Iron and Steel in the Book of Mormon

Home

From the Mormon Apologetics and Discussion Message Board

Bill Hamblin

Feb 13 2008, 06:39 PM Post #1

Senior Member: Divides Heaven & Earth Group: Pundit Posts: 938 Joined: 14-October 04 Member No.: 1026

Gen 4:22 tell us that Tubal-cain, an antediluvian descendent of Cain, "worked copper and iron." According to traditional biblical chronology, he lived before the rise of archaeologically verified iron working in the ANE. So, I have two questions: 1- For inerrantists, why do archaeologically unsubstantiated claims of metal-working in the BOM prove it is false, while similar claims in the Bible do not prove it is false. For an Evangelical to reject the historicity of the BOM because of metal-working issues seems a blatant double standard if one insists, at the same time, on the historicity of the Bible, despite its unverified claims of antediluvian metal-working. 2- From a secularist perspective, an account of ancient legendary heroes working unknown metals in the Bible [Tubal-Cain] does not prove the Israelites did not exist. So why does an ancient legendary heroes [Shule the Jaredite] working unknown metals in the BOM prove that Nephites didn't exist? It seems to me we need a consistent standard in evaluating such things, and neither the inerrantists nor the secularists are willing to apply their standards consistently.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=32843&view=findpost&p=1208364563

Bill Hamblin

Feb 14 2008, 09:35 AM Post #18

Senior Member: Divides Heaven & Earth Group: Pundit Posts: 938 Joined: 14-October 04 Member No.: 1026

QUOTE(Jessicka @ Feb 13 2008, 08:03 PM) It's true that an anachronism in the Bible does not prove Israelites did not exist, but I don't think 'secularists' hang their hat solely on a similar anachronism in the Book of Mormon in disbelieving in the existence of Nephites. Could it be that there is evidence supporting the existence of the Israelites where there is none for the Nephites? Thanks for making my point. If it is a faulty argument to reject the existence of the Israelites because they had legendary beliefs about antediluvian metallurgy, it should be equally faulty to reject the existence of the Nephites on this ground. (The question here, I should note, is not whether the Nephites really existed or not. The question is whether the Jaredite metal-working issue is a valid argument against the existence of Nephites. Please keep this distinction in mind. If it is not valid in the case of Israel, it cannot be valid in the case of the BOM.) This post has been edited by Bill Hamblin: Feb 14 2008, 09:44 AM

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=32843&view=findpost&p=1208364769

Bill Hamblin

Feb 14 2008, 09:43 AM Post #19

Senior Member: Divides Heaven & Earth Group: Pundit Posts: 938 Joined: 14-October 04 Member No.: 1026

QUOTE(John Larsen @ Feb 13 2008, 08:32 PM) You are setting up a false dichotomy and you know it. The idea that if there is a mistake in the bible that brings into question the existence of a people who exist today is absurd and no one, save yourself has ever proposed that. It is amazing how much I can learn from other people about things I know, but that I didn't know I knew. Sargon understands the argument. You do not. The argument is: if the fact that Israelites had beliefs about legendary antediluvian metal-working does not prove the Israelites did not exist, then BOM beliefs about legendary Jaredite metal-working should not prove that the Nephites did not exist. The issue at hand is the validity of a particular argument of the critics. It is not whether the Nephites existed. Try to stay focused. There may have been no Nephites and this particular argument of the critics may still be invalid. It is perfectly possible to devise fallacious arguments for true conclusions.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=32843&view=findpost&p=1208364776

Bill Hamblin

Feb 14 2008, 10:27 AM Post #22

Senior Member: Divides Heaven & Earth Group: Pundit Posts: 938 Joined: 14-October 04 Member No.: 1026

QUOTE(John W @ Feb 14 2008, 09:54 AM) The difference appears to be this: The Bible citation indicates that a later, metalworking culture attributed their skills to a prior "mythical" group. In the Book of Mormon, you have a non-steelmaking Nephite group attributing steelmaking to an earlier, possibly mythical group, which is more problematic. I am not saying the Jaredites are mythic. I am saying the attribution of steel-working to Shelum may be legendary. Nephi worked steel/bronze.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?s=99f2a78becbe37418f0528e33e826513&showtopic=32843&view=findpost&p=1208364821

Bill Hamblin

Feb 14 2008, 10:34 AM Post #24

Senior Member: Divides Heaven & Earth Group: Pundit Posts: 938 Joined: 14-October 04 Member No.: 1026

QUOTE(Jaybear @ Feb 14 2008, 09:54 AM) Close, but no cigar. The metallurgy issue raises an anachronism that supports the argument that that the BoM is a work of fiction, and not a translation of an ancient document. Since you can obviously have fictional accounts of real people, the existence of an anachronism rendering a work fiction does not in and of itself prove that people mentioned in the fictional account do not exist. While it is true anachronistic metallurgy (if such there is in the BOM) is consistent with a 19C fictional BOM, it does not prove the BOM is 19C. The accounts of Jaredite Shule legendarily working metals is also consistent with an ancient BOM; that is, ancient peoples anachronistically attributed metal-working to their ancestors, as exemplified by the Bible. The issue, in other words, although consistent with 19C fictional authorship, is not evidence in favor of 19C fictional authorship. QUOTE(John W @ Feb 14 2008, 10:31 AM) Yes, he did, according to the text, which in turn makes the text problematic. But Nephi came from the ANE, where metal-working is well attested. By analogy, would you insist that a Viking text describing metal-working in Vinland is anachronistic because the Inuit did not work metals?

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?s=99f2a78becbe37418f0528e33e826513&showtopic=32843&view=findpost&p=1208364828

Bill Hamblin

Feb 14 2008, 10:55 AM Post #26

Senior Member: Divides Heaven & Earth Group: Pundit Posts: 938 Joined: 14-October 04 Member No.: 1026

QUOTE(John W @ Feb 14 2008, 10:40 AM) It depends on how you define evidence. Much of what passes for evidence in favor of the Book of Mormon is really nothing more than parallelism, and what you have here is something that parallels quite nicely with 19th-century mound builder mythology. The decision one has to make is which is more likely. Obviously we disagree in our conclusions. I note that you now attempt to bring other assumptions and issues to obfuscate the original argument. The original question is a simple one, and you have tacitly agreed with my position by refusing to engage the actual argument. QUOTE The accounts of Jaredite Shule legendarily working metals is also consistent with an ancient BOM; that is, ancient peoples anachronistically attributed metal-working to their ancestors, as exemplified by the Bible. QUOTE(John W @ Feb 14 2008, 10:40 AM) I would if there were accounts that the Vikings had become politically and culturally dominant among the Inuit and that Viking technology had been taught to the Inuit and practiced by them. Seems pretty obvious to me. That certainly happened in the Greenland Viking colonies, which lasted a couple of centuries. Yet the Inuit still did not adopt sword making metallurgy from them.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?s=99f2a78becbe37418f0528e33e826513&showtopic=32843&view=findpost&p=1208364856

Bill Hamblin

Feb 6 2008, 06:38 PM Post #199

Senior Member: Divides Heaven & Earth Group: Pundit Posts: 938 Joined: 14-October 04 Member No.: 1026

It should be noted that iron working was introduced to the New World at least six times, in addition to some indigenous development. Inuit from Bering Straights Vikings in Vinland (eleventh century, introduced and lost--a cautionary tale for critics) Anglo-French in NE Spanish in Mexico Spanish in Peru Portuguese in Brazil (the latter four are contemporaneous, but should be viewed as separate introductions because the regions where iron working was introduced are culturally and geographically discontiguous.) There are probably others. So, how many Native American tribal peoples adapted their own indigenous iron working technologies from these introdcutions? As far as I am aware, none did. Indeed, IIRC, some tribes, like the Yanomami of Amazonia still do not have indigenous metal working technology some 500 years after the definitive introduction of metal working by the Europeans in the sixteenth century. There is far more involved in developing and transmitting metal-working technology than mere existence of such technology. Some clarification of assumptions are in order. By the way, technically speaking, the BOM never mentions "smelting."

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=32358&view=findpost&p=1208359236

Bill Hamblin

Feb 6 2008, 07:27 PM Post #201

Senior Member: Divides Heaven & Earth Group: Pundit Posts: 938 Joined: 14-October 04 Member No.: 1026

QUOTE(SolarPowered @ Feb 6 2008, 07:09 PM) It does, however, say, "he did molten out of the hill." I don't know what that might mean, other than "smelting." I note also that the brother of Jared "did molten out of a rock sixteen small stones," for whatever that's worth in interpreting the word "molten." Edit: Also, regarding Nephi making tools with which to make a ship, it says, "And it came to pass that I did make tools of the ore which I did molten out of the rock." I note a couple interesting things here: First, it's not the "ore" that he "molten[ed]", it was the rock. "Molten[ing]" the rock resulted in "ore." I have no idea what to make of that. Second, Nephi describes what seems to be a bellows forge, which I understand won't get hot enough to melt iron. One can, however, use such a forge to refine ore into sponge iron, which can then be worked into tools. That would appear to suggest that perhaps "molten" doesn't involve producing actual liquid metal. You are assuming here that Nephi is working iron. It could just as easily be copper. As noted, steel in the KJV always refers to copper, not iron. There are various ways of using heat to work metal that don't involve liquifying and casting.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=32358&view=findpost&p=1208359277

Bill Hamblin

Feb 6 2008, 09:57 PM Post #205

Senior Member: Divides Heaven & Earth Group: Pundit Posts: 938 Joined: 14-October 04 Member No.: 1026

QUOTE(SolarPowered @ Feb 6 2008, 09:37 PM) What John is talking about is smelting of steel, not of other metals. The argument is that, because iron melts at a much higher temperature, the smelting of other metals is not evidence of the smelting of steel. So smelting of silver and copper in ancient times doesn't tell us much the smelting of steel. This is what is seen in the Old World--widespread smelting of copper happened long before widespread smelting of iron. Have we still not grasped the fact that "steel" in the KJV translation always refers to copper, or copper-based alloys?

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=32358&view=findpost&p=1208359354

Bill Hamblin	Feb 6 2008, 10:46 PM Post #214
Senior Member: Divides Heaven & Earth Group: Pundit Posts: 938 Joined: 14-October 04 Member No.: 1026	By the way, we know that Vikings introduced iron working in Vinland around 1000 AD. We also know iron working was known in French Canada in the 16th century. Are we therefore to assume that iron working was known in Canada from 1000 AD through the 16th century.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=32358&view=findpost&p=1208359389