Who Are the LDS Apologists Critics Often Quote – Part II

Continuing with the last post, regarding who LDS apologists are, and why they are so labeled by the mainstream sectarian world, the first two examples were covered in the last post. Below continues with the third and additional points:

3. “One apologist has suggested that the “chariots” mentioned in the Book of Mormon might refer to mythic or cultic wheeled vehicles.”

Wrong approach. Once again, the record states “chariot,” and is used at least in one circumstance as a vehicle for a king and his passenger: “They should prepare his horses and chariots, and conduct him forth to the land of Nephi” (Alma 18:9), and that the King and Ammon journeyed forth obviously in the chariots mentioned (Alma 20:6).

4. “Some apologists claim that wheeled toys have been found in tombs indicating that the wheel was known by ancient American peoples. Mainstream archaeologists are not convinced the toys are of ancient origin, since other artifacts were also found in the tombs that are clearly out of place. It is suspected that the toys were introduced into the tombs after the arrival of Europeans on the continent.” In addition, mainstream archaeologists claim that “Chariots would, of course, suggest wheels. This is another gross blunder. The wheel was never used in America before the coming of the Europeans, and was not adopted by the Indians even after they had come into possession of the Spanish horses.... The wheel was never used in making pottery.”

Diane E. Wirth, in her scholarly work, “Parallels,” explains that “until recently, scholars were of the opinion that the potter’s wheel was not used anywhere in pre-Columbian America. But with a new find of a potter's wheel in the excavations of Pashash, Peru, scholars have reevaluated their views. Rotary tools, drill bits, and a spindle were also found there.”

5. “One LDS apologist argues that few chariot fragments have been found in the Middle East dating to Biblical times (apart from the disassembled chariots found in Tutankhamun’s tomb), therefore wheeled chariots did exist in ancient America and it is not unreasonable that archaeologists have not discovered any evidence of them.”

This is an argument that carries no weight with mainstream archaeologists, especially since there is other evidence in the Old World.

6. Critics counter that although few fragments of chariots have been found in the Middle East, there are many images of ancient chariots on pottery and frescoes and in many sculptures of Mediterranean origin, thus confirming their existence in those societies. The absence of these images among pre-Columbian artwork found in the New World, they state, does not support the existence of Old World–style chariots in the New World.

This is why any statement about the Book of Mormon must be well-thought-out, and encompass all the known information regarding the subject. The fact that evidence of chariots from Roman days onward is well known and documented, only adds to the fuel of the term “apologist.”

7. “Another LDS apologist speculates that the word "chariot" in the Book of Mormon may refer to a non-wheeled vehicle.”

Wrong approach. Whatever the chariots of King Lamoni were, they were pulled by horses. This seems obvious in the mention of horses and chariots in the same sentence (Alma 18:9-10,12;20:6). However, these chariots were configured, they would have been something that a horse could pull and fit the regality of a king and his guest.

(See the next post, “Who Are the LDS Apologists Critics Often Quote – Part III,” for more on this subject and to see why apologists trying to change the meanings of words in the scriptural record have led to the very label “apologist.”