Steel in America during the time of the Book of Mormon

[_Fortigurn]

is it just me? or where the arguments put forth in that last link already refuted?

Yes. I just went through it. Slightly different spin, and huge efforts are made to play down the presence of steel in the Book of Mormon, but the same basic arguments are made, and some of the same examples cited.

The last ditch attempt at the end of the article is to suggest that the reference to steel in Ether is a mythical description:

Another possibility is that Ether 7.9 is a "mythical" text, a recollection of an ancient heroic "golden age" when men had weapons of steel or iron. An example of this type of phenomenon is found in the Pyramid Texts (PT) of Egypt (circa 2400 B.C.) that describe thrones and implements of iron, which no pharaoh ever actually had. According to these texts, gods in heaven sit upon an "iron throne" which the king shares in the afterlife,7 the king receives an "iron scepter,"8 and the god Horus wears "iron bands on [his] arms."9 In the resurrection the king's bones will be made of iron,10 strong and everlasting, and the gates to the gods' celestial castle are protected by "doors of iron."11 Since we know the Egyptians in 2400 B.C. lived over a thousand years before the Iron Age, what are we to make of this? Should we insist, following anti-Mormon hyper-skeptical methodology, that the Egyptians didn't exist because they describe the widespread use of iron which archaeologically we know they did not possess? Or is this a tale of a great cultural hero miraculously making a unique weapon out of celestial materials-the "metal from heaven" (meteoric iron)?

Unfortunately:

* Myths don't describe genuine artefacts which are unknown to the community to which the myth belong (unless the MesoAmericans actually knew of steel, they couldn't refer to it in their myths)

* There's the whole 'inspired translation' issue to take into account (if this was 'meteoric iron', not steel, then we would expect an inspired translation to say so)

[_Pokatator]

From: http://www.meridianmagazine.com/ideas/050801steel.html

Linguistics Layers and Steel

a historical Book of Mormon would have at least seven different linguistic layers:

1. early nineteenth century American English;

2. Jacobean English of the KJV Bible;

3. Fourth century A.D. language of Moroni (Morm 9.33-34);

4. Mesoamerican language(s);

5. Hebrew of the sixth century B.C.;

6. Egyptian of the sixth century B.C.;

7. Jaredite language.

So, Why Me, are we supposted to believe that the Book of Mormon is true as far as it is translated correctly?

Where does Reformed Egyptian fit in this list?

Grammar over archeological and historical facts????

[_Pokatator]

Why Me X 2 one closer to Why Me X 1.23e6

no bruises?

[_Runtu]

Why Me X 2 one closer to Why Me X 1.23e6

no bruises?

I don't think we need to be personally insulting here. It was insulting for bcspace to tell us that we're all guilty of lazy research, but there's no need to return the insult.

[_Mephitus]

I just got a message back from my friend the bladesmith, here is his response exactly on the subject of survivability of steel weapons or implements.

i don't have a lot of time but here is how this is so totaly bogus that it is laughable....
in the brittish isles where there is more precipitation in one square mile than in half of the americas put together they have found the almost completely intact remains of steel swords from the vikings/celts/romans oki now here is where it gets interesting.... durring the time period that the family of lehi left for the americas the only mettal that was in use was bronze but a few centuries latter steel was developed in the asian countries and in the area known as gaelia a.k.a. the british isles.... now the only way that steel could have been present on the americas in the hands of either the nephites or the laminites would have required a direct trading relationship with one of these two groups ( celts and asians) and you would think that if a relationship of this kind would have been big enough to be documented but its not
but then again this is just the ramblings of a college trained bladesmith.....

[_Runtu]

I just got a message back from my friend the bladesmith, here is his response exactly on the subject of survivability of steel weapons or implements.

i don't have a lot of time but here is how this is so totaly bogus that it is laughable....
in the brittish isles where there is more precipitation in one square mile than in half of the americas put together they have found the almost completely intact remains of steel swords from the vikings/celts/romans oki now here is where it gets interesting.... durring the time period that the family of lehi left for the americas the only mettal that was in use was bronze but a few centuries latter steel was developed in the asian countries and in the area known as gaelia a.k.a. the british isles.... now the only way that steel could have been present on the americas in the hands of either the nephites or the laminites would have required a direct trading relationship with one of these two groups ( celts and asians) and you would think that if a relationship of this kind would have been big enough to be documented but its not
but then again this is just the ramblings of a college trained bladesmith.....

It doesn't matter because they didn't use the word "smelt." Case closed. ;-)

[_why me]

You guys seem to misunderstand. I posted two websites that may be of interest to grandpa75. Nothing more. I thought that he needed to bone up on some material out there so he can reach his own conclusions. Now what grandpa thinks is up to him. I offered no commentary about the websites. But I did say the book stands tall in the saddle. And that is true. And so what is the problem? I see no problem. I was being nice to grandpa.

However, the critics were out in force picking through flesh. Lets let grandpa read some of the material and see what happens. Perhaps he will have a good take on it.

Now the vultures can go back to their cage and rest a while...every so often I will feed you until grandpa comes back.

[_Runtu]

You guys seem to misunderstand. I posted two websites that may be of interest to grandpa75. Nothing more. I thought that he needed to bone up on some material out there so he can reach his own conclusions. Now what grandpa thinks is up to him. I offered no commentary about the websites. But I did say the book stands tall in the saddle. And that is true. And so what is the problem? I see no problem. I was being nice to grandpa.

However, the critics were out in force picking through flesh. Lets let grandpa read some of the material and see what happens. Perhaps he will have a good take on it.

Now the vultures can go back to their cage and rest a while...every so often I will feed you until grandpa comes back.

I understand where you're coming from. What I don't understand is why you would post links to two websites containing bad apologetics for grampa75 to "bone up on." If you're going to post subpar apologetics, you should expect some of us to take issue with it.

[_Mercury]

If grampa75 posts many more of these type threads Fort's signature's going to read "grampa75 X screw it I can't count that high"

More likely it'll start to read like "Grampa75 x 1.23e6". Past a point you have to change the expression used to describe the number.

Theres always scientific notation

[_Fortigurn]

You guys seem to misunderstand. I posted two websites that may be of interest to grandpa75. Nothing more. I thought that he needed to bone up on some material out there so he can reach his own conclusions. Now what grandpa thinks is up to him. I offered no commentary about the websites. But I did say the book stands tall in the saddle. And that is true. And so what is the problem? I see no problem. I was being nice to grandpa.

However, the critics were out in force picking through flesh. Lets let grandpa read some of the material and see what happens. Perhaps he will have a good take on it.

Now the vultures can go back to their cage and rest a while...every so often I will feed you until grandpa comes back.

The problem is, whyme, you were offering him websites which only mislead him. They do not substantiate the case gramps75 is attempting to make. They only expose him to ridicule if he attempts to use their arguments. That is the problem.

The book can hardly 'stand tall in the saddle' when what is offered in its defense is such misleading apologetic material such as this.