Question About Rod Meldrum Theories

[ANACO]

Really? This shows either your ignorance, or willingness to ignore facts.

For starters, Joseph Smiths letter to John Bernhisel which he wrote thanking him for Stephens and Catherwoods book on Mesoamerica. he said that the contents of that book "corresponds with & supports the testimony of the Book of Mormon." He continues by saying "I have read the volumes with the greatest interest & pleasure & must say that of all histories that have been written pertaining to the antiquities of this country it is the most correct luminous & comprihensive." Joseph Smith, "Church History," Times and Seasons 3 no. 9 (1

March 1842), 707

Seems pretty obvious to me that he wasn't speaking of the Great Lakes region.

In that statement, there's no indication that Joseph Smith said he learned anything. He's relying on his previously gained knowledge to make a statement. Look at Page 98 of the book.

Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas and Yucatan ..., Volume 1, 1841 http://books.google....epage&q&f=false I addressed this in the Focused Discussions on this site.

[ANACO]

I've had enough of this. Good night, fellow Mormons who believe the Prophets of God don't know geography. No hard feelings. Have a great Sabbath Day.

[ERayR]

NO! You're implication is low. I'm not a member of any bom geography organization! How about you? Do you get a cut of the book sales at FAIRLDS? Are you given the podium at its conferences to hock your books? How about $$ from the yet to be published Mormon Codex? Or are you a part of MormonInterpretor.com asking for donations? Were you a paid member of FARMS before getting fired by email?

I just think it's ridiculous that a BoM Geo. Theory has to claim Joseph Smith didn't know what he was talking about to have to believe in it. You've all proven my point.

Do to your vehement:stance I just had to make sure. I have noted before your tendency to misrepresent what Mwso-American adherents are saying. Nobody is denigrating Joseph Smith. They are saying that he learned line upon line, precept upon precept. 2Nephi 28:30. Joseph didn't have a vision and wake up with his memory banks fully loaded with nothing else to learn.

[Anijen]

I've had enough of this. Good night, fellow Mormons who believe the Prophets of God don't know geography. No hard feelings. Have a great Sabbath Day.

At the time the Book of Mormon was published, Joseph knew the same amount of geography as his Palmyra neighbor did. We have to remember Joseph did not have much of an education when he was translating. I am glad you have had enough, your drivel was complimenting my patience.

I do not take ANACO comments as anything close to serious. He/She obviously is closed minded, refuses to have a respectable dialogue, and lastly whose knowledge of the Book of Mormon and geography is at a high school level. I say high school because he/she is locked onto the heartland theory by emotion which is usually a marker of following someone blindly and lacks the discipline to research for him/herself.

For example Anaco writes the following paragraph;

And it came to pass that the Spirit said unto me: Look! And I looked and beheld a tree; and it was like unto the tree which my father had seen; and the beauty thereof was far beyond, yea, exceeding of all beauty; and the whiteness thereof did exceed the whiteness of the driven snow.

Anaco writes this as a defense to snow mentioned in the BofM thereby allegedly supporting a Heartland model. The problem Anaco did not look deeper into the verse and realizes it is the only time in the entire Book of Mormon that snow is mentioned and it is mentioned before Nephi has even built the boat, they were still in the Old World.

[livy111us]

In that statement, there's no indication that Joseph Smith said he learned anything. He's relying on his previously gained knowledge to make a statement. Look at Page 98 of the book.

Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas and Yucatan ..., Volume 1, 1841 http://books.google....epage&q&f=false I addressed this in the Focused Discussions on this site.

Soooooo.....he is going off of previously gained knowledge of BOM geography in Mesoamerica before he read the book and made a public statement?

Either way, you are dismissing statements from Joseph Smith that you don't agree with. Plain and simple.

[cursor]

Your own father in his writings changed his ideas about the climate and weather in Mesoamerica.

Yes, he loves learning new things.

He doesn't, however, at any point suggest that he's at all convinced that any geographic setting sporting snow, ice, freezing cold shouldn't be patently eliminated from consideration as Book of Mormon lands. It's adequately clear that the setting enjoyed a _{tropical climate.}

_{And you admit, if it didn't happen in Mesoamerica, then it happened in North America.}

_{Um ... not at all.}

_{Why don't you address the flaws of your own 500 x 200 mile theory?}

_{Please delineate what you see as identifiable flaws. Thanks.}

_{The Land of Promise is mentioned in the 2nd chapter of the Book of Mormon. You think it was in Mesoamerica among the Maya- i.e. Lehi was delivered from Jerusalem and led to the Land of Promise to live among savages.}

_Laughable.

_{Excuse me, but how might the fact that "savages" inhabited [a portion of] a land precludes it from being God's declared "Land of Promise?"}

[Hestia]

ANACO has left the building.

[livy111us]

Again.....

ANACO has left the building.

Again.....

[DNA truthseeker]

As Herr Professor Doktor Sorenson said a month or so ago: "Where are the cities? Where are the writings?"

That's a good place to start.

Shall we start here?

Dr. Roger Kennedy, former director of the Smithsonian's American History Museum, as published in his book, Hidden Cities - The Discovery and Loss of Ancient North American Civilization - Free Press, 1994 wrote, "Few realize that some of the oldest, largest, and most complex structures of ancient archaeology were built of earth, clay and stone right here in America, oin the Ohio and Mississippi valleys. From 6,000 years ago until quite recently, North America was home to some of the most highly advanced and well organized civilizations in the world - complete with cities, roads and commerce." With over 200,000 earthen walls, embankments, fortifications, temple mounds, burial mounds etc. scattered throughout the Ohio and Mississippi river valley's, with non-LDS scholars claiming the overall work accomplished by the Hopewell to be possibly even greater than that of the pyramids of Egypt or the Great Wall of China (Dr. Bradley Leper - Head Archaeologist of Ohio) and with the incredibly advanced knowledge of astronomical alignments, high mathematics and precision geometric complexes, it is hard to imagine this all being accomplished by a few small clans of hunter gatherers. Has there ever been similar massive works accomplished by hunter gatherers in human history?

For an informative article on the ONLY non-LDS scientifically verified HEBREW writing anywhere in the America's that dates to Book of Mormon time frames you might want to read

Hebrew Written Language CONFIRMED in Hopewel Mound in Tennessee!

One may ask if there has ever been found and verified any Hebrew or Egyptian language evidence anywhere in Mesoamerica? The Mayan language has no relation to either of the two languages mentioned in the Book of Mormon record. Why not? Yes, the Maya had a written language, it just doesn't happen to be any language mentioned by the Book of Mormon.

[DNA truthseeker]

It is not the choice of geography that bothers me about Brother Meldrum, it is his methodology and treatment of those who disagree with him....

In brief...

In the first case, he uses what he wants of the science, often pulling stuff totally out of context to come to the conclusions he wants while disregarding the technical limitations attached to the data (such as the time frame for the presence of certain DNA). In the second, he accuses those who disagree with him of ignoring the prophets while he himself does not take into account everything that is said by them, plus he labels others as apostates way too easily.

Currently he/his followers has/have made a claim that certain former employees of the NAMI were fired because of their treatment of him when there is no evidence to support his claim and in fact, the same reasoning that caused them to be let go would be used for any of his vocal supporters (not wanting to engage in apologetics, wanting to go a more academic route).

In his latest email sent out, I believe he makes a claim that Hugh Nibley was a "Heartlander" based on use of certain quotes while ignoring others.

He seems to feel that the more celebrities he can attach to his "movement" the more evidence there is that his claims are accurate. The self promotion is a big issue for me.

Speaking of methodology and treatment of those who disagree...

You mention that I have taken out of context my conclusions, and then you use an an example the time frame of the arrival of haplogroup X into the America's which is based, as I have provided direct quotations from scientific journals, on humans and chimps sharing a common ancestor 5-6 million years ago. This form of DNA dating, called phylogenetic dating, was found not to match with observed DNA mutation rates of actual grandmother-granddaughter lineages. Geneticists themselves have had a hot debate over the dating as outlined in my book ReDiscovering the Book of Mormon Remnant Through DNA which is available for free download at http://www.bookofmormonevidence.org/downloads.php. Just because I don't automatically accept that humans came from chimps does not mean that I have taken things out of context. I disagree with the premise and have outlined my reasons for questioning the dating. I did not ignore it.

I have simply shown historically documented cases in which the Prophet Joseph Smith has himself claimed revelation (Wentworth letter, American Revivalist account, Zelph accounts, Letter to Emma etc.) which is indicative of a North American setting and then compared his words to those of Mesoamerican scholars who have claimed his ignorance on the matter, or that he later changed his mind and reniged on his earlier revelations. I am not the one claiming revelation, Joseph Smith did. Also, I have not ignored any known historical account by the Prophet Joseph Smith, I have only required that any account be historically verified as being the prophets, and not an unknown source such as the much vaunted Times and Seasons unsigned articles which are the foundations upon which all Mesoamerican theories have been built, yet no one knows who actually wrote them, although some have speculated using word print analysis to try to make connections that are not verifiable. In contrast, every revelatory account in support of the Heartland Model by Joseph Smith are documented by official Church historians to have been those of the Prophet Joseph. Before making further embarrasing comments regarding the Heartland research you should first at the very least know what the Heartland research is claiming, which is obvious that you don't by your very questions. You can learn more about the historical facts by reading the article Did Joseph Smith Identify Zarahemla in Guatemala? You can also watch (for FREE, contrary to the misinformed assumptions to the contrary that I only share this research for money) the entire first two DVD's of by 5 DVD series titled Book of Mormon Evidence by going to my VIDEO GALLERY and watching video's 1-15 of the more than 80 free videos located there. In the Joseph Knew videos I address nearly every known account used by Mesoamerican promoters and demonstrate their lack of historical verification. Again I would ask that you be at least modestly informed of our positions and research before attacking it.

Regarding FARMS/NAMI firings. Our FIRM Foundation official statement can be found HERE. Where is a claim that the firings were because of their treatment of me and other Heartland model researchers? I simply observed that nearly all of those fired have been vocal and hostile critics of the Heartland Model and also pointed out that FARMS was at least partially organized for the purpose of promoting Mesoamerican theories, as evidenced by Daniel Peterson's own words and the FARMS logo sporting a Mayan glyph.

In an upcoming article I debunk the claim that Hugh Nibley was a Mesoamerican adherant using his own quotes. The article is not yet complete and has not been released so I fail to understand how the claim that I have ignored quotes has any validity since you have no idea what I have or have not covered. Are all your accusations so noteworthily and blatantly false?

[DNA truthseeker]

Speaking of Meldrum's claims about Hugh Nibley, a few years ago, I did a post here in regard to a Nibley quote that had been posthumously wrenched from context for a full page ad that Meldrum put in the Tribune (I think). Meldrum's drafting the decesased author of Approaching Zion as a shill for a money-making conference still annoys me. A more informative response to Meldrum compared to Nibley is here:

http://www.bmaf.org/node/340

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

I have not released my claims regarding Dr. Nibley, however I have directly quoted him. Whether it was "wrenched from context" is subjective and I encourage the reading of all of Dr. Nibley's related articles which in many cases promotes the Hopewell Mound builders and thus the Heartland Model geography. Try reading his book "An Approach to the Book of Mormon" or "Ancient Temples: What Do They Signify?" Ensign, Sept. 1972 p 47 and see for yourself if I am taking Dr. Nibley out of context. Anyone can make such a claim (and Mesoamerican supporters who have nothing better to offer often resort to such tactics). In his article Kirk Magleby tries mightily to make the case that Dr. Nibley was a Mesoamericanist, but offers only his own personal accounts rather than any written statements by Dr. Nibley himself.

While it may be annoying to you that I have used direct quotes from Dr. Nibley that question Mesoamerican theories, your "methodology" is to attempt to characterize me as a money-grubbing hoaxster for spending years of my life conducting this research and offering educational materials to help in educating others of the facts surrounding this new Book of Mormon geography model. Isn't this a bit disingenuous? How, pray tell, would one go about sharing information to the membership of the Church without offering some things for sale to at least cover the costs of years of research and production of the materials? I have not gone about soliciting financial donations in order to share this research, but instead have offered at reasonable and normal costs my materials which I have used to create more detailed and improved materials and research. And I have paid for nearly all of it myself without financial benefactors. I don't spend much of my time soliciting donated funds as some Mesoamerican promotion organizations do, who then create and offer for sale their materials to Church members resulting from those donations. Doesn't this strike you as somewhat hypocritical to continue with character assassination attempts and howling "priestcraft" when I or other Heartlanders offer our hard-earned research in a DVD or book, yet crow about John Sorenson's books offered for sale?

How many books, tours, travel advertisements etc. have been targeted to LDS members promoting Mesoamerica? Have you ever stepped into any Deseret Book store and wandered into the Book of Mormon (geography) section? Maybe you can tell me who is promoting and trying to sell more books and DVD's, the Heartland Model proponents or Mesoamericanists? Any how many years has this promotion gone on without abatement? How many people have purchased $3000-$4000 per person tours to so-called "Book of Mormon Lands" while there is not a single location anywhere in Mesoamerica where it is known that any Book of Mormon event actually occurred. At least in North America we have 5 locations 1. (real) Hill Cumorah, 2. Zelph's Mound, 3. Nephite altar at Adam-ondi-Ahman, and the temples sites of 4. Manti and 5. St. George which are ALL KNOWN locations of Book of Mormon events (and BTW, they are ALL located in North America while not one is located in Mesoamerica). So stop with the obvious character attacks and try to address the research. Become familiar with it first. I am confident most of those reading this blog will appreciate it.

[DNA truthseeker]

I don't remember seeing any of the names I usually associate with the Mesoamerican geography theory calling into question the personal faithfulness of those who disagree with them on geography.

Honestly? Have you not read the FAIR "reviews" or even in this very thread where some have resorted to declaring my offering educational materials as "priestcraft." FAIR claims that I declared to have received revelation for the Church on the matter and their entire reviews are based on the supposition that I am only sharing this research for money. Many attacks against me have been based on assumptions about my motives rather than try to address the research. Read the articles and ask if you would like to have such derogatory claims leveled at yourself and whether they are personal or simply addressing the research. You might be surprised if you put yourself into my shoes in these articles. I have not attacked the many problems with Mesoamerican theories, but rather have tried to simply offer our Heartland solutions. Where are our attack articles like those on BMAF and the now defunct FARMS/FARMS Review which attempt to dismantle Mesoamerican theories? You won't find them on our websites. Read the article from Meridian Magazine and our response HERE. If there is any attacking going on, it is coming from the Mesoamerican side, not the Heartland Model side.

Case in point.... livy111us has made it his life's quest to bad mouth anything he finds about the Heartland model research anywhere on the internet. He claims to be neutral but if one simply looks at all of his comments on Amazon, for example, he has singled me out personally and written lengthy negative articles in his efforts to dissuade members of the Church from even looking at our research. He is associated with the FAIR organization and has been hostile toward me and this research for four years now, always stalking our every move to place his hatred of me and this research up online as fast as he can. I have not done so against him or any other Mesoamerican theorist, but have encouraged members to look at both geographies and come to their own conclusions. Why can't the Mesoamerican scholar's research bear the same? Why don't they encourage folks to study out the research and come to their own conclusions? Because they know the devastating results of members becoming informed with the facts...if a member objectively looks into this research there is an extremely high probability that they will consider the Heartland model a stronger, more robust theory. Our surveys have shown it consistently for the past 4 years. It is growing exponentially and has become a definite and overwhelming challenge to the theories that consider Guatemala to be a better fit for a "land of liberty" and "mighty Gentile nation above all other nations" than the United States of America. Read The Scriptural Basis for the Heartland Model Geography

When someone uses a screenname, do not publish anyone's name without their permission.

[DNA truthseeker]

I have sat in on a meldrum presentation and have a video of a Mark Wright presentation. I can attest in the difference in the two in many ways.

Meldrum has an elitist attitude and a ethnocentric personality, and when questioned he is condescending and incredibly contentious.

Wright is a humble presenter, yet incredibly gifted in his knowledge of Mesoamerica and how it fits in with the setting for the Book of Mormon. When he is questioned he is friendly and respectful.

Another feeling I had as I sat in on Meldrums presentation is to me it appeared to be canned (staged) with ringers in the audience to respond and lead him on to where he wants to go, any opposing questions are treated with jeers from these same ringers. In my personal opinion It felt and looked like an advertisement for a time share and a DVD market. It is one reason I plainly and without embarrassment say to me it appeared to be priestcraft than anything else.

I will not pull any punches. I know others feel the opposite. I have family members swearing he [Meldrum] will be called as the next General Authority. But for me no thank you.

Might I humbly suggest that those reading this blog take the time to actually watch for themselves my presentations and see if you agree with Anijen's personal assesment of my presentation is like? Anijen is offering nothing more than his opinion about my supposed "elitist attitude" and "ethnocentric personality." Or that I am "condescending" or "incredibly contentious" in when being questioned, all of which is false and meant only again to dissuade folks from learning the truth about the research. So rather than taking Anijen's opinion, watch the video's themselves and compare them to Mark Wright and determine the facts in the case for yourself. Or better yet, come to an upcoming presentation or conference and see for yourself.

Another "feeling" Anijen had was that I had "ringers" in the audience that "jeered" others? Really? You can bet that he/she had precisely NO evidence to support that bogus claim. Again my motives are brought up to support the 'feelings' or vibes he/she somehow got. And there we have another "priestcraft" supposition without evidence. Yet I am the one doing the attacking? Please show me ANY time I've accused any Mesoamerican enthusiast of committing priestcraft. I never have.

Really? You have family members who swear I will become the next General Authority? I honestly do not have any idea where that idea would have come from. But it does sound vagely familiar to the statement made some years ago by FAIR president Scott Gordon about how I probably thought I was going to become the next apostle or something such as that. That would be funny if it weren't so blatanty without a shred of evidence. My aspiration to be the next General Authority? None. Would I serve the Church in any capacity they should ask of me? Absolutely, and without question.

[DNA truthseeker]

From his website:

(http://www.bookofmor...nce.org/FAQ.php)

I think it is pretty clear that the reason that Bro. Meldrum believes that the Nephites lived up by the Great Lakes is because he is convinced that the United States is more promised than the rest of the Americas (I wonder if he thinks American Samoa and US embassies are part of the Promised Land!). Everything else is just him trying to find evidence to back up his opinion. To me it seems more political than anything.

It is political. The Book of Mormon prophets said it would be a "nation" that would occupy their lands in the latter days. The Lord in his visit to the Nephites declared that there are two covenant promised lands. They are "more promised" than other lands because He has prepared them from before the foundations of this earth with all that they need to be able to bless the other nations of the earth (spiritually and physically). See the article The Scriptural Basis for the Heartland Model Geography

This does not mean that other lands are somehow inferior or that their inhabitants cannot attain the blessings of the gospel, only that there is a covenant land and a covenant people of God and I am not the one who proposed it. If you don't like the fact that there are covenant lands than take it up with the prophets and the scriptures. The United States of America is the only nation that God said he raised up men for the very purpose of its formation. If you disagree, please show us the revelations that support the idea that the governments of Mexico and Guatemala were set up and established by men raised up to that purpose by God. Please help us understand how these two Mesoamerican nations qualify as the latter day nation that would be referred to by Book of Mormon prophets 7 times in the text as "the land of liberty" and then explain how the United States was/is not that land.

[DNA truthseeker]

In my own view, I am opposed to the Heartland view for many reasons, not the least of which is that the map just does not fit the Book of Mormon. Besides that, in the Heartland theory--unless things have changed recently, the river Sidon flows in the wrong direction. That is a big problem. Sidon in the Book of Mormon flows from south to north. In the Heartland theory it is the opposite so they have to situate Zarahemla in a river loop. It still changes nothing since the river Sidon flowed from the region of Manti, and Manti is south of Zarahemla in the Book of Mormon, with Manti at a higher elevation. The heartland theory has to do the opposite of this.

Another serious problem is Book of Mormon descriptions of weather patterns. They just don't fit the region. They do fit Mesoamerica, though--perfectly.

Use of alcoholic beverages and a huge number of them hinted at. In the Heartland, the natives went so long without use of alcohol that the genes required for alcohol metabolism did not work as well as for those who lived in Mesoamerica. In Mesoamerica, on the other hand, the people outside of the Book of Mormon made alcoholic beverages out of all sorts of things. The same is implied for the Book of Mormon peoples with all their alcoholic beverages.

The practices of the sacrifice of human blood are Mesoamerican practices (the Book of Mormon mentions that practice and tells how useless it is).

Dyeing oneself in human blood before battle is a Mesoamerican scare tactic and practice.

The kingship structure of the Maya and other Mesoamerican groups compares favorably with that of the Lamanites in the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon Lamanites had kings over lands and cities, with a great king set over them all. Mesoamericans shared a similar structure. I know of no valid evidence that this was the case in the Heartland of what would later be called the United States. What we see there is a collection of loose federations of tribes.

If the following passage in the Book of Mormon refers to Columbus as has been interpreted so for generations, then the Heartland theory is toast on this ground alone.

This is reminiscent of the following:

Problem: Columbus never landed in North America, much less in the heartland thereof. He did, on the other hand, make Mesoamerican landings.

There is a lot more that could be said about this but I have run out of time for the moment.

1. Map doesn't fit? Have you seen the two hour recorded presentation (disk #5) of the DVD series Book of Mormon Evidence? If not, you have no basis for your opposition to the Heartland Model. It fits the geography beautifully.

2. Apparently you have not even read my article regarding the River Sidon as the Mississippi river. May I suggest you read the article before coming to your conclusions and opposition to the model. You can read it for FREE on the website at The Mississippi; Could it have been River Sidon? In the Heartland model there is no "river loop" as you claim.

3. Weather patterns? Don't fit? Really? You have apparently not seen disk 4 of the DVD series on the 25 correlations which includes an entire section on weather and climate. Mesoamerica doesn't fit at all. The Book of Mormon claims there were "seasons of the year" and that this was "the nature of the climate." (Alma 46:40). The book of Mormon thrice mentions frozen water (hail, snow) and only twice does it mention rain! Does anyone really believe that it only rained twice in the entire Book of Mormon history? It would seem that weather wasn't a particularly important use of the limited space on the plates. Why doesn't it speak of rainy seasons like Mesoamerica has, or monkeys, or palm trees or iguana's which are all indigenous to Mesoamerica? Why did the Nephites and Lamanites wear "thick clothing" and have "coats" and "cloaks" to wear if wandering Mesoamerica? What about the fact that whirlwinds are mentioned in the Book of Mormon but do not occur in Mesoamerica, yet the Heartland of North America is "tornado alley"? What about the migrating beasts spoken of in the book which is caused by seasonal changes in weather? Either you have not seen any of the DVD's or the books or you are not familiar with the facts in this case. This was addressed years ago, why are you saying these things if you have not even seen our research on them?

4. Alcoholic beverages? I'm surprised you even brought this one up because it demolished the Mesoamerican models. The Nephites made "wine" which they certainly understood to be made with grapes because of their Hebrew traditions and the color of grapes signifying the blood of Christ. Grapes are indigenous to North America but are entirely lacking in Mesoamerica. Only in the last few years have any grapes been grown in Guatemala. They don't grow there naturally because they require cold weather. Making alcoholic beverages from corn (as the Maya did) would not satisfy the requirement of a sacramental offering or drink. The Nephites made "wine" not just "alcohol" and they got the Lamanites drunk on occasion with it. The lack of grapes in Mesoamerica is a major stumbling block to the theory.

5. Human sacrifice is a solely "Mesoamerican" practice? Really? What makes you so sure that the ancient people in America's Heartland didn't do human sacrifices? What evidence do you have for that assumption? How is this evidence that the Book of Mormon occurred in Mesoamerica?

6. The Kingship structure of the Maya make them Lamanites? Not according to FARMS/NAMI who published an article specifically ruling out the Maya as being the Nephites, yet somehow the Nephites were "among the Maya" even through their entire lands (according to Mesoamerican scholars) could easily fit into the southern half of the state of Utah! So we have the Nephites, the Lamanites and the Maya all occupying a land no bigger than half of Utah yet nowhere in the text of the Book of Mormon is any other people specifically mentioned, nor is there any mention of others by the Maya who would surely be looked upon as intruders into their lands, especially with their strange Hebrew customs and their own kings and rulers extending throughout their history. The Hopewell mound builders were a very highly organized civilization with political structure as well. Having kings is not exclusive to the Maya, right? Aren't there other civilizations that had kings? Why is this then some kind of definitive evidence that the Maya were in any way Book of Mormon related? Loose federations of tribes do not accomplish the massive ceremonial earthworks encoding the entire plan of salvation as only LDS would know it, such as were built by them in Newark, Ohio. You should take your study of the Heartland model more seriously before making any further unsubstantiated and easily refutable ignorant claims.

7. Please give me the chapter and verse in the Book of Mormon that claims that "Christopher Columbus" was the one spoken of or even that there was some requirement for that person to be the very first explorer to arrive. What? It doesn't say anything about a requirement for this man who is "wrought upon" to be the first nor is the name "Columbus" ever written in the text. Columbus, according to your maps, never set foot in Guatemala or Mexico either, so how does this help your Mesoamerican theories? Are you implying that because Columbus wrote about being moved upon by the Holy Ghost that he is the only one who has ever had such an experience? Have you read about the fact that Columbus wrote that the aboriginals he discovered would make good slaves? Have you read about John Cabbot, the first European explorer to land in North America and what was his take on the Indians? He began to preach Christianity to them and built the first Christian Church in the New World and some claim (such as Noah Webster) that he arrived BEFORE Columbus. What about that?

[DNA truthseeker]

CFR since there are "a number" of books that "present credible evidence" please list a few of these books and list some of the credible evidence that is used.

I study the archaeology or the Northeast area especially the New York, Canada area and have yet to find evidence that has more weight than that of Mesoamerica. IOW I am willing to bet that I could list two just as credible evidences for Mesoamerica against everyone listed for the heartland.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with using science to help understand and strengthen your understanding of the scriptures. The leaders of our church from Joseph Smith to President Monson has not discouraged this fact but constantly encourage it.

You are correct we should use the Book of Mormon. However if we are studying settings to the book, then we now are including the physical world with all the sciences available to help us understand that setting. Also the authors of the Book of Mormon know more about the setting of the Book of Mormon than anyone in this modern era, that would include Joseph Smith and the modern day prophets. I would strongly encourage to place a greater importance in their words regarding the area they lived before those of modern day prophets. I am not throwing our modern day prophets words out and find them very important. Bottom line is as far as the setting of the Book of Mormon it is important to know that Mormon, Alma, Helaman, Nephi, knew more about the area where they actually lived more than Joseph, Elder Mark E. Peterson, President Marion G. Romney etc where they thought they lived.

Lastly Mesoamerica is an excellent fit. If we choose to use the opinions of our modern day prophets we must recognize that many of them including Joseph included Mesoamerica for some of the setting of the Book of Mormon. Most Heartland followers completely reject any place in Mesoamerica and focus on a United States and no other place. And they cite "promise land" quotes to support that idea. They neither understand the term promised land or the multiple meanings it has.

OK, I'll bite. How about providing us all with just one (1) non-LDS scientific verification of Hebrew or Egyptian language use during Book of Mormon Nephite time frames among the Maya civilization or whoever you think the Nephites were (since you don't have any actual target civilization to be the Nephites, according to FARMS). Or how about any Hebrew or Egyptian writings as specified in the Book of Mormon even if not scientifically verified. You can read all about the non-LDS scientific verification of Hebrew in the Heartland of America by reading the article Hebrew Written Language CONFIRMED in Hopewell Mound in Tennessee!

What about all the 36 promises that identify the lands of the Book of Mormon being in the latter days a new Gentile nation above all other nations...a land of prosperity and security...and the same lands as the New Jerusalem? Lets see if you can offer twice as many evidences for Guatemala being that nation than the United States of America can in our Heartland Model. Oh, and 8 times the Book of Mormon prophets refer to that nation as the "land of liberty." Which nation do you suppose better fits that description? Guatemala, Mexico, or the United States of America? The majority of the evidence for the Heartland Model geography is coming from non-LDS scientific sources. Can that also be said for Mesoamerican models? Or are most of the claims coming from LDS Mesoamerican proponents? Why is it that Joseph Smith's statements and revelations, such as those about Zelph, have been proven out by non-LDS scholars here in North America and not in Mesoamerica? For more information you should watch the Prophecies and Promises sections on the VIDEO GALLERY or read the FREE excerpts of the book Prophecies and Promises.

You state that Heartland followers reject any place other than the United States. Don't Mesoamerican scholars reject any proposed setting other than Mesoamerica? Are we "Heartlanders" really so different? If so I don't see it. Yes, of course we cite "promised land" quotes because they are prophetic and they support our position. Mesoamerican scholars do not cite them because they are absolutely devastating to their theories. Does anyone really believe that Guatemala is the mighty Gentile nation where the New Jerusalem is prophesied to be built? Does anyone really think that Guatemala is the "land of liberty" spoken of by the ancient prophets regarding this latter day nation? Does anyone really consider Guatemala to be the "land of prosperity and security" prophesied by the Book of Mormon prophets and NOT the United States of America? The scriptural limiting factor is it consistent use of the word "nation" in referring to this latter day land. That the term "nation" denotes a political entity is clear from the reference to having no kings upon the land once it is established. Don't assume we don't know what a "promised land" is...isn't it possible that you don't understand? You might consider reading the book by Timothy Ballard called "The American Covenant" as seen on Glenn Beck. You may be surprised what you'll learn about this covenant promised land we call the United States of America today.

[DNA truthseeker]

Understandable. Some of those who have proposed the Great Lakes scenario were critics of the Church with an agenda of proving that Joseph Smith just borrowed and referred to the geography of the area in which he lived.

But, when I look at the Book of Mormon and compare practices and references to similar things in Mesoamerica, including kingship structure, I see much better matches for the whole of it than I do for any Great Lakes geography. This is especially so when I look at the setting of the Book of Mormon in relation to geographical descriptions of the relationships between cities and lands, as well as the river Sidon. The entire Book of Mormon in context shows a southward to northward flow for Sidon. Most of the Heartland material I have seen and read over the years cannot get past that.

The weather patterns just don't fit, either. Where is the snow that should be talked about if most of the Book of Mormon events took place in the Heartland of what would later become the US? Where are the volcanoes that would make air that is thick and results in darkness all over the land?

Worse, there is no way to see the prophecy commonly regarded as that referring to Columbus as referring to him anymore, under any Heartland theory, because he landed in Mesoamerica, not North America.

Sorry, but nowhere in the Book of Mormon does it ever claim that the Sidon river flowed north. This has been assumed based on Mesoamerican speculations about geography. We know it had east and west banks, but there is no definitive statement of its flowing to the north. You don't need to bother looking, although if you want an exercise in futility, be my guest. You may be surprised when the newest guides to the scriptures is released what they may say about the direction of flow of the Sidon. You have quite obviously not become familiar with the Heartland model geography because you keep mentioning "Great Lakes Geographies" which the Heartland Model is most assuredly not. It is down in the Ohio and Mississippi river valleys primarily, not up in New York along the Niagara River.

Weather patterns? Please see my previous post on the matter.

Volcanoes? You again have obviously NOT seen my ground-breaking presentation on disk 2 of the 6 DVD series titled "Book of Mormon Evidence II." This paradigm shattering research offers an unprecedented correlation to the Heartland Model with the Book of Mormon. Where in the Book of Mormon text do we find the word "volcano" or "lava" or anything else that is exclusively volcanic in nature. Wait until you see the evidence from non-Mormon sources that matches exactly the Book of Mormon observations of the destruction at the time of Christ. Once you see that presentation, you'll be thinking twice about bringing up volcanoes again in any discussion on the Book of Mormon. Of the 28 observations made by the prophet Nephi, all 28 were observed during the largest sequence of earthquakes in North America...on the Heartland's New Madrid Fault System. Do your due diligence and watch the presentation, then come back and report on what you have found.

As far as Columbus, please see my previous post.

[DNA truthseeker]

Heat and humidity combined are far worse in Mesoamerica, and can really sap your strength, particularly if you have been laboring very hard to accomplish something in a hurry.

In one battle sequence, it takes place at the time of the new year. The enemy is frightened when they awaken to find their leader dead. They were quite fatigued from the heat of the day prior to that event. This would have been in the winter time if the people of the Book of Mormon went by any sort of solstitial calendar like many of those in various parts of the Americas.

And, no, references to times of fever are not enough, but it can be taken together with other elements to build a stronger case. These, taken together with Mesoamerican practices that seem to be discussed in the Book of Mormon, with descriptions of weapons that seem to conform to Mesoamerican equivalents, right down to arm shields, head plates, and armor made of thick animal skins or cloth, with geographical descriptions that seem to fit best in Mesoamerica, it all adds weight to the argument.

For instance, the common position of heartland models fails in light of certain criteria, particularly regarding the Sidon, Zarahemla and Manti. They often leave out crucial information and rely upon misunderstanding of the wording of certain passages of the Book of Mormon that, combined, make a good case for being anywhere but the Heartland of what would later become the US. Let me give you an example.

Valley of Gideon and Sidon east of Zarahemla (must cross Sidon from Valley of Gideon to reach Zarahemla from there). (Alma 2:26-27)

Alma goes over (crosses Sidon) upon east of Sidon to go out of Zarahemla into Valley of Gideon. (Alma 6:7)

The Valley of Gideon is east of Zarahemla, as is Sidon, which Sidon it is necessary to cross to get to Zarahemla when headed there from the Valley of Gideon.

Alma, journeying southward to Manti and gone "away to the land of Manti" from Gideon, meets the sons of Mosiah, who themselves were heading northward from the land of Nephi toward Zarahemla. (Alma 17:1)

Manti is south of Zarahemla. The headwaters of Sidon originate near Manti but still are beyond the land of Manti. The actual headwaters of Sidon are "away up beyond" (heading south and at higher altitude than) the borders of the land of Manti, where, even there, they will cross Sidon and meet the Lamanites on east of Sidon to fight them there. (Alma 16:6)

It is "up" to go toward the land of Nephi from both Zarahemla and Manti. It is "away up beyond" the borders of the land of Manti in the South Wilderness, where the actual head of Sidon is located. Thus, Sidon flows from south to north, on the east side of Zarahemla.

Even by Manti, there is a valley separating Sidon from the borders of Manti, and from this location, the Sidon still has west and east banks. (Alma 43:31-32) The south wilderness is on the east of Sidon. (Alma 16:7)

Now, look at all of the following heartland models and tell me which one, if any, fits best.

Meldrum's model.

Vernal Holley's Model.

Byron Marchant's model.

I can tell you that all these models fail because of either arrangement of relative locations of Zarahemla and Manti to the river or the proposed identification with Sidon flows the wrong direction, or regions around Zarahemla do not match in varying ways. I mean, look where Holley's map puts the valley of Alma in relation to Zarahemla and the land of Lehi-Nephi. Meldrum's map makes the Sidon go the wrong direction. It gets worse when you look at the fuller picture of battle logistics. There are a lot more river crossings involved if you look at the wider picture.

Attempts to place Manti northward fail, as do attempts to make Sidon flow the wrong direction accordingly in order to force a northern Manti or a Manti at a lower altitude than Zarahemla to force-fit a location that does not really fit as some models do.

It is also problematic in the case of the verse that traditionally has been interpreted to discuss Columbus. If that passage that I mentioned above does refer to Columbus, no heartland hypothesis or theory will ever hold up because Columbus never came to or visited what would become the continental United States, much less the heartland thereof. Columbus came to Mesoamerica. If the passage in the Book of Mormon does not discuss Columbus, then who does it discuss and what of those General Authorities who thought of the passage as representing Columbus? I can recall many official missionary copies of the Book of Mormon that used to make just that positive identification. I even have a couple lying around here in my home somewhere.

1. Heat and humidity are far worse in Mesoamerica? Really? Mesoamerican temperatures rarely get hotter than 80-85 degree's. This year in America's Heartland temperatures have routinely been higher than 100 degrees with nearly 90% humidity. Show us Mesoamerican conditions that are worse than that.

2. Battle at "New Year" has a warm day? Your assumption that this battle was in winter shows a near complete lack of understanding of Book of Mormon calendaring and the Hebrew roots of Nephite civilization. Before embarrassing yourself further, as did Daniel Peterson, you might want to consider reading the article written as a response to his Mormon Times article about the "heat of the day." You can read it for FREE at Reply to a Misleading New Years Article

3. Weapons that conform to Mesoamerican equivalents? Really? So you think that a wooden club with obsidian bladelets are the equivalent to the steel swords made after the manner of Laban's sword that had a hilt, a single pointed tip, a sheath and could 'cancor with rust'? What about the complete and absolute lack of anything made of metal (within Book of Mormon time frames) as described in the text to have been made of copper? Did you know that many museums of the Hopewell include copper head plates and breastplates and even arm shields?

4. In the Heartland model Zarahemla is north of Manti, the Sidon is on the west of the river and the valley of Gideon (Illinois river valley) is east of Zarahemla. Much of the remaining items you suggest are not directly stated in the text but are conjecture based upon your interpretations. The map you provided doesn't show the entire Heartland model geography, only one small portion of it. This map lacks the land of Nephi, First Inheritance and Bountiful, as well as Desolation. I have provided many other maps, but you only provided this one map of the Heartland model. I would suggest watching the nearly two hour presentation on the Heartland geography which is on disk 5 of the Book of Mormon Evidence DVD series which covers all of this. The series has been out now for more than three years. It is inexcusable that you would be unfamiliar with the research you are attempting to discredit. Your lack of knowledge of the Heartland model is telling and you really should acquaint yourself with it before making further false and incorrect assumptions.

See my previous post for Columbus info.

[DNA truthseeker]

John Clark discusses a set of Great Lakes models here:

http://maxwellinstit...14&num=1&id=420

Sorenson and Clark have identified around 500 passages in the Book of Mormon with geographical information. And it all has to fit together like a jigaw puzzle.

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

The problem is... this ISN'T a Great Lakes Model so Clark's information is not relevant to the Heartland Model. This is the Heartland model, called that because it NOT in the Great Lakes primarily. The 36 prophecies in the Book of Mormon may provide more information about geography than speculations about narrow necks of land and what direction a river flows. Watch the Prophecies and Promises video's for FREE in our VIDEO GALLERY or download the FREE excerpt of the book Prophecies and Promises and find out for yourself! It all fits together in Mesoamerican like a jigsaw puzzle? Really? Then why is there such argument about geography among Mesoamerican proponents? Why is it necessary to 'adjust' the cardinal directions for John Sorenson's model in order to force a fit?

[DNA truthseeker]

Another consideration is the plants and seeds which were taken from a middle eastern,mediterranean climate and planted in the Americas. They florished. The Great Lakes region might be a bit tough on some middle eastern seed plants.

Again, another post wherein the poster is completely ignorant of the Heartland Model. The proposed location for the Land of First Inheritance in the Heartland Model geography is the gulf coast states of the USA. Do a little research and you will find that the southern portion of these states is virtually the exact same latitude as Jerusalem in Israel! The seeds would be very happy to be planted in the mineral rich soils of the Mississippi river valley! The Heartland model geography proposed lands closer to Knoxville, TN and St. Louis, MO than Rochester, NY. Please do everyone a favor and familiarize yourself with the research before bloviating on the subject, especially when the thread is on a specific model!

[DNA truthseeker]

And population contemporaneous with the Book of Mormon around the Great Lakes is no where near the numbers that is needed.

Try moving to where the Heartland Model is being actually being proposed and you will find main stream archaeology stating that the Hopewell Mound builder civilization built over 200,000 earthworks, fortifications, cities, burial mounds etc over about 15 states. The amount of labor performed by this civilization rivals any of antiquity. Would anyone consider the Great Pyramids of Egypt or the Great Wall of China to have built by a tiny little population of hunter gatherers? No, yet that is what has happened in the past with North America's Native populations. Today, population extrapolations are being challenged by main stream archaeological findings such as those recently reported in the journal Science 23 Dec. 2011 which tells how the estimated populations in the area around Cahokia (Mississippian culture) have been off by more than a factor of 10. They originally estimated the population near ancient St. Louis to have been around 7,000, but recent archaeological funding due to a bridge project has moved that estimated population to over 75,000 and growing! By their own admission, their population estimates are going to have to be revamped. It would be good for you to become informed about the Heartland model geography before making such statements.

[DNA truthseeker]

I haven't paid too much attention to this issue. I've always believed the events of the Book of Mormon took place in Central America, but I never cared much about trying to pinpoint locations. The Heartland Theory suffers, from my vantage point, one major flaw. The journey from Jerusalem to the New World, though we don't know for sure I guess, ended on the west coast of the Americas. (I think ocean currents support a west coast landing.) The Heartland Theory requires a major trek then, by the new settlers, through vast unknown lands, before Lehi's family, including the rebellious brothers, found a place to call home. Seems like Nephi would have mentioned such a journey across North America. Doesn't it seem likely Laman and Lemuel would not have done something noteworthy during such a major trek? Nah. For me, the Heartland Theory makes no sense because it doesn't give a reasonable explanation, as far as I know, of how Lehi's family ended up there.

I am just appalled at the near complete lack of knowledge of the Heartland Model by those who are claiming to have difficulties with it. I know that you have not yet seen, nor read the plethora of information already provided on this subject. It has been on our website(s) for over two years and yet someone comes on this thread who has not done their homework before bloviating. Please simply read the article Lehi's Voyage Demonstrated; The Phoenicia Expedition

The article is good, but to really understand the entire strength of the evidence, you will need to watch the nearly two hour DVD # 1 from the 6 DVD Series called "Book of Mormon Evidence II" wherein I discuss in detail the recent voyage of the ship called the "Phoenicia" which sailed around Africa and its implications for Book of Mormon geography. It is more than a reasonable explanation, it has been absolutely proven to be possible to sail from Saudi Arabia to the Gulf Coast states of the United States in a 600 BC era wooden sailing ship! Read the article, get the DVD and get informed! This is some of the most exciting evidence for the Book of Mormon's validity yet!

[DNA truthseeker]

Exactly at what point was Joseph Smith beyond learning new things? Did he know everything after his first vision? If not, might it have been after he was visited by Moroni? Wait ... maybe it was immediately after he retrieved the gold plates from the stone box. Then again, perhaps it wasn't until he translated the plates. Oh wait ... he later made changes to his translation.

To presume that Joseph Smith did not continuously learn new stuff throughout his relatively short life, is simply preposterous.

That is true, but to claim, as Mesoamericanists have been forced by their model to do, that Joseph Smith abandoned his earlier views wherein HE claims to have received the information by REVELATION (Wentworth letter, letter to Emma while on Zion's camp, Missions to the "Lamanites", American Revivalist Account, Zelph accounts) is equally preposterous.

[DNA truthseeker]

At least he is accepting of the facts that you are not. You only accept the statements from Joseph Smith which agree with you while ignoring the rest that do not. You dismiss the Prophet when he says something that is inconvenient for you by attacking what you believe to be the source of the statements. Instead of looking at all of the evidence, as any honest man should do, you pick and choose what statements from the Prophet you choose to believe.

We look at all the evidence and find it wanting on the Mesoamerican side. Please, show us one historically documented and accepted revelation from the Prophet Joseph Smith making claims of Mesoamerican as the Book of Mormon setting. Letters written by others (John Taylor's letter to Bernhisle) and unsigned Times and Seasons articles are not historically verifiable to have been Joseph's. On the Heartland side we have the Wentworth Letter (revelation), the American Revivalist account (Joseph claimed was "written by commandment from God), the Zelph account(s) (another revelation claim made), the letter to Emma written two days after the Zelph experience and D&C sections 28, 30, and 32 wherein the LORD send missionaries "unto the Lamanites" and then promises them that He would "go before them" on their journey. What about the Nephite altar at Adam-ondi-Ahman which was also revealed to Joseph? So to try once more with you...please provide just one single historically documented revelation from Joseph Smith supporting Mesoamerica...just one. We have no less than seven (7) such documents. Who is picking and choosing to dismiss authentic, historically accepted writings while clinging to non-signed, unknown authorship for support of their theories? That would be our friends in the Mesoamerican camp. Again, I didn't claim the revelation, Joseph did. Attempts to dismiss it are not going to change the facts.

Don't use posters personal names that they don't share themselves.

Edited September 11, 2012 by Ares

[DNA truthseeker]

It's about you because you are only are joining a discussion but are only accepting a portion of the evidence. If you would like to be an effective proponent of Meldrums theory, then you must at least be willing to look at and accept all evidence, no matter if it agrees with you or not. You are doing him a disservice by your actions and doubt anyone on this entire board takes you seriously because you have your answer before you even ask the question. You have your theory no matter what evidence is out there.

I've actually studied the issue quite thoroughly and do not just accept what someone is selling me whole heartedly without examining the evidence, so yes, I am familiar with the history. Since I do accept the evidence no matter what it says, I've adjusted my beliefs accordingly. My personal BOM geography accepts ALL of JS statements. But I think other theories are just as valid.

On that note, you as a Heartland apologist only accept what the Prophet said early in his calling while ignoring what he said as he learned line upon line, precept upon precept towards the end of his life. I've said this before, picking and choosing your evidence isn't going to get you anywhere.

Now, I know you that you know that this is simply not true. You know that just a month before the Prophet was killed at Carthage Joseph Smith met with the North American Sac and Fox Indians in his back kitchen on May 23rd 1844 and for the second time reiterated to them that the Book of Mormon was "about your fathers & Great Spirit told me." He had not abandoned his earlier beliefs as you are so want to claim. He had not changed his position on who the remnant was one bit. He continued to hold that this Native American tribe were the direct descendants of the Book of Mormon peoples and today we know from DNA that this tribe is a part of the Algonquian language group who have the Haplogroup X DNA type. Their ancestors are the Hopewell Mound builders, not the Maya or any other Mesoamerican peoples. They are the remnant according to the Lord in the D&C sections 28, 30, and 32. They are in North America, not Mesoamerica. See the prophets personal diary entry for this date and you will know of the truth of it. Joseph never denied his revelatory knowledge obtained in the above accounts. Are you claiming that his revelations were false due to unsigned and undocumented articles in the newspaper in Nauvoo? That is certainly what is seems you and your Mesoamerican cohorts are claiming. If I am wrong, please tell me how these unsigned articles negate those that are signed and known to be the prophets?

Edited September 11, 2012 by Ares