
  4. The horse requires a degree of domestication such as stables.
  5. Stables are where other similar animals like the donkey is kept
  6. Donkeys are required to make mules
  7. Neither mules nor donkeys are native to the Western Hemisphere.

.
It does not get much simpler than that, people. If I were a Mormon,I would wonder about some of the other stuff that is shared at Testimony Meeting. Is there a point that you begin to ask the questions about logic and making sense about the things that you were taught?

Without any sense of "rubbing it in your face" I could cite other similar things that you were taught when you asked questions, but were given non-answers. It seems as if the same sort of non-answer was given to you as was given to me as a precocious 11 years old. My mother was pregnant, and I could see the bump of the baby get bigger and bigger, so not knowing about the birds and the bees, I asked my mother how the baby came out.

She said after some thinking for a few moments of silence, "A little door opens, and the baby comes out." Well that is not entirely correct, as we adults know. But I am supposing that you got the same sorts of answers when you asked questions about your faith., and to paraphrase Socrates, "The unexamined religion is not worth believing."

Can you not examine the discrepancies such as I posted about your religion? If you find that the answers genuinely reflect conditions that are true, then good for you.

OTOH if the answers do NOT square with reality, then you need to find truth.
I will be happy to discuss the Christian understanding of truth with anyone; just give me a PM, and we can begin.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What then is the connection between the posts from the two places and the wheel article from Britannica? This place represented the high water mark of the Native Americans, and in particular the Five Civilized [Native American] Nations; they were decimated by the French in the French and Indian War in 1673, or so. So if these were pinnacle of any civilization, then there would be records, or relics of this happening, and theer are. I remember when I was in 6th grade, living outside Philadelphia, in a suburb that I studied these tribal nations. I was fascinated that the first Constitution of the United States, more accurately The Articles of Confederation were taken from this group. I wanted to see the bark-sided long house in person, and never dreamed that one day I would be able to live near that site. When I saw it I was amazed.

The legend of the Book of Mormon is that around 600 BC (late Iron Age) a group of Jews fled the Middle East area, and sailed on boats, down one side of Africa, and across the South Atlantic and the North Atlantic, into the Caribbean and began their civilization somewhere in the Caribbean lands, or South America. Somehow along the journey, they forgot to read Hebrew, they forgot to obey the Laws of Moses, they forgot how to write, they forgot how to smelt copper, or anything like that, they forgot how to build ships, and OF COURSE THEY FORGOT HOW TO CREATE A WHEEL.

That is it in a nutshell.

In other words, the two posts demonstrate the improbability of the accuracy of the BoM as a historical document. Therefore, the BoM, and everything connected to it is utterly unsupportable.
 
The legend of the Book of Mormon is that around 600 BC (late Iron Age) a group of Jews fled the Middle East area, and sailed on boats, down one side of Africa, and across the South Atlantic and the North Atlantic, into the Caribbean and began their civilization somewhere in the Caribbean lands, or South America. Somehow along the journey, they forgot to read Hebrew, they forgot to obey the Laws of Moses, they forgot how to write, they forgot how to smelt copper, or anything like that, they forgot how to build ships, and OF COURSE THEY FORGOT HOW TO CREATE A WHEEL.

In other words, a civilization based in the Middle East during the Iron age took a very long ocean voyage and then suddenly reverted into stone age camps of hunter-gatherers. And that describes the civilization level of the Native Americans until after the US Civil War area.

Archeologists can find examples of the usage of the wheel in the Middle East, and later throughout the world, but NO ONE has found the usage of the wheel FOR TRANSPORTATION anywhere in the Western Hemisphere. The absence of any sort of evidence for the wheel is surely the evidence of its absence in the "New World". Therefore, its absence is the single, most damaging evidence against the tales of the Book of Mormon.
That is a solid argument. I would definitely like to know what the Mormons have to say in defense of such a solid blow.
 
That is a solid argument. I would definitely like to know what the Mormons have to say in defense of such a solid blow.

Stay tuned.

You should notice the absence of any response from the Mormons, and you will also notice that the mods needed to close the previous thread because certain members of the LDS church could only spew personal remarks as an apologetic against the truth.

In an act of self-hypnosis, and before they post against the truth they recite their testimony. (as if that will change the truth). the more you know about what Mormons believe and do the more you shake your head.
 
Somehow I'm missing your thinking of Mormon thinking of the introduction of the mule. Is that part of the BoM?

Actually, it is a part of the Doctrine and Covenants, Section 62 which purports to be "Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, on the bank of the Missouri River at Chariton, Missouri, August 13, 1831. On this day the Prophet and his group, who were on their way from Independence to Kirtland, met several elders who were on their way to the land of Zion, and, after joyful salutations, received this revelation."


6 Behold, I, the Lord, have brought you together that the promise might be fulfilled, that the faithful among you should be preserved and rejoice together in the land of Missouri. I, the Lord, promise the faithful and cannot lie.
7 I, the Lord, am willing, if any among you desire to ride upon horses, or upon mules, or in chariots, he shall receive this blessing, if he receive it from the hand of the Lord, with a thankful heart in all things.


.
Taking this at its face value, this a promise from God through Joseph to the other fellow Mormons telling them no matter what their method of transportation is, they will get the blessing of their testimony from this. What should be striking is the anachronism chariots being used by their god here. Surely their Mormon god should know that the usage of chariots as a mode of transportation has never been used in the Americas. But when the BOM has 7 references that include the words "horses and chariots" together, Alma 18:9; Alma 18:10; Alma 18:12; Alma 20:6; 2 Nephi 12:7 3 Nephi 3:21; and 3 Nephi 12:14 which were all describing the purported usage of horses in the Americas before the Spaniards, you can see that there is a pattern of the speech of Smith, and the fact that he slipped in "mules" which are the sterile offspring of a mare and a donkey, you can easily see how Smith slipped up here.

The One, True God does not make errors of anachronism, nor would He mention a mode of transportation in the Americas that did never existed there.
 
The legend of the Book of Mormon is that around 600 BC (late Iron Age) a group of Jews fled the Middle East area, and sailed on boats, down one side of Africa, and across the South Atlantic and the North Atlantic, into the Caribbean and began their civilization somewhere in the Caribbean lands, or South America. Somehow along the journey, they forgot to read Hebrew, they forgot to obey the Laws of Moses, they forgot how to write, they forgot how to smelt copper, or anything like that, they forgot how to build ships, and OF COURSE THEY FORGOT HOW TO CREATE A WHEEL.

In other words, a civilization based in the Middle East during the Iron age took a very long ocean voyage and then suddenly reverted into stone age camps of hunter-gatherers. And that describes the civilization level of the Native Americans until after the US Civil War area.

Archeologists can find examples of the usage of the wheel in the Middle East, and later throughout the world, but NO ONE has found the usage of the wheel FOR TRANSPORTATION anywhere in the Western Hemisphere. The absence of any sort of evidence for the wheel is surely the evidence of its absence in the "New World". Therefore, its absence is the single, most damaging evidence against the tales of the Book of Mormon.
That is a solid argument. I would definitely like to know what the Mormons have to say in defense of such a solid blow.
Thanks for at least considering that Mormons might have some intelligence and may possibly have an answer to this.

The main reason given by the moderators for this thread being deleted earlier is that it had turned into a thread promoting the Book of Mormon. That says a lot right there as to how solid a blow this is.

First of all, let me correct some possible misunderstandings within the above quote from By Grace. The story in the Book of Mormon does not identify the route the people traveled to get from the Arabian peninsula to the New World and most Mormon scholars believe they arrived on the west coast of Mesoamerica, not the east. Also, the Book of Mormon very clearly teaches that the main group of people continued to live the law of Moses until the coming of Christ. And there is no evidence from the text that these people forgot Hebrew. Rather, it says their language gradually evolved over several hundred years to be different than anything we would recognize today. There is still, however, much evidence from the translated text of the Book of Mormon of Hebrew influence. There are also several examples of ship building in the Book of Mormon, so I don’t know where that came from. The idea of writing is emphasized to the extreme in the Book of Mormon, so I am scratching my head on this one as well.

As far as the use of the wheel is concerned, By Grace is basing his assumption on the idea that if we haven’t discovered an actual wheel that dates to the period of time covered in the BofM, that alone is strong evidence it never existed in that region. This reasoning ignores the fact that archaeological discoveries are occurring all the time of things we hadn’t discovered before. This assumption also ignores the obvious fact that there are many things in ancient writings that have not been found archaeologically and may never be found. A perfect example of this is the claim the Bible makes of thousands of chariots being used in the land of Palestine. As of yet, not a single chariot from that period of time has ever been discovered in that land. Does this count as a damaging evidence against the validity of the Bible? I don’t think so.

Another faulty assumption is that if they knew of the use of the wheel, they would necessarily use it for transportation. If this assumption were true, the Mesoamerican people would have jumped right into the use of the wheel for transportation as soon as it was introduced by the Europeans. The fact is that it took several hundred years after that exposure before the wheel was used by these peoples.

By Grace is also aware of the fact that there is indeed archaeological evidence for knowledge of the use of the wheel for transportation by the ancients of Mesoamerica because of the finding of miniatures that appear to be toys.

So archaeologically, what do we know about the use of the wheel in ancient America?
We know these people understood the function of the wheel.
We have as yet not found any artifact that proves it was used for transportation.
We know that even after being introduced to the wheel, their descendants still chose not to use it for transportation for several hundred years.
We know that lack of artifacts does not mean they didn’t exist.
We know that it is still possible that artifacts could be found in the future.
We know that the climate of MesoAmerica is much more hostile to the preservation of such artifacts than the climate in the Middle East.

Probably the biggest stretch in this criticism is the idea of the Book of Mormon actually claiming the use of the wheel. There is no specific mention of the wheel being used by these people in the book. There is only one possible inference of its use referred to in the text and that is from two obscure mentions of the use of chariots. This is a weak inference because a broad definition of the word chariot can include devices of transportation without wheels. An important rule to follow in analysing ancient texts, or even writings of over a hundred years ago, is not to impose modern views of things onto ancient ones. I don’t think the ancient people we are speaking of, or Joseph Smith, ever had the chance to see the movie Ben Hur.

If this is indeed the single most damaging evidence against the Book of Mormon, I would say the entire case against the book is shaky at best.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
By Grace is also aware of the fact that there is indeed archaeological evidence for knowledge of the use of the wheel for transportation by the ancients of Mesoamerica because of the finding of miniatures that appear to be toys.

Notice my qualification FOR TRANSPORTATION. It is a far cry from making wheels of clay on a toy to making a wheel capable of bearing a load of weight.

The engineering design of the Egyptian chariots is superb in that it had torque control and was highly stable at high speed. It was also capable of providing the load-bearing capacity, and was light because it used spokes. NONE of this refinement was found on toys, nor was there any transference of any sort of wheel-capable devices to be used as any transportation device in ANY of the Americas, even after the Spaniards came, or after the West was "settled".


Probably the biggest stretch in this criticism is the idea of the Book of Mormon actually claiming the use of the wheel.

How do you suppose the so-called chariots mentioned in the BoM moved? Your argument is specious. It is the characteristic of a chariot to have wheels, without the wheel, you are left with sleds.

This is a weak inference because a broad definition of the word chariot can include devices of transportation without wheels.

AGAIN begging the question. It is impossible to find an example of a chariot-like device without wheels.

An important rule to follow in analysing ancient texts, or even writings of over a hundred years ago, is not to impose modern views of things onto ancient ones

Patently absurd! Chariots are seen in the tombs of Pharaohs, and they were entombed 1400 BC.

The main reason given by the moderators for this thread being deleted earlier is that it had turned into a thread promoting the Book of Mormon. That says a lot right there as to how solid a blow this is.

I will credit you with a vivid imagination, but your imagination is far from the truth.

If this is indeed the single most damaging evidence against the Book of Mormon, I would say the entire case against the book is shaky at best.

You have YET to disprove empirically what I posted in the OP, and subsequently
 
Indians did too use wheels. Archeological finds of Indians using wheels can be found yet today as collector items. http://hooniverse.com/wp-content/upl...and-indian.jpg

LOL That was funny

Here are some other wheels:

about_indian_updates.jpg


And in addition to playing lacrosse, they also played professional baseball in Cleveland (Indians), professional football in Washington Redskins), and NCAA sports at the Florida State University (Seminoles) But still they did not hace any wheel used as transportation.

BTW
PAT please tell Jeff Lindsay to get better material.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Notice my qualification FOR TRANSPORTATION. It is a far cry from making wheels of clay on a toy to making a wheel capable of bearing a load of weight.

The engineering design of the Egyptian chariots is superb in that it had torque control and was highly stable at high speed. It was also capable of providing the load-bearing capacity, and was light because it used spokes. NONE of this refinement was found on toys, nor was there any transference of any sort of wheel-capable devices to be used as any transportation device in ANY of the Americas, even after the Spaniards came, or after the West was "settled".
By Grace, you are missing the point. The point is that they were aware of the idea of using the wheel for transportation and chose for some reason not to use it, or they did use it, but we just haven’t found the artifacts, or none survived for us to find. Perhaps the reason they didn’t use the wheel, if they didn’t, was the same reason their descendents didn’t for hundreds of years after seeing the wheel used by the Europeans. One reason we know of that native Mesoamericans did not use the wheel was because of religious reasons that related wheels to the sun. It is very possible that even if BofM people used the wheel, others would have wanted to destroy any evidence of their use, seeing them as a sort of blasphemy.
You are insisting they had to have used Egyptian war chariots, but there is nothing in the Book of Mormon that makes such a claim. There isn’t even any mention of chariots being used in battle.
 

How do you suppose the so-called chariots mentioned in the BoM moved? Your argument is specious. It is the characteristic of a chariot to have wheels, without the wheel, you are left with sleds.
AGAIN begging the question. It is impossible to find an example of a chariot-like device without wheels.
In Maya battle imagery, for instance, the king rides into battle on a litter or cloth covered framework between two parallel bars.
Since the Book of Mormon never hints at riding or mounting a chariot (and since it is never mentioned in a military context), we cannot confidently conclude what such a “chariot†was. Some biblical passages referring to “chariots†can also be translated as a “portable couch†or “human-born ‘sedan’ chair.†The Talmud even uses the term (translated “chariot†in English) for a nuptial bed.

An important rule to follow in analysing ancient texts, or even writings of over a hundred years ago, is not to impose modern views of things onto ancient ones

Patently absurd! Chariots are seen in the tombs of Pharaohs, and they were entombed 1400 BC.
Yes, but how aware was Joseph Smith of what those chariots looked like. You have to remember the limited amount of literature, especially with pictures available to Joseph Smith in the 1820s. Even in our dictionary today we have these different definitions of the word chariot: dictionary.com definition #2 says, "a light, four-wheeled pleasure carriage." Definition 3 states, "any stately carriage." Do these sound like an Egyptian battle chariot to you? The stately carriage definition could very easily include a litter as is described above, which was used by ancient Mayans. You have no idea of what image came to Joseph Smith’s mind when he used the word chariot. But it was very likely not the one that comes to ours today.

If this is indeed the single most damaging evidence against the Book of Mormon, I would say the entire case against the book is shaky at best.

You have YET to disprove empirically what I posted in the OP, and subsequently
I have shown very clearly how every one of your assumptions is faulty, which leaves you without anything to support your conclusion. Why would I need to present anything more?
 
In Maya battle imagery, for instance, the king rides into battle on a litter or cloth covered framework between two parallel bars.
Since the Book of Mormon never hints at riding or mounting a chariot (and since it is never mentioned in a military context), we cannot confidently conclude what such a “chariot†was. Some biblical passages referring to “chariots†can also be translated as a “portable couch†or “human-born ‘sedan’ chair.†The Talmud even uses the term (translated “chariot†in English) for a nuptial bed.
So are you saying those Indian wheels were a Travois?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travois

Of course, maybe since we seem to be using any and all reasoning to disprove or justify Joseph Smith's vision, is it possible he could see what none other could see that was hidden from them such as that that Elisha saw in the following scriptures? If he said it, should that be good enough?

2 Kings 6:17 And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.
 
In Maya battle imagery, for instance, the king rides into battle on a litter or cloth covered framework between two parallel bars.
Since the Book of Mormon never hints at riding or mounting a chariot (and since it is never mentioned in a military context), we cannot confidently conclude what such a “chariot†was. Some biblical passages referring to “chariots†can also be translated as a “portable couch†or “human-born ‘sedan’ chair.†The Talmud even uses the term (translated “chariot†in English) for a nuptial bed.
So are you saying those Indian wheels were a Travois?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travois

Of course, maybe since we seem to be using any and all reasoning to disprove or justify Joseph Smith's vision, is it possible he could see what none other could see that was hidden from them such as that that Elisha saw in the following scriptures? If he said it, should that be good enough?

2 Kings 6:17 And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.
Yes it is possible and even probable that Joseph could see what none other could see and was hidden from them, just as Elisha. But I'm not sure what you are getting at here. Obviously the type of chariot described here is the type that was used in battle. What I have been trying to point out is that there are other types of transport devices that can also be referred to as chariots. Why is that so hard to accept? You seem to be inferring that this is a stretch. Why? If it is possible that Joseph, in using the term chariot, could have been referring to a different type of object than By Grace is claiming is the only possible object, then his claim is obviously faulty. What other conclusion can we come to?
 
By Grace, you are missing the point. The point is that they were aware of the idea of using the wheel for transportation and chose for some reason not to use it, or they did use it, but we just haven’t found the artifacts, or none survived for us to find. Perhaps the reason they didn’t use the wheel, if they didn’t, was the same reason their descendents didn’t for hundreds of years after seeing the wheel used by the Europeans. One reason we know of that native Mesoamericans did not use the wheel was because of religious reasons that related wheels to the sun. It is very possible that even if BofM people used the wheel, others would have wanted to destroy any evidence of their use, seeing them as a sort of blasphemy.


That is surely a blizzard of bologna there! All of those puerile "explanations to explain the obvious: THE WHEEL WAS NEVER USED AS A MODE OF TRANSPORTATION IN THE AMERICAS BY THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES UNTIL THE 19th CENTURY.

You are insisting they had to have used Egyptian war chariots, but there is nothing in the Book of Mormon that makes such a claim. There isn’t even any mention of chariots being used in battle.

More nonsense! I am simply difining the word chariot, and you are attempting to make a chariot with wheels into a sled.

In Maya battle imagery, for instance, the king rides into battle on a litter or cloth covered framework between two parallel bars.

this proves nothing, even if it is true. You are trying to make something else into a chariot, and excusing at the same time that Smith created a work of fiction because there is ZERO evidence of the usage of wheels as transportation for any native people in the Americas.

Yes, but how aware was Joseph Smith of what those chariots looked like

That is too funny! And it is so preposterous that I am surprized that your keyboard did not break in half when you posted tit.

I have shown very clearly how every one of your assumptions is faulty, which leaves you without anything to support your conclusion. Why would I need to present anything more?

Nothing of the sort happened, except that you went to Jeff Lindsey and copied his inane stuff. Sooner or later you will need to look carefully at your religion, and then you will see that the BoM contains one preposterous lie after another.
 
Yes it is possible and even probable that Joseph could see what none other could see and was hidden from them, just as Elisha.
Why?

I read in Colossians 1:25, "Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God." This word "Fulfil" in Strong's Concordance is: fill, be full, complete, and end.

2 Timothy 3:16 "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." I see nothing here prophesying further scripture.
 
And there is no evidence from the text that these people forgot Hebrew. Rather, it says their language gradually evolved over several hundred years to be different than anything we would recognize today. There is still, however, much evidence from the translated text of the Book of Mormon of Hebrew influence.
Well, it seems to me that Joseph Smith plagiarized the King James Bible, and along with it, plagiarized some of the mistakes of the King James Bible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Book_of_Mormon_and_the_King_James_Bible


When you create a new religion by plagiarizing the King James Bible, the Hebrew gets further lost in the mix.
 
Back
Top