Glass & Steel in the Book of Mormon, why a problem?

[_Drifting]

My apologies Tobin I should have been clearer.

Firstly, I stated up front that we should accept the timeframe and location as consistent.

Secondly I was after references about the Jaredites from the Book of Mormon that seem consistent with what we know about the Olmecs.

Thanks.

Bump for Tobin...

[_Tobin]

My apologies Tobin I should have been clearer.

Firstly, I stated up front that we should accept the timeframe and location as consistent.

Secondly I was after references about the Jaredites from the Book of Mormon that seem consistent with what we know about the Olmecs.

Thanks.

Bump for Tobin...

Drifting, we've already discussed the similarities in here. Is there anything in the Book of Mormon that says it must be the Olmecs over anyone else? No, but please present a better candidate and I'll be interested in hearing about it. The most pressing problem with other theories I've heard is a population and distance problem. You just don't get the high concentrations of people close together that is necessary that you find in the central american civilizations and it is hard to miss the narrow neck of land references in the Book of Mormon and immediately not have Panama spring to mind.

[_Drifting]

Drifting, we've already discussed the similarities in here. Is there anything in the Book of Mormon that says it must be the Olmecs over anyone else? No, but please present a better candidate and I'll be interested in hearing about it. The most pressing problem with other theories I've heard is a population and distance problem. You just don't get the high concentrations of people close together that is necessary that you find in the central american civilizations and it is hard to miss the narrow neck of land references in the Book of Mormon and immediately not have Panama spring to mind.

My apologies once again.
I thought there was something concrete that was making you 'suspect' that the Olmecs and the Jaredites were one and the same.

[_bcuzbcuz]

I suppose if they understood what iron could do, they might have been able to figure out how to create better furnaces to make more use of them. The metals they did use, did not need as much heat, so maybe there was not enough interest in making better. I wonder if natives would have been interested in Iron and steel weapons and tools they may have seen when they arrived.

Ample historical evidence exists about native peoples incorporating new technologies into their living and fighting (steel knifes and horses). This happened throughout the Americas. But something else the Spanish brought with them made an even greater impact: disease.

Millions upon millions of people throughout the West Indies and South and Central America were wiped out by European sicknesses (North America followed suit later).

Add to this the way the Spanish double agenda of:
1. exploration and Christianization, (open agenda)
2. stealing gold and silver, (hidden agenda)
by any means necessary, (mostly achieved through ruthless slaughter)

It is quite possible that the people capable of copying weapons technology were wiped out before they even had a chance to explore the idea.

The Americas had only one method of fighting back. (Something else that was, by the way, carelessly neglected from any mention in the Book of Mormon) Tobacco.
(Oops, maybe the Americas had a second weapon, Syphilis)

All in all the score, for death and losses due to European conquest versus Tobacco, is about even.

Is there anything, even slightly remote, that apologists can find in the Book of Mormon that references tobacco?

[_Themis]

Ample historical evidence exists about native peoples incorporating new technologies into their living and fighting (steel knifes and horses).

None that I am aware of that has them making steel knives, although I am sure groups who were already smelting softer metals would have if not for some of the things you mentioned happening after. Most groups are usually interested in things that look nice or are evident they have value to them. This is why the horse caught on so well over much of the Americas after they were reintroduced. Doesn't do well for the Book of Mormon though.

It is quite possible that the people capable of copying weapons technology were wiped out before they even had a chance to explore the idea.

I am sure if they were given time or knowledge on how to do it, they would have done it. This of course also does not do well for iron and steel in the Book of Mormon.

It's odd that such valuable knowledge would be lost, and no evidence showing they had it from two civilizations that spanned close to 3000 years and numbered in the millions.

Is there anything, even slightly remote, that apologists can find in the Book of Mormon that references tobacco?

No, but then it is fairly clear to those who do not have a major agenda to believe it, that it is a 19th century production, and not a real story of ancient peoples in the Americas.

[_Equality]

it is hard to miss the narrow neck of land references in the Book of Mormon and immediately not have Panama spring to mind.

Seems a lot of people read the Book of Mormon references to the narrow neck of land and have the land between Lake Erie and Lake Ontario immediately spring to mind:
http://www.bookofmormongeography.org/files/u1/tonawanda-watershed-map.jpg

[_Quasimodo]

it is hard to miss the narrow neck of land references in the Book of Mormon and immediately not have Panama spring to mind.

Seems a lot of people read the Book of Mormon references to the narrow neck of land and have the land between Lake Erie and Lake Ontario immediately spring to mind:
http://www.bookofmormongeography.org/files/u1/tonawanda-watershed-map.jpg

I guess it depends on one's point of view. If you're desperately trying to find an explanation of why the Book of Mormon is true, Panama helps to solve a few uncomfortable inconsistencies (certainly not most of them).

If you are an objective reader, the Northeast U.S. just seems the most obvious place that Joseph Smith would use as a setting for his story. He lived there. The same logic applies for claims of Eden in Missouri.

[_Tobin]

it is hard to miss the narrow neck of land references in the Book of Mormon and immediately not have Panama spring to mind.

Seems a lot of people read the Book of Mormon references to the narrow neck of land and have the land between Lake Erie and Lake Ontario immediately spring to mind:
http://www.bookofmormongeography.org/files/u1/tonawanda-watershed-map.jpg

I guess it depends on one's point of view. If you're desperately trying to find an explanation of why the Book of Mormon is true, Panama helps to solve a few uncomfortable inconsistencies (certainly not most of them).
If you are an objective reader, the Northeast U.S. just seems the most obvious place that Joseph Smith would use as a setting for his story. He lived there. The same logic applies for claims of Eden in Missouri.

Oh, I'd quibble with use of 'objective' in that sentence.

[_Quasimodo]

Oh, I'd quibble with use of 'objective' in that sentence.

I used the word "objective" to describe a non-Mormon reading the book. Someone that doesn't come to it with a prior believe that Joseph Smith was truly quoting God in his translations. Someone that is trying to evaluate whether or not the book is true or fiction.

The book itself seems to imply that the events took place in what is now upstate New York. I think (from what I've read) that most Mormons believe that too. I believe that recent apologists have come up with a Meso-American theory to explain away some difficult facts.

Doesn't the Hill Cumorah Pageant still take place near Palmyra, NY?

[_Runtu]

I used the word "objective" to describe a non-Mormon reading the book. Someone that doesn't come to it with a prior believe that Joseph Smith was truly quoting God in his translations. Someone that is trying to evaluate whether or not the book is true or fiction.

The book itself seems to imply that the events took place in what is now upstate New York. I think (from what I've read) that most Mormons believe that too. I believe that recent apologists have come up with a Meso-American theory to explain away some difficult facts.

Doesn't the Hill Cumorah Pageant still take place near Palmyra, NY?

It is interesting to see how scholars without a dog in the fight see the Book of Mormon. Michael Coe has given the book some attention, and he has kind words for apologists like John Sorensen. But, as he put it, the problem is that there are no actors in the Book of Mormon; the civilization described doesn't work anywhere in the Americas in the correct time frame. Of course, I'm sure some Mormons will say Coe is an evil anti-Mormon hell-bent on destroying the church.