Examining Mormonism 3 (The Jaredites)

The Mormon church teaches that the origin of our languages was at the tower of Babel and that God led the Jaredites from Babel to the New World. In this video I take a look at the science behind these stories and see if the claims of Mormonism stand up to the evidence

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Mormonism
• Mormons
• Joseph
• Smith
• Church
• of
• Jesus
• Christ
• Latter-day
• Saints
• tower
• Babel
• Jaredites
• brother
• Jared
• book
• Ether
• New
• World
• migration
• robert
• hales
• honeybees
• barges
• latin
• languages
• germanic

[shadow50429]

"God had specifically told the Jaredites that they could not have glass windows..." Hmmm.... There's only one thing missing about this claim. THE WORD GLASS IN THE ENTIRE BOOK OF MORMON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Even if it mentioned glass, Egyptians had glass 3,000 years ago.

Your "thinking" is simple: Ignore any argument coming from a Mormon scholar, and, strangely, even if it's simply quoted by a Mormon scholar. Why? You've decided what's true, and any evidence to the contrary is false.

[FlackerMan]

@shadow50429 The glass you are referring to were little beads, created by the slag of metal working, that were treated like gemstones. They were not used for windows or anything like that.

Realize that I spent years as an LDS apologist before I was overwhelmed by the evidence that was contrary to the position that I wanted to be true. Changing my position on the church was an act of personal integrity and the hardest thing I have ever had to do.

[Sk8er408]

@FlackerMan

Handful... no... twice 

[FlackerMan]

@Sk8er408 Actually there are five references to steel in the text. In addition to that, it also talks about how the people were armed with swords fashioned in the same way that the sword of Laban was. The sword of Laban was a steel sword.

Do you think that only having a handful of references throughout the text (covering a period of several hundred years) makes the claim of the BofM less valid, less trustworthy? If a cache of steel swords was found, wouldn't you use it as evidence for the BofM?

[Sk8er408]

@shadow50429

Other then Laban Steel sword the BoM only mentions steel swords once more...

[FlackerMan]

@shadow50429 They are still producing and using steel for several hundreds of years, and the text talks about the objects they produced throughout. There should be some evidence for it. Since there isn't any, you have to try to invent what may have happened in order to make your predetermined conclusion possible.

Be honest and let the facts/evidence/reason influence your world view rather than the cognitive dissonance game you are playing.

[FlackerMan]

@shadow50429 The point is that you accused me of not quoting anybody when I clearly did. Please by honest.

[FlackerMan]

@shadow50429 "first of millions produced on two continents". When did I say that? You are putting words in my mouth. Don't accuse me of making straw man arguments and then turn around and do the same.

[shadow50429]

@FlackerMan The text of the Book of Mormon doesn't mention steel swords after 200 B.C. The Sword of Laban, brought from Jerusalem where steel WAS used, brought a sample of the technology that allowed a much smaller Nephite population to produce some unknown number more. After that, for all we know, they may well have disappeared from usage. That's a far cry from saying the B of M supports two continents filled to the brim with steel war implements. The text simply doesn't support that idea.

[shadow50429]

@FlackerMan What you assume Joseph meant by what he said is not explicitly what he said. Even if he meant exactly what you say he meant, the Quorums of the First Presidency and Twelve had only ratified as doctrine the Book of Mormon, not just any off-hand commentary about it. Many GAs thoughout the history of the Church have openly criticized JS's own theories about where the B of M was. Why could they do that without censure? Because it wasn't doctrine, but speculation, as even JS said.

[shadow50429]

@FlackerMan Not really. You're making subtle changes in the meaning of the text that people who aren't familiar with the B of M would not be able to understand. Claim X does not mean claim X, therefore NOT claim Y. You're making unwarranted logical jumps and fallacies to misrepresent doctrine and scripture. On another one of your videos you make the textually-unsupportable jump that the steel sword of Laban was the first of millions produced on two continents. You're simply making things up.