Hopewell/Nephite Forts

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
_bomgeography
_Emeritus
Posts: 646
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2016 4:48 am

Re: Hopewell/Nephite Forts

Post by _bomgeography »

The disappearance of the Hopewell civilization as stated by ARCHEOLOGISTS has been associated with everything from famine war or drought.
If you want to contradict the statement about the hopewell disappearance in that you seem to suggest they just changed culture a reference is most useful.

Mormonism is not a cult and the popular North American model has a lot of evidence.

You guys just don't like the fact there is physical evidence for the Book of Mormon. Your on an lds forum saying that we shouldn't discuss a popular Book of Mormon North American model.

Whenever you can't disprove the physical evidence you both resort to calls of racism. It's all over the forum.
Last edited by Guest on Mon Mar 13, 2017 8:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
_bomgeography
_Emeritus
Posts: 646
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2016 4:48 am

Re: Hopewell/Nephite Forts

Post by _bomgeography »

According to revelation Missouri is the border of the Lamanites.

Doctrine and Covenants 54:8
8 And thus you shall take your journey into the regions westward, unto the land of Missouri, unto the borders of the Lamanites.

Every aspect of the Book of Mormon is supported by modern archeology or early accounts by settlers fkndd in Hopewell mounds
_tapirrider
_Emeritus
Posts: 893
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 8:10 am

Re: Hopewell/Nephite Forts

Post by _tapirrider »

bomgeography wrote:The disappearance of the Hopewell civilization as stated by ARCHEOLOGISTS has been associated with everything from famine war or drought.
If you want to contradict the statement about the hopewell disappearance in that you seem to suggest they just changed culture a reference is most useful.

Mormonism is not a cult and the popular North American model has a lot of evidence.

You guys just don't like the fact there is physical evidence for the Book of Mormon. Your on an lds forum saying that we shouldn't discuss a popular Book of Mormon North American model.

Whenever you can't disprove the physical evidence you both resort to calls of racism. It's all over the forum.


The people did not disappear, the culture changed. I am not contradicting the statement about the Hopewell culture disappearance, you are misrepresenting it by claiming that the people themselves disappeared. It is you who is choosing to ignore the facts.

I have already provided you with this source, but here it is again:

New Study of Ancient DNA Reveals Population History of Northeastern North America
https://ohioarchaeology.wordpress.com/2 ... h-america/

"Shook and Smith determined that there were close similarities between the people of the Hopewell Mound Group and the people from the Mississippian/Late Prehistoric sites of Great Western Park, Ontario, and Orendorf and Norris Farms in Illinois. This indicates relatively strong regional continuities in populations from the Hopewell through the Mississippian in this broad region. One conclusion you might draw from these data is that whatever brought about the end of the Hopewell culture, it did not involve the movement of new groups of people into the Northeast."

That makes it clear that your claims are flawed. Nephites with unique DNA markers were not wiped out, invading armies of Lamanites, mixed with "other" non-BofM people with a different DNA haplotype simply did not happen. The people did not disappear, the culture changed. Get it?

One factor that you ignore is that the bow and arrow is not found in the regions of the United States until after the time of the Book of Mormon's final battle story. And the arrival of the bow and arrow is a viable explanation for the shift that marks the end of the Hopewell culture. The absence of the bow and arrow prior to that is another damaging evidence against the Book of Mormon.

See: Adoption of the Bow in Prehistoric North America, John H. Blitz, North American Archaeologist, Vol. 9(2), 1988
http://anthropology.United Airlines.edu/reprints/22.pdf

And read this:
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories ... tures.html

"According to Blitz and Porth, the bow and arrow were adopted in the Ohio Valley between A.D. 300 and 400. During this period, large spear points were replaced by smaller arrowheads. The result, however, was not an increase in social complexity. Far from it.

This period marks the collapse of the Hopewell culture, a far-flung network of cooperating communities that gathered periodically at monumental ceremonial centers, such as Newark’s sprawling earthworks.

You might think that means the social-coercion theory bites the dust.

Not so, according to Blitz and Porth. They argue that the introduction of the bow increased the efficiency of individual hunters so much that they no longer needed to cooperate in large-scale game drives. With one big reason for large gatherings eliminated, the precocious social complexity of the Hopewell disintegrated.

But that’s not the end of the story. In the wake of the Hopewell collapse, the population actually increased, and villages began to pop up across the Ohio valley. In time, these communities began to compete with one another.

Around A.D. 600, a more-sophisticated arrowhead appeared in eastern North America and rapidly replaced the older version. This was followed by an even bigger boost in population, which increasingly became concentrated in large villages.

These villages often were surrounded by a palisade or a ditch, and bodies buried at these sites frequently have arrowheads lodged in their bones, indicating that the bow and arrow were used as military weapons.
"

On other boards, even LDS members have tried to explain to you that the population of the Hopewell culture does not match the Book of Mormon descriptions of large cities. But look at what I have provided you with these sources about the bow and arrow. The increase in populations of villages happened AFTER the Hopewell civilization collapsed. It is time for you to face the fact that it was the same people, they did not disappear. It was a change in culture.

You also refuse to acknowledge the racism that you are preaching and you are lying once again about me. I do not bring it up for the reasons you are falsely stating here and you know that. Stop lying to me. You do preach racism. It is racist to claim that the accomplishments in North America were because of ancient Caucasian migrations who brought skills and knowledge that American Indians didn't have.
Last edited by Guest on Mon Mar 13, 2017 1:26 pm, edited 6 times in total.
_tapirrider
_Emeritus
Posts: 893
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 8:10 am

Re: Hopewell/Nephite Forts

Post by _tapirrider »

bomgeography wrote:According to revelation Missouri is the border of the Lamanites.

Doctrine and Covenants 54:8
8 And thus you shall take your journey into the regions westward, unto the land of Missouri, unto the borders of the Lamanites.

Every aspect of the Book of Mormon is supported by modern archeology or early accounts by settlers fkndd in Hopewell mounds


No, your claim is absolutely not supported. Would you care to explain the Shawnee? Oliver Cowdery preached to them. The Shawnee had been in the Americas practicing their unique burial practices before the fantasy Book of Mormon Jaradites, even before Noah's flood. And those practices were still being performed in the 1830s. See this study: Evidence of Ritualized Mortuary Behavior at the Meyer Site: An Inadvertant Discovery in Spencer County, Indiana (3,300 B.C.) http://www.in.gov/dnr/historic/files/hp ... ournal.pdf
_ClarkGoble
_Emeritus
Posts: 543
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2017 4:55 pm

Re: Hopewell/Nephite Forts

Post by _ClarkGoble »

bomgeography wrote:Excellent point Joseph Smith was probably an expert on the Hopewell Civilization and new the Hopewell disappeared at the exact time the Nephites were wiped out 400AD.

While the cause of the cultural shift away from Hopewell practices may be unclear, this change had occurred by around A.D. 400
(Theler and Boszhardt 2003:121).


I confess it bothers me a tad that you put Hopewell as *the* answer rather than a way of reading the Book of Mormon that most disagree with. It's fine to push your own views of course, but while I recognize most here see this just as your opinion I like noting the numerous ways scripture can defensively be read. *Personally* I don't think the Hopewell makes much sense as the Nephites for a wide variety of reasons.
Post Reply