Horse and Chariots--Another Apologist Red Herring

[_subgenius]

"Runtu" writes...

In short, there were no beasts of burden in Mesoamerica, nor was the wheel used in transportation. This makes the description of horses and chariots completely anachronistic, unless you accept that Mormon originally wrote, "Now when Lamoni had heard this he caused that his servants should make ready his ceremonial battle beasts and his wheel-less litter."

There is no "record", yes...but obviously any talk of Llamas is not going to be sufficient for your cynicism, and likely not for my skepticism.

However, it would seem that you are implying a certain use for chariots from its significantly limited use in the Book of Mormon. I mean to say, why is the chariot not used with more frequency in the Book of Mormon? It plays a significant role in the Bible, but it is all but barely mentioned in the Book of Mormon, and those mentions are not truly conclusive as to what purpose the chariot served.
Not that your speculation is not applauded, but it is still speculation.

It is perfectly reasonable that horses existed but no remains have ever been found.
well, except horse bones were found at Mayapan, dating centuries before the Spaniards.
excavations from Cenote Ch'en Mul have also uncovered traces.

In short - The Tikal Palaces have imagery which clearly illustrates Kings going into battles upon a litter with protector beings all about. It is completely reasonable that Joseph Smith, upon translating, would encounter such an unfamiliar concept and convey the imagery as "horse and chariot" - which is pretty spot on.

but more importantly -
you fail to read the Book of Mormon
In Ether 9:19 we find,
And they also had horses, and asses, and there were elephants and cureloms and cumoms; all of which were useful unto man, and more especially the elephants and cureloms and cumoms

Now the Book of Mormon being a linear translation makes the jaredites hardly an afterthought when one considers Alma 37:21

all in all it would seem that you ignore the context, about how the story of the destroyed civilization to the north is an integral part of the Book of Mormon narrative.

But what about modern science? Science believes that horses, mammoths, etc. came over the land bridge but then the Pleistocene period ends and many "large animals" are believed to have gone extinct.


that being said, sounds like gnat-straining to me (bzzzzzzz)

[_Runtu]

There is no "record", yes...but obviously any talk of Llamas is not going to be sufficient for your cynicism, and likely not for my skepticism.

I don't know about you, but I've actually been around llamas quite a bit. I did spend two years in Bolivia, which is kind of llama central. I'll just ask you a few questions, if I may:

1. Are there llamas in Guatemala/Mexico, where the Book of Mormon peoples are supposed to have resided?

2. How far is it from the northernmost habitat of llamas to Guatemala/Mexico?

3. Are there any environmental features that prevented the spread of llamas into Central America and Mexico?

However, it would seem that you are implying a certain use for chariots from its significantly limited use in the Book of Mormon. I mean to say, why is the chariot not used with more frequency in the Book of Mormon? It plays a significant role in the Bible, but it is all but barely mentioned in the Book of Mormon, and those mentions are not truly conclusive as to what purpose the chariot served. Not that your speculation is not applauded, but it is still speculation.

All I'm saying is that you have two things going on here: vehicles (chariots) and beasts of burden (horses). The text clearly associates the two with transportation, so the burden is on the apologist to show how that association is "speculation."

It is perfectly reasonable that horses existed but no remains have ever been found. well, except horse bones were found at Mayapan, dating centuries before the Spaniards. excavations from Cenote Ch'en Mul have also uncovered traces.

First of all Cenote Ch'en Mul is the name of the cenote where the horse bones were found in Mayapan. It's not two places.

The remains of horses also were found during the excavations at the Postclassic Mayan site of Mayapan on the Yucatán peninsula (Ray 1957, 278; Pollock and Ray 1957, 635, 638). Two of the specimens are easily explained as modern because they came from surface lots. According to Ray, fragmentary horse teeth were recovered from Cenote Ch’en Mul near Mayapan, where they were found in the bottom layer “in a sequence of unconsolidated earth almost two meters in thickness” (278). They are considered pre-Columbian. Due to the degree of mineralization which was greater than that of any bone or tooth found near them, they are thought to be of Pleistocene age. Ray suggests that the Maya may have picked up the fossil teeth as curios and transported them to the site. At this point then there is no convincing evidence that the horse survived until the period of the Mesoamerican civilizations.

Also, Pollock and Ray did not believe they were contemporary to the Maya, although apologists dismiss their findings as "lame."

In short - The Tikal Palaces have imagery which clearly illustrates Kings going into battles upon a litter with protector beings all about. It is completely reasonable that Joseph Smith, upon translating, would encounter such an unfamiliar concept and convey the imagery as "horse and chariot" - which is pretty spot on.

Apparently, Joseph Smith was unfamiliar with the English word "litter." I wonder what he was thinking of when he wrote "Captain Patten was carried some of the way in a litter, but it caused so much distress that he begged to be left by the way side...he died that night" (Vol. 3, p. 171).

but more importantly -
you fail to read the Book of Mormon
In Ether 9:19 we find,
And they also had horses, and asses, and there were elephants and cureloms and cumoms; all of which were useful unto man, and more especially the elephants and cureloms and cumoms

More anachronisms help your cause in what way?

Now the Book of Mormon being a linear translation makes the jaredites hardly an afterthought when one considers Alma 37:21

all in all it would seem that you ignore the context, about how the story of the destroyed civilization to the north is an integral part of the Book of Mormon narrative.

What does this have to do with the notion of horses and chariots?

But what about modern science? Science believes that horses, mammoths, etc. came over the land bridge but then the Pleistocene period ends and many "large animals" are believed to have gone extinct.


that being said, sounds like gnat-straining to me (bzzzzzzz)

Well, sure, it's possible that horses and other large animals survived for another 10,000 years beyond the end of the Pleistocene era until the time of the Lamanites. Why not? Surely, you can't be serious.

[_Themis]

Runtu,

You have a lot of patience. :)

[_Runtu]

Runtu,

You have a lot of patience. :)

It's like watching Karl Pilkington's mind at work:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36LqTovm ... AAAAAAAAAQ

[_Themis]

It's like watching Karl Pilkington's mind at work:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36LqTovm ... AAAAAAAAAQ

+1

[_subgenius]

So, from the time of the Jaredites until just before the time of Christ, there was abundant ore and widespread use of smelting technology, but all of that stopped, such that there is now no evidence of smelting technology, no leftover slag and mines, no weapons, no tools. Is that what you're arguing?

actually there has been evidence already posted....except no one makes claims about "abundance" and "widespread" as you so erroneously try to insert.
what is known, is that the ore was used, shipments of raw materials have been documented. It is also known that this type of work was tantamount to "masonry" and its techniques considered somewhat secret. Also, there is even archaeological occurrences at various coinciding times, but since steel is not capable of being "preserved" for posterity, artifacts are rare - but available.

[_subgenius]

I don't know about you, but I've actually been around llamas quite a bit. I did spend two years in Bolivia, which is kind of llama central. ....

wow, lighten up, i was being facetious about the llamas - (hint "skepticism")
and actually i have friends and business in central america....but that is irrelevant....much like your Bolivia reference (you see being there does not necessarily make you an authority on llamas nor does it make you Benjamin Mendoza y Amor Flores)

All I'm saying is that you have two things going on here: vehicles (chariots) and beasts of burden (horses). The text clearly associates the two with transportation, so the burden is on the apologist to show how that association is "speculation."

actually the burden is on you...i have made no claim as to what the chariots were used for, i simply listed a few possibilities...you, on the other hand, have emphatically claimed that it was for transportation - which is, at best, a speculation on your part - so show the association and admit it is speculation.

....Ray suggests....

to which you boldly substitute "states as fact" for the word "suggests"....nice.

ahem..."obviously some guy found some horse teeth and liked them and then they found their way over here....in some place with pottery...but at a different depth...cause that is what those people would do...yep, i am scientist, that is probably what happened, no need to even bother with dating that, i have already figured it out...you see it does not "fit" with my pre-conceived notion,sooooo...obviously the teeth were a souvenir...blah blah blah"

Apparently, Joseph Smith was unfamiliar with the English word "litter." I wonder what he was thinking of when he wrote "Captain Patten was carried some of the way in a litter, but it caused so much distress that he begged to be left by the way side...he died that night" (Vol. 3, p. 171).

out of that, you cherry pick the word "litter" and go down this rabbit hole?....

More anachronisms help your cause in what way?

no, but since you have no rebuttal for the Jaredites, i accept your concession.

What does this have to do with the notion of horses and chariots?

ugh....

Well, sure, it's possible that horses and other large animals survived for another 10,000 years beyond the end of the Pleistocene era until the time of the Lamanites. Why not? Surely, you can't be serious.

i am not sure you are that familiar with the Book of Mormon...i think i know why you have left the church...but hey as long as you got some book material out of it.

[_Runtu]

i am not sure you are that familiar with the Book of Mormon...i think i know why you have left the church...but hey as long as you got some book material out of it.

Insults are apparently the last refuge for people who don't really have an argument. It's funny, but the Book of Mormon had very little to do with why I left. It's true that I did reread the book and pray for an answer, but the book itself wasn't the catalyst for leaving.

I suppose it matters not. You seem happy to read my mind and throw mindless insults. I don't have the time or interest.

[_Tobin]

In Alma 24:12-15,

1) We are discussing Lamanites, NOT Nephites!
2) We are discussing Lamanites, NOT JAREDITES!
3) We are discussing Lamanites, NOT MULEKITES!
4) We are discussing a time LONG before Lamanites merged with the Nephite civilization.

What are you talking about? The text makes it clear that ore was abundant for the Nephites and Lamanites (and the Jaredites before them). Here's Helaman 6:9-11 again:

This is EXACTLY how obtuse you are acting. Case in point: In what order chronologically were the book of Alma and Helaman written - specifically Alma 24 and Helaman 6? When you can seriously address that in that mind of yours, maybe you can understand my frustration with talking with you. You take things wildly out of context and chronological order. You generalize assumptions based on one period of time, people or civilization and then paint everyone with it. I find what you are doing both dishonest and uninteresting and I'm through discussing it with you.

[_Drifting]

All I'm saying is that you have two things going on here: vehicles (chariots) and beasts of burden (horses). The text clearly associates the two with transportation, so the burden is on the apologist to show how that association is "speculation."

actually the burden is on you...i have made no claim as to what the chariots were used for, i simply listed a few possibilities...you, on the other hand, have emphatically claimed that it was for transportation - which is, at best, a speculation on your part - so show the association and admit it is speculation.

Let's have a look at the context within which the word 'chariot' is used within the Book of Mormon...

Chariot
see also BD Chariot.
Lamoni commands servants to prepare horses and chariots, Alma 18:9 (Alma 20:6)
9 And they said unto him: Behold, he is feeding thy horses. Now the king had commanded his servants, previous to the time of the watering of their flocks, that they should prepare his horses and chariots, and conduct him forth to the land of Nephi; for there had been a great feast appointed at the land of Nephi, by the father of Lamoni, who was king over all the land.

Ammon prepares Lamoni’s chariots, Alma 18:10, 12
10 Now when king Lamoni heard that Ammon was preparing his horses and his chariots he was more astonished, because of the faithfulness of Ammon, saying: Surely there has not been any servant among all my servants that has been so faithful as this man; for even he doth remember all my commandments to execute them.
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.

Nephites gather with horses and chariots, 3 Ne. 3:22
22 And it came to pass in the seventeenth year, in the latter end of the year, the proclamation of Lachoneus had gone forth throughout all the face of the land, and they had taken their horses, and their chariots, and their cattle, and all their flocks, and their herds, and their grain, and all their substance, and did march forth by thousands and by tens of thousands, until they had all gone forth to the place which chad been appointed that they should gather themselves together, to defend themselves against their enemies.

the Father will destroy chariots of Gentiles, 3 Ne. 21:14 (Micah 5:10).
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;

wind and fire are chariot of the Lord, Abr. 2:7
7 For I am the Lord thy God; I dwell in heaven; the earth is my footstool; I stretch my hand over the sea, and it obeys my voice; I cause the wind and the fire to be my chariot; I say to the mountains—Depart hence—and behold, they are taken away by a whirlwind, in an instant, suddenly.
(LDS.org Topical Guide - Chariot)

Now does these scriptures better support Runtu's view of transportation or subgenius' view:
subgenius wrote:

However, it would seem that you are implying a certain use for chariots from its significantly limited use in the Book of Mormon. I mean to say, why is the chariot not used with more frequency in the Book of Mormon? It plays a significant role in the Bible, but it is all but barely mentioned in the Book of Mormon, and those mentions are not truly conclusive as to what purpose the chariot served.

subgenius, aside from transportation - what other purposes do you think are possible that are consistent with the scriptures above?