No resty we don't think that. We know better.
THIS IS CLEAVER:
| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 05/11/2008 6:45:33 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
You’re not going to take digs at the Religion Moderator and “censorship” on my watch. |
Posted on 05/11/2008 7:57:40 AM PDT by greyfoxx39
Posted as a discussion thread for the topic of caucus thread at: This FR location
Many readers have read about the finding of ancient votive altars in Yemen that appear to bear the Book of Mormon place-name Nahom. This significant find has been noted in the Ensign magazine,[1] in the April 2001 general conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,[2] and in a recently published volume by Terryl Givens in which he refers to these altars as "the first actual archaeological evidence for the historicity of the Book of Mormon" and "the most impressive find to date corroborating Book of Mormon historicity."[3] This article considers the altars and their inscriptions, giving the background to this development and its significance within the larger context of research into Lehi's journey across Arabia.
A 1999 article by S. Kent Brown in the Journal noted that an altar recently uncovered at the excavation of a temple near Marib in Yemen bore the tribal name Nihm, apparently a variant of Nahom, where Ishmael was buried while Lehi's group was en route to Bountiful (1 Nephi 16:34).[4] Because archaeologists had already dated the altar to the seventh or sixth centuries B.C., Brown concluded that this earliest known reference to the name "very probably" referred to the Nahom of which Nephi wrote.
At that time it seemed unlikely that more could be learned about this find, since the altar was one of two altars in an exhibit on ancient Yemen touring Europe since October 1997 and could no longer be examined at the Bar'an temple site.[5] Although a photograph of the altar appeared in the commemorative catalog accompanying the exhibit, the full engraved text—including the actual reference to Nihm—was not visible in the photograph, and readers had to be content with the translation provided in the catalog's caption. Since then, however, two additional altars bearing the name Nihm have been identified at the same temple site.
On 12 September 2000, I and fellow researchers Lynn Hilton and Gregory Witt identified and examined one of the two additional altars at the site,[6] where excavation and reconstruction had been completed by an expedition from the German Archaeological Institute. This artifact (denominated altar 2 for present purposes, reflecting its order in the identification of the three altars) was nearly identical—same size, same inscription, very similar style—to the one touring Europe (altar 1). Unknown to us at that time, another altar (altar 3) found at Bar'an bore an almost identical dedication formula. Due to ongoing restoration work and other circumstances, altar 2 was only briefly examined, measured, and photographed, along with being seen by 23 members of an LDS tour group.
Early in November 2000, I returned to Yemen and, with the kind cooperation of the German restoration team, was able to make an extended examination of all the altars at Bar'an, as well as the temple site itself.While documenting the finds, I examined and recorded several inscriptions on the temple walls and noted a further collection of altars from the site—eight largely intact and several broken—bearing differing inscriptions. Then during May 2001, David Johnson, a BYU archaeologist working in Marib as part of an excavation team, identified the tribal name Nihm on one of those altars (altar 3).
Ping
can you post a picture of the inscription? maybe some more detail on the atual translation?
Wouldn’t this discovery simply prove that the source material used to produce the book of mormon was in fact accurate ?
Rather a large presumption, I should think.
That is the subject of debate, is it not? The original thread was closed to debate by the mormon poster.
Its my understanding much of the book of Mormon was plagiarized. So whatever books were used to produce it were working off of existing knowledge of the day.
So assuming the correctness of this discovery I wouldn’t take it as proving inspiration rather as proving the plagiarized source material was in fact correct itself. The body of archaeological/historical knowledge in the source material was in fact correct.
Granted and your point is most likely valid. My line of thinking is ok so it does represent whats contained in the book. Whats the impact ? See other posts slightly higher here.
Thanks for the explanation.
Is this a joke? Suddenly Nihm morphs into Nahom and becomes "the first actual archaeological evidence for the historicity of the Book of Mormon". This Mormon researcher is actually stating that there is no historicity of the Book of Mormon.
++++++++++++++++++++++
Just one recorded witness to the Book of Mormon would not be enough for me.
Yet, added to the other evidences that have been posted here at FR, the proof is getting better and better.
Was Nahom known to the people of 1800’s.
If Joseph Smith, or any of the people the anties say he got the Book of Mormon from, did know not of Nahom through science, he could have only gotten it by revelation.
How do we find out if Nahom was known among the people of the 1800’s?
The name of Nahom at the site is a recent discovery. It was just a lucky guess. :-)
Just out of curiosity, can you produce a copy of the book that you allege the Book of Mormon was plagerized from?
***....an altar recently uncovered at the excavation of a temple near Marib in Yemen bore the tribal name Nihm, apparently a variant of Nahom,***
It sounds more like an acronym for National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) but the workman was drunk so it came out Nihm.
Hey my explanation is just as good as theirs!
Good point. Assuming they haven’t already done it.
CALM DOWN.....they do and who cares???? wrong is wrong even if it is shouted!!there was only one Jesus Christ.....He was not a god, he was THE God!!He came to earth, as God to redeem mankind....in so doing, He founded a church.....not 20,000 or so denominations....one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church....that would be the Catholic church....not the Lutherans, not the methodists, not the Presbeterians, and certainly not the Mormans....After he founded the Catholic Church, he promised to be with it “from now through the end of time”....fits my needs exactly.....and remember, if you were baptised in a christian denomination, you are Catholic....welcome home!!!
First, I did not know that Mormons considered themselves “Protestants”
Whatever your religion, a little scrutiny is a good thing. A study on tobacco sponsored by the tobacco industry should be looked at more carefully than one by an independent group. An archaeological finding by an LDS sponsored group will cause many to question the findings. If the LDS church published the findings for others to review (rather than to shut down any “opposition”) your findings would be more respected.
The LDS church seems to have a history of hiding their history and being rather nasty to those who legitimately ask questions. Likewise the SDA church should throw open the doors of the White estate vault, sunlight is a good thing!
cleaver?
If your friends are so pleased with the development in this article, why wasn't it posted on the news forum in the first place?
No one has any interest in jumping into devotional or caucus threads. As far as I'm concerned you can preach to each other all day every day as long as you aren't posting something that is applicable to a debate, which this article is.
BTW, why would you post something about a Protestant threat to Catholics since neither you nor I are either?
********************
In what way was the post in question an attempt to censor?
You’ve figured out the essence of this current ruse from LDS apologists. Now enjoy the twists and dissembling the apologists will mount to try and make this sow’s ear into a mormon silk purse. This should be quite amusing to behold. With the gaggle starting to convene (restornu, frproy, OldMountainman, etc.). You should see how heated they get trying to defend Joe Smith’s proclamations regarding inhabitants of the Moon! The ‘land past the North Pole’ is another amusing tale ...
Did you go to the original post? There were those that questioned the caucus designation and at post 4, this was stated: "Essentially it is an archeological find that is evidence of a location mentioned in the Book of Mormon, one of our books of scripture."
This was posted at post #3: "I do not mean to be disrespectful but this article is about the intrepretation of an archeological find not a prayer, or devotional, etc".
This comment by the Religion Moderator couldn't be clearer: I just changed the title from “LDS Devotional” to “LDS Caucus.” The point of the designation is to close a Religion Forum thread from on all challenges so the members of that confession can find ‘safe harbor.’ If you wish to post another, related thread as “open” for discussion - then go ahead. This one is closed.
10 posted on Saturday, May 10, 2008 10:58:30 PM by Religion Moderator
You may or may not agree with the use of the term "censor". Closing off debate on an article like that on a topic that has been consistently debated on the forum smells like censorship to me.
Perhaps you should consider taking a look at this.
BTTT
You think this is cleaver will just remember the Protestants can do the same thing to your Catholic closed threads!
In what way is this an attempt to censor?
I'm afraid that within the LDS subculture the concept of not accepting the authority of the church or its approved documents is quite foreign.
Closed thread was initiated because immature beings in their faith were incapable of being civil with the Catholic whom they considered as heretic.
I have been told by various mods that if you think only the LDS get beat up on you should read the battles between other denomination and the Catholics.
I have noticed that the Catholics adhering to the tenets of their faith and other denomination don’t attack other faiths even if they disagree with them!
The LDS found it nice way to share with their fellow LDS things they read of interest.
When you walk by a Church not of your faith would you walk in and start arguing with them... I don’t think so!
That is what a closed thread means it is a private meeting pass on by!
Sniped
3. “Closed” threads on the Religion Forum include devotionals, prayer threads and caucuses. The header of the thread should make it obvious that the thread is closed, i.e. like a church meeting behind closed doors. Such assemblies will not be disturbed. Any challenges or ridicule will be removed. Any thread can be designated a caucus - e.g. labeled as a “[Catholic Caucus]” or “[LDS Caucus]” - provided that neither the article nor any of the posts challenge [*see footnote] or ridicule any other confession. These are “safe harbors” for those who are easily offended or are ill equipped to defend their own confession.
Sniped
There will be people on the forum who are anti- your confession whether anti-Christian, anti-Calvinist, anti-Catholic, anti-Protestant, anti-Mormon, anti-Atheist, anti-Scientologist and so on. As long as they are arguing for their position on an “Open” thread – and are not using hate mongering material such as the false “oath for Knights of Columbus” or Jack Chick cartoons – and are otherwise abiding by the guidelines, their challenges will be tolerated.
______
IMO, trying to censor an article that is of interest in the ongoing debate about the vaildity of the BOM by posting it in a closed thread is the attempt at “cleaverness”.
***
There is a difference between a deliberate act as you have done here.
We have posted both kinds sometimes we just want to talk among ourselves, after all you have read many this week we open to all of you!
As I stated we have done both I find this projectin to accuse teh LDS of cleaverness on this issue after all the “open threads” the LDS have posted this week!
I am just reminding, that some here might not like this if they want their closed threads to be honored you are opening them to the same kind of repercussion.
Do unto others as you have them do unto you!
No resty we don't think that. We know better.
THIS IS CLEAVER:
The power of Intend!
Telestial behavor mocking is being witness!!
CALM DOWN.....they do and who cares???? wrong is wrong even if it is shouted!!there was only one Jesus Christ.....He was not a god, he was THE God!!He came to earth, as God to redeem mankind....in so doing, He founded a church.....not 20,000 or so denominations....one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church....that would be the Catholic church....not the Lutherans, not the methodists, not the Presbeterians, and certainly not the Mormans....After he founded the Catholic Church, he promised to be with it “from now through the end of time”....fits my needs exactly.....and remember, if you were baptised in a christian denomination, you are Catholic....welcome home!!!
________
I see...
MARY IS PATTERN OF CHURCH’S HOLINESS (Catholic Caucus)
Sunday, May 11, 2008 12:31:41 AM · 8 of 35
Religion Moderator to 1Truthseeker; Psalm_2; Gargantua
If you are not Catholic, then leave this thread. It is a caucus - closed to challenges.
Any closed thread you find me on is fair game for your revenge...go for it!
I'm wondering, are you confused, dear? Did you think you were on your closed thread with all us "telestials"? This is not breaking your caucus...it is still intact.
What will the cleaver do?
Any closed thread you find me on is fair game for your revenge...go for it!
I am striving to stay on the Terrestrial path why would I want to deliberately want to chase away the Holy Spirit!
IMO, trying to censor an article that is of interest in the ongoing debate about the vaildity of the BOM by posting it in a closed thread is the attempt at "cleaverness".
Looks to me the the goal is to keep us from commenting on their posts rather than allowing them a forum.
Sounds like censorship to me.
I’m tempted to go on a closed thread, just to tempt you. ;)
All your base are belong to us!!
Cleaver cleaver Danny Deever
Dance all night and still deceive 'er...
Ooohhh...noooo...the "Power of INTEND" will be unleashed upon you...set beeber to "stune" in self-defense! Duck if you see flying cleavers!
OK, if it makes them feel better, and I'm sure it will, I'll admit that they are "objectively" holier than me. They go around with their pious posts and tell all of us "Telestials" that we are not acting as Christian as they ACT.
Fine, let them ACT like Holy men. Then when the final judgment comes they will get their academy award.
I'm not going to be saved because I ACT holier than the next guy. I don't even pretend to be holier than the next guy.
So for everyone who thinks they are holier than P-Marlowe, take heart, you probably are. Now, doesn't that make you all feel better?
Resty, you still have your little closed thread to play on. The article is public record so it can be posted in other threads. Might want to put some ice on that sore spot, Resty.
I kinda think she thought I really did break the caucus and was on that closed thread. It would be a fairly easy mistake to make.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.