Posted by Walker on July 08, 1998 at 15:13:33:
In Reply to: Conclusion from SWN posted by SWN on July 08, 1998 at 03:36:32:
Was your conclusion that ancient peoples wrote on metalic objects?
If so, you have convinced me. Actually just a couple of accurately dated items would have convinced me. I would think that could be accomplished in just a couple of paragraphs at most.
I don't think anti-Mormons challenge this point. I don’t think information on this site challenges this point. There are other, more difficult questions on this site.
A quote from Thomas Ferguson really troubles me. Perhaps you could respond to this.
"Metallurgy does not appear in the region under discussion [Sorensen's geography] until about the ninth century A.D None of the foregoing technical demands [bellows, mining, swords, etc.] are met by the archaeology of the region proposed as Book of Mormon lands and places…I doubt that the proponents will be very convincing, if they content that evidence of metallurgy is difficult to find and a rarity in archaeology. Where mining was practiced—as in the Old Testament world—mountains of ore and tailings have been found. Artifacts of metal have been found. Art portrays the existence of metallurgical products."
From "Quest for the Gold Plates", Stan Larson--257
Why is there so little evidence in this hemisphere to support the kind of metallurgy described in the Book of Mormon?
BTW, I hope this BB allows the continuance of this discussion; questions need answering. I hope you are able to come concise answers and avoid copying and pasting huge pieces of barely related information.
Also, does anyone know of a FARMS response to "Quest for the Gold Plates". I noticed that one FARMS response to "New Approaches" didn’t specifically rebut Larson’s "The Historicity of the Matthean Sermon on the Mount in 3rd Nephi." The other response to this work was poor.
[ Follow Ups ] [ Exmormon.org- Honest Inquiry Message Board ] [ FAQ ]