I had the same experience touring a mesoamerican ruin. When I asked about the many horses we were seeing in the wall drawings, I was told they couldn't be horses because "everybody knows" there were no horses.
I took my junior-high Spanish students to Mexico on various occasions. On one trip we had a very unusual guide. He claimed to be LDS and took us to places few others have ever visited. He took us to Tulum,the ruins of the fortress that looks out over the Caribbean. Inside one of the ancient buildings he pointed to some ancient drawings on the inner wall. There among the other beasts was a horse. I've never heard of anyone else talking about this source of historical information.
“A horse is a horse, of course, of course . . . !” Ronn!
You made my day. That, Sir, was a wonderful brain tickler.
Jim, I agree that a testimony of the scriptures will always be worth more than any physical evidence. Physical evidence, though, is a nice bonus for believers.
I read a history book that gave credit to a Catholic priest when in the newly discovered America said he didn't see any horses where he was. That didn't mean there weren't any horses in other areas.
how many times do we have to go around this story. I was 8 years old when I visited the Argentine Museum of Natural History in Buenos Aires. There on display was a pre-Colombian horse.
Curiously, unicorns and dragons are mentioned in the Old Testament. Added to the strangly named animals in the Book of Mormon
Interesting article. Of course there were horses on the American Continent prior to the flood. And if they were brought here by the Jaredites they would have survived for the arrival of Lehi and Nephi. Horses are mentioned specifically as being created on the 5th day in the temple endowment. Deer and Elk are not. The Book of Mormon is a compilation, a condensation and therefore many specifics are left out. Joseph's translation is perfect. If he wrote horse that is what the Lord meant him to write. I strongly disagree with using the anachronism theory to explain why horses are mentioned. We know over 150 things about the ancient americans and their culture that were not known when the book was published. We have two animals mentioned that we do not know what are. Curreloms and Cummoms. Many have speculated that one was a llama perhaps the other an alpaca. Well, there goes the anachronism theory. I am sure we will understand what they are when the time is right.
I live in Mexico and close to where I live were found the remains of horses dated back to 600 BC. This was in Peña de Bernal, Queretaro. The archaeological world is keeping that quiet because it does not coincide with their theories. The world will finally give "proof" to the Book of Mormon, for those not to stubborn or closed minded to hear. Until then a spiritual confirmation and testimony of that great book is better than all the archeological "proof" put together. Stop trying to be politically correct about the Book of Mormon. It is true, literally. It is the most perfect book upon the face of the earth and the cornerstone of our religion and I believe that if Joseph Smith put the word horse in the book, he meant horse.
“A horse is a horse, of course, of course . . . !”
(_Somebody_ had to say it . . . )
Email (will not be published)
Daily news, articles, videos and podcasts sent straight to your inbox.