The text and especially the images indicate the book was made for the funeral of an aristocrat who was an adept of the Orpheus cult.
Posted on 03/19/2009 1:58:13 PM PDT by colorcountry
Smithsonian Institution Statement Regarding the Book of Mormon Some Latter-day Saints, in their zeal to give tangible authenticity to the Book of Mormon, have told prospective converts that the Smithsonian Institution has used the Book of Mormon to verify sites in the New World. In response to numerous requests on this subject, the Smithsonian has issued the following paper detailing their position on the matter.
Information from the National Museum of Natural History Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 20560
Statement Regarding the Book of Mormon
1. The Smithsonian Institution has never used the Book of Mormon in any way as a scientific guide. Smithsonian archaeologists see no direct connection between the archaeology of the New World and the subject matter of the book.
2. The physical type of the American Indian is basically Mongoloid, being most closely related to that of the peoples of eastern, central, and northeastern Asia. Archaeological evidence indicates that the ancestors of the present Indians came into the New World -- probably over a land bridge known to have existed in the Bering Strait region during the last Ice Age -- in a continuing series of small migrations beginning from about 25,000 to 30,000 years ago.
3. Present evidence indicates that the first people to reach this continent from the East were the Norsemen who briefly visited the northeastern part of North America around A.D. 1000 and then settled in Greenland. There is nothing to show that they reached Mexico or Central America.
4. One of the main lines of evidence supporting the scientific finding that contacts with Old World civilizations, if indeed they occurred at all, were of very little significance for the development of American Indian civilizations, is the fact that none of the principal Old World domesticated food plants or animals (except the dog) occurred in the New World in pre-Columbian times. American Indians had no wheat, barley, oats, millet, rice, cattle, pigs, chickens, horses, donkeys, camels before 1492. (Camels and horses were in the Americas, along with the bison, mammoth, and mastodon, but all these animals became extinct around 10,000 B.C. at the time the early big game (sic) hunters spread across the Americas.)
5. Iron, steel, glass, and silk were not used in the New World before 1492 (except for occasional use of unsmelted meteoric iron). Native copper was worked used (sic) in various locations in pre-Columbian times, but true metallurgy was limited to southern Mexico and the Andean region, where its occurrence in late prehistoric times involved gold, silver, copper, and their alloys, but not iron.
6. There is a possibility that the spread of cultural traits across the Pacific to Mesoamerica and the northwestern coast of South America began several hundred years before the Christian era. However, any such inter-hemispheric contacts appear to have been the results of accidental voyages originating in eastern and southern Asia. It is by means certain that even such contacts occurred; certainly there were no contacts with the ancient Egyptians, Hebrews, or other peoples of Western Asia and the Near East.
7. No reputable Egyptologist or other specialist on Old World archaeology, and no expert on New World prehistory, has discovered or confirmed any relationship between archaeological remains in Mexico and archaeological remains in Egypt.
8. Reports of findings of ancient Egyptian, Hebrew, and other Old World writings in the New World in pre-Columbian contexts have frequently appeared in newspapers, magazines, and sensational books. None of these claims has stood up to examination by reputable scholars. No inscriptions using Old World forms of writing have been shown to have occurred in any part of the Americas before 1492 except for a few Norse rune stones which have been found in Greenland.
9. There are copies of the Book of Mormon in the library of the National Museum, of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution.
SIL - 76 Rev. May 1980
Where did the stone box atop Cumorah go?
Evidences are not the same as science. Neither does the secular world view evidences the same as the faithful.
Christians and Jews worldwide who believe the scriptures and their very unscientific claims of faith promoting stories of Noah, Adam, Moses parting the Red Sea, etc would take great care to take anything an accepted scientific body said about their faith.
When the Smithsonian decides to exhibit a display on Joshua turning back the sun, or Jesus turning water into wine, will you please post that for us.
Thanks
But the Smithsonian would (I assume) accept the fact of the nation of Israel in the land of Canaan, the presence of a temple in Jerusalem, the existence of a Jewish presence, etc etc.
I would assume, yes, that they would reject the miraculous claims of the Bible, but they’d accept the non-miraculous history of the Bible.
I’m not asking you to become an atheist, just to become a Biblical Christian by dropping the things that have deceived you, and to receive the True Jesus.
“For by grace you are saved through faith,
and that not of yourselves,
it is the gift of God,
not of works, lest any man should boast.”
There are at least 3 accounts as to it’s history and multiple eyewitnesses. Google is your friend.
"They" are like jurors that have their eyes covered and their ears plugged.....
See my post 23.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2210200/posts?page=23#23
The Smithsonian would accept the __non-miraculous__ from the Bible, but they won’t accept a single thing from the BOM.
The are plenty of Biblical evidences that the Smithsonian has published and when there is new evidence of such, then I fully expect the Smithsonian to publish it.
However it is you Mormons who are trying to “prove” the Book of Mormon using non-existent archaelogical evidences. There is none, nada, not one thing. All you people can site is parallel evidences - no evidence at all!
7, you've just posted the arm of man in another thread. The smithsonian and like scientific institutions are making a very simple and clear statement that your arm is not substantated. However, the Smithsonian does recognize the bible as an accurate historical document and has valid archeology to back it up. You arm is looking very weak 7.
Thanks for your concern, but I know in whom I have trusted, and it’s not in the arm of flesh. It is in the grace and power of my Savior, even Jesus Christ my Lord.
You worship him according to your own conscience, I will do the same.
That’s enough sandbox playing for me, enjoy yourselves.
So where is it?
Very good, your post #23!
THE BIBLE AS HISTORY. The Smithsonian’s Department of Anthropology has received ... following statement has been prepared to answer these questions: ...
http://csnradio.com/tema/misc/SmithsonianLetter.pdf
Thanks - very interesting information that the members of the LDS Church should become familiar with. Then perhaps they would quit sounding like they’ve only ever examined one side of this story.
yuppers
The text and especially the images indicate the book was made for the funeral of an aristocrat who was an adept of the Orpheus cult.
Noah and the red Sea parting are not stated as science, but as miracles, while the BOM plainly states that civilizations existed here that had Jews in them.
Zero evidence for and more evidence against
I really don't see how Mormons try to use this as evidence for the BOM
Its called grasping at straws in an attempt to defeat an initial arguement against the bom waged in the 1800's.
Whether it was parted or not, I can still swim in the Red Sea.
However I cannot walk the historic ruins of the Nephites...
A minor but very ptovocative difference...
Hey, nevermind it being a scientific guide...why can't it even serve as a geographic guide...like a rough descriptor even of its continental neighborhood???
Why hasn't the Book of Mormon editors (and it's been edited thousands of times, mostly for grammar clean-up) placed "Book of Mormon maps" in the back -- like many Bibles do?
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.