Hebrew Language/Culture in N. America at 8 Sites, mounting evidence for the B. of Mormon

[kirtland r.m.]

Anti "Mormons" including the 750 or so "Ministries" set up to derail any honest investigation of the Church will continue to loose ground as more and more evidence comes to light(pun intended) on all things surrounding the restoration of the Lord's True Church. A spiritual witness, as we have been told, is vital to stand firm in the often creepy times we live in, but more and more physical evidence is also coming, and it seems will continue to come forth over time.
"Since the coming forth of the Book of Mormon there has never been more profound evidence of its authenticity than today. Arguably among the two greatest linguistic discoveries relating to the authenticity of the Book of Mormon are two ancient stones bearing Hebrew inscriptions that can now finally take their rightful place in the history of the world! Many, if not hundreds of stones inscribed with ancient characters and symbols have been summarily dismissed as fakes and forgeries because it was against the official policy of the scientific community under the Smithsonian Institution, and because linguistic evidence cannot be supported by one or two random artifacts. Recent scientific verifications of several sites and artifacts – numbering eight as of this writing – now establish that people with a knowledge of ancient Hebrew written language and culture were in America during Book of Mormon time frames! Read on for the entire history making story...the case for Book of Mormon written language in America’s Heartland!"http://firmlds.org/hebrew-languagecultu ... a-8-sites/

[larsenb]

As mentioned before, the Wyrick inscription stones (the decalogue and keystones) exhibit Hebrew script that falls outside of the Lehi/Nephi time frame (i.e., they came over in ~584 BC). Therefore, you can't take them as proof of the Book of Mormon. You can use them as evidence that other Hebrew groups came to the New World.

The same could be said of the Menorah mound or earthen representation, if that's what it even really is. It is presented as 9 branched. Temple menorahs were 7 branched. As far as I understand, the 9 branched menorah came into use after the Macabee revolt and the subsequent cleansing of the temple, which took place in about 165 BC.

This is waaay outside of the Lehi/Nephi advent. But again, could be taken as evidence that other Jewish/Hebraic groups came to the New World. Heck, they may have have even linked up w/Nephi/Lamanite remnants and recognized each other, much the same as the Mulekites/Nephites.

Here is what I've written on this before, located at viewtopic.php?f=1&t=50941&p=918504#p918504 with absolutely not one person recognizing OR refuting the points I made:

The Wyrick inscription stones. The first, called The Decalogue stone, used a “ very peculiar ‘post-Exilic’ [came into use AFTER the Babylon captivity] script”. Again, this places it outside of the Nephite/Lamanite/Mulekite time frame. The second stone, called “the Keystone”, used letters that “are nearly standard Hebrew” . . . . “developed at the time of the Dead Sea Scrolls (circa 200-100 B.C.)”. They also have examples of letter ‘dilation’, which only appeared after the 200-100 BC period. Conclusion: the Keystone Hebrew letters again, fall well outside the Nephite/Lamanite/Mulekite time frame. . . . . . . .

My take-away on this is that there could very well have been other Hebrew/Jewish migrations to the New World that had nothing to do with the Nephite/Lamanite groups. Some Cherokees claim this. The Bat Creek, Tennessee Hebrew inscriptions translated by Cyrus Gordon, is another example of this. Others have been found in Brazil, etc., et.

[larsenb]

And why does Meldrum et al., totally ignore (as far as I know; correct me if I'm wrong), the work of Brian Stubbs who has presented MASSIVE evidence for the strong presence of Hebrew, Aramaic, Egyptian elements in the Uto-Aztecan languages? Could it be because speakers of these languages extend all the way into Guatemala and because the Aztecs of Central Mexico were speakers? I.e., they don't fall within his CONUS (not North America) Heartland model template and requirements??