Did ancient Mayan's believe in Christ?

[Anguille]

Forgive my ignorance of what the hell a Golden Salamander is.

You don't know about the hoax in the 80's? Momon elders bought a phony story and a letter lock stock and barrel from a forger.
Salamander letter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The letter was deemed authentic by experienced document examiners, a testimony to Hofmann's superior forgery techniques. The letter also seemed to support the opinions of Reed Durham, D. Michael Quinn and others regarding "magical" aspects of Smith's religious experiences. [2] Hofman's disenchantment with the LDS Church may have played a role in his selection of subject matter to forge. The more sensational and controversial the subject, the higher its potential market value, but in addition, the content would act to cast suspicion on the LDS Church's origins, relieving Hofman of some burden of his then failing faith."

 

[Truthspeaker]

Forgive my ignorance of what the hell a Golden Salamander is.

You don't know about the hoax in the 80's? Momon elders bought a phony story and a letter lock stock and barrel from a forger.
Salamander letter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The letter was deemed authentic by experienced document examiners, a testimony to Hofmann's superior forgery techniques. The letter also seemed to support the opinions of Reed Durham, D. Michael Quinn and others regarding "magical" aspects of Smith's religious experiences. [2] Hofman's disenchantment with the LDS Church may have played a role in his selection of subject matter to forge. The more sensational and controversial the subject, the higher its potential market value, but in addition, the content would act to cast suspicion on the LDS Church's origins, relieving Hofman of some burden of his then failing faith."

Oh....I remember now, the phony certificate of professor Charles Anthon. It didn't fool anybody since the leaders of the church never validated it either. It took them a while to figure it out but no big deal.

 

[Anguille]

Forgive my ignorance of what the hell a Golden Salamander is.

You don't know about the hoax in the 80's? Momon elders bought a phony story and a letter lock stock and barrel from a forger.
Salamander letter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The letter was deemed authentic by experienced document examiners, a testimony to Hofmann's superior forgery techniques. The letter also seemed to support the opinions of Reed Durham, D. Michael Quinn and others regarding "magical" aspects of Smith's religious experiences. [2] Hofman's disenchantment with the LDS Church may have played a role in his selection of subject matter to forge. The more sensational and controversial the subject, the higher its potential market value, but in addition, the content would act to cast suspicion on the LDS Church's origins, relieving Hofman of some burden of his then failing faith."

Oh....I remember now, the phony certificate of professor Charles Anthon. It didn't fool anybody since the leaders of the church never validated it either. It took them a while to figure it out but no big deal.

Not according to Wiki and journalists reporting on the story. Tons of church decrees had to be purged. References to the Golden Salamander apparently still pop up in old church brochures.

 

[Truthspeaker]

You don't know about the hoax in the 80's? Momon elders bought a phony story and a letter lock stock and barrel from a forger.
Salamander letter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The letter was deemed authentic by experienced document examiners, a testimony to Hofmann's superior forgery techniques. The letter also seemed to support the opinions of Reed Durham, D. Michael Quinn and others regarding "magical" aspects of Smith's religious experiences. [2] Hofman's disenchantment with the LDS Church may have played a role in his selection of subject matter to forge. The more sensational and controversial the subject, the higher its potential market value, but in addition, the content would act to cast suspicion on the LDS Church's origins, relieving Hofman of some burden of his then failing faith."

Oh....I remember now, the phony certificate of professor Charles Anthon. It didn't fool anybody since the leaders of the church never validated it either. It took them a while to figure it out but no big deal.

Not according to Wiki and journalists reporting on the story. Tons of church decrees had to be purged. References to the Golden Salamander apparently still pop up in old church brochures.

Har har, who cares, so the certificate was a fake, it doesn't matter. The forger was just trying to make a buck and he didn't permanently fool anybody. How bout the rest of the mountain of evidence eh. Is that the best you got? You better head for the dirtiest anti-mormon website and cut and paste something stronger than that.

How about the worlds foremost meso american archaeologist Michael Cohn,a non mormon, in his book, "The Maya", he makes it clear in chapter 2 on page 41 sixth edition. "There is little agreement among scientists as to who colonized the americas... Boats must have been available to the people of Eurasia. Since there was no land bridge from Siberia to Australia but that continent must have been reached via maritime travel. Therefore the Siberian landbridge only theory is destroyed. It must be considered a possibility of maritime voyages from other parts of the world into the New World."

 

[Amanda]

Why is it important either way what they believed?

 

[Dr. T. Sanchez]

The book of morman was all one mans imaginings.

Its has no historical basis.

You shouldn't make fun of Joseph Smith. Afterall, he DID invent Utah.

 

[Truthspeaker]

Why is it important either way what they believed?

Well I am not trying to convert anybody but I just want people to open their minds to the possibility of Book of Mormon events being historically true. What they believed is important because it tells us more about history and where we came from and how things got to be the way they are. It is fascinating to me to watch Indiana Jones or the actual uncoverings of ancient knowledge that has not been seen for millenia.

Aren't you at least curious about these things. Or are you too cute for that

 

[Truthspeaker]

The book of morman was all one mans imaginings.

Its has no historical basis.

You shouldn't make fun of Joseph Smith. Afterall, he DID invent Utah.

He did say they would eventually be built up as "a mighty people in the midst of the Rocky Mountains."

 

[Amanda]

Why is it important either way what they believed?

Well I am not trying to convert anybody but I just want people to open their minds to the possibility of Book of Mormon events being historically true. What they believed is important because it tells us more about history and where we came from and how things got to be the way they are. It is fascinating to me to watch Indiana Jones or the actual uncoverings of ancient knowledge that has not been seen for millenia.

Aren't you at least curious about these things. Or are you too cute for that

I don't really have an opinion one way or the other on the Book of Mormon. My faith, while Christian-esque and rooted in Baptist tradition is fairly unconventional. I think anything that get people closer to the ideal of God is a good thing. I just don't see how it matters what ancient people believed.

If you look at Christianity and other religions that preceded it closely you'll see many parallels. I think that the idea of God is a little more universal and inclusive than a lot of people may believe. But whether or not any particular people believed any particular thing doesn't seem all that relevant to me. Maybe my cuteness is getting in the way... LOL

 

[Truthspeaker]

Why is it important either way what they believed?

Well I am not trying to convert anybody but I just want people to open their minds to the possibility of Book of Mormon events being historically true. What they believed is important because it tells us more about history and where we came from and how things got to be the way they are. It is fascinating to me to watch Indiana Jones or the actual uncoverings of ancient knowledge that has not been seen for millenia.

Aren't you at least curious about these things. Or are you too cute for that

I don't really have an opinion one way or the other on the Book of Mormon. My faith, while Christian-esque and rooted in Baptist tradition is fairly unconventional. I think anything that get people closer to the ideal of God is a good thing. I just don't see how it matters what ancient people believed.

If you look at Christianity and other religions that preceded it closely you'll see many parallels. I think that the idea of God is a little more universal and inclusive than a lot of people may believe. But whether or not any particular people believed any particular thing doesn't seem all that relevant to me. Maybe my cuteness is getting in the way... LOL

touche,
Now I don't intend for this thread to be really religious. I want to have much more of a historical and scientific discussion. We can have more of a religious discussion on my religious threads.
I just think that the book of mormon as a historical document would prove to be fascinating in it's claims in light of recent historical and archaeological findings. It could be just chalked up to a coincidence but it is fun to speculate isn't it?

 

[Anguille]

I don't really have an opinion one way or the other on the Book of Mormon. My faith, while Christian-esque and rooted in Baptist tradition is fairly unconventional. I think anything that get people closer to the ideal of God is a good thing. I just don't see how it matters what ancient people believed.

Like those of the Reagan era? JK

I'm curious what you mean by your church being unconventional. You've mentioned that before.

 

[Amanda]

I don't really have an opinion one way or the other on the Book of Mormon. My faith, while Christian-esque and rooted in Baptist tradition is fairly unconventional. I think anything that get people closer to the ideal of God is a good thing. I just don't see how it matters what ancient people believed.

Like those of the Reagan era? JK

I'm curious what you mean by your church being unconventional. You've mentioned that before.

Not my church, my personal faith. I'm not sure I want to go into all that much detail as I have no intention of having a debate about what I believe. Basically, I see God as unconditional love rather than a guy with a beard. I have grey areas where I'm not really sure how things work but I have faith that if we try to reach the ideal that God represents we are doing the right thing.

 

[Anguille]

Ah, I like that you are a free thinker. Nice way to envision God. Thanks, I don't need to know more and understand completely why you would like to keep it private.

 

[Truthspeaker]

I don't really have an opinion one way or the other on the Book of Mormon. My faith, while Christian-esque and rooted in Baptist tradition is fairly unconventional. I think anything that get people closer to the ideal of God is a good thing. I just don't see how it matters what ancient people believed.

Like those of the Reagan era? JK

I'm curious what you mean by your church being unconventional. You've mentioned that before.

Not my church, my personal faith. I'm not sure I want to go into all that much detail as I have no intention of having a debate about what I believe. Basically, I see God as unconditional love rather than a guy with a beard. I have grey areas where I'm not really sure how things work but I have faith that if we try to reach the ideal that God represents we are doing the right thing.

That IS my religion!!!! You and I think alike!

 

[mightypeon]

You know, Christianity copy and pasted from a lot of other religions. Did it occur to anyone that a Cross looks a lot like an Ankh for example?
Similiarly, Apocalpytic rebirth thingies also happen in the Norse belief system. Baldr anyone?
Dont forget that the Maya were polytheists. That a big way off from christianity.

Different peoples will get similiar ideas about gods. The Norse Pantheon had parts that could be interchanged with the Greco-Roman one. Just as other parts of it were interchangable with any Native American one. It is MUCH more likely to assume that the Maya (who lived in not exactly the most hospitable place of the world) would also gain some ideas about "glorious apocalyptic rebirths" in the same way the Norse did (and yes, Ragnarok is way older than Christianity). These similiarities come from Humans having similiar ideas and wishes, not from mystical spiritual contact that goes against Temporal causality.

 

[Truthspeaker]

You know, Christianity copy and pasted from a lot of other religions. Did it occur to anyone that a Cross looks a lot like an Ankh for example?
Similiarly, Apocalpytic rebirth thingies also happen in the Norse belief system. Baldr anyone?
Dont forget that the Maya were polytheists. That a big way off from christianity.

Different peoples will get similiar ideas about gods. The Norse Pantheon had parts that could be interchanged with the Greco-Roman one. Just as other parts of it were interchangable with any Native American one. It is MUCH more likely to assume that the Maya (who lived in not exactly the most hospitable place of the world) would also gain some ideas about "glorious apocalyptic rebirths" in the same way the Norse did (and yes, Ragnarok is way older than Christianity). These similiarities come from Humans having similiar ideas and wishes, not from mystical spiritual contact that goes against Temporal causality.

That is an intelligent statement. I must, however respectfully disagree. Sure the state of the Maya was polytheistic when the Spanish came along, but I think they were monotheistic originally when they first landed. Since they brought with them the equivalent of the Hebrew Bible up through Isaiah. Over time they became idol worshippers just like their old Jewish relatives and seemed to inherit a temptation for idol worship.
Just IMO

 

[mightypeon]

I disagree here, the general consensus is that the first colonisation of America happened over the Bering street.

According to the common modell for the first humam colonisation of native America, the whole thing happened about 12000 years ago, way before Judaism even existed.
Models of migration to the New World - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mind you, the Baldr-Christus similiarities were something that the church heavily used in trying to missionarise Germanic and Norse tribes, something similiar was attempted with the Lithuanians (which was a bit more complicated, they did not have a "Jesus look alike" in their Panthenon, but Dievas or Perkunas made some nice Jehovas too.) later on. In the end, it was the Polish crown(Krakau was well worth a mess too), a beautifull princess and a good chance of vengeance against the Teutonic order which faciliated their conversion. If I would be a Spanish conquistador trying to missionarise Atzecs or mayans, I would also equate Christus with Quetzacoatl (although that guy would make a way better Satan than a Christus, flying snakes, human sacrifices and stuff), if that makes them more obedient.

 

[Truthspeaker]

I disagree here, the general consensus is that the first colonisation of America happened over the Bering street.

According to the common modell for the first humam colonisation of native America, the whole thing happened about 12000 years ago, way before Judaism even existed.
Models of migration to the New World - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mind you, the Baldr-Christus similiarities were something that the church heavily used in trying to missionarise Germanic and Norse tribes, something similiar was attempted with the Lithuanians (which was a bit more complicated, they did not have a "Jesus look alike" in their Panthenon, but Dievas or Perkunas made some nice Jehovas too.) later on. In the end, it was the Polish crown(Krakau was well worth a mess too), a beautifull princess and a good chance of vengeance against the Teutonic order which faciliated their conversion. If I would be a Spanish conquistador trying to missionarise Atzecs or mayans, I would also equate Christus with Quetzacoatl (although that guy would make a way better Satan than a Christus, flying snakes, human sacrifices and stuff), if that makes them more obedient.

I will disagree again in that the Bering Strait only dogma is to be reconsidered.

How about the worlds foremost meso american archaeologist Michael Cohn,a non mormon, in his book, "The Maya", he makes it clear in chapter 2 on page 41 sixth edition. "There is little agreement among scientists as to who colonized the americas... Boats must have been available to the people of Eurasia. Since there was no land bridge from Siberia to Australia but that continent must have been reached via maritime travel. Therefore the Siberian landbridge only theory is destroyed. It must be considered a possibility of maritime voyages from other parts of the world into the New World."

 

[Xenophon]

No.

The Christian faith was brought to the Americans by the Iberian powers.

 

[Truthspeaker]

No.

The Christian faith was brought to the Americans by the Iberian powers.

Well the debate could rage on and on, but what I want to prove is the PLAUSIBILITY of the ancient Mayan civilization arriving close to 600 bc in the Meso American area via maritime voyage and setting up shop from there. They claimed to have dealings with Christ and the God of Abraham in the same manner as their fertile crescent progenitors. You have to admit, you can't rule it out. From a debate standpoint, you may not agree with it but must accept the plausibility of this scenario.