Comments on: Some Thoughts on Jaredites Barges

By: Clark Goble

Clark Goble — Wed, 15 Feb 2017 22:37:46 +0000

Not to mention the Book of Mormon’s warning about distinguishing what’s in the book (largely compiled by uninspired scribes from unknown sources around 200BC) from when it proceeded from the mouth of the prophet. Assuming inerrancy for the Old Testament over what science can demonstration (not to mention tree rings) seems deeply problematic.

But we’re getting pretty far afield from the original topic so I think I’ll close things up.

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 15 Feb 2017 22:30:46 +0000

I’m not going to take the time to look anything up, but there are quotes from general authorities indicating that the Bible is not intended to be a textbook for history, geology, etc. Talmage may have been one of them. I don’t write this for Rob’s benefit; he’s married to a very literal view of scripture, but rather to others who may come along and read this discussion.

By: Rob Osborn

Rob Osborn — Wed, 15 Feb 2017 22:15:50 +0000

Yeah, better to not believe biblical chronologies, they may be right.

By: Clark Goble

Clark Goble — Wed, 15 Feb 2017 21:40:13 +0000

Umm. I don’t think we know that but I’ll drop it.

By: Rob Osborn

Rob Osborn — Wed, 15 Feb 2017 19:50:21 +0000

Well, we know c-14 dating isnt accurate. For example, we know the biblical chronology fairly well and accurately. Egypt was first found by the daughter of Ham, the granddaughter of Noah. Her son Pharaoh was the first to govern Egypt. This is according to our scripture.

23 The land of Egypt being first discovered by a woman, who was the daughter of Ham, and the daughter of Egyptus, which in the Chaldean signifies Egypt, which signifies that which is forbidden;
24 When this woman discovered the land it was under water, who afterward settled her sons in it; and thus, from Ham, sprang that race which preserved the curse in the land.
25 Now the first government of Egypt was established by Pharaoh, the eldest son of Egyptus, the daughter of Ham, and it was after the manner of the government of Ham, which was patriarchal. (Abraham 1:23-25).

According to published chronologies of the bible the flood was around 2350 bc. After the flood was the tower of Babel and the founding of Egypt. This would place the first government of Egypt to be roughly around 2250 bc. But, according to accepted c-14 dates the first government of Egypt to be at around 3100 bc. Thats almost a thousand years! The great pyramid would of obviously came at a later period after Egypt became established.

If we apply this same faulty system of dating to the Americas we should question the validity of using c-14 dating methods to date the Mayans.

By: Clark Goble

Clark Goble — Wed, 15 Feb 2017 17:02:55 +0000

Some are of course. I think the issue is ultimately a question of how to read the texts, how to acknowledge fallibilism in the authors, and how to examine the scientific claims and what their actual reach is. Often how people present science against religion isn’t quite what the science itself says.

By: Rob

Rob — Wed, 15 Feb 2017 03:49:33 +0000

Clark,
LDS scholars are some of the worst cherry pickers when it comes to ancient American history. There nothing wrong with that, its just reality. Im a great cherry picker myself.

By: Rob

Rob — Wed, 15 Feb 2017 03:46:26 +0000

Felix,
Not when it comes to anything in the past. They are so bad at it its unreal. I applaud technology and where we are headed, but that isnt necessarily “secularism” either. Attempting to write or interpret history void of all the beliefs we have as historical proofs is “secularism” and they are very far from the truth.

By: Felix

Felix — Wed, 15 Feb 2017 00:26:47 +0000

Rob,
How can you say that secularism is bad at finding truth? The explosion in knowledge about everything from the atom to the Virgo Cluster since the Scientific Revolution is incomparable. And the benefit to human beings in quality and length of life is also astounding. I think there are non-empirical truths, and I think that knowledge by supernatural means is possible. But “secuarlism” (if you want to call it that) has been very, very successful at finding truth over the last 300 years.

By: Clark Goble

Clark Goble — Tue, 14 Feb 2017 23:00:55 +0000

Yes, and what I’m saying is that it’s not cherry picking.

By: Rob Osborn

Rob Osborn — Tue, 14 Feb 2017 22:39:22 +0000

I guess my point is that we all cherry pick what information we want and refute or disband what we dont like. Everyone of us does it. I really dont care what mainstream intellectuals say about the ancient history of the Americas. It just proves to me how bad secularism is at finding truth.

By: Clark Goble

Clark Goble — Tue, 14 Feb 2017 22:24:11 +0000

But none of those things falsify the Book of Mormon. The seaworthy ship bit is of course also false as the examples in the original post demonstrate. So I think you are attacking a strawman.

By: Rob Osborn

Rob Osborn — Tue, 14 Feb 2017 22:18:07 +0000

Even saying mud in caves is highly objectionable as a global flood would destroy the entire topography of tge land, but anyway…
For the Book of Mormon they say stuff like- ancient Americans never used steel, nor worked with steel tools nor did they have use of elephants or crossed or sailed oceans in sea worthy ships so therefore the BoM is false. Stuff like that.

By: Clark Goble

Clark Goble — Tue, 14 Feb 2017 20:19:18 +0000

Scientists can say the flood wasn’t global because of the lack of mud deposits in caves and the like. That is that is a scientific question. I’m not aware of anything equivalent for the Book of Mormon.

By: Rob Osborn

Rob Osborn — Tue, 14 Feb 2017 19:34:56 +0000

Scientists say a lot about the Book of Mormon as not being real history just the same as scientists also say the flood in Noahs day wasnt a global event. Saying otherwise on either of these raises the heresy eyebrow from science.