Another Nail in the Book of Mormon's Coffin

[_No_Hidden_Agenda]

I get that fine. But the Nephite version of the Mayan version has Christ's death at the start of the 1st month of the calendar and the latest dated event on the 10th day of the 11th month - 139 days later in the year.

I'm not following you, sorry.

The earliest and latest dates have a time span of 139 days between them, got that.
On a 290 day cycle, spring and summer would move in terms of whereabouts on that 290 day calendar they fall, because (assuming the seasons then fit the seasons as we know them now) we now they work to a 365 day cycle, more or less.

I apologise for not seeing what you are saying more clearly.

I hadn't adjusted the 260-day for the 365-day in looking at each of the dates. We "know" 1st Month, 4th Day in 34AD-Nephite Edition approximately = Early April 34AD by current reconning. I'd have to whip out the High School Maths to try and backtrack the Gregorian calendar equivalents of the other dates.

Weird that they would mix BC and AD years with Mayan month calendars. Me thinks the BC and AD assigned dates all assumed 12-month calendars when calculated by whatever Correlation Committee...

[_Bazooka]

Weird that they would mix BC and AD years with Mayan month calendars. Me thinks the BC and AD assigned dates all assumed 12-month calendars when calculated by whatever Correlation Committee...

Well, one could argue that the dating of the Book of Mormon narrative was done by people within the latter day Church rather than at the time of translation (I think that's right) and that the dates within the narrative are from the people living at the time of the events. The jibing of those two could be perceived as further evidence of the internal dates being legitimately ancient.

[_Craig Paxton]

Wow Bazooka...we completely disagree on this...#1 for your counter theory to carry any weight...the Nephites would need to be part of the Maya culture, least of all a Christian one, to begin with and yet nothing that we know of the Maya's would suggest that they were influenced by an outside culture and nothing in the Book of Mormon suggests that the Nephites were influenced by an outside culture either and without those two things being true it all falls apart.

Knowing that Joseph made it all up and with that understanding (which I know you have) this new study is just another bread crumb on the trail of evidence that leads us all to the truth that it’s all a made up fraud. Its another clue left behind...that when added to other clues leads us to a firm conclusion that Joseph made the whole thing up...

I don't think we're particularly far apart holistically on the Book of Mormon Craig.

However, you cannot ignore the remarkable fit that the dates in the Book of Mormon have with the known Mayan calendar system. I'm not saying that this proves the Book of Mormon true or historic, because you can find other explanations (although they are less credible explanations of this coincidence of dates, in my opinion). I'm simply saying that when you look at this data on its own merits in conjunction with known Mayan calendar systems, it is more a piece of evidence for the historicity of the Book of Mormon, than it is a piece of evidence against it. And I am VERY surprised the apologists haven't made hay with it (that I know of).

I would only agree with your premisis from the point of view of a believer...Yes a believer would find this compelling

[_Bazooka]

I would only agree with your premisis from the point of view of a believer...Yes a believer would find this compelling

Okay.
Now, from a believers perspective, can you think of any other piece of tangible evidence that is more compelling than this?

[_Spanner]

Do you think that "days" had a different length as well?

After all, Jesus was entombed no longer than 39 hours, yet the Book of Mormon says it takes the space of three days before his resurrection:

3 Nephi 8:22 And there was not any light seen, neither fire, nor glimmer, neither the sun, nor the moon, nor the stars, for so great were the mists of darkness which were upon the face of the land.
23 And it came to pass that it did last for the space of three days that there was no light seen; and there was great mourning and howling and weeping among all the people continually; yea, great were the groanings of the people, because of the darkness and the great destruction which had come upon them.

Three days' darkness is explicitly mentioned in other places as well.


Jesus died at 3pm on Friday and was resurrected by 6am Sunday. That corresponds to 7am Friday and 10pm Saturday in Mexico (or 8am and 11pm New York). Remember the darkness was not normal night time (the sun is well up by 7 am at that time of year anyway, so Thursday night is not included anyway).

So at most the Nephites should have complained of two days of darkness, if you give them till dawn on Sunday to notice the darkness lifted.

[_SteelHead]

Time zones.... It was dark here when he died?

[_Craig Paxton]

I would only agree with your premisis from the point of view of a believer...Yes a believer would find this compelling

Okay.
Now, from a believers perspective, can you think of any other piece of tangible evidence that is more compelling than this?

If you accept the premise that Maya = Nephites...then yes...on the surface this could be twisted into a faithful Book of Mormon bulls eye

[_mentalgymnast]

Now that I've pondered this for a while. What I find surprising is that the apologists have not made bigger mileage out of this.
From where I'm looking this the single biggest bullseye that I've read in conjunction with discussion of the Book of Mormons historicity or otherwise.

Here is some more calendaring information. that maybe you haven't seen? Don't know if it helps...but here it is.

http://www.josephsmithforum.org/researc ... -calendar/

Regards,
MG

[_Bazooka]

I would only agree with your premisis from the point of view of a believer...Yes a believer would find this compelling

Okay.
Now, from a believers perspective, can you think of any other piece of tangible evidence that is more compelling than this?

If you accept the premise that Maya = Nephites...then yes...on the surface this could be twisted into a faithful Book of Mormon bulls eye

That's not what I asked.
I'm asking that if you were a believer, can you think of any piece of evidence that you would find more compelling than these dates as proof of the historicity of the Book of Mormon? The study shows that for Joseph to have been this lucky by chance is a 1.5 billion to one chance.

The point I'm making is that this is the most compelling evidence I've ever read about in favour of the Book of Mormon's historicity.
I'm not making the point that the Book of Mormon is historical.

[_mackay11]

IF the Nephites really did adopt the calendar of the "others" in the land and those others were using this 260-day Mayan calendar (which I don't know if its contempory to the Book of Mormon dates) ... what are the odds that all the dated events happened in months numbered smaller than 12?

260-day calendar divided by 13-day months is 20 months.

That would be a strong hit: "Yea, in the 13th day of the 16th month ..."

Not always. Some of the meso calendars had short day months but secondary names/numbers which would have made the month longer. Like: 1a, 1b, Second Amendment, 2b etc