How does the Local Geographic Theory

[Rollo Tomasi]

I know know of NO Revelation issued by the Church that says that either the LGT or Hemispheric model are correct.

The following in LDS canon support the hemispheric model: Joseph Smith - History 1:34 (specifically: "He [Moroni] said there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang." (emphasis mine)); and D&C 128:20 (specifically: "And again, what do we hear? Glad tidings from Cumorah! Moroni, an angel from heaven, declaring the fulfillment of the prophets -- the book to be revealed.") -- I read this latter verse to establsh that the NY hill and BofM hill are one and the same "Cumorah," which would seem to establish a hemispheric model (unless the LGT folks want to put BofM geography in New York instead of Mesoamerica, but I don't think that's gonna happen). It can be argued that both these sources are words of Joseph Smith rather than a revelation in the words of Jesus Himself (like so many other D&C sections are), but they are in the canon, so that should carry some weight.

[GDTeacher]

I know know of NO Revelation issued by the Church that says that either the LGT or Hemispheric model are correct.

The following in LDS canon support the hemispheric model: Joseph Smith - History 1:34 (specifically: "He [Moroni] said there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang." (emphasis mine)); and D&C 128:20 (specifically: "And again, what do we hear? Glad tidings from Cumorah! Moroni, an angel from heaven, declaring the fulfillment of the prophets -- the book to be revealed.") -- I read this latter verse to establsh that the NY hill and BofM hill are one and the same "Cumorah," which would seem to establish a hemispheric model (unless the LGT folks want to put BofM geography in New York instead of Mesoamerica, but I don't think that's gonna happen). It can be argued that both these sources are words of Joseph Smith rather than a revelation in the words of Jesus Himself (like so many other D&C sections are), but they are in the canon, so that should carry some weight.

Rollo

Are you aware of ANY comments by GA's that support the LGT theory? If not, are we left with lots of comments by GA's that support the idea of the hemispheric theory, with canon that tends to support hemispheric theory and interpretation of some canon by some modern scholars which tend to support LGT?

[thesometimesaint]

RT:

You and I have discussed this before. I am content with my position, as you are content with yours.

[Rollo Tomasi]

Are you aware of ANY comments by GA's that support the LGT theory? If not, are we left with lots of comments by GA's that support the idea of the hemispheric theory, with canon that tends to support hemispheric theory and interpretation of some canon by some modern scholars which tend to support LGT?

I recall there being something said by Dallin Oaks (perhaps in a speech to FARMS or similar group) that he thought a type of LGT made more sense when he first studied the BofM at BYU. That's all I can recall at the top of my head. I think nearly all comments by the Brethren over the years can be viewed as supportive of a type of hemispheric model, but I think there are a few exceptions to this rule (perhaps not specifically endorsing the LGT, but backing off the hemispheric model a bit -- I think this trend will continue until the LGT is endorsed officially or pretty darn close to it).

[Pahoran]

Rollo

Are you aware of ANY comments by GA's that support the LGT theory? If not, are we left with lots of comments by GA's that support the idea of the hemispheric theory, with canon that tends to support hemispheric theory and interpretation of some canon by some modern scholars which tend to support LGT?

If he is, he will play them down as hard as possible.

You are asking the wrong person, GD. Rollo is an ardent zealot for the Hemispheric model; not because he thinks there's evidence for it--clearly he does not--but because he thinks it's easier to attack, and as the single most dedicated anti-Mormon participant here, that's all that really matters to him.

If he thought a Madagascar-based geography made for a better target, he'd be arguing for that.

Regards,

Pahoran

[The Dude]

If he thought a Madagascar-based geography made for a better target, he'd be arguing for that.

For the record, I'm a proponent for the Island of Comoros version of LGT. The fact that the capitol city is named Moroni must be more than coincidence.

[USU78]

If he thought a Madagascar-based geography made for a better target, he'd be arguing for that.

For the record, I'm a proponent for the Island of Comoros version of LGT. The fact that the capitol city is named Moroni must be more than coincidence.

I myself opt for an Austrian model, making the Danube the Sidon.

Note that, in German, Moroni's introduction of himself in Morm 8:12 reads thus:

Ich heisse Moroni.

Note further that, in German and Austrian cities, a favorite treat is hot chestnuts. You can hear on the streets of Vienna every Winter the call of the streetsellers:

Heisse Marone!

[Programmer]

The following in LDS canon support the hemispheric model: Joseph Smith - History 1:34 (specifically: "He [Moroni] said there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang."

...

Interpretation carries alot of weight too. With those pesky nephites who used to block the northern part of the narrow neck of land gone and deeply dead, the 'Lamanites' had 1400 years to wander north into the American territories and settle or wander, however they saw fit. In fact the book of Mormon says that in the 1st century BC, many people left and went into the land northwards. That's roughly 21 centuries ago. And the book of Mormon never talks about them again.

1400 years is a long time for people to spread. Look how fast the Europeans spread throught the Americas in 500 years. What can happen in another 900 years if left unchecked.

I'm still amazed that folks are still looking for intact Nephite rusty breastplates and swords nearly 2000 years after the fact. We wouldn't even know that 50000+ people died in the battle of Antietam during the civil war, except people have actively preserved the place and built visitors center there. We would know even less 1500 years from now. And BTW for you brainiac anti-mormons:

The Lamanites didn't build visitors centers for historic battles.

I'm sure it would bolster the faith of many anti-mormon if the 'Lamanites' did such ridiculous things as built visitors centers for historic battles, or kept truthful histories on gold plates, or kept gold plates free from thieves for 1400 years, etc...

about as equally ridiculous as expecting 1830's era Missourians to have told kept and preserved the Mormon establishments at Far West Missouri.

[Rollo Tomasi]

If he is, he will play them down as hard as possible.

You are asking the wrong person, GD. Rollo is an ardent zealot for the Hemispheric model; not because he thinks there's evidence for it--clearly he does not--but because he thinks it's easier to attack, and as the single most dedicated anti-Mormon participant here, that's all that really matters to him.

If he thought a Madagascar-based geography made for a better target, he'd be arguing for that.

False on all counts. But, other than Pahoran, we all already knew that.

[Rollo Tomasi]

Interpretation carries alot of weight too. With those pesky nephites who used to block the northern part of the narrow neck of land gone and deeply dead, the 'Lamanites' had 1400 years to wander north into the American territories and settle or wander, however they saw fit. In fact the book of Mormon says that in the 1st century BC, many people left and went into the land northwards. That's roughly 21 centuries ago. And the book of Mormon never talks about them again.

True enough. But, imo, Moroni seems to be saying that the plates give the account of folks who inhabited this continent (that is, folks the writers knew about, not ones who left and were never heard from again), which (to me at least) suggests a hemispheric model for the actual folks spoken of in the book. Also, we must remember that two-thirds of the plates were sealed and not read or translated by Joseph -- there could have been a lot of info in there that relates to this question.

[Daniel Peterson]

"He [Moroni] said there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang."

"This continent"? Meaning North America?

Maybe.

The most reputable academic limited geography models all put the principal events of the Book of Mormon in Mesoamerica.

Question: In what continent is Mesoamerica?

Answer: Mesoamerica is wholly within North America.

But the phrase this continent, in Moroni's statement, probably just means "the Americas," anyway.

Accordingly, in either case, it's unclear to me precisely how Moroni's comment is supposed to work against, say, John Sorenson's limited geographical model.

[Rollo Tomasi]

"This continent"? Meaning North America?

Maybe.

...

Accordingly, in either case, it's unclear to me precisely how Moroni's comment is supposed to work against, say, John Sorenson's limited geographical model.

I agree that Mesoamerica can certainly be included in the phrase "this continent," even if Moroni was referring only to North America, but I just don't see why Moroni would use the word "continent" (suggesting a model covering at least North Amercia, and perhaps Central and South America) to describe where "the former inhabitants" lived if he knew (as he would have to, as the final author in the BofM) that "the former inhabitants" actually lived in the relatively small area of Mesoamerica (compared to the whole of North America), many thousands of miles away from Palmyra, New York.

[GDTeacher]

Rollo

Are you aware of ANY comments by GA's that support the LGT theory?  If not, are we left with lots of comments by GA's that support the idea of the hemispheric theory, with canon that tends to support hemispheric theory and interpretation of some canon by some modern scholars which tend to support LGT?

If he is, he will play them down as hard as possible.

You are asking the wrong person, GD. Rollo is an ardent zealot for the Hemispheric model; not because he thinks there's evidence for it--clearly he does not--but because he thinks it's easier to attack, and as the single most dedicated anti-Mormon participant here, that's all that really matters to him.

If he thought a Madagascar-based geography made for a better target, he'd be arguing for that.

Regards,

Pahoran

Pahoran

Could you please point me so some comments by GA's that support the LGT theory. Thanks in advance.

[rameumptom]

"This continent"?  Meaning North America?

Maybe.

...

Accordingly, in either case, it's unclear to me precisely how Moroni's comment is supposed to work against, say, John Sorenson's limited geographical model.

I agree that Mesoamerica can certainly be included in the phrase "this continent," even if Moroni was referring only to North America, but I just don't see why Moroni would use the word "continent" (suggesting a model covering at least North Amercia, and perhaps Central and South America) to describe where "the former inhabitants" lived if he knew (as he would have to, as the final author in the BofM) that "the former inhabitants" actually lived in the relatively small area of Mesoamerica (compared to the whole of North America), many thousands of miles away from Palmyra, New York.

One thing that you consistently miss in these discussions, Rollo, is the fact that the BoM peoples were largely connected culturally.

Jacobites, Zoramites, Josephites and others all fell under the cultural name: Nephite. This was later expanded to include the Mulekites, who with most of the others, were not descended from Nephi at all.

Lamanites tended to grow exponentially. Even after the Nephites and Mulekites join forces, they still were vastly outnumbered by the Lamanites. Did the Lamanites have giant families? Triplets and quadruplets? Or did they absorb other tribes already here?

If Moroni saw the Lamanites/Nephites as a cultural group, then they WOULD be the ancestors of today's Indians in the Americas and the islands of the sea. And while the majority of the BoM would have occurred in a limited geography (as the internal text requires), it would not be innaccurate to state that it covered the peoples of all the Americas, either.

[unoriginal]

I agree that Mesoamerica can certainly be included in the phrase "this continent," even if Moroni was referring only to North America, but I just don't see why Moroni would use the word "continent" (suggesting a model covering at least North Amercia, and perhaps Central and South America) to describe where "the former inhabitants" lived if he knew (as he would have to, as the final author in the BofM) that "the former inhabitants" actually lived in the relatively small area of Mesoamerica (compared to the whole of North America), many thousands of miles away from Palmyra, New York.

Some things to consider

[Pahoran]

Pahoran

Could you please point me so some comments by GA's that support the LGT theory.  Thanks in advance.

I believe we have seen this style of posting before. Could it be the case that you have posted under another name in the recent past?

In any event, here are a couple of examples of General Authority statements that support the LGT.

"The Church has not taken an official position with regard to location of geographical places [of the Book of Mormon]."[Footnote to "Book of Mormon Geography," in Encyclopedia of Mormonism] This has been true for at least a century. George Q. Cannon, a member of the First Presidency, wrote in 1890, "The First Presidency have often been asked to prepare some suggestive map illustrative of Nephite geography, but have never consented to do so. Nor are we acquainted with any of the Twelve Apostles who would undertake such a task. The reason is, that without further information they are not prepared even to suggest."[Footnote to The Instructor 73 (April 1890): 160, quoted in Sorenson, Geography of Book of Mormon Events, 385.]

And:

In 1841 John Lloyd Stephens published volume one of his Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas and Yucatan, the first accessible English-language account of the Maya ruins. It was enthusiastically received by the early Mormons, who saw it both as a validation of the Book of Mormon and as a source to help understand Book of Mormon geography. An editorial reviewing this book in the Times and Seasons was written either by Joseph Smith or John Taylor. The editorial speculated that the city of Zarahemla was to be found in modern Guatemala north of the Isthmus of Panama (called Darien in the early nineteenth century). Since the internal geography of the Book of Mormon places Zarahemla south of the narrow neck of land, the editorial implies that the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, rather than Panama, was the Book of Mormon narrow neck of land. Thus Joseph Smith, rather than insisting only on the validity of the Hemispheric Geography Model, both advocated an early form of the Limited Geography Model and encouraged the modification of geographical interpretations of the Book of Mormon based on the discovery of new evidence. The important thing to note is that the core concept of the Limited Geography Model was in existence in 1842, with the approval and possible authorship of Joseph Smith himself.

The source for both of these is "Basic Methodological Problems with the Anti-Mormon Approach to the Geography and Archaeology of the Book of Mormon" by William J. Hamblin, published in "Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 2/1 (Spring 1993) pp. 161-197."

Now that your question is answered, perhaps you'd like to give some consideration to the fact that it is simply the wrong question. Since the Church has no official position on Book of Mormon geography, and never has had one--an absolute and unquestioned fact which no honest and informed person disputes--it follows that what matters is not what others say about it, but what the book itself says.

And it happens that the internal geography of The Book of Mormon is unquestionably a limited geography.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Rollo Tomasi]

One thing that you consistently miss in these discussions, Rollo, is the fact that the BoM peoples were largely connected culturally.

Jacobites, Zoramites, Josephites and others all fell under the cultural name: Nephite. This was later expanded to include the Mulekites, who with most of the others, were not descended from Nephi at all.

Lamanites tended to grow exponentially. Even after the Nephites and Mulekites join forces, they still were vastly outnumbered by the Lamanites. Did the Lamanites have giant families? Triplets and quadruplets? Or did they absorb other tribes already here?

If Moroni saw the Lamanites/Nephites as a cultural group, then they WOULD be the ancestors of today's Indians in the Americas and the islands of the sea. And while the majority of the BoM would have occurred in a limited geography (as the internal text requires), it would not be innaccurate to state that it covered the peoples of all the Americas, either.

As I mentioned in a prior post to you, the only folks or groups mentioned by name in the BofM appear to be Israelites; I don't recall any non-Israelites. And while cultural bonds may have played a part in some identifications, there are several instances in which blood lineage is noted (as late in time as the prophet Mormon nearly 1,000 years after the BofM narrative begins, who describes himself as a "pure" descendant of Lehi (3 Nephi 5:20)). Indeed, in 1835 Joseph Smith described the Angel Moroni as referring to Native Americans as "literal descendants of Abraham." (emphasis mine). I take this to refer to blood lineage, rather than simply cultural ties. Joseph Smith also seems to refer to blood bonds when he describes to John Wentworth in 1842 Lehi's band this way: "They were principally Israelites, of the descendants of Joseph."

[GDTeacher]

Pahoran

Could you please point me so some comments by GA's that support the LGT theory.

[Rollo Tomasi]

Do we know for certain what words Moroni used?

Only what Joseph Smith has told us.

Do we know for certain that Moroni was attempting to address the issue of Book of Mormon geographical theories at this time?

Using the phrase "this continent" to describe where the "inhabitants" lived seems geographical to me. Mother Smith also describes the many details Joseph told his family about these inhabitants (some seemingly minor, like their dress, cities, mode of travel, etc.) well before he ever got the plates.

Do we know for certain that Moroni was even the least bit concerned about being extremely precise and accurate in his wording so that Joseph Smith, the people alive at that time and the people thereafter would never ever misinterpret or misapply them?

You'll have to ask Joseph that. Joseph wrote Wentworth in 1842 that during the first 1823 visit, Moroni gave him "a brief sketch of their origins, progress, civilization, laws, governments, of their righteousness and iniquity ...." Over the next 4 years, until Joseph got the plates, Joseph "received instruction and intelligence from him [Angel Moroni] at each of our interviews ...." (Joseph Smith - History 1:54). This is likely where Joseph learned the details about the lives of BofM peoples that he later shared with his family before he obtained the plates. I have a hard time believing that Joseph learned so many details about BofM peoples from a divine messenger, but somehow got it wrong by thousands of miles as to where they lived.

[Rollo Tomasi]

... it follows that what matters is not what others say about it, but what the book itself says.

And it happens that the internal geography of The Book of Mormon is unquestionably a limited geography.

You have just decimated any need for living prophets ....

[Rollo Tomasi]

I promise I have never posted here under another name. I'm just new here. I would swear that to be true on a not only a Bible, but a Quad. I'm not exactly sure to what style of posting you refer.

Don't worry, GD, you'll get used to it. Pahoran invariably uses an 'attack the messenger, ignore the message' style toward anyone with whom he disagrees.

[Brant Gardner]

Rollo Tomasi:

You have just decimated any need for living prophets ....

Really? The only function of a prophet is to provide the historical setting of scriptures? I would never have guessed from any prophet I have ever read about. I thought they were interested in more spiritual things.

I took a quick mental tour through the Bible and I can't find any prophet who fits your apparent definition. How did you come by it?

[Brant Gardner]

GDTeacher:

but few LDS are as informed as you are. I generally do not fault them for their lack of being informed. Most adult LDS that I know are as informed as the standard curriculum allows, which includes no specific discussion of LGT or hemispheric theory.

I agree. I am not sure, however, what agreeing means. From all of the religious history I have been able to examine, the Lord appears quite content to let us work out certain things on our own. In the normal course of change, religion is the slowest, even when the things that are slow to change are simply tradition and not gospel.

In the case of an understanding of the Limited Geography Theory of the Book of Mormon, I think the spread of the information is coming along pretty quickly for a relgion.

If you are interested in the history of ideas within religions, that can make a good topic. If you are suggesting that there is something wrong with the current state of things, that is a different issue and would be predicated on things other than known history of religions.

The history of certain ideas in the LDS church is always interesting. For instance, the issues behind evolution and a very old earth. Early saints seem to have been rather precocious in accepting a very old earth. However, there was a period that reversed that trend and created the atmosphere that suggested that one couldn't be a good member of the church and believe in evolution (I'll leave it at the broadest definition for the moment). That position is changing. I don't see any particular difference between the current of thought behind evolution and that behind any Book of Mormon geography. Ideas get tossed about and have a life of their own. Neither, however, was a revelation.

Just in case you are interested, yes, I think Joseph Smith was influenced by current ideas and didn't really understand Book of Mormon geography. I find it absolutely fascinating that the text knows its geography better than Joseph Smith does. That suggests to me that he wasn't the author - else he would have been the authority.

[Rollo Tomasi]

How did you come by it?

Pahoran argued that all we need is the text, which "unquestionably" establishes a limited geography for the BofM in Mesoamerica. If so, then there is no need for what Angel Moroni taught Joseph, or what Joseph taught to his family or others, or what other Brethren have taught members for the past 175 years. We can do away with GC talks like the one SWK gave about Lamanite children's skin becoming lighter in fulfillment of prophecy. No more "principal ancestors" in the BoM Introduction. All CES manuals must be changed. Rescind the 1845 proclamation by the Twelve about Native Americans and their "Israelitish heritage." Tell the senior missionary couples at the Hill Cumorah Visitors' Center to stop telling folks that Nephites and Lamanites lived and battled in and around that area. Of course, Moroni really just meant "a small Mesoamerican backwater thousands of miles from here" when he said "this continent" to Joseph Smith near Palmyra, New York. Zelph is a humbug; Joseph was making it up when he told Emma of "Nephite plains" in Illinois; and the list goes on and on. Sure, take care of all this (and more) and the LGT fits perfectly.

EDITED TO ADD: Forgot to mention -- from now on, all those prophecies by Nephi that we apparently just assumed spoke to the future colonization and birth of the U.S. and those "Gentile" Americans essentially taking over North America? Well, just forget about 'em -- they were really about Guatemala or Mexico.

[Who Knows]

EDITED TO ADD: Forgot to mention -- from now on, all those prophecies by Nephi that we apparently just assumed spoke to the future colonization and birth of the U.S. and those "Gentile" Americans essentially taking over North America? Well, just forget about 'em -- they were really about Guatemala or Mexico. wink.gif

I think I mentioned in a previous post somewhere, that this was my biggest problem with the LGT theory. No one even replied to it.

BTW Rollo, don't you know already, CES manuals, statements by prophets, General Conference - none of that counts for anything - it's not doctrine if it's not in the scriptures, it's only opinion.