Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 48

Thread: Christ in Ancient Americas - A Compelling Evidence of the BOM's Authenticity

  1. #1
    tWebber TimothyRB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Marysville, Washington
    Faith
    Mormon
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    33
    Amen (Given)
    0
    Amen (Received)
    3

    Christ in Ancient Americas - A Compelling Evidence of the BOM's Authenticity

    The Book of Mormon has always been a stumbling block for many evangelical Christians. Many attempts have given over to some interesting theories of how this text came about. One of the main criticisms is that there is no archaeological evidence to substantiate any people, person, place, or event recorded in the Book of Mormon text.

    However, what if there existed an actual historical recording of the most singular and significant event that brings forth a close to the criticism? Not only a recording that lends credibility to this magnificent event, it correlates geographically to a specific place.

    Account in The Second part of the Chronicle of Peru

    "Before the Incas reigned in these kingdoms, or had ever been heard of, they Indians relate another thing MUCH MORE NOTABLE of all things else they say. For they declare that they were a long time without seeing the sun, and that suffering much evil from its absence, great prayers and vows were offered up to their gods, imploring for the light they needed. "
    Account recorded in 3 Nephi 8 - 11

    "And it came to pass that when the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the storm, and the tempest, and the quakings of the earth did cease—for behold, they did last for about the space of three hours; and it was said by some that the time was greater; nevertheless, all these great and terrible things were done in about the space of three hours—and then behold, there was darkness upon the face of the land. And it came to pass that there was thick darkness upon all the face of the land, insomuch that the inhabitants thereof who had not fallen could feel the vapor of darkness; And there could be no light, because of the darkness, neither candles, neither torches; neither could there be fire kindled with their fine and exceedingly dry wood, so that there could not be any light at all; 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. 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. And in one place they were heard to cry, saying: O that we had repented before this great and terrible day, and then would our brethren have been spared, and they would not have been burned in that great city Zarahemla. And in another place they were heard to cry and mourn, saying: O that we had repented before this great and terrible day, and had not killed and stoned the prophets, and cast them out; then would our mothers and our fair daughters, and our children have been spared, and not have been buried up in that great city Moronihah. And thus were the howlings of the people great and terrible."
    Account in The Second part of the Chronicle of Peru

    "Things being in this state, the sun, shining very brightly, came forth from the island of Titicaca, in the great lake of the Collao, at which every one rejoiced. Presently afterwards, they say, that there came from a southern direction a white man of great stature, who by his aspect and presence called forth great veneration and obedience. This man who thus appeared had GREAT POWER, insomuch that he could change the plains into mountains, and great hills into valleys,and make water flow out of stones. As soon as such power was beheld, the people called him the Maker of created things, the prince of all things, father of the Sun. For they say that he performed other wonders, giving life to men and animals, so that by his hand marvelous great benefits were conferred on the people. And such was the story that the Indians who told it to me say that they heard from their ancestors, who in like manner heard it in the old songs which they received from very ancient times. They say that this man went on towards the north, working these marvels along the way of the mountains; and that he never more returned so as to be seen. In many places he gave orders to men how they should live, and he spoke lovingly to them and with much gentleness, admonishing them that they should do good, and no evil or injury one to another, and that they should be loving and charitable to all. In most parts he is generally called Ticiviracocha, but in the province of the Collao they call him Tuapaca, and in other places Arnauan. In many parts they built temples in which they put blocks of stone in the likeness of him, and offered up sacrifices before them."

    Book of Mormon - 3 Nephi 9 - 11 (contextually), focus on 3 Nephi 11:8-15

    "And it came to pass, as they understood they cast their eyes up again towards heaven; and behold, they saw a Man descending out of heaven; and he was clothed in a white robe; and he came down and stood in the midst of them; and the eyes of the whole multitude were turned upon him, and they durst not open their mouths, even one to another, and wist not what it meant, for they thought it was an angel that had appeared unto them. And it came to pass that he stretched forth his hand and spake unto the people, saying: Behold, I am Jesus Christ, whom the prophets testified shall come into the world. And behold, I am the light and the life of the world; and I have drunk out of that bitter cup which the Father hath given me, and have glorified the Father in taking upon me the sins of the world, in the which I have suffered the will of the Father in all things from the beginning. And it came to pass that when Jesus had spoken these words the whole multitude fell to the earth; for they remembered that it had been prophesied among them that Christ should show himself unto them after his ascension into heaven. And it came to pass that the Lord spake unto them saying: Arise and come forth unto me, that ye may thrust your hands into my side, and also that ye may feel the prints of the nails in my hands and in my feet, that ye may know that I am the God of Israel, and the God of the whole earth, and have been slain for the sins of the world. And it came to pass that the multitude went forth, and thrust their hands into his side, and did feel the prints of the nails in his hands and in his feet; and this they did do, going forth one by one until they had all gone forth, and did see with their eyes and did feel with their hands, and did know of a surety and did bear record, that it was he, of whom it was written by the prophets, that should come."
    download.jpg

    Image result for Lake Titicaca. This lake is the largest fresh water lake that borders on Peru and Bolivia.

    And, Isla del Sol is said, by Inca legends and mythology, to be the birthplace of the Sun. What we notice in Pedro de Ceza de Leon's historical account is that the Indians describe the coming of a man with great power. His brightness caused the darkness to disappear - as in how the Sun rises. Now, we know that the Sun rises in the East and sets in the west. The account here signifies that this man came from a Southern direction, from the Island of Titicaca. Pedro de Cieza de Leon's account is not as in depth as what the account in 3 Nephi describes. What is worthy to note here, as well, is the description in 3 Nephi 11 that those who remained were gathered in the "land bountiful". These inhabitants witnessed the coming of Christ. Parallel this event with the recording of Pedro de Ceza de Leon, we notice there is striking similarities between the two accounts. These similarities are not contradictory. If anything, Pedro de Ceza de Leon's account is more of what we may consider a summation of what 3 Nephi 11 describes. However, comparing these two accounts, we see that Pedro de Cieza de Leon is being told of a significant event that happened long before the Inca's came into power in that region of Peru. Here is the parallel to both accounts:

    • Both accounts describe darkness being over the land for a significant period of time
    • Both accounts describe the inhabitants of the land in mourning, distress, and groaning, praying, and seeking God
    • Both accounts describe that the darkness is gone and the inhabitants witness a bright light and a man coming toward them
    • Both accounts describe this man having power and authority to cause mountains to flatten and other creative powers
    • Both accounts describe that this man taught them certain teachings and healed as well as other miracles


    The evidence is beyond mere circumstances and does not appear to be sharing two different events. In fact, when you read Pedro de Cieza de Leon's, the story the Inca's told of another great "apostle" like man coming to the inhabitants. There does not seem to be a time line in, the Chronicler's account. However, we read further beyond Third Nephi that about 200 years passed when men came to the people and were taken captive by them.


    Lake_Titicaca_map.png

    Image result for Lake Titicaca

    This information is important because if the Book of Mormon truly is a fraud, how does it come to describe, in perfect detail, a historical event that is also recorded in another source? Furthermore, how would Joseph Smith, or any other person (if he borrowed this from the Spaulding or View of the Hebrews manuscript) know about this single most important event when the Second part of the Chronicle of Peru was not translated and published until 1883 by the Haklyut Society? This is 53 years after the coming forth of the Book of Mormon.

    The Book of Mormon is claimed to be another testament of Jesus Christ. It substantiates the notion that this text is more sacred and authentic than modern Evangelical Critics claim. Whatever their claims against this set of scripture, many are unable to provide an adequate rebuttal to the evidence presented here.

    I have asked many Christian Pastors, Evangelical Christians, and Critics of Mormonism, and others, who lay claim that there is no archaeological evidence to support the Book of Mormon - as to how such a momentous event not only shows proof that Jesus Christ did visit the inhabitants of the ancient America's - has a recorded historic account that mirrors and summarizes the actual event itself in 3 Nephi.

    This challenge has been given to many people in the past 15 years since I have initially discovered the account written by Pedro de Cieza de Leon.
    Last edited by TimothyRB; 02-18-2019 at 05:05 PM. Reason: Editing bullet points

  2. #2
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    60,575
    Amen (Given)
    13083
    Amen (Received)
    27656
    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    The Book of Mormon has always been a stumbling block for many evangelical Christians.
    Actually, you'd need to back up and start with the author. The fact that he was a man of incredibly questionable character is the first problem. The "gold plates"? Who else saw them? How they were supposedly transcribed? Where are they now?

    Many attempts have given over to some interesting theories of how this text came about.
    Many attempts have been made to try to explain how Joseph Smith came up with it in the first place.

    One of the main criticisms is that there is no archaeological evidence to substantiate any people, person, place, or event recorded in the Book of Mormon text.
    Naw, I disagree. None of that matters if Joseph Smith was a fraud.
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

  3. Amen mossrose, Dante, RumTumTugger amen'd this post.
  4. #3
    tWebber TimothyRB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Marysville, Washington
    Faith
    Mormon
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    33
    Amen (Given)
    0
    Amen (Received)
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Actually, you'd need to back up and start with the author. The fact that he was a man of incredibly questionable character is the first problem. The "gold plates"? Who else saw them? How they were supposedly transcribed? Where are they now?
    Your first mistake is not dealing with the original argument, and evidence, I am presenting. It is committing a red herring logical fallacy right here. This invalidates the entirety of your actual argument.

    (also known as: beside the point, misdirection [form of], changing the subject, false emphasis, the Chewbacca defense, irrelevant conclusion, irrelevant thesis, clouding the issue, ignorance of refutation) Description: Attempting to redirect the argument to another issue to which the person doing the redirecting can better respond. While it is similar to the avoiding the issue fallacy, the red herring is a deliberate diversion of attention with the intention of trying to abandon the original argument.
    You are redirecting the argument to a different topic by introducing something that is not relevant to this. The argument here is evidence found within Pedro de Cieza de Leon's work The Second Part of the Chronicle of Peru that provides a description of an event that has parallel information where we find it in 3 Nephi 8-11 regarding Christ's appearance to the inhabitants of this land.

    Your second mistake is not following the proper course of discussion. What I mean by this is that I introduced a topic for healthy discussion. This requires that we both agree that there may be information available to determine the argument's validity. If you are not able to envision any information being presented that may change your mind regarding the information - then NO, it is not a discussion and I am not obligated to further engage in any discussion with you.

    If you agree that any information presented, as I am in agreement here myself, that may change one's understanding, then we move to the next criteria. Which is, if one of our arguments is shown to be faulty, we agree to stop using that argument all together. If you are not in agreement with this, then we no longer have a discussion and I am not obligated to engage in any further discussion with you.

    If we both are in agreement on this matter, we move to the next criteria where we abide by the following criteria:

    • The position that is more reasonable and has more supporting evidence should be accepted as true
    • The person asserting a position bears the onus of demonstrating its truth


    We have a discussion and I am more than willing to discuss with you this specific topic - whether or not there is evidence that Christ appeared in the America's where it may regard a specific location that is tied to a specific event

    This means:

    • We do not introduce new arguments while another argument has yet to be resolved
    • Do not move on to another argument if it is shown that a fact you have relied upon is inaccurate
    • Provide evidence for your position or arguments
    • Do not argue that you do not need evidence


    If either of us breaches this proper form of discussion, then we have cheated and the discussion is terminated on the basis:

    • You are deemed to have conceded all opposing arguments up to this point
    • You forfeit any right to complain about the discussion


    If neither of us breached this proper flow of a healthy discussion on this topic (or any other topic) then we have engaged in a rational exchange of ideas.

    Therefore, present any logical and objective reasoning that may dispute the argument I am presenting without derailing or shifting the focus to some other topic.

    Many attempts have been made to try to explain how Joseph Smith came up with it in the first place.
    If that is the case (which is a biased and prejudicial assumption on your part) then please deal with the evidence and argument that I am being presented where Pedro de Cieza de Leon records information that is strongly parallel to the account of 3 Nephi 8-11 and that this information was not known until the publication of The Second Part of the Chronicles of Peru fifty some years after the coming forth of the Book of Mormon. If Joseph Smith came up with the account of a catastrophic destruction and the risen Savior coming to the inhabitants of the ancient inhabitants, how come we find this recorded in a historical document outside of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon?

    Again, it brings us right back to my argument and evidence.

    Naw, I disagree. None of that matters if Joseph Smith was a fraud.
    We are not discussing Joseph Smith and his character, that is not the argument and that is not the evidence being brought forth. Again, justifying your red herring logical fallacy here.

    Again, if you are wanting to have a rational and objective discussion on this, or any other topic, I request we both agree to follow the rules of proper flow of discussion. If you are not willing to agree to that, nor are willing to address my argument and evidence I brought forth in a rational manner, then I am not willing to engage you in any form of discussion on here.
    Last edited by TimothyRB; 02-18-2019 at 08:41 PM. Reason: Adding more content
    For a Christ-Centric Recovery and Mindful Christian Living - Damascus Way Recovery

    For Latter-day Saint Christian, Political, and Social Commentary and Apologetics - Mormon Apologia

  5. #4
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    60,575
    Amen (Given)
    13083
    Amen (Received)
    27656
    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    Your first mistake is not dealing with the original argument, and evidence, I am presenting.
    I am under no obligation to accept your premise, knowing what I know of Joseph Smith and his life of deception and fraud. You seem to believe that a main objection to the Book of Mormon is "that there is no archaeological evidence to substantiate any people, person, place, or event recorded in the Book of Mormon text".

    I have never heard a single person use that as the reason they reject the Book of Mormon. So all your "evidence" is useless. You're trying to answer a question that's not being asked.
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

  6. Amen Cerebrum123, QuantaFille amen'd this post.
  7. #5
    tWebber TimothyRB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Marysville, Washington
    Faith
    Mormon
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    33
    Amen (Given)
    0
    Amen (Received)
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    I am under no obligation to accept your premise, knowing what I know of Joseph Smith and his life of deception and fraud. You seem to believe that a main objection to the Book of Mormon is "that there is no archaeological evidence to substantiate any people, person, place, or event recorded in the Book of Mormon text".

    I have never heard a single person use that as the reason they reject the Book of Mormon. So all your "evidence" is useless. You're trying to answer a question that's not being asked.
    There are many objections to the Book of Mormon and it's authenticity. I never said that lacking archaeological evidences is the main objection against the Book of Mormon. I stated clearly that one of the objections to the authenticity of the Book of Mormon is the lacking of archaeological evidence. So, that is where I am starting to establish my argument as to whether or not there is sufficient archaeological evidence to show forth that lends credibility to the authenticity to the claims of the Book of Mormon being of an ancient record.

    Now, since you are not willing to engage in a rational discussion on this because of biased and presumptious opinion. This tells me any additional discussions you attempt to engage me with will not be answered as I will not be obligated to engage in any further discussion with you on this or any other topic.

    This is based on the evidence you are not willing to produce any evidence contrary to what I presented and are unwilling to abide by proper rules of rational discussion. Have a good day.
    Last edited by TimothyRB; 02-18-2019 at 08:55 PM.
    For a Christ-Centric Recovery and Mindful Christian Living - Damascus Way Recovery

    For Latter-day Saint Christian, Political, and Social Commentary and Apologetics - Mormon Apologia

  8. #6
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    60,575
    Amen (Given)
    13083
    Amen (Received)
    27656
    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    Then you are not willing to engage in a rational discussion on this because of biased and presumptious opinion.
    Calm yourself, TRB, this is a discussion board, not a court of law, and you're not Clarence Seward Darrow.

    We DO have a formal debate area where can lay out the terms of discussion, but that's not how it works here. You seem to want to blog, and you actually do a better job of laying out your case - such as it is - on your blog.

    This tells me any additional discussions you attempt to engage me with will not be answered as I will not be obligated to engage in any further discussion with you on this or any other topic.
    I'm not going to accept a false premise, then get dragged into the weeds, no.

    This is based on the evidence you are not willing to produce any evidence contrary to what I presented and are unwilling to abide by proper rules of rational discussion.
    Just remember - this is not your blog. You're free to express your opinions within the rules of the forum, and I'm free to reject your false prophet and his false testimony.

    Have a good day.
    365 days a year! It's all about Jesus!
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

  9. #7
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    60,575
    Amen (Given)
    13083
    Amen (Received)
    27656
    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    I never said that lacking archaeological evidences is the main objection against the Book of Mormon. I stated clearly that one of the objections to the authenticity of the Book of Mormon is the lacking of archaeological evidence.
    You're getting kinda slippery here, Timothy. That is NOT what you said. What you said was....

    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    One of the main criticisms is that there is no archaeological evidence to substantiate any people, person, place, or event recorded in the Book of Mormon text.
    You're kinda trying to backtrack on what you claimed. You went from claiming it's "one of the main criticism" to "one of the objections".

    That's disappointing.

    Hey, if you want to set up a formal debate, as I said, we have a venue for that called "The Arena".

    Maybe you can find somebody to play your games there!
    Last edited by Cow Poke; 02-18-2019 at 09:26 PM. Reason: The Arena link wasn't working
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

  10. #8
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    58,016
    Amen (Given)
    1206
    Amen (Received)
    21217
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Actually, you'd need to back up and start with the author. The fact that he was a man of incredibly questionable character is the first problem. The "gold plates"? Who else saw them? How they were supposedly transcribed? Where are they now?



    Many attempts have been made to try to explain how Joseph Smith came up with it in the first place.



    Naw, I disagree. None of that matters if Joseph Smith was a fraud.
    Then there is the matter of the complete lack of DNA evidence that the indigenous people of the Americas came from the Middle East. The recent excuse that they have been diluted by mixing with other Native Americans doesn't hold water not just because the Book of Mormon doesn't have any clear reference to other groups of people existing in the Americas that would account for this dilution but because we can still pick up genetic markers from Neanderthals in certain populations which were most definitely "diluted."

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

  11. #9
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    52,782
    Amen (Given)
    5370
    Amen (Received)
    23306
    From what I can tell of the Chronicles of Peru, they were written by a conquistador in the 1500's. Assuming your translation above it correct (you give no link to the translated materials or reference to the book, chapter, etc) why should we believe anything it says about the Incas or about their history? Not to mention, the Book of Mormon was supposed to have happened in north and central America, not south. Plus, the Nephites were white so why would they even notice a white man among them like you mention above as special enough to call out the color of his skin?

    Joseph Smiith liked to take events in the bible and exaggerate them. When Jesus died on the cross the bible says there was 3 hours of darkness, so Smith writes of an event with 3 DAYS of darkness. Gotta impress the yokels right?

  12. #10
    tWebber Dante's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Malaysia
    Faith
    Russian Orthodox
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,027
    Amen (Given)
    804
    Amen (Received)
    536
    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    The Book of Mormon has always been a stumbling block for many evangelical Christians. Many attempts have given over to some interesting theories of how this text came about. One of the main criticisms is that there is no archaeological evidence to substantiate any people, person, place, or event recorded in the Book of Mormon text.
    False. One of the main criticisms of the Book of Mormon is the extensive amount of egregious errors found in the Book of Mormon.
    https://www.apologeticspress.org/rr/...-of-Mormon.pdf

    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    However, what if there existed an actual historical recording of the most singular and significant event that brings forth a close to the criticism? Not only a recording that lends credibility to this magnificent event, it correlates geographically to a specific place.
    No such historical record exists.

    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    Account in The Second part of the Chronicle of Peru

    Account recorded in 3 Nephi 8 - 11
    A solar eclipse followed by repentance isn't a unique event at all. It has happened during the Eclipse of Thales, where a battle was stopped because the soldiers perceived it to be the wrath of the gods against them, and so they made peace. Furthermore, the duration of the darkness wasn't even specified by the Peruvians; it could be less than a day for all it matters, since an eclipse lasting more than 7 minutes is already highly unusual even for modern times.

    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    Account in The Second part of the Chronicle of Peru

    Book of Mormon - 3 Nephi 9 - 11 (contextually), focus on 3 Nephi 11:8-15
    The parts that you bolded are not reflected in the Chronicle of Peru. One would think that if Christ had indeed appeared to them, they would not have had human sacrifices.

    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    Image result for Lake Titicaca. This lake is the largest fresh water lake that borders on Peru and Bolivia.

    And, Isla del Sol is said, by Inca legends and mythology, to be the birthplace of the Sun. What we notice in Pedro de Ceza de Leon's historical account is that the Indians describe the coming of a man with great power. His brightness caused the darkness to disappear - as in how the Sun rises.
    The Peruvian account has them saying that the white man came after the sun had appeared, not that the white man caused the eclipse to go away.

    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    Now, we know that the Sun rises in the East and sets in the west. The account here signifies that this man came from a Southern direction, from the Island of Titicaca.
    Per the Peruvian account, the white man has nothing to do with the rising of the sun. Plus, the account in the Book of Mormon has "Christ" descending from heaven, and not the south.

    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    Pedro de Cieza de Leon's account is not as in depth as what the account in 3 Nephi describes.
    Because his account has absolutely nothing to do with the fictional account in the Book of Mormon.

    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    What is worthy to note here, as well, is the description in 3 Nephi 11 that those who remained were gathered in the "land bountiful".
    I don't see what's of worth to note about this description, since it has nothing to do with the Peruvians.

    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    These inhabitants witnessed the coming of Christ.
    Far from it. Here's what Pedro de Cieza de Leon said with regards to them:
    Source: The second part of the Chronicle of Peru, Chapter V

    When I passed through this province, I went to see the idol, for the Spaniards affirm that it may have been some apostle. I heard many declare that it had legends written{8} on its hands. But this is nonsense, unless my eyes were blinded, for although I looked closely I could not see anything of the kind. The hands were placed over the haunches, the arms twisted, and on the girdle were indications that the vestments were fastened with buttons. Whether this or any other was intended for one of the glorious apostles who, in the days of his preaching, had passed this way, God Almighty knows. I know not, and can only believe that if he was an apostle, he would work with the power of God in his preaching to these people, who are simple and with little guile; and there would be some vestige of his visit. Yet what we see and understand is that the Devil had very great power over these people, God permitting it, and that in these places very heathenish and vain sacrifices were offered up. Hence I believe that, until our times, the word of the Holy Gospel was not heard. Now we see all the temples profaned, and the glorious Cross planted in all directions.

    © Copyright Original Source



    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    Parallel this event with the recording of Pedro de Ceza de Leon, we notice there is striking similarities between the two accounts. These similarities are not contradictory. If anything, Pedro de Ceza de Leon's account is more of what we may consider a summation of what 3 Nephi 11 describes.
    The similarities are only very superficial and they do not possess the same details at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    However, comparing these two accounts, we see that Pedro de Cieza de Leon is being told of a significant event that happened long before the Inca's came into power in that region of Peru.
    The first line of Chapter V of the Second Part of the Chronicle of Peru literally begins with the line "BEFORE the Incas reigned in these kingdoms, or had ever been heard of, the Indians relate another thing much more notable than all things else that they say." We don't need to compare the two accounts to know this since it's stated explicitly in the source material.

    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    Here is the parallel to both accounts:

    • Both accounts describe darkness being over the land for a significant period of time
    • Both accounts describe the inhabitants of the land in mourning, distress, and groaning, praying, and seeking God
    • Both accounts describe that the darkness is gone and the inhabitants witness a bright light and a man coming toward them
    • Both accounts describe this man having power and authority to cause mountains to flatten and other creative powers
    • Both accounts describe that this man taught them certain teachings and healed as well as other miracles
    Here is where the two accounts differ:

    • No amount of time specified in the Peruvian account with regards to how long the darkness lasted, in contrast to the account in the Book of Mormon that specified it to be three days, accompanied by many other fantastic events that, if true, would have been noted by the Peruvians as well.
    • The Peruvians weren't seeking God; the account says "great prayers and vows were offered up to their gods" meaning that they were still pagan, as can be understood if only you read the rest of the account.
    • The Peruvian account does not mention anything about a bright light, and in fact mentions that the man appeared from the south, in contrast to the Mormon account that "Christ" descended from heaven.
    • The Mormon account does not contain any such description of having power and authority to cause mountains to flatten. In fact, the accounts are contradictory in that the Peruvians said that the white man who appeared performed those great feats after he appeared to them, in contrast to all the death and destruction that supposedly transpired in the three hours during the three days of darkness in the Mormon account.
    • Both accounts differ on what has been taught them by the man who appeared to them.


    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    The evidence is beyond mere circumstances and does not appear to be sharing two different events.
    The evidence proves that the two accounts are irreconciliable.

    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    In fact, when you read Pedro de Cieza de Leon's, the story the Inca's told of another great "apostle" like man coming to the inhabitants. There does not seem to be a time line in, the Chronicler's account. However, we read further beyond Third Nephi that about 200 years passed when men came to the people and were taken captive by them.
    And what similarities are there between the account of the Peruvians and the account in Third Nephi with regards to those who came later? I would wager, absolutely none.

    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    Image result for Lake Titicaca

    This information is important because if the Book of Mormon truly is a fraud, how does it come to describe, in perfect detail, a historical event that is also recorded in another source?
    It doesn't. Hence, it truly is a fraud.

    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    Furthermore, how would Joseph Smith, or any other person (if he borrowed this from the Spaulding or View of the Hebrews manuscript) know about this single most important event when the Second part of the Chronicle of Peru was not translated and published until 1883 by the Haklyut Society? This is 53 years after the coming forth of the Book of Mormon.
    Just because it was yet to be fully translated during his time doesn't mean he couldn't have heard of the parts that were translated from someone who is familiar with the source. Furthermore, as we have seen, the two accounts contain significant differences, such that the similarities are insignificant.

    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    The Book of Mormon is claimed to be another testament of Jesus Christ. It substantiates the notion that this text is more sacred and authentic than modern Evangelical Critics claim. Whatever their claims against this set of scripture, many are unable to provide an adequate rebuttal to the evidence presented here.
    Except I just did.

    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    I have asked many Christian Pastors, Evangelical Christians, and Critics of Mormonism, and others, who lay claim that there is no archaeological evidence to support the Book of Mormon - as to how such a momentous event not only shows proof that Jesus Christ did visit the inhabitants of the ancient America's - has a recorded historic account that mirrors and summarizes the actual event itself in 3 Nephi.
    Reading the full text of the Chronicle of Peru, you would know that this is absolutely not the case.

    Quote Originally Posted by TimothyRB View Post
    This challenge has been given to many people in the past 15 years since I have initially discovered the account written by Pedro de Cieza de Leon.
    Did you even read the whole account by Pedro de Cieza de Leon? Quite obviously not. Here you go.
    The fact that science cannot make any pronouncement about ethical principles has been misinterpreted as indicating that there are no such principles; while in fact the search for truth presupposes ethics. - Karl Popper, 1987

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •