No Lion Remains in Israel: another one bites the dust

[_MrStakhanovite]

The more I read from Mike Ash, the more I wonder if he actually engages in this as an intellectual endeavor, or he just writes things that sound good, hoping that those in crisis never bother to read deeper.

[_stemelbow]

And finally, it's worth adding that the period of Hun rule was quite short compared to the several-thousand-year lacuna of horse evidence in the Americas from the generally-accepted Paleolithic extinction date to the time of alleged domestication by Book of Mormon peoples. Even if the Hun period had been a true lacuna-- which it is not-- it wouldn't really have been comparable to the situation in the Americas.

Interesting. What part of America are we talking about? Also, the three or so mentions of horses in the Book of Mormon can't really equate to too many horses right? Or at least it could possibly be true that there were very few horses at all among any generation of nephites/lamanites right? Less than a hundred? or something. What can we expect to find among such a small population? I don't know if anything. You?

[Guest]

Interesting. What part of America are we talking about? Also, the three or so mentions of horses in the Book of Mormon can't really equate to too many horses right? Or at least it could possibly be true that there were very few horses at all among any generation of Nephites/Lamanites right? Less than a hundred? or something. What can we expect to find among such a small population? I don't know if anything. You?

What Book of Mormon are you reading?
just curious.

Did the Book of Mormon, or did it not, describe how large and vast the lamanite/nephite population was? Where did you get a ""small population" out of it?
Wouldn't such a large population of Lehi's seed roaming North America, I mean Central America, or shoot, I mean South America, naturally equate a need for a large population of horses to accommodate - or at least consider that there would likely be a larger population of horses to accommodate the large population of people?

Example of our previous debate on the other thread: If I'm in error about recalling the Book of Mormon's mention of the large population that would still not affect the overall problem of the base discussion as to the truth of the Book of Mormon and the prophet(s) and members that sustain it as truth.

eta: if the prophets and apostles and apologists could get on the same page as to where the Book of Mormon took place it would help the BYU team go to that location to find horse paraphenalia .
I don't see that happening any time soon.

[_Buffalo]

Heleman 3:8 "And it came to pass that they (the Lehites in the Book of Mormon) did multiply and spread, and did go forth from the land southward to the land northward, and did spread insomuch that they began to cover the face of the whole earth, from the sea south to the sea north, from the sea west to the sea east."

Heleman 11:20 "And thus it did come to pass that the people of Nephi began to prosper again in the land, and began to build up their waste places, and began to multiply and spread, even until they did cover the whole face of the land, both on the northward and on the southward, from the sea west to the sea east."

Mosiah 27:6 "And there began to be much peace again in the land; and the people began to be very numerous, and began to scatter abroad upon the face of the earth, yea, on the north and on the south, on the east and on the west, building large cities and villages in all quarters of the land."

Ether 15:2 "He saw that there had been slain by the sword already nearly two millions of his people41, and he began to sorrow in his heart; yea, there had been slain two millions of mighty men, and also their wives and their children."

Mormon 6: 10-15 "And it came to pass that my men were hewn down, yea, even my ten thousand who were with me, … and we having survived the dead of our people, did behold on the morrow, when the … the ten thousand of my people who were hewn down, being led in the front by me. And we also beheld the ten thousand of my people who were led by my son Moroni. And behold, the ten thousand of Gidgiddonah had fallen, and he also in the midst. And Lamah had fallen with his ten thousand; and Gilgal had fallen with his ten thousand; and Limhah had fallen with his ten thousand; and Jeneum had fallen with his ten thousand; and Cumenihah, and Moronihah, and Antionum, and Shiblom, and Shem, and Josh, had fallen with their ten thousand each. And it came to pass that there were ten more who did fall by the sword, with their ten thousand each; yea, even all my people, save it were those twenty and four who were with me, and also a few who had escaped into the south countries, and a few who had deserted over unto the Lamanites, had fallen; and their flesh, and bones, and blood lay upon the face of the earth, being left by the hands of those who slew them to molder upon the land, and to crumble and to return to their mother earth."

[_stemelbow]

My question is focused on an idea of a small population of horse.

[_Runtu]

Interesting. What part of America are we talking about? Also, the three or so mentions of horses in the Book of Mormon can't really equate to too many horses right? Or at least it could possibly be true that there were very few horses at all among any generation of Nephites/Lamanites right? Less than a hundred? or something. What can we expect to find among such a small population? I don't know if anything. You?

Small population? That's not what the Book of Mormon describes. According to the text, horses were used by the Jaredites and were found by the Nephites when they arrived. 500 years later, Lamoni was using them for transportation. Why would a small group of horses be kept for 500 years and of which no trace can be found? Lamoni was a regional sub-king, so unless he was special, he probably wouldn't have been the only one with horses.

Even if we stipulate that the mention of horses in the Book of Mormon does not mean any of the equine species, we still have the problem of animals being used for transportation. That does not fit the Mesoamerican model at all, where only turkeys and ducks and dogs were domesticated for food purposes. There aren't any pack animals among the Maya, nor are there chariots. It goes without saying that there is no trace of any horses, either.

[_Kishkumen]

My question is focused on an idea of a small population of horse.

What does that matter, stem? I mean really! There were no horses in the Americas in the period during which the Book of Mormon events supposedly took place. And furthermore, horse is not Joseph Smith's translation of "llama" or "alpaca" or "tapir" or what have you. The simple and correct answer to these problems is that the Book of Mormon is not ancient.

[Guest]

My question is focused on an idea of a small population of horse.

The problem is that the Book of Mormon asks us to believe that a very small group of people arrived at the new world and multiplied faster than mankind has done even under the best of environments and yet you are suggesting the population of horses did not? So while conditions were ideal for Nephites and Lamanites to multiply at a rate never before matched, somehow their horses didn't fare so well. (We won't ask how the Lamanites, who were nomadic, multiplied faster than the Nephites who were not.)

[_CaliforniaKid]

Mike is a really nice guy, and actually quite willing to admit mistakes. The real problem here is that he's mostly a synthesizer of research done by others, and quite often the others haven't haven't done their homework. Mike should probably be more careful, but it's also not entirely fair to pin all the blame on him.

[_Runtu]

Mike is a really nice guy, and actually quite willing to admit mistakes. The real problem here is that he's mostly a synthesizer of research done by others, and quite often the others haven't haven't done their homework. Mike should probably be more careful, but it's also not entirely fair to pin all the blame on him.

I know. What strikes me is that the Bennett article predates Mike's by 7 years and discusses the same issue and is published in the same place. Surely someone should have noticed the contradiction.