Jason Troyer and Jo Scott Expose the Contradiction Between DNA and the Book of Mormon

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mustard Seed

New member
Shimei said:
I might think that maybe what was written was more credible if the items mentioned in the book actually existed at one point in time.

What if an obscure location name mentioned as occuring in the mid-east happened to be just where it was described to be by the book despite the fact that it's name and location were unknown and unavailable to Joseph Smith and his contemporaries in the western world or the bible?
 

Servo

Formerly Shimei!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Mustard Seed said:
What if an obscure location name mentioned as occuring in the mid-east happened to be just where it was described to be by the book despite the fact that it's name and location were unknown and unavailable to Joseph Smith and his contemporaries in the western world or the bible?

Didn't they have a map or a Bible?

Again, wouldn't it help if there were some actual "units of exchange" that existed that we could all see? No evidence of such a claim doesn't help your side.
 

Mustard Seed

New member
Shimei said:
Didn't they have a map or a Bible?

The location is not on any available map nor in the Bible.

Again, wouldn't it help if there were some actual "units of exchange" that existed that we could all see? No evidence of such a claim doesn't help your side.

Wouldn't it help if there were some actual tablets containing ten specified commands? No evidence of such doesn't help the claim of Moses, or does it?
 

Servo

Formerly Shimei!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Mustard Seed said:
The location is not on any available map nor in the Bible.



Wouldn't it help if there were some actual tablets containing ten specified commands? No evidence of such doesn't help the claim of Moses, or does it?

But there is evidence of the 10 commandments. They were written down and repeated over and over again in different writings by different authors. And as I already posted a link that shows all the Biblical coins.

There is NO evidence pointing to the coins or units of exchange that are mentioned in the Book of Mormon. That is a big problem for those who think the book is inspired by God.

Also, what about all of the weapons of war mentioned in the Book of Mormon? Chariots and Scimitars and other METAL weapons used in North America? Where did they all go?
 

Mustard Seed

New member
There's as much evidence for the actual tablets as there is for Book of Mormon described units. The repeating of accounts by secondary sources drawing from the initial account of something doesn't make it (the initial) more true or valid.

There's evidence for the Book of Mormon units in that the units offered would permit the users of those units as currency an efficiency and elegancy beyond even today's monetary divisions in terms of minimizing the number of coins needed to designate a specific quantity. Here's a tid bit detailing the elegancy of the system--

The Numerical Elegance of the Nephite System

The mathematical configuration of the Nephite system of weights and measures is intriguing. The main Nephite gold values were these: the senine; two senines made a seon; two seons made a shum; and the limnah was the sum of them all. In other words, the values were one, two, four, and seven (one plus two plus four), as shown on Table 1:




TABLE 1: GOLD



1 = senine



2 = seon



4 = shum



7 = limnah




Similarly, the silver values were also one, two, four and seven, as shown on Table 2:




TABLE 2: SILVER



1 = senum



2 = amnor



4 = ezrom



7 = onti




The beauty of this mathematical configuration is its simplicity.* The values of 1, 2, 4, and 7 can be expressed with the use of a single piece, and the values 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, and 14 can be achieved with only two, while values of 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, and 18 can all be formed by using only 3 in combination. Not until one exceeds 13 does one need two of the same weights:




TABLE 3



Values

Number of Weights Required to Make up that Value

1___1
2___1
3___2___2 + 1
4___1
5___2___4 + 1
6___2___4 + 2
7___1
8___2___7 + 1
9___2___7 + 2
10__3___7 + 2 + 1
11__2___7 + 4
12__3___7 + 4 + 1
13__3___7 + 4 + 2
14__2___7 + 7
15__3___7 + 7 + 1
16__3___7 + 7 + 2
17__4___7 + 7 + 2 + 1
18__3___7 + 7 + 4
19__4___7 + 7 + 4 + 1
20__4___7 + 7 + 4 + 2


1. For a comparison of 1–2–4–7, 1–2–4–8, and 1–2–5–10 systems, see Richard P. Smith, "The Nephite Monetary System," Improvement Era 57, May 1954, 316–17. On binary systems generally, see Phylis and Philip Morrison, "Wonders," Scientific American (February 1996): 130–31.

The Numerical Elegance of the Nephite System (part 2)

The gold antion (worth one and a half gold senines) allows the system to express half values. The question is, why was "a half senine" not adopted? Perhaps for two reasons: smaller valued silver weights were used, but gold was probably intrinsically more valuable, and thus a piece of gold smaller than a senine may have gotten lost or damaged too easily. But more than that, the values of 1 1/2, 3, 3 1/2, and 5 1/2 more readily formed with the antion than if, instead, a hypothetical half senine gold measure had been used, as seen on Table 4

*

TABLE 4



Values__With the Antion_______Without the Antion__With 1/2 Senine

1 1/2___1 weight__________________impossible______2 weights
2 1/2___2 weights___1 + 1 1/2____impossible_______2 weights
3 1/2___2 weights___2 + 1 1/2____impossible_______3 weights
4 1/2___3 weights_1 + 2 + 1 1/2__impossible_______3 weights
5 1/2___2 weights__4 + 1 1/2_____impossible_______3 weights
6 1/2___3 weights_4 + 1 + 1 1/2__impossible_______3 weights


So, the presence of the gold antion improved the efficiency of the system. Again, all of the half values between one and seven can be made without needing to use two of the same weights.

Altogether, seven silver measures were used. The shiblon, shiblum, and leah were 1/2, 1/4, and 1/8 of a senum, respectively. Because these three smaller measures extend the binary system on into fractions smaller than one, one can see the mathematical consistency of the system from the leah to the ezrom. For purposes of clarification, if one were to consider the leah (the smallest measure) as 1, then the shiblum (twice the size of a leah) becomes 2, the shiblon becomes 4, the senum is then 8, the amnor 16, and the ezrom 32. See table 5, which also expresses this relationship in terms of powers of two and fractions, alternative ways of saying the same thing:
TABLE 5

1/8_____= leah_______= 1____= 2^0
1/4_____= shiblum___= 2____= 2^1
1/2_____= shiblon____= 4____= 2^2
1________= senum____= 8____=2^3
2________= amnor____= 16___= 2^4
4________= ezrom_____= 32___= 2^5
7________=onti


When Alma 11:13 says that an onti was "as great as them all," it would appear that the onti equaled 1 + 2 + 4 = 7 senums. It is possible, however, that the onti also included the value of the three smaller measures as well, in which case the onti was worth seven and 7/8 senums, or 63 leahs.

--taken from

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=jbms&id=198


There you are, we may not have yet found coins but the system itself, through it's efficiencies demonstrates it wasn't just thrown in to some copy and paste work.
 

Servo

Formerly Shimei!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Mustard Seed said:
There you are, we may not have yet found coins but the system itself, through it's efficiencies demonstrates it wasn't just thrown in to some copy and paste work.

Copy and paste work indeed. It would still be nice to find some of those coins though.

And then maybe some metal battle armor and silk!
 

Mustard Seed

New member
Shimei said:
Copy and paste work indeed. It would still be nice to find some of those coins though.

And then maybe some metal battle armor and silk!

That's what the masses of atheists, agnostics and non-abrahamic believers have claimed of the ark of the covenant, the tablets, mana etc. etc. ad infinitum ad nausium
 

Servo

Formerly Shimei!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Mustard Seed said:
That's what the masses of atheists, agnostics and non-abrahamic believers have claimed of the ark of the covenant, the tablets, mana etc. etc. ad infinitum ad nausium

But there is so much archaeological evidence pertaining to the people, objects and places listed in the Bible. The Bible is a history book. The same can not be said for the Book of Mormon. You have no evidence. Not one ancient city mentioned in the Book of Mormons has ever been found, not one!

Are you saying that we should live by blind faith?
 

Mustard Seed

New member
Shimei said:
But there is so much archaeological evidence pertaining to the people, objects and places listed in the Bible. The Bible is a history book. The same can not be said for the Book of Mormon. You have no evidence. Not one ancient city mentioned in the Book of Mormons has ever been found, not one!

Are you saying that we should live by blind faith?


Are you saying that those Christians who lived before all the evidence you present there in that link pertaining to the Bible were living by blind faith?
 

Servo

Formerly Shimei!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Mustard Seed said:
Are you saying that those Christians who lived before all the evidence you present there in that link pertaining to the Bible were living by blind faith?


No, they never did. They always had evidence of the true and living God. It is all around us! But the claims in the Book of Mormon, they contradict with what scripture says AND there is no evidence that ANY of it ever happened.

Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse…
 
Last edited:

Mustard Seed

New member
Shimei said:
No, they never did. They always had evidence of the true and living God. It is all around us! But the claims in the Book of Mormon, they contradict with what scripture says AND they is no evidence that ANY of it ever happened.

Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse…

They don't contradict what God says and do not contradict anything that does constitute scripture.

Just as you claim the evidence is all around so do I.

Here are some more specific evidences pertaining to the Book of Mormon

http://www.jefflindsay.com/BMEvidences.shtml
 

JoyfulRook

New member
Mustard Seed said:
DNA has proven no such thing. This is a lie perpetuated on and centered around the general public's naivity touching all things 'DNA'. DNA has proven no such thing one way or the other. Here's my more indepth addressing of this issue in the past--

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1044670&postcount=154
Hmm.
Mormon Seed - Clinton style said:
I did NOT have sexual relations with that woman! This is a lie perpetuatued on and centered around the general public's naiivity touching all things Presidential. The blue dress has proven no such thing one way or the other.
 

Mustard Seed

New member
If you think I'm in a similar position to the president then you should be able to produce more than just a personal perception.

Can you respond to the issue and move beyond insinuation?
 

Toast

New member
Mustard, I dont think anybody can make you see that Morminism is just another cult like the Jehova's Witnesses, because your eyes are closed. We have the messianic prophecies of the OT, and the historicity of The Bible as a whole to support our view that The Bible is from God. There is no such evidence which authenticates your book. It just seems like another made up religion, with false beliefs.

He also sealed The Bible at Revelations. What your saying is God apparantly forgot to add all the mormon junk in there before he sealed it, and that just doesnt seem reasonable. And even Christ says at the end of Revelations, dont add to this Book. We simply dont need any more doctrines and covenants, The Bible is enough. Christs words are enough, in spite of what Joseph Smith thinks.
 

Mustard Seed

New member
Toast said:
Mustard, I dont think anybody can make you see that Morminism is just another cult like the Jehova's Witnesses, because your eyes are closed. We have the messianic prophecies of the OT, and the historicity of The Bible as a whole to support our view that The Bible is from God. There is no such evidence which authenticates your book. It just seems like another made up religion, with false beliefs.

The Jews don't accept your view of what is and isn't, and to which Messiah those Messianic prophecies apply. So where is the power in that claim? The more inclined to the secular view sees similarities in pre-Biblical myths and wonders at the degree of historical accuracy.

There is evidence for the Book of Mormon and for the Bible, the Bible does have more volume wise as it's remained tied to the present western tradition of civilization and to the lands of such AND there's been alot more time effort put into such verifications of lands and congruencies in other historical indicators. But to make it fair why don't we get an equivilant amount of time and some compensation for the fact that there's a clear disconnect in the irradication of the nation and culture which is primarily accounted for in the Book of Mormon? Are you aware of how many ruins in the Americas HAVEN'T even begun to be excavated?

He also sealed The Bible at Revelations. What your saying is God apparantly forgot to add all the mormon junk in there before he sealed it, and that just doesnt seem reasonable. And even Christ says at the end of Revelations, dont add to this Book. We simply dont need any more doctrines and covenants, The Bible is enough. Christs words are enough, in spite of what Joseph Smith thinks.

Then do you reject all those books (IN THE BIBLE!) that have been shown to have been written AFTER the book of Revelations was written? And what about the fact that it wasn't untill some time after most of the Bible was written that the Book of Revelations was actually made a part of it? And what about the fact that the individuals who did the compiling (the second group as the first group must have really screwed up since they didn't include Revelations the first time) were fighting over whether or not to put in the Book of Enoch or the Book of Revelations? And what about Martin Luther? The man advocated the Book of Revelations (and some others) not be included in the Bible. Is the leader and starter of the protestant reformation the lowest of scum because he wanted to take away from the Bible? If he was taking away from the Bible and you follow him, and you see us as adding to it (It's not us, it's God, and God never said he couldn't or wouldn't add to those words in the Bible) are we then both to be condemned?
 

Toast

New member
In so far as I know Revelations was the last book written, penned by the apostle John around what many believe to be A.D. 90'ish. Also, most of the books written in the NT were written by people who were apostles of Jesus, and/or were given authority by Jesus or the apostles. In other words, first hand stuff. Alot of it also has to do with story flow, what actually seems to be legitmate also fits with the story. As for the apocrypha and other so called books of The Bible that werent included in the cannon? They were deemed by the church fathers to be not only not authoritative, but they just didnt seem to fit with the story. Just a bunch of made up garbage, kind of like the book of mormon, written by people who were bitten by the "I want to make up stuff and have it be part of a religion" bug.
As for the Jews? I'm sure they wish the prophecies in the OT didnt conspicuously point to Jesus Christ, but then again, Jesus warned them, saying, "if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for Moses wrote about Me."
 

Mustard Seed

New member
Toast said:
In so far as I know Revelations was the last book written, penned by the apostle John around what many believe to be A.D. 90'ish.

Some hold it to possibly have been written back in 68. Regardless it's interesting that you would place the whole of the Bible under it's dictates when the Bible wasn't compiled for several centuries AFTER, and even then the Book of Revelations didn't come 'till even later and with MUCH conflict over whether or not to include it.


As for the Jews? I'm sure they wish the prophecies in the OT didnt conspicuously point to Jesus Christ, but then again, Jesus warned them, saying, "if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for Moses wrote about Me."

10 And now, my beloved brethren, and also Jew, and all ye ends of the earth, hearken unto these words and believe in Christ; and if ye believe not in these words believe in Christ. And if ye shall believe in Christ ye will believe in these words, for they are the words of Christ, and he hath given them unto me; and they teach all men that they should do good.

--2Nephi 33:10
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top