Posted on 05/02/2012 10:12:27 PM PDT by Theoria
For decades, scientists thought that the Clovis hunters were the first to cross the Arctic to America. They were wrong — and now they need a better theory
The mastodon was old, its teeth worn to nubs. It was perfect prey for a band of hunters, wielding spears tipped with needle-sharp points made from bone. Sensing an easy target, they closed in for the kill.
Almost 14,000 years later, there is no way to tell how many hits it took to bring the beast to the ground near the coast of present-day Washington state. But at least one struck home, plunging through hide, fat and flesh to lodge in the mastodon's rib. The hunter who thrust the spear on that long-ago day didn't just bring down the mastodon; he also helped to kill off the reigning theory of how people got to the Americas.
For most of the past 50 years, archaeologists thought they knew how humans arrived in the New World. The story starts around the end of the last ice age, when sea levels were lower and big-game hunters living in eastern Siberia followed their prey across the Bering land bridge and into Alaska. As the ice caps in Canada receded and opened up a path southward, the colonists swept across the vast unpopulated continent. Archaeologists called these presumed pioneers the Clovis culture, after distinctive stone tools that were found at sites near Clovis, New Mexico, in the 1920s and 1930s.
As caches of Clovis tools were uncovered across North America over subsequent decades, nearly all archaeologists signed on to the idea that the Clovis people were the first Americans. Any evidence of humans in the New World before the Clovis time was dismissed, sometimes harshly.
(Excerpt) Read more at nature.com ...
Once again ignorant, bumpkin Joseph Smith, Jr. hits it out of the park.
That and the rest (especially the theosis bit) pretty much negates any argument you can make.
There is nothing "Christian" about the LDS, you guys just took his name and ran with it.
That you and yours have to latch onto historical and archaeological histories of others to try and "validate" the fiction of Smith is fun to watch...
http://concordances.org/hebrew/strongs_6672.htm
Tsohar is used 24 times in the OT. 23/24 times it is translated as noonday. It is only translated once as window and that is not considered a good translation.
Noah took the noonday with him on the Ark...or something that shone like the noonday. Not wanting to believe something doesn’t make it go away. It is very Hebrew to call a thing (noun) and the thing it does (verb).
The Jaredite story is much more detailed and specific than the Noah story. Yet we have two ship’s built to God’s specifications each one with a miraculous light. They’d look like similar designs. Smith got this while 99/100 Bible scholars would tell you that Noah’s Ark looks like the child’s toy you see in pictures. They’re wrong, Joseph Smith is right and so am I.
You don’t find people more Christian than the LDS.
It is straight supposition on your and others part to try and fit the BoM fiction in with the Bible.
They’re wrong, Joseph Smith is right and so am I. You don’t find people more Christian than the LDS.
I can't decide it that's insulting or hilarious...
Considering the source the latter is a safe bet.
How did Noah get “noonday” into the Ark?
With a window at noon. Like everyone else...
WEAK and disingenuous.
Yes your argument is weak and disingenious. Mine is based on the very sources YOU posted including Strongs who use the term window or noonday sun and make NO REFERENCE WHAT SO EVER to magic glowing rocks.
Oh except the Indiana Jones Fan site...
Fiction lovers pushing fiction. Ripe for Mormon “conversion”...
Do you really want to keep this up I really have no need to have my point proven over and over...
Yes your argument is weak and disingenious. Mine is based on the very sources YOU posted including Strongs who use the term window or noonday sun and make NO REFERENCE WHAT SO EVER to magic glowing rocks.
Oh except the Indiana Jones Fan site...
Fiction lovers pushing fiction. Ripe for Mormon “conversion”...
Do you really want to keep this up I really have no need to have my point proven over and over...
Yes your argument is weak and disingenious. Mine is based on the very sources YOU posted including Strongs who use the term window or noonday sun and make NO REFERENCE WHAT SO EVER to magic glowing rocks.
Oh except the Indiana Jones Fan site...
Fiction lovers pushing fiction. Ripe for Mormon “conversion”...
Do you really want to keep this up I really have no need to have my point proven over and over...
http://concordances.org/hebrew/6672.htm
Genesis 6:16
http://bible.cc/genesis/6-16.htm
http://www.jweekly.com/article/full/4275/noah-finding-light-in-shadow-of-darkness/
This is my last comment on the matter:
http://bible.cc/genesis/6-16.htm
Clarke's Commentary on the Bible
A window shalt thou make - What this was cannot be absolutely ascertained. The original word צהר tsohar signifies clear or bright; the Septuagint translate it by επωυναγων, "collecting, thou shalt make the ark," which plainly shows they did not understand the word as signifying any kind of window or light. Symmacbus translates it διαφανες, a transparency; and Aquila, μεσημβρινον, the noon. Jonathan ben Uzziel supposes that it was a precious luminous stone which Noah, by Divine command, brought from the river Pison. It is probably a word which should be taken in a collective sense, signifying apertures for air and light.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
A window shalt thou make to the ark,.... Or a "light", such as is that at noon, for which the word in the dual number is used; and therefore Junius and Tremellius translate it a "clear light". The Jewish writers (s) will have it to be a precious stone, a pearl which Noah fetched from the river Pison, and hung up in the ark, and it gave light to all the creatures, like a large chandelier; but a window no doubt it was to let light into the several apartments, and to look out at on occasion, since Noah is afterwards said to open it; but what it was made of is difficult to say, since it does not appear that as yet glass was invented. Some think it was made of crystal, which would let in light, and keep off the water.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
None of the above are LDS sites. All list something very much like the Jaredite stones as a possible interpretation. This information isn't readily available to the average Christian because this isn't taught. So today with our modern information technology perhaps a handful of Christian scholars are aware of the real meaning of tsohar. Likely 0% of Christian scholars were aware of it in Joseph Smith's time and he certainly wasn't.
Hence the argument for a divine source for the Jaredite story, given the consistent parallels with the Noah story.
Also, keep in mind the following:
1. "to make" http://concordances.org/hebrew/6213.htm clearly means that one must do something - action on the part of Noah.
2. The Ark interior isn't an open space like an indoor gymnasium or sports arena. Its construction includes clear direction to make "rooms/nests/apartments" and therefore a single window wouldn't suffice for lighting.
So with a semblance of intellectual honesty, not to mention Christian honesty, one can very logically and reasonably conclude that the Jaredite story isn't unBiblical. The opposite is true: it is wholly Biblical.
This is my last comment on the matter:
http://bible.cc/genesis/6-16.htm
Clarke's Commentary on the Bible
A window shalt thou make - What this was cannot be absolutely ascertained. The original word צהר tsohar signifies clear or bright; the Septuagint translate it by επωυναγων, "collecting, thou shalt make the ark," which plainly shows they did not understand the word as signifying any kind of window or light. Symmacbus translates it διαφανες, a transparency; and Aquila, μεσημβρινον, the noon. Jonathan ben Uzziel supposes that it was a precious luminous stone which Noah, by Divine command, brought from the river Pison. It is probably a word which should be taken in a collective sense, signifying apertures for air and light.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
A window shalt thou make to the ark,.... Or a "light", such as is that at noon, for which the word in the dual number is used; and therefore Junius and Tremellius translate it a "clear light". The Jewish writers (s) will have it to be a precious stone, a pearl which Noah fetched from the river Pison, and hung up in the ark, and it gave light to all the creatures, like a large chandelier; but a window no doubt it was to let light into the several apartments, and to look out at on occasion, since Noah is afterwards said to open it; but what it was made of is difficult to say, since it does not appear that as yet glass was invented. Some think it was made of crystal, which would let in light, and keep off the water.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
None of the above are LDS sites. All list something very much like the Jaredite stones as a possible interpretation. This information isn't readily available to the average Christian because this isn't taught. So today with our modern information technology perhaps a handful of Christian scholars are aware of the real meaning of tsohar. Likely 0% of Christian scholars were aware of it in Joseph Smith's time and he certainly wasn't.
Hence the argument for a divine source for the Jaredite story, given the consistent parallels with the Noah story.
Also, keep in mind the following:
1. "to make" http://concordances.org/hebrew/6213.htm clearly means that one must do something - action on the part of Noah.
2. The Ark interior isn't an open space like an indoor gymnasium or sports arena. Its construction includes clear direction to make "rooms/nests/apartments" and therefore a single window wouldn't suffice for lighting.
So with a semblance of intellectual honesty, not to mention Christian honesty, one can very logically and reasonably conclude that the Jaredite story isn't unBiblical. The opposite is true: it is wholly Biblical.
This is my last comment on the matter:
http://bible.cc/genesis/6-16.htm
Clarke's Commentary on the Bible
A window shalt thou make - What this was cannot be absolutely ascertained. The original word צהר tsohar signifies clear or bright; the Septuagint translate it by επωυναγων, "collecting, thou shalt make the ark," which plainly shows they did not understand the word as signifying any kind of window or light. Symmacbus translates it διαφανες, a transparency; and Aquila, μεσημβρινον, the noon. Jonathan ben Uzziel supposes that it was a precious luminous stone which Noah, by Divine command, brought from the river Pison. It is probably a word which should be taken in a collective sense, signifying apertures for air and light.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
A window shalt thou make to the ark,.... Or a "light", such as is that at noon, for which the word in the dual number is used; and therefore Junius and Tremellius translate it a "clear light". The Jewish writers (s) will have it to be a precious stone, a pearl which Noah fetched from the river Pison, and hung up in the ark, and it gave light to all the creatures, like a large chandelier; but a window no doubt it was to let light into the several apartments, and to look out at on occasion, since Noah is afterwards said to open it; but what it was made of is difficult to say, since it does not appear that as yet glass was invented. Some think it was made of crystal, which would let in light, and keep off the water.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
None of the above are LDS sites. All list something very much like the Jaredite stones as a possible interpretation. This information isn't readily available to the average Christian because this isn't taught. So today with our modern information technology perhaps a handful of Christian scholars are aware of the real meaning of tsohar. Likely 0% of Christian scholars were aware of it in Joseph Smith's time and he certainly wasn't.
Hence the argument for a divine source for the Jaredite story, given the consistent parallels with the Noah story.
Also, keep in mind the following:
1. "to make" http://concordances.org/hebrew/6213.htm clearly means that one must do something - action on the part of Noah.
2. The Ark interior isn't an open space like an indoor gymnasium or sports arena. Its construction includes clear direction to make "rooms/nests/apartments" and therefore a single window wouldn't suffice for lighting.
So with a semblance of intellectual honesty, not to mention Christian honesty, one can very logically and reasonably conclude that the Jaredite story isn't unBiblical. The opposite is true: it is wholly Biblical.
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.