New Cumorah Thread

[Guest antishock82003]

Originally posted by Peace@Jan 18 2004, 01:01 PM

What if,....what if they were all ressurrected? What if, with all the wars that happened after this great battle, their instruments of war were gathered up again and used in other wars in other places?

There wouldn't be a whole lot of evidence of what they did there...would there?

Umm...yeah...ok...

[Paul Osborne]

Antishock,

You are wasting your breath.

I assume it was either Nephi-Moroni the son of Mormon, or Moroni-Nephi son of Mormon. That sounds like a good combination to me. Moroni had a second name which he honored before the prophet-- first and last. Regardless, Joseph Smith is a prophet and the Church is true. There are answers to all things including the ones that will cause you to mourn in the afterlife. You have done nothing to shake my testimony. All you are doing is further wrecking yourself and ruining your chances for a return to the restored gospel.

tick tick tick

Paul O

[Guest antishock82003]

Originally posted by Paul Osborne@Jan 18 2004, 03:35 PM

Antishock,

You are wasting your breath.

I assume it was either Nephi-Moroni the son of Mormon, or Moroni-Nephi son of Mormon. That sounds like a good combination to me. Moroni had a second name which he honored before the prophet-- first and last. Regardless, Joseph Smith is a prophet and the Church is true. There are answers to all things including the ones that will cause you to mourn in the afterlife. You have done nothing to shake my testimony. All you are doing is further wrecking yourself and ruining your chances for a return to the restored gospel.

tick tick tick

Paul O

Paul,

You've simply sold yourself on a delusion. You're like the kid who holds his hands over his ears and screams while the adult tries to talk to him. What the adult is saying isn't any less True just because you refuse to acknowledge it.

Your threats are an immature reaction to rational thought and discourse. I rebuke you. You have no hold over anyone except yourself. Free your mind, Paul.

Sincerely,

AS8

PS- Please stick to the topic. If you want to threaten me please start a new thread to do it.

[Paul Osborne]

Antishock,

Ok, so I’m being immature-- so what, who cares? You can handle that just fine-- so it seems to me. And, I’m not threatening you, really, but am telling you what the end result is for those who fight against the Church according to the BofM which you trample on as a thing of naught, so it is the book that threatens you, and not really me. Shall I quote from the BofM?

I’d rather be sold to delusion and illusion than deny the testimony that God gave me. If I were to lie and say God never did such and such for me it would be like covering my face with my hands while humming a sad tune. Don’t you get it? My witness is more powerful then the supposed contradictions that have caused you to deny your testimony and I can work through them just fine!! I don't know all the answers but there are answers.

You’re right about me having no hold over anyone but myself. It’s all about choice and I’ve made mine and am sticking with it. I’m not going to lie to the Lord as you would have me do.

Paul O

[Guest antishock82003]

Originally posted by Paul Osborne@Jan 19 2004, 06:51 AM

Antishock,

Ok, so I’m being immature-- so what, who cares? You can handle that just fine-- so it seems to me. And, I’m not threatening you, really, but am telling you what the end result is for those who fight against the Church according to the BofM which you trample on as a thing of naught, so it is the book that threatens you, and not really me. Shall I quote from the BofM?

I’d rather be sold to delusion and illusion than deny the testimony that God gave me. If I were to lie and say God never did such and such for me it would be like covering my face with my hands while humming a sad tune. Don’t you get it? My witness is more powerful then the supposed contradictions that have caused you to deny your testimony and I can work through them just fine!! I don't know all the answers but there are answers.

You’re right about me having no hold over anyone but myself. It’s all about choice and I’ve made mine and am sticking with it. I’m not going to lie to the Lord as you would have me do.

Paul O

That's fine, Paul. You can believe based on feelings, but don't tell me that JS said this or that when in reality he said something completely different. I just want everyone to be informed so they can decided based on all the information at hand rather than the information just provided by the Church...because it's incomplete or changed.

Anyways, if you feel the need to continue this off topic discussion, please start a new thread.

Now, back to the topic. I've proven that the Hill Cumorah is what I've claimed it to be (the place where the Final Battle has occurred twice). I've proven that Church leaders have said it is in Western New York. Can we all agree that there is no archaeological evidence at the Hill Cumorah to support the BoM's claims?

[Jenda]

Originally posted by antishock82003+Jan 19 2004, 07:23 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (antishock82003 @ Jan 19 2004, 07:23 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Paul Osborne@Jan 19 2004, 06:51 AM

Antishock,

Ok, so I’m being immature-- so what, who cares?  You can handle that just fine-- so it seems to me.    And, I’m not threatening you, really, but am telling you what the end result is for those who fight against the Church according to the BofM which you trample on as a thing of naught, so it is the book that threatens you, and not really me. Shall I quote from the BofM?

I’d rather be sold to delusion and illusion than deny the testimony that God gave me. If I were to lie and say God never did such and such for me it would be like covering my face with my hands while humming a sad tune. Don’t you get it? My witness is more powerful then the supposed contradictions that have caused you to deny your testimony and I can work through them just fine!! I don't know all the answers but there are answers.

You’re right about me having no hold over anyone but myself. It’s all about choice and I’ve made mine and am sticking with it. I’m not going to lie to the Lord as you would have me do.

Paul O

That's fine, Paul. You can believe based on feelings, but don't tell me that JS said this or that when in reality he said something completely different. I just want everyone to be informed so they can decided based on all the information at hand rather than the information just provided by the Church...because it's incomplete or changed.

Anyways, if you feel the need to continue this off topic discussion, please start a new thread.

Now, back to the topic. I've proven that the Hill Cumorah is what I've claimed it to be (the place where the Final Battle has occurred twice). I've proven that Church leaders have said it is in Western New York. Can we all agree that there is no archaeological evidence at the Hill Cumorah to support the BoM's claims?

AS8,

Since I am not LDS, I can agree with you, plain and simple. But what does that agreement do? Does it prove the BoM false? No. Does it prove that the church leaders can be mistaken? Yes. That is why we are told not to put our trust in the arm of flesh.

Reading the scripture that I quoted previously in the other Cumorah thread shows (almost beyond a shadow of a doubt) that the NY Hill Cumorah is not the Hill Cumorah. It is just the place where Moroni buried the one set of plates he was carrying around for 20 years. The rest of the plates were buried in the Hill Cumorah at some other location (most likely Mexico.)

[Guest antishock82003]

Originally posted by Jenda+Jan 19 2004, 10:30 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jenda @ Jan 19 2004, 10:30 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -antishock82003@Jan 19 2004, 07:23 AM

<!--QuoteBegin--Paul Osborne@Jan 19 2004, 06:51 AM

Antishock,

Ok, so I’m being immature-- so what, who cares?  You can handle that just fine-- so it seems to me.    And, I’m not threatening you, really, but am telling you what the end result is for those who fight against the Church according to the BofM which you trample on as a thing of naught, so it is the book that threatens you, and not really me. Shall I quote from the BofM?

I’d rather be sold to delusion and illusion than deny the testimony that God gave me. If I were to lie and say God never did such and such for me it would be like covering my face with my hands while humming a sad tune. Don’t you get it? My witness is more powerful then the supposed contradictions that have caused you to deny your testimony and I can work through them just fine!! I don't know all the answers but there are answers.

You’re right about me having no hold over anyone but myself. It’s all about choice and I’ve made mine and am sticking with it. I’m not going to lie to the Lord as you would have me do.

Paul O

That's fine, Paul. You can believe based on feelings, but don't tell me that JS said this or that when in reality he said something completely different. I just want everyone to be informed so they can decided based on all the information at hand rather than the information just provided by the Church...because it's incomplete or changed.

Anyways, if you feel the need to continue this off topic discussion, please start a new thread.

Now, back to the topic. I've proven that the Hill Cumorah is what I've claimed it to be (the place where the Final Battle has occurred twice). I've proven that Church leaders have said it is in Western New York. Can we all agree that there is no archaeological evidence at the Hill Cumorah to support the BoM's claims?

AS8,

Since I am not LDS, I can agree with you, plain and simple. But what does that agreement do? Does it prove the BoM false? No. Does it prove that the church leaders can be mistaken? Yes. That is why we are told not to put our trust in the arm of flesh.

Reading the scripture that I quoted previously in the other Cumorah thread shows (almost beyond a shadow of a doubt) that the NY Hill Cumorah is not the Hill Cumorah. It is just the place where Moroni buried the one set of plates he was carrying around for 20 years. The rest of the plates were buried in the Hill Cumorah at some other location (most likely Mexico.)

Well, Jenda, I just don't know what to say to that other than re-read Mormon chapter 6, figure out the meaning of context, and go on wit yo' bad self. If you come to a different conclusion, that is your perogative...however it is different than that of the First Presidency and past Mormon prophets and apostles.

[Guest TheProudDuck]

Curvette -- The casualty numbers cited by the Book of Mormon for the last battles of the Jaredite and Nephite civilizations aren't totally implausible (although battles of the size cited would have been incredibly rare in the ancient world). But the description of the Jaredite mutual extermination does strike me as a little implausible.

If I remember right, Moroni refers to 240,000 casualties in the final Nephite wipeout. That's derived from 24 "ten thousands" that were "hewn down." If I were a FARMS apologist concerned about the fact that you'd be hard-pressed to find an example of an ancient battle that had 240,000 fighters on either side, let alone that many battle casualties. (In the pre-modern age, the logistics of supplying such an army would have been almost impossible, especially since there doesn't seem to have been an ocean nearby to provide for supply by sea, like there was with the second Persian invasion of Greece -- probably the largest ancient military expedition ever mounted, with numbers on the Persian side comparable to the Nephite numbers.) Anyway, if I were concerned about the 240,000 number being too large, I might speculate that the term "ten thousand" was a military term of art, kind of like the Roman "century," which nominally meant a hundred men but might have fewer in a particular circumstance, or a Civil War regiment whose nominal strength was 1,000 men but whose real strength could have been as low as 300.

In summary, I don't find the account of the Nephite last battle entirely implausible. Recall that the Rwandan genocide killed an estimated 800,000 people in a few weeks, largely using machetes and clubs. You don't necessarily need modern weapons to run up a big butcher's bill. (By comparison, the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are estimated to have killed something like 150,000 people, combined.)

The Jaredites' killing each other almost entirely off, however, presents another problem. Armies just don't annihilate each other. Invariably, there's a winner and a loser. Once the losing army is broken -- either by breaking its lines or destroying its morale -- it retreats. If the other side is smart and has some energy left in it, it pursues, inflicting great losses on the retreating army and, very occasionally, even annihilating it completely. There has never been a case where two armies stood hammering it out until both were completely annihilated, as the account in Ether has it. Somebody always reaches the end of his rope and runs. The Jaredite battle could only destroy both armies if the armies were manned by robots, on whom the effects of morale had no effect.

Hugh Nibley tries to get around this problem by noting that in some "Asiatic" cultures (and he argues that the Jaredites were originally Central Asians), the commander of an army commands from the rear, and the goal is to break through and kill him. This supposedly would allow the battles of annihilation described in Ether -- the losing side wouldn't know it had lost until the commander had been killed, and he wouldn't get killed until the rest of the army had died first. But that still ignores the effect of morale, and assumes that no individual soldier would flee from a battle. Experience shows otherwise. Even with the best of armies, there always comes a point where it has taken too much and collapses into flight. Even Napoleon's Imperial Guard retreated from Waterloo.

If you want to believe the Book of Ether to be literal truth of real historical events, that belief has to be on faith, and after a conclusion that "faith" is a proper means of evaluating a subject -- history -- that is generally considered to be capable of evaluation through other means.

[Paul Osborne]

Antishock,

Ok, we got side tracked and you know how easy it is to do that when arguing about religion and I can be a jerk at times. Basically, I think you proved your point about Cumorah on two points:

1. Cumorah is one and the same

2. There is no archeological evidence

With this conclusion I am forced to exercise faith in order to maintain the position given by the General Authorities of the Church. From the outset it looks like you win the fight and the world will back you-- but I don’t follow the world-- I follow Jesus Christ who is not of this world and Joseph Smith his prophet. I suppose all the archeological evidence was swept up and hidden by the Lord in order that people like me would be tested in the last days. Therefore, I am fulfilling the Lord’s will in having faith. I sure wish you could do the same; it‘s not too late-- come back….

Paul O

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by TheProudDuck@Jan 19 2004, 01:00 PM

Hugh Nibley tries to get around this problem by noting that in some "Asiatic" cultures (and he argues that the Jaredites were originally Central Asians), the commander of an army commands from the rear, and the goal is to break through and kill him. This supposedly would allow the battles of annihilation described in Ether -- the losing side wouldn't know it had lost until the commander had been killed, and he wouldn't get killed until the rest of the army had died first. But that still ignores the effect of morale, and assumes that no individual soldier would flee from a battle. Experience shows otherwise. Even with the best of armies, there always comes a point where it has taken too much and collapses into flight. Even Napoleon's Imperial Guard retreated from Waterloo.

If you want to believe the Book of Ether to be literal truth of real historical events, that belief has to be on faith, and after a conclusion that "faith" is a proper means of evaluating a subject -- history -- that is generally considered to be capable of evaluation through other means.

Thanks for your thoughts PD. I always enjoy your point of view. I've always found Ether to be extraodinarily hard to believe from the first page to the last. Nibley thinks the Jaredites came from Central Asia (like the huns?) Where the heck did he come up with that? They were from Mesopotamia at the tower of Babel (later Babylon)

[Guest antishock82003]

Originally posted by curvette+Jan 19 2004, 10:28 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (curvette @ Jan 19 2004, 10:28 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--TheProudDuck@Jan 19 2004, 01:00 PM

Hugh Nibley tries to get around this problem by noting that in some "Asiatic" cultures (and he argues that the Jaredites were originally Central Asians), the commander of an army commands from the rear, and the goal is to break through and kill him.  This supposedly would allow the battles of annihilation described in Ether -- the losing side wouldn't know it had lost until the commander had been killed, and he wouldn't get killed until the rest of the army had died first.  But that still ignores the effect of morale, and assumes that no individual soldier would flee from a battle.  Experience shows otherwise.  Even with the best of armies, there always comes a point where it has taken too much and collapses into flight.  Even Napoleon's Imperial Guard retreated from Waterloo.

If you want to believe the Book of Ether to be literal truth of real historical events, that belief has to be on faith, and after a conclusion that "faith" is a proper means of evaluating a subject -- history -- that is generally considered to be capable of evaluation through other means.

Thanks for your thoughts PD. I always enjoy your point of view. I've always found Ether to be extraodinarily hard to believe from the first page to the last. Nibley thinks the Jaredites came from Central Asia (like the huns?) Where the heck did he come up with that? They were from Mesopotamia at the tower of Babel (later Babylon)

Nibley is the Uberapologist. His game is simple. Dazzle 'em with manure. Most Mormons want to believe. Most people in general aren't too bright. Combine both, and you have a willing audience...give 'em anything, anything little shred of hope, and they'll believe.

I think the Nibster achieves this by putting words into "anti" authors' mouths, assassinates "anti" authors' characters, creates elaborate "what if" scenarios by linking ancient habits or rituals of one people to anything Mormon...creating tenuous connections that are easily swallowed by the gullible (i.e. CENTRAL ASIAN MILITARY TACTICS BEING USED BY THE JAREDITES), and just plain obfuscation. I honestly don't think he believes anything he postulates.

The aim of course is to keep the American Tithe Payer in the fold...more specifically the Corridor Mormon (think West). Keeping that base in tact is crucial to the long-term financial viability of the Church. That is the job of a PAID apologist.

[Guest Starsky]

This is from a poster on entirely different board...I thought it an interesting tidbit.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A few days ago I was standing on top of a Mayan pyramid near Cancun Mexico. Our little maya guide said their high priest was like a wizard or what we call the Magi. (Couldn't help but think of you Wulfen) He mentioned that they looked Asian; their language was similar to Polynesians and their customs like the American Indian. Their history goes back 5000 years.

BTP

"Where the Spirit of the Lord is there is Liberty"

(2 Cor 3:17)

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Peace@Jan 20 2004, 10:23 AM

This is from a poster on entirely different board...I thought it an interesting tidbit.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A few days ago I was standing on top of a Mayan pyramid near Cancun Mexico. Our little maya guide said their high priest was like a wizard or what we call the Magi. (Couldn't help but think of you Wulfen) He mentioned that they looked Asian; their language was similar to Polynesians and their customs like the American Indian. Their history goes back 5000 years.

BTP

"Where the Spirit of the Lord is there is Liberty"

(2 Cor 3:17)

Of course he looked Asian. Anthropologists have tracked two major migrations from Siberia into the Americas. I noticed when I was a missionary in Korea that many Korean men looked hauntingly Native American. That was my first clue that the Book of Mormon story left out the important detail of extreme intermarriage with the obviously Asian occupants of America. I don't think that every Native American came to America with these Asian migrations--there's evidence of a boat migration of Australian Aboriginals circa 10,000 years BP in South America and I suspect many more will be discovered in the future.

[srm]

That is not what the Book of Mormon says. It says that they fought and killed people all across the land. Read Chapter 14 to see this. At the begining of Chapter 15 Coriantumr laments that two million had died. He was not refering to the battle at Ramah (Cumorah). He says this before the battle at Cumorah took place. In fact it was at least 4 years later that the battle at Cumorah took place. It does not say millions died at the last great battle or hundreds of thousands, or tens of thousands or even thousands. In fact the only numbers that we are given in the last great battle tops out at 121 people (52 and 69). granted many had died in the battle but we have no indication whatever that two million (or even 2000) died in that final battle. You have created a strawman that does not hold up to scrutiny.

1) Morm. 6: 2 And I, Mormon, wrote an epistle unto the king of the Lamanites, and desired of him that he would grant unto us that we might gather together our people </span>unto the land of Cumorah, by a hill which was called Cumorah, and there we could give them battle.

Morm. 6: 4 And it came to pass that we did march forth to the land of Cumorah, and we did pitch our tents around about the hill Cumorah; and it was in a land of many waters, rivers, and fountains; and here we had hope to gain advantage over the Lamanites.

Morm. 6: 6 And it came to pass that when we had gathered in all our people in one to the land of Cumorah, behold I, Mormon, began to be old; and knowing it to be the last struggle of my people, and having been commanded of the Lord that I should not suffer the records which had been handed down by our fathers, which were asacred, to fall into the hands of the Lamanites, (for the Lamanites would destroy them) therefore I made this record out of the plates of Nephi, and hid up in the hill Cumorah all the records which had been entrusted to me by the hand of the Lord, save it were these few plates which I gave unto my son Moroni.

Morm. 6: 11  And when they had gone through and hewn down all my people save it were twenty and four of us, (among whom was my son Moroni) and we having survived the dead of our people, did behold on the morrow, when the Lamanites had returned unto their camps, from the top of the hill Cumorah, the ten thousand of my people who were hewn down, being led in the front by me.

Again, we should discuss this but you claim was talking about the jaredites. let's stick to that issue before we jump to another.

11 And it came to pass that the army of Coriantumr did pitch their tents by the hill Ramah; and it was that same hill where my father Mormon did hide up the records unto the Lord, which were sacred.

12 And it came to pass that they did gather together all the people upon all the face of the land, who had not been slain, save it was Ether.

13 And it came to pass that Ether did behold all the doings of the people; and he beheld that the people who were for Coriantumr were gathered together to the army of Coriantumr; and the people who were for Shiz were gathered together to the army of Shiz.

14 Wherefore, they were for the space of four years gathering together the people, that they might get all who were upon the face of the land</span>, and that they might receive all the strength which it was possible that they could receive.

15 And it came to pass that when they were all gathered together, every one to the army which he would, with their wives and their children—both men, women and children being armed with weapons of war, having shields, and breastplates, and head-plates, and being clothed after the manner of war—they did march forth one against another to battle; and they fought all that day, and conquered not.

16 And it came to pass that...blah blah blah they killed each other real good.

Here you have cleverly combined the two accounts which occured centuries apart.

There can be no doubt that 1) you're wrong, and 2) you're really wrong.  It's ok, you can fess up.  I've done it.  Now it's your turn.  I'll concede that the BoM said two million before this battle took place...but it gave the impression there were plenty of people left, and yes, they did fight at the Hill Cumorah.  Don't try to wriggle out of this one, it'll just make you look really bad.

I'm sorry, but I'm right on target with what the text says... please show me even one thing from the above quote that it wrong. I'll outline them for you.

1. I said the the text states the the two million who dies were before the final battle. Even you have conceded that I'm correct here.

2. I said that the battle was at least four years later. read Ether 15:14. I'm right again.

3. I said the only numbers we have for the final battle is 121. Read Ether 15:23. I did concede that it does indicate that many did die in battle and it is obvious that the number was greater that 121. But nowhere in the text does it indicat that it was anywhere near the two million that you claim.

Those are the three claims that I made. Please show me where I'm wrong.

<span style=\'color:purple\'>I said, The second point is moot because as we see there was not a battle where two million people died. But armour, swords and shields does not mean metal. but even if some were metal...what would be left after 2600 years.

We keep finding ancient artifacts that are as old, if not older than the timeframe you provide...in the ground and in the sea.  Google it, you'll know what I mean.  So, you're wrong again.  Plus, I'm talking about BOTH epic battles...so the timeframes I'm looking at range from what you put (why not?) until 400 a.d. .  1600 years is not much time arcaeologically speaking young padawan.

First, let's finish with the Jaredites. let's look at what I said.

1. there was not 2,000,000 people. You even agree!

2. I said that those weapons of war swords etc may not have meant metal.

3. the time frame of yo9u original premise was 2600 years. Here is a quote of what you said,

The Book of Ether, 15:2 illustrates that "nearly two millions " of the Jaredites had their last great battle at the Hill Cumorah. That's a lot of archaeological evidence to support the claims of the Book of Mormon. Has their been a lot of pre-Colombian weaponry found at the site...things like swords and armor?

Later you said (referring to the jaredites still),

Since they died only a mere 1500-1600 years a ago

It was not until I pointed out your error that you said that you were trying to combine the two.

The third and final point is that I don't know that the hill in New York is the same hill where this small battle took place. Church leaders beliefs notwithstanding. Can you provide a source in the scriptures or a revelation from the prophet that says it was?

Sure:

Marion G. Romney (President of the Church, 1975)- <a href=\'http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll?f=templates=default.htm=%5BRank+500%5D%28%5BField+general+conference%3Ahill%20cumorah%5D%29=Advanced=relevance-weight=Magazines=%5BXML%5D%5Bkwic%2C0%5D=xhitlist.xsl=first=title%3Bpath%3Bcontent-type%3Bhome-title%3Bhit-context%3Bfield%3Azr%3Bfield%3ARef\' target=\'_blank\'>http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll?f=t...r%3Bfield%3ARef</a>

This is just one talk from conference.  When I went to to LDS.ORG and did a search on 'hill' + 'cumorah' I had hit upon hit.  There is no doubt, whatsoever, that the Church believes the hill in western NY is the same one in the BoM.  I even provided you with a letter from the Office of the First Presidency in the last thread that stated that very thing.

Finally, Mark E. Peterson said without equivocation, "As the fighting neared its end, Mormon gathered the remnant of his forces about a hill which they called Cumorah, located in what is now the western part of the state of New York."

Thank you for providing President Romney's opinion. But I asked for, "the scriptures or a revelation from the prophet." please provide one. I'm not asking for opinions or for beliefs or for 'long held views'. I'm asking for something from the scriptures or a revelation to the president of the Church. Can you provide me with that? You have created a strawman with a little red hering thrown in to boot.

[srm]

Originally posted by Paul Osborne@Jan 16 2004, 03:19 PM

SRM,

I consider the following sermon by President Romney to be certified as inspiration to the whole Church under the direction of the President of the Church and it confirms the location of the hill Cumorah. The apostles and prophets of Mormonism are agreed in this matter and so should we:

President Marion G. Romney

Second Counselor in the First Presidency

Marion G. Romney, “America’s Destiny,” Ensign, Nov. 1975, 35

"My beloved brothers and sisters, I bear you my personal witness that I know that the things I have presented to you today are true—both those pertaining to past events and those pertaining to events yet to come"

Paul, an utterance in conference (or anywhere else) does not make an inspired or prophetic or even a revelatory utterance. You can find various opinions from Church leaders about the whereabouts of th location of the final battleplace of both civilizations. I'm lookking for something in the scriptures or an revelation to the president of the Church. Do you know of any?

[Guest antishock82003]

o When I refer to the Hill Cumorah I am referring to the one that is located in Western New York, and is described in the BoM where 2 Final Battles took place.

o You continue to assert that I claim that 2 million Jaredites died at the Hill Cumorah. You're wrong (once again). I conceded that point. I also pointed out that the Jaredites spent 4 years gathering together their people for the Final Battle Part I. I think we can both safely assume that if you're spending 4 years gathering all the people for the Final Battle Part I, the number would be high. If you don't want to assume that, then that's fine by me. I'm going to assume it though.

o According to lds.org, when you click on the "breastplate" link, it takes you to a reference that states that they're made of brass. Brass is metal. The reference gives you the impression that BoM breastplates are made of metal. I think we can safely assume that swords, headplates, and breastplates usually are made of metal and that the BoM inferes such curious workmanship is made of the same. If you don't want to assume such a thing you can be my guest.

o Marion G. Romney...wasn't he a prophet? And why wouldn't his statement on the Hill Cumorah be considered revelation?

What specific points would you like me to address?

[Paul Osborne]

SRM,

I guess you can take the prophets for whatever you want and decide for yourself when and when not their personal testimony's are of the Lord or of man. I cannot satisfy you or offer what you are looking for. Everyone of us have to learn how to live in Mormonism according to the dictates of their own concience. I wish you well, my friend, but beware of those bumps and humps along the way that leads to the tree of life. It won't be easy to get there.

Paul O

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Paul Osborne@Jan 20 2004, 05:03 PM

beware of those bumps and humps along the way that leads to the tree of life.

I thought it was supposed to be the iron rod that leads to the tree of life. Are there bumps and humps in that?

[Paul Osborne]

Originally posted by curvette+Jan 20 2004, 05:31 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (curvette @ Jan 20 2004, 05:31 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Paul Osborne@Jan 20 2004, 05:03 PM

beware of those bumps and humps along the way that leads to the tree of life.

I thought it was supposed to be the iron rod that leads to the tree of life. Are there bumps and humps in that?

Yep.

Paul O

[Guest Starsky]

No. It is mists of darkness and diverse paths we have to watch out for.

[Paul Osborne]

Come on now. We all know that we go through humps and bumps in life. The iron rod is an allegory of how our faith and reliability should be steadfast in trusting the Lord in all things and not to wonder off the straight path.

Paul O

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Paul Osborne@Jan 21 2004, 06:39 AM

Come on now. We all know that we go through humps and bumps in life. The iron rod is an allegory of how our faith and reliability should be steadfast in trusting the Lord in all things and not to wonder off the straight path.

Paul O

Well you brought it up! I don't recall the allegory mentioning the bumps and humps in the iron rod (although I do recall reality presenting plenty of them :) )

[srm]

Originally posted by antishock82003@Jan 20 2004, 02:25 PM

o When I refer to the Hill Cumorah I am referring to the one that is located in Western New York, and is described in the BoM where 2 Final Battles took place.

o You continue to assert that I claim that 2 million Jaredites died at the Hill Cumorah. You're wrong (once again). I conceded that point. I also pointed out that the Jaredites spent 4 years gathering together their people for the Final Battle Part I. I think we can both safely assume that if you're spending 4 years gathering all the people for the Final Battle Part I, the number would be high. If you don't want to assume that, then that's fine by me. I'm going to assume it though.

o According to lds.org, when you click on the "breastplate" link, it takes you to a reference that states that they're made of brass. Brass is metal. The reference gives you the impression that BoM breastplates are made of metal. I think we can safely assume that swords, headplates, and breastplates usually are made of metal and that the BoM inferes such curious workmanship is made of the same. If you don't want to assume such a thing you can be my guest.

o Marion G. Romney...wasn't he a prophet? And why wouldn't his statement on the Hill Cumorah be considered revelation?

What specific points would you like me to address?

o When I refer to the Hill Cumorah I am referring to the one that is located in Western New York, and is described in the BoM where 2 Final Battles took place.

I realize what you are referring to. I don't think that we can establish from the scriptures or from a revelation from the Prophet that the hill in New York. There have been different opinions from from people at all levels of the Church. Joseph Smith even seemed to change his view about where the Book of Mormon lands were. I think that many people have strong views about it but we don't know and the Lord has not seen fit to reveal it.

o You continue to assert that I claim that 2 million Jaredites died at the Hill Cumorah.  You're wrong (once again).  I conceded that point.  I also pointed out that the Jaredites spent 4 years gathering together their people for the Final Battle Part I.  I think we can both safely assume that if you're spending 4 years gathering all the people for the Final Battle Part I, the number would be high.  If you don't want to assume that, then that's fine by me.  I'm going to assume it though.

I do not continue to assert that. In your post you said, "There can be no doubt that 1) you're wrong, and 2) you're really wrong." I outlined my three points so that you could show me where I'm wrong. One of the points was that the two million died before the battle. When I listed it I even said that you have conceded that point. Here is what I said, "I said the the text states the the two million who dies were before the final battle. Even you have conceded that I'm correct here." Ergo; I'm not asserting that you still claim that 2,000,000 died in the battle. I'm asserting that you are mistaken when you said, "There can be no doubt that 1) you're wrong, and 2) you're really wrong." I'm still asking for to show me where I'm wrong. Here are my three points again.

1. I said the the text states the the two million who dies were before the final battle. Even you have conceded that I'm correct here.

2. I said that the battle was at least four years later. read Ether 15:14. I'm right again.

3. I said the only numbers we have for the final battle is 121. Read Ether 15:23. I did concede that it does indicate that many did die in battle and it is obvious that the number was greater that 121. But nowhere in the text does it indicat that it was anywhere near the two million that you claim.

Those are the three claims that I made. Please show me where I'm wrong.

o According to lds.org, when you click on the "breastplate" link, it takes you to a reference that states that they're made of brass.  Brass is metal.  The reference gives you the impression that BoM breastplates are made of metal.  I think we can safely assume that swords, headplates, and breastplates usually are made of metal and that the BoM inferes such curious workmanship is made of the same.  If you don't want to assume such a thing you can be my guest.

I can't find a "breastplate" link there. Do you mean a search. I did a search for breastplate and received 82 hits. I read through a few of them and didn'd find the word brass. Then I search breastplate and brass within 50 words of each other and got 4 hits. none of them speak about the breastplates used at the final battle of the jaredites. Please give me a specific link. While those things can be made of metal they are not always and it could well be that the armour that they used (or at least most of it) was not.

o Marion G. Romney...wasn't he a prophet?  And why wouldn't his statement on the Hill Cumorah be considered revelation?

he was not the Prophet...he was not charged with receiving revelation for the whole Church. but more importantly. He was giving a talk. He did not speak of a vision, nor a visitation nor a revelation about the location of Cumorah. You are grasping at straws here. BTW Anti, I concede that I may be wrong and that the hill in New York is the same one. But, I don't concede that we know from the scritpures from a rvelation to the Prophet that it is in New York

What specific points would you like me to address?

I'd like to see verification from the scriptures or a revelation to the Prophet that the Hill in New York is the same hill where the final battle took place

[Guest Starsky]

Originally posted by Paul Osborne@Jan 21 2004, 06:39 AM

Come on now. We all know that we go through humps and bumps in life. The iron rod is an allegory of how our faith and reliability should be steadfast in trusting the Lord in all things and not to wonder off the straight path.

Paul O

I was just being ....or rather ...trying my hand at being funny....LOL

[Guest Starsky]

Originally posted by curvette+Jan 21 2004, 09:33 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (curvette @ Jan 21 2004, 09:33 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Paul Osborne@Jan 21 2004, 06:39 AM

Come on now. We all know that we go through humps and bumps in life.    The iron rod is an allegory of how our faith and reliability should be steadfast in trusting the Lord in all things and not to wonder off the straight path.

Paul O

Well you brought it up! I don't recall the allegory mentioning the bumps and humps in the iron rod (although I do recall reality presenting plenty of them :) )

LOL...you must have had it easy then because my bumps were 'smacks' and my humps were 'mountains'! LOL