Flood of Noah and the BoM

[A New Dawn]

mormonism is a religion based on faith alone. And there is something wrong with having faith? They do not have the means to back up the claims that are made in the bom and have been struggling lately to defend the stories within. Who has been struggling to defend the stories? It is more the antagonists who are struggling to discredit them. No, there is absolutely no physical evidence that proves any of the stories in the bom and it has been researched by many very qualified archeaoligists. With the increase of knowlege the stories keep falling further apart. Like the DNA studies that have not conclusively shown that the Native Americans have absolutely no link to the Hebrew people and the study done on the papyri that joe smith said he translated the pearl of great price from. Now here, you are right. Joseph Smith said he translated it. He did not say it was an inspired translation. It has been conclusively shown to be nothing more then a common book of breathings, or funeral text showing the steps of embalming a body.

Anyone can have faith in something that is right in front of their eyes. It takes real faith to believe what God reveals to you that is not seen with the naked eye.

 

[fatboys]

mormonism is a religion based on faith alone. They do not have the means to back up the claims that are made in the bom and have been struggling lately to defend the stories within. No, there is absolutely no physical evidence that proves any of the stories in the bom and it has been researched by many very qualified archeaoligists. With the increase of knowlege the stories keep falling further apart. Like the DNA studies that have conclusively shown that the Native Americans have absolutely no link to the Hebrew people and the study done on the papyri that joe smith said he translated the pearl of great price from. It has been conclusively shown to be nothing more then a common book of breathings, or funeral text showing the steps of embalming a body.

FB: Faith alone will save you. Yet Faith in the LDS religion will not. So when you say that the LDS church is based on faith, this is a compliment, quite the opposite of what you meant it to be. Yet your religion also has to be based on faith as well. There is no proof for the existance of God, nor that the bible is a supposed book written by prophets who God called. No proof at all. There is no proof that Jesus was a real person, no proof that the flood ever happened. We believe because we have faith that it did.

 

[gort]

FB quote:

There is no proof for the existance of God,

yes there is.

<><

 

[Darkelf]

FB: Faith alone will save you. Yet Faith in the LDS religion will not. So when you say that the LDS church is based on faith, this is a compliment, quite the opposite of what you meant it to be. Yet your religion also has to be based on faith as well. There is no proof for the existance of God, nor that the bible is a supposed book written by prophets who God called. No proof at all. There is no proof that Jesus was a real person, no proof that the flood ever happened. We believe because we have faith that it did.

Your are sadly wrong there is very strong evidence for the existance of God, there is proof that jesus was a real person.

 

[A New Dawn]

Your are sadly wrong there is very strong evidence for the existance of God, there is proof that jesus was a real person.

Proof that there was an historical Jesus is not proof that He was the Son of God, or even that God exists. Man has been trying for ages to prove just that, and so far, has come up empty-handed.

But you seem more enlightened than the rest of us. Why don't you share your knowledge with us?

 

[jprovis]

Mark 16:17-18 (NKJV): And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; they will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.


There is proof of God's existence, and the working of His Holy Spirit, in today's world, and in exactly the way Jesus promised. I have seen, with my own eyes, evidence of every one of these signs listed. This is good enough evidence for me (as a scientist) to believe in God, and His Son.

 

[Swart]

Actually you are mistaken. The church I attend even has several videos that chronicle the evidence for the flood. There is much scientific evidence for a worldwide flood. The Creation Research Institute was there recently and they were able to show some amazing evidence for this happening.

I'm not talking about pseudo-science, I'm talking about real science as found in peer-reviewed Journals such as Nature.

 

[A New Dawn]

Mark 16:17-18 (NKJV): And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; they will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.


There is proof of God's existence, and the working of His Holy Spirit, in today's world, and in exactly the way Jesus promised. I have seen, with my own eyes, evidence of every one of these signs listed. This is good enough evidence for me (as a scientist) to believe in God, and His Son.

For everything that you claim to be proof of the existence of God, others can come up with a different explanation.

It all comes down to faith.

 

[jprovis]

It all comes down to faith

I agree completely. However, when presented with the evidence, and a sequence of events that could either be an (a) outrageous number of consecutive coincidences, or (b) proof that God's Word is true and that Jesus is exactly who He claims to be, I choose to opt for the latter.

 

[A New Dawn]

I agree completely. However, when presented with the evidence, and a sequence of events that could either be an (a) outrageous number of consecutive coincidences, or (b) proof that God's Word is true and that Jesus is exactly who He claims to be, I choose to opt for the latter.

I do, also, but some would rather go for the string of coincidences.

 

[Bond Slave]

I'm not talking about pseudo-science, I'm talking about real science as found in peer-reviewed Journals such as Nature.

Psuedo science? No, I don't think so. These are very well respected scholars. There is much science to be shown. The world will not accept it though as they cannot even begin to try and think there is a Creator.

 

[zeontes]

For further discussions on the Flood of Noah please come on over to the Creation and Evolution section. There is a whole passel of trouble brewing over there. Ok, maybe I would just enjoy you sharing about the flood in that area instead of over here. I really wanted to use this thread to find out if the BoM had anything in it about the flood and apparently it never made it into the book. You are more than welcome to fill us in if there is anything in there. It was one event that changed the culture of the world, I just assumed there would have been something in the BoM about it, my bad.

 

[Swart]

Psuedo science? No, I don't think so. These are very well respected scholars. There is much science to be shown. The world will not accept it though as they cannot even begin to try and think there is a Creator.

Okay, if they are respected scientists, please list the peer-reviewed journals they have published their findings in.

And don't say the establishment is out to get them, if Velikovsky could get his material published then anyone with good empirical data could.

 

[Aceman1992]

Ok, maybe I would just enjoy you sharing about the flood in that area instead of over here. I really wanted to use this thread to find out if the BoM had anything in it about the flood and apparently it never made it into the book. You are more than welcome to fill us in if there is anything in there. It was one event that changed the culture of the world, I just assumed there would have been something in the BoM about it, my bad.

The BoM really starts with people (the Jaredites) in the time of Nimrod (Noah > Ham > Cush > Nimrod), so it really doesn't cover the flood at all.

 

[Aceman1992]

Like the DNA studies that have conclusively shown that the Native Americans have absolutely no link to the Hebrew people...

The interesting thing about science is that it keeps finding new things.
Point #1: Michael Whiting, in 2003, a member of the Systematic Biology program of the National Science Foundation (NSF) would not vote to approve any funding for any research to test the authenticity of DNA evidence to prove/disprove the Book of Mormon because there is NO way to structure a test to prove or disprove the claim. DNA evidence CANNOT prove or disprove the Book of Mormon. His quote, "I would be just as critical of someone who claimed that current DNA testing proves the Book of Mormon is true as I would of those who claim that DNA evidence proves it is not true."

Point #2: Given that a definite proof is out of the question, can DNA be used to offer a plausible explanation for the Book of Mormon. Yes. The location origin of Hebrew people would be Turkey (location of Mount Ararat and Noah as the DNA source) and spread from there to parts of the world. In an article, Origin and Diffusion of mtDNA Haplogroup X, Maere Reidla et al. published in the American Society of Human Genetics, the X2a haplogroup has been found in the Navaho and Ojibwa indians. This haplogroup is a direct mutation of the X2 haplogroup that originated in the Greece, Turkey, and Iranian areas. The meaning of the direct mutation is that a close decendant of a person with X2 DNA provided the X2a DNA for the Navaho and Ojibwa and came from one of the three countries cited, not from Siberia, not from anywhere else. The X2a haplogroup is not found in any other world location, just America. So yes, there is a plausible scientific DNA connection between contemporary people of Biblical people and North American Indian populations. This is not proof of the BoM, only that a plausible connection does exist using DNA.