English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

It is a fact that domestic plants are all flowering plants which means they produce pollen in large quantities to survive. If the Nephite/Jaredite civilizations had been growing these crops: wheat, barley, and flax for even just a few decades, every soil core sample taken in Central and North America should show traces of their respective pollen. Pollen is one of the most indestructible natural objects known, and has been found on the Shroud of Turin and Antarctic core samples.

So far, there has been no evidence of any cultivation of these crops prior to European colonization.

Did J Smith translate this correctly?

2007-06-08 14:56:54 · 13 answers · asked by Dances with Poultry 5 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

13 answers

What has he translated correctly?

His magical seer stone never found any treasure accept for the non existent golden plates, and he successfully with his magical seer stone translated these imaginary plates. He somehow managed to translated an ordinary Egyptian funeral text into the book of Abraham.

He had a lot of “revelations”, some came true and some didn’t. I guess this is just one of them that didn’t.

If you visit a pro Mormon web site they will most likely say be patient the evidence will come, and then when the most obscure tiniest bit of evidence comes they will give it holy grail status

2007-06-08 15:28:44 · answer #1 · answered by . 3 · 4 4

The fact that the Smithsonian made (if my sources are precise) basically state that the Smithsonian made basically states that they do no longer regard the e book of Mormon as a medical record. they look at it as a non secular textual content cloth. It says no longer something approximately them disproving it. What I examine interior the three variations of the letter that i stumbled on is basically a posh way of them asserting "we don't understand sufficient approximately this so we are no longer likely to declare something approximately it desirable now different than to cal it what it incredibly is, a non secular textual content cloth." If human beings have taken from that the thought a approach or the different disproves the e book of Mormon then they, for my section, would desire to be extremely desperate for something to apply against the Church.

2016-10-07 03:40:17 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

CORN is used in the Bible, and it is not the same around the world. Seven different words in Hebrew and three in Greek have been translated as corn in the KJV. They are words referring to the cereal grains used for food, such as wheat or barley. Corn in English refers to the cereal grains most common in a given region, such as wheat in England, oats in Ireland and Scotland, or maize (Indian corn) in Australia, Canada, and the U.S. Thus “ears of corn” in the English of the KJV would be called “heads of grain” in the United States. Indian corn (maize) was known and used only in the Western Hemisphere prior to the discovery of America; it is not the corn of the Bible. If corn can mean different things in the Bible, why can't wheat in the BOM?

2007-06-11 09:28:36 · answer #3 · answered by Isolde 7 · 0 0

AH! but no one can explain how mummies got high on pot that was found in there DNA or there mummified remains. Pot is only found in South America and the only ship that we know that went acrossed the ocean was Colubus, so one must have gone acrossed to South America around the time of Pharoh and got them some pot to smoke (the Jewish slaves wore them out so much, they needed to relax). Most Sceintist try to ignore this phenomenom because it can't be explained.

2007-06-09 03:53:43 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

He did not translate this correctly and his opinions about the natives don't stack up with DNA research.
This is not new that his opinions were popular at the time but not based on historical or scientific research available even at that time.

2007-06-11 01:22:51 · answer #5 · answered by Buzz s 6 · 1 1

Um, Central america is a tad warmer than the Antarctic, and nothing was preserved like the shroud.

2007-06-08 17:08:47 · answer #6 · answered by mormon_4_jesus 7 · 2 3

You always try to discredit Mormons.

Does the Mormon belief bothers you?
Or are you one of those individual who want to save the world from Mormonism. How noble of you, what a self less act.

Good day.

2007-06-08 19:28:21 · answer #7 · answered by Wahnote 5 · 3 3

Scientists don't know where maize came from, nor are their horse bones in the vicinity of the place the Huns lived.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

2007-06-08 18:56:04 · answer #8 · answered by je_apostrophe 2 · 2 3

J. Smith lied.

Did you know he wrote a book about the plants in his area and their affect upon consuming them? Magic mushrooms are in the book.

2007-06-08 15:16:18 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4 3

Wow you really researched this.
Here I will give you the Mormon answer "With God all things are possible, if there was proof then we could not have faith, faith is one of the main parts in the plan of salvation"

2007-06-08 15:04:55 · answer #10 · answered by divinity2408 4 · 3 3

fedest.com, questions and answers