Mormonism

[vampyregirl]

I think its interesting even if you're not religous.

Book of Mormon Evidence and Christ in America: The City of Tulum - YouTube

Book of Mormon Evidence and Christ in America: The City of Tulum - YouTube

[vampyregirl]

Also, its interesting to note that several sixteenth century Spanish historians recorded Indian legends from Mexico to Venezulea of a great white bearded god who descended from the sky.

[Hannibal]

Viracocha

It is an old theory and has been largely disproven by even cursory examination. I blame Von Daniken, but Graham Hancock should shoulder the blame for reinventing it for a new generation of the gullible

[vampyregirl]

Originally Posted by Hannibal

Viracocha

It is an old theory and has been largely disproven by even cursory examination. I blame Von Daniken, but Graham Hancock should shoulder the blame for reinventing it for a new generation of the gullible

I don't think Tulum has anything to do with Viracocha. I put these question to you.
How could Joseph Smith know Zama was the original name for Tulum when that wasn't known until well into the twentieth century?
Who are the three men depicted in the murals inside the temple?
Why is this Mayan temple so eerily similair to the Temple of Solomon as described in the Bible?

[m1k3jobs]

Magic, that can be the only reason. If we don't know the answer then the correct answer is magic.

Simple as that.

Why is this Mayan temple so eerily similair to the Temple of Solomon as described in the Bible?

It couldn't be a coincidence could it? I mean that sort of stuff just doesn't happen in the real world does it.

Sabre Tooth Cat:


Sabre Tooth Marsupial:

[Hannibal]

Originally Posted by vampyregirl

I don't think Tulum has anything to do with Viracocha. I put these question to you..

Never said it did - Viracocha was in relation to this

Originally Posted by vampyregirl

Also, its interesting to note that several sixteenth century Spanish historians recorded Indian legends from Mexico to Venezulea of a great white bearded god who descended from the sky.

Please keep up....

Originally Posted by vampyregirl

How could Joseph Smith know Zama was the original name for Tulum when that wasn't known until well into the twentieth century?.

Tulum was first mentioned by Juan Díaz, a member of Juan de Grijalva's Spanish expedition of 1518, and the first detailed description of the ruins was published by John Lloyd Stephens and Frederick Catherwood in 1843 in the book Incidents of Travel in Yucatan.

Significantly there was also a stele at the site, with an inscribed date of AD 564 which is interpreted to mean that it was most likely built elsewhere and brought to Tulum to be reused.

If you think oral tradition or native legends don't mention orginal names and instead prefer a largely unfounded and fanciful theory then fill your boots

Originally Posted by vampyregirl

Who are the three men depicted in the murals inside the temple?.

Larry Curley and Moe?
Three wise elders of the village?
The avatars for Orions belt?

Trinities are not unique to the bible. A more valid question is how the story of Jesus was acted out in religions that predate christianity? That suggests that it is not christianity that influenced the myths it is vice versa

Originally Posted by vampyregirl

Why is this Mayan temple so eerily similair to the Temple of Solomon as described in the Bible?

According to which translation?

And again buildings share many similarities the globe over. See the above description of the stele

Sory but this whole theory is wet and collapses at even the slightest hint if scruitiny

[Hannibal]

Or alternatively.....

[vampyregirl]

Originally Posted by Hannibal

Never said it did - Viracocha was in relation to this



Please keep up....



Tulum was first mentioned by Juan Díaz, a member of Juan de Grijalva's Spanish expedition of 1518, and the first detailed description of the ruins was published by John Lloyd Stephens and Frederick Catherwood in 1843 in the book Incidents of Travel in Yucatan.

Significantly there was also a stele at the site, with an inscribed date of AD 564 which is interpreted to mean that it was most likely built elsewhere and brought to Tulum to be reused.

If you think oral tradition or native legends don't mention orginal names and instead prefer a largely unfounded and fanciful theory then fill your boots



Larry Curley and Moe?
Three wise elders of the village?
The avatars for Orions belt?

Trinities are not unique to the bible. A more valid question is how the story of Jesus was acted out in religions that predate christianity? That suggests that it is not christianity that influenced the myths it is vice versa



According to which translation?

And again buildings share many similarities the globe over. See the above description of the stele

Sory but this whole theory is wet and collapses at even the slightest hint if scruitiny

Its just a fact Zama as the original name wasn't documented until well into the twentieth century. You can ignore that fact if you want.

[Hannibal]

Again - says who?

Your "fact" has so many holes in it you can drive a bus through it

The settlement was "officially" first found in 1518 - that gives you around 500 years. Do you think that in all that time it might possibly you know have been mentioned at some point? Here is a clue - darn tootin it would have been!

The only mystery here is how such bunk gets swallowed wholesale

[vampyregirl]

Originally Posted by Hannibal

Again - says who?

Your "fact" has so many holes in it you can drive a bus through it

The settlement was "officially" first found in 1518 - that gives you around 500 years. Do you think that in all that time it might possibly you know have been mentioned at some point? Here is a clue - darn tootin it would have been!

The only mystery here is how such bunk gets swallowed wholesale

You know Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon in 1830, long before Catherwood and Stephens book. And you do know he was a farmboy, not a scholar. just making sure you're aware.

[Hannibal]

Yes and you know that 1518 predates that by 300 years or so correct?

[vampyregirl]

Originally Posted by Hannibal

Again - says who?

Your "fact" has so many holes in it you can drive a bus through it

The settlement was "officially" first found in 1518 - that gives you around 500 years. Do you think that in all that time it might possibly you know have been mentioned at some point? Here is a clue - darn tootin it would have been!

The only mystery here is how such bunk gets swallowed wholesale

Then why is there no documentation of it before the 20th century?

[Hannibal]

It is also worth noting that Smith apparently claimed the Moon was inhabited by 6 ft Quakers who lived to be 1,000

You believe that too?

[Hannibal]

Originally Posted by vampyregirl

Then why is there no documentation of it before the 20th century?

Have you looked? Or are you just taking the claim that there was no written account at face value?

Even if there was no written account that would simply reflect the fact that the older term "Zama" was not in common usage - not any more than referring to Ho Chi Minh City as Saigon

Ths is the way of oral tradition - the terms stay in memory even though everything else changes

[vampyregirl]

www.yucatan-revealed.com/Christ-In-Tulum.html for further reading