This is what archeologists do.

[_The Dude]

Isn't the argument that nothing has been found, so Nephites are a myth saying the same thing?

No it's not the same thing. What is wrong with you, Charity?

[_guy sajer]

JERUSALEM - A wall mentioned in the Bible's Book of Nehemiah and long sought by archaeologists apparently has been found, an Israeli archaeologist says.

The findings suggest that the structure was actually part of the same city wall the Bible says Nehemiah rebuilt, Mazar said. The Book of Nehemiah gives a detailed description of construction of the walls, destroyed earlier by the Babylonians.

"We were amazed," she said, noting that the discovery was made at a time when many scholars argued that the wall did not exist. "This was a great surprise. It was something we didn't plan," Mazar said.

However, another scholar disputed the significance of the discovery.

Does this sound at all familiar.

Oh goody, this means that I can still hold out belief that Shangri-La is still out there. After all, that hasn't been discovered yet either.

By the way, Charity, for an outsider non-Mormon, why is the possible existence of, say, Zarahemla more credible, ex ante, than, say, Shangri-La?

[_moksha]

I suppose my assumption that they (the LDS Church) has curtailed any archaeological expeditions looking for evidence of Book of Mormon civilizations is correct. While I think that it is interesting that ancient places like Troy, this wall and other Biblical localtions can sometimes be found based on text, it would bepend on the text itself - would it not?

[_truth dancer]

All I have seen here is kneejerk reactions.

No Charity, what you have seen is responses from people who are amazed that you are once again not understanding.

How long has archeological research been going on in the Holy Lands? Are they still finding new things? Obviously. Are those new finds disputes? Yes. How long has archeological research been going on in Meso-America? Not nearly as long. Can they be new discoveries? Obviously. Will they be disputed? Probably.

It is not a strawman argument to make a comparison. When the anti-Mormon crowd stops saying "There isn't any evidence of Nephites and we have been doing archeological digs for a hundred years and nothing has shown up" then I will stop posting when archeologists are "surprised" at new evidence.

Charity... please read the following carefully.

There is NO on this board (or any non-believer I have ever heard), who would state that there will never ever be any new archaeological discoveries.

Again... there is NO one on this board who would state there will never ever be any new archaeological discoveries.

Please take this in.

What many will say, is that the likelihood of anyone finding archaeological evidence that supports many of the claims in the Book of Mormon is very unlikely.

Do you understand the difference?

Let me give you some examples....

While it is possible that someone might find evidence that the people of Catal Hyuk used the internet, it is unlikely.

While it is possible that I might find a alien spacecraft in my backyard, it is highly unlikely.

While it is possible that we discover quakers on the moon, it seems rather unlikely.

Do you see the difference?

While OF COURSE there will be new archaeological discoveries in the Americas, the chance of anything coming to light that supports various Book of Mormon claims seems remote.

You seem to think non-believers assert there will never ever be any new archaeological discoveries in the Americas.

I have no idea why you think this... I have certainly never heard such a thing from non-believers.

OK... to repeat one more time:

No one is suggesting there will never ever be any new archaeoligcal discoveries.

I hope this helps.

~dancer~

[_Doctor Steuss]

By the way, Charity, for an outsider non-Mormon, why is the possible existence of, say, Zarahemla more credible, ex ante, than, say, Shangri-La?

The Hunza Valley by any other name would smell as sweet.

[_Blixa]

Ah, Hunza. Purveyors of fine yogurt.

[_charity]

Oh goody, this means that I can still hold out belief that Shangri-La is still out there. After all, that hasn't been discovered yet either. [/quote[]


Do you believe James Hilton was a prophet of God, and Lost Horizon is a holy book of scripture, attested to the Holy Spirit? Then go for it.

By the way, Charity, for an outsider non-Mormon, why is the possible existence of, say, Zarahemla more credible, ex ante, than, say, Shangri-La?

Here is one reason. James Hilton said he made it up. Joseph Smith said it was a real history of real people. Of course, you could assume that both men were lying, that Hilton had received his book by revelation and Joseph Smith made his up.

[_guy sajer]

Oh goody, this means that I can still hold out belief that Shangri-La is still out there. After all, that hasn't been discovered yet either. [/quote[]


Do you believe James Hilton was a prophet of God, and Lost Horizon is a holy book of scripture, attested to the Holy Spirit? Then go for it.

By the way, Charity, for an outsider non-Mormon, why is the possible existence of, say, Zarahemla more credible, ex ante, than, say, Shangri-La?

Here is one reason. James Hilton said he made it up. Joseph Smith said it was a real history of real people. Of course, you could assume that both men were lying, that Hilton had received his book by revelation and Joseph Smith made his up.

Ok, try another example, how about Atlantis?

It exists, I just know it. I received a witness that it does.

Now, prove me wrong.

[_charity]

Charity, what you have seen is responses from people who are amazed that you are once again not understanding. Charity... please read the following carefully.

There is NO on this board (or any non-believer I have ever heard), who would state that there will never ever be any new archaeological discoveries.

What many will say, is that the likelihood of anyone finding archaeological evidence that supports many of the claims in the Book of Mormon is very unlikely.

Do you understand the difference?

While OF COURSE there will be new archaeological discoveries in the Americas, the chance of anything coming to light that supports various Book of Mormon claims seems remote.

You seem to think non-believers assert there will never ever be any new archaeological discoveries in the Americas.

I have no idea why you think this... I have certainly never heard such a thing from non-believers.

OK... to repeat one more time:

No one is suggesting there will never ever be any new archaeoligcal discoveries.

I hope this helps.

~dancer~

I understand that many, if not most, who post here would guess that new discoveries will be made. But they still continue to put forward the idea that the current failure to find anything confirming Book of Mormon archeology means there is nothing to find. This is why I post those "surprise" archeological findings. It is not the new discovery, it is the SURPRISE that is important.

Suprise at finding something puts it outside the day to day occurrance. When you walk to your mailbox, you aren't surprised at finding mail there. Whne you are an archeologist at a dig, you think you know what you are going to find. Surprise is something different.

[_truth dancer]

Hi Charity...

I under that many, if not most, who post here would guess that new discoveries will be made. But they still continue to put forward the idea that the current failure to find anything confirming Book of Mormon archeology means there is nothing to find. This is why I post those "surprise" archeological findings. It is not the new discovery, it is the SURPRISE that is important.

OK... one more time.

No one is saying there is not lots more to come concerning archaeological discoveries in the America. Yes.. lots of surprises! It is EXPECTED!

No non-believer says, "current failure to find anything confirming Book of Mormon archeology means there is nothing to find."

What non-believers suggest is that it is highly unlikely that there will be archaeological evidence that supports the Book of Mormon.

Just like it is highly unlikely that there will be microwaves found in Ancient Egypt dating to 3000 BCE.

Will there be new discoveries? More surprises? Lots of fun information? YES, YES, and YES!

Suprise at finding something puts it outside the day to day occurrance. When you walk to your mailbox, you aren't surprised at finding mail there. Whne you are an archeologist at a dig, you think you know what you are going to find. Surprise is something different.

Archaeologists are ALWAYS ready and hoping for a surprise. Are you kidding? The surprises are what they live for! :-)

We (even non-archaeologists), love the surprises, expect them, celebrate them... we hope for them.

This has NOTHING to do with the likelihood of finding evidence that supports the Book of Mormon.

Because many of us do not think there will be evidence uncovered that supports the Book of Mormon does not mean we think all the evidence is in or that there will be no surprises.

~dancer~