Mesoamerican History and the Book of Mormon

[Olavarria]

First off, I applaud the change to what I assume is your real name. That's a good Basko name if I ever saw one. Spanish side or French?

Spanish Basque, by way of Puerto Rico.

Anyway, does anyone else find it odd that Oaks would say that by simply limiting the claim of BoM lands and people, the burden of proof shifts to critics of the book's historicity? They now must prove that the Nephites and Lamanites did not exist somewhere, sometime, on the two continents? I don't see it. The burden still lies with those who make the extraordinary claim that a portion of the ancient Americans were sea-faring immigrants from Israel, and were separate from those who migrated from Asia 12,000+ years ago.

From what I understood reading the whole thing, a long time ago, my side is saying that only a spiritual witness will prove it is true, so we arent even trying to play the scientific proof game. Critics say they can scientifically prove the BoM is false. So, if your going to do that then you have to do what he said in that quote. A LGT is a smaller target to hit with a shot gun than a HGT. I know im bastardizing his idea, but thats the jist as I understand it.

[Olavarria]

I think this is to refute Sorensen's DNA claims, basically challenging Sorenson to "prove" that the BoM is not real. Since the apologists had now isolated the BoM into some fragment of the larger population, it is impossible for him to make his claims.

Someone correct me if Im wrong, but I thought this talk was given way before DNA ever became an issue. What I say is :1)We know there were non-Lehite/non-Jaredite people here before the Lehites arrived on the scene. That is a scientific fact. 2)The original Lehites(24 people?) would have been swamped culturally(which is what the prophets were trying to fight against) and genetically. So why would we expect the DNA of Mormon or Moroni to differ significantly from that of other people descendant from the Behring Straiters? LGT is giving the critics fits.

[krose]

I think this is to refute Sorensen's DNA claims, basically challenging Sorenson to "prove" that the BoM is not real. Since the apologists had now isolated the BoM into some fragment of the larger population, it is impossible for him to make his claims.

Scottie, I believe you meant to say Southerton rather than Sorenson, didn't you?

[krose]

Critics say they can scientifically prove the BoM is false.

I don't recall any responsible person making that claim, because proving a negative is next to impossible. If they have, I assume it is in regard to the hemispheric model with no native "others," that most members have always believed in. As you say, shrinking the target way down does make it harder to refute. On the flip side, it makes it even more unlikely that confirming evidence of a tiny group like that will ever be found.

As a personal aside, Euzkadi is one of the Earth's garden spots, and one of my favorites. If you haven't visited the motherland yet, you really must do so at some point. People are surprised when I describe the area as cool, green mountains and gorgeous coastlines, because their image of Spain is solely that of hot flatlands, where Don Quixote roamed. It's beautiful, and we're headed back there next summer (mainly the Bizkaia area, roaming between Bilbao and San Sebastian).

[Sevenbak]

How do we know that the city of Enoch was in the locale of the Gulf of Mexico?

I believe it was Wilford Woodruff's journal that documented that teaching of Joseph Smith.

[Sevenbak]

Sevenbak,

Guatemala is on the Pacific coast nowhere near the Gulf of Mexico. You need to look at a good map of Central America.

Larry P

LOL. Correct, I meant the Yucatan region. I tend to lump some of those those geographical countries together. Although, Guatemala does have some real state on the coast.

[Sevenbak]

Funny how the ones with actual authority to make claims, aka the apostles, as to where the BoM is located are still referencing the hemispheric model. It's only apologists who insist on the LGT.

Not all apologists. There are still many who are old school and believe what the early brethren taught.

[Sevenbak]

All of the apostles and prophets(as per the definition of doctrine in the link in my siggy)embraced the possibility of an LGT in 1984 with the publication of Sorenson's two-part article on BoM archeology in the Ensign.

They didn't embrace Sorenson. They allowed his work to be published.

[Sevenbak]

The fact remains, the developement of meso-civ parallels the BoM in both time and space. Why is that? That is a different questian for a another day.

As does the Hopewellean culture in North America. Parallels in both time and space. 200 BC to 500 AD, to be exact.

Hemispheric.

[Scottie]

Scottie, I believe you meant to say Southerton rather than Sorenson, didn't you?

Yes, thank you for correcting me.

[krose]

I still have a difficult time making sense of that LGT map.

First off we have to believe that the Lehites flipped their directions 90 degrees, such that the "Land Northward" is actually to the west and the "Land Southward" is to the east. I've heard the explanation, that they may have defined directions by where the sea was, but it's hard to accept.

Then there is the issue of the "narrow neck of land." It's difficult for me to believe that people who walked everywhere would recognize enough of a difference in the narrowest point (Tehuantepec), which is still over 100 miles across, and the slightly wider surrounding land, to call it a "narrow" anything. If anything, it's more of a "waist" than a "neck."

[poulsenll]

I still have a difficult time making sense of that LGT map.

First off we have to believe that the Lehites flipped their directions 90 degrees, such that the "Land Northward" is actually to the west and the "Land Southward" is to the east. I've heard the explanation, that they may have defined directions by where the sea was, but it's hard to accept.

Then there is the issue of the "narrow neck of land." It's difficult for me to believe that people who walked everywhere would recognize enough of a difference in the narrowest point (Tehuantepec), which is still over 100 miles across, and the slightly wider surrounding land, to call it a "narrow" anything. If anything, it's more of a "waist" than a "neck."

Which LGT map? There are over 50 different proposed maps, many of them based on a limitted (non hemispheric)

geography.

See the following FAIR WIKI discussion.

http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon_geography/All_models_by_name_table

John Clark published a rather extensive review about Book of Mormon lands. He suggested the following figure represents how the Nephites viewed thier lands.

http://mi.byu.edu/images/review/01_1989_07h.gif

I have since published a concept for directions that expands on Clarks suggestion and resolves many of the apparent anomolies with how the Nephites viewed directions.

http://mi.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=19&num=2&id=655

You might also check my website

http://poulsenll.org/bom/index.html

and Clarks article for info about the narrow neck.

Larry P

[krose]

Which LGT map?

The one I've seen most is the one that Pedro pasted into this thread, where the Isthmus of Tehuantepec is assumed to be the "narrow neck."

[shrff]

As does the Hopewellean culture in North America. Parallels in both time and space. 200 BC to 500 AD, to be exact.

Hemispheric.

I've yet to see a comprehensive, point-by-point comparison between what is known archaeologically about the Hopewell and the material culture expectations derived from the text of the Book of Mormon. Knowing what I know about both, I can say that such a comparison would show a lot of discrepancies. I have seen point-by-point comparisons for various Mesoamerican locales, and these are fairly convincing.

Assertions, no matter how many times they are repeated, can not take the place of careful scholarship. I would be glad to read a study comparing the Hopewell to the BOM that has not already been debunked by another scholar. To my knowledge, no such study exists.

[Anijen]

I think once one starts looking deeper into the Hopewell culture they can come to the conclusion that they were not a Book of Mormon people. Professor Clark in the following quote indicates some reasons, note he sources archeology of New York state as recent as 2004. I must agree the Hopewells did not have the population or other facts that is required from the BoM.

John E Clark (Professor of Anthropology)

"The Cumorah of the golden plates is not the Cumorah of the final battles. These conclusions follow from a few basic points and assumptions. First, I presume that the archaeology of New York State, as currently published (2004), is a fair representation and adequate sample of what is there, and particularly that the evidence for some periods has not been systematically destroyed. Second, I presume that the evidence published for the various regions and time periods is accurateâ??that is, that the majority of archaeologists working in this region are competent and academically honest in terms of their archaeology. Third, I assume that additional research and discoveries will not significantly alter current understandings of the times or places of prehistoric occupation nor of the cultural practices involved; rather, such data will lead to minor adjustments to some of the details of prehistory. Fourth, the archaeological record lacks evidence for cities, sedentism, corn agriculture, fortifications, and dense populations during Archaic, Early Woodland, and Middle Woodland times. In accord with these general observations about New York and Pennsylvania, we come to our principal objectâ??the Hill Cumorah. Archaeologically speaking, it is a clean hill. No artifacts, no walls, no trenches, no arrowheads. The area immediately surrounding the hill is similarly clean. Pre-Columbian people did not settle or build here. This is not the place of Mormon's last stand. We must look elsewhere for that hill.11 The Palmyra hill is still a sacred place and was the repository of the golden plates and other relics placed there by Moroni. How Moroni made his way to this place and constructed his time capsule of artifacts is a historic adventure for another time.

[Obiwan]

Funny how the ones with actual authority to make claims, aka the apostles, as to where the BoM is located are still referencing the hemispheric model. It's only apologists who insist on the LGT.

The "hemispheric" and "limited" geography ideas are "straw men" created by anti's who haven't a clue about what LDS leaders are meaning when they speak "hemispherically". They are essentially saying that the "blood of Israel" is in essentially all the natives of the America's and the Islands of the sea through Lehi and/or when the tribes split. This is not talking about "where" Lehi landed and where the Nephites/Lamanites had their adventures. LDS leaders are speaking of "descendecy" from a scriptural and spiritual/literal perspective, not according to the "predominate" DNA strand genetics perspective as exists in current native populations.

Even Joseph Smith ultimately believed BOM events took place somewhere in south/central America. So, trying to say apologists are somehow out of mainstream LDS leadership is simply anti-mormon wishful thinking. The two are simply NOT dealing with the same issues. LDS scholars are dealing with the sciences, LDS leaders are dealing with spiritual things. You can't claim LDS leaders are talking science when they speak of descendecy of those from Lehi, or the Jews, or the Lamanites, etc. I've never been confused or seen anything contradictory in what they have said compared to LDS scholarship. It's only in the anti-mormon confused as to the truth and facts mind is such dichotomy's created.

[Anijen]

very good post Obiwan.

[Tiberius]

I think in your statement that LDS Leaders are dealing only with spiritual things, you limit their authority to deal with the sciences. You want to go that far? Especially when many of them, professionally, were/are scientists? For you to claim LDS Leaders only speak in a spiritual sense, you're implying they have been hindered by the "predominate" DNA strand genetics perspective as somehow harming the veracity of the Book of Mormon.

So what do we fall back on? The literal descendancy of those from Lehi and the Jews, is not scientific, but "spiritual" only? Should Jacob 5 be only considered a spiritual message? Not scientific, as well? The Book of Mormon speaks of the House of Israel being scattered among all nations. There has to be some scienctific evidence behind the spiritual message. A scattering occured. People were led away. Nephi building a ship is not just a spiritual message. Just because Science hasn't discovered the evidence, yet, then those portions of the Book of Mormon not proven by science is purely spiritual?

Elder Oaks warned against dismissing the Book of Mormon as a historical record of the ancient peoples of America. You can't accept its spiritual message then deny that the actual events ever took place.

And, I don't know what "anti's" have to do about the creation of the "hemispheric" and "limited" geography theories. That itself is a strawman to place blame upon others. Anti's are only using this current geographic LDS Scholarly-squabble to poke criticism on the Church. They perceive this as a type of internal dissent as an excuse to mock.

The problem lies with LDS individuals who are overly concerned exactly where the events occurred. As you asserted, Joseph Smith noted BOM events took place somewhere in south/central America, as well as in North America.

I find it amusing that some LDS Scholars believe Joseph Smith was a prophet, then discount his statements such as found in the Wentworth Letter, etc. or modify it into a purely "spiritual" context - or having to redefine "country" "continent" and "remnants" to support this or that geographic theory which they adamantly cling to, claiming the Seer and Revelator knew little about BOM geography, as if they know more than the Prophet or can determine what he knew and when.

This to the point the LDS Church had to exclude a portion of it from the current Joseph Smith manual, not because they don't not believe in that portion of the letter, but to prevent contention among Church members - seeing this as the latest hot button for debate. Hey, if you can't handle the knowledge, then they'll remove what was given.

2 Nephi 28:30 isn't just referring to Bible Thumpers.