Prophet and Apostle statements on Cumorah location

[Sevenbak]

I agree that his textual position deserves consideration. I think everyone's position deserves consideration. In fact, if you read back through the posts you'll find that I have not criticized his theory to which you refer at all. Not once. But I do take issue with his frequent implications that those of us who don't interpret the text the same way he does are not following the brethren. (If this isn't offensive, I don't know what is.) And when I try to engage him in a reasonable discussion, he doesn't reply to the substance but merely shotguns toss-away lines that remind me of Johnny's posts (whose avatar was a monkey). I did not call him any names, I simply compared his posting style to that of a former board participant.

That's not what I said Green. I said the scriptures are interpreted differently by these brethren who have the exact text as we do, yet we think we are wiser in figuring out distances, models, etc. compared with revered, honored and yes, scholarly men who have taught the subject of this thread since the Church was founded.

We will have to agree to disagree.

[Sevenbak]

Sevenbak:

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I just don't get how the mound builders of Hopewell were in anyway connected to the Nephites.

Ha. Ditto.

If we discount the mound builders, we also discount Zelph, which we don't need to get into here, we all know the accounts.

It all makes perfect sense to me, layer added to layer, as taught by the prophet.

And the Zelph mound wasn't the only one where Joseph received revelations about what battle had transpired there. There was another one, now called the Enon mound. This is from Joseph's journal with Zions camp:

“About nine o’clock . . . we came into a piece of thick woods of recent growth, where I told them that I felt much depressed in spirit and lonesome, and that there had been a great deal of bloodshed in that place, remarking that whenever a man of God is in a place where many have been killed, he will feel lonesome and unpleasant, and his spirits will sink.

“In about forty rods from where I made this observation we came through the woods, and saw a large farm, and there near the road on our left, was a mound sixty feet high, containing human bones. The mound was covered with apple trees, and surrounded with oat fields, the ground being level for some distance around.”

Levi Hancock, writing about two weeks after Joseph Smith, may also have referred to this incident when he recorded the following:

“I . . . remembered what he (i.e. Joseph Smith) had said a few days before while passing many mounds on our way that was left of us. Said he, ‘these are the bodies of wicked men who have died and are angry at us…“

[poulsenll]

The big problem with any model that places Zarahemla in Mesoamerica and Cumorah in New York is accommodating this model with the geography of the Jaredite lands. According to Ether, Cumorah and the hill Shim were south of the central Jaredite occupation. This would place the Jaredites in Canada. As had been mentioned before, this would mean that their wars would have been subject to cold and snow and there is no mention of such. True that Moroni's abridgement may have left that possibility out but that requires just one more assumption. Ether also describes the Jaredite lands as west of a seashore. The only seashore east of Palmyra is the Atlantic and it is too far away to fit the description of the Jaredite battles. Another problem is the journey of the Limhi search party. Either they would have had to travel to New York to find the plates of Ether or Ether would have had to travel to Mesoamerica to hide them somewhere for the Limhites to find them. Either possibility seems a stretch. The recorded length of time for there journey was too short to accomodate a trip to New York.

It is amazing to me how many proposed models of BofM geography fail to take into account the Book of Ether and the geography described therein.

Larry P

[shrff]

Mormon 5:

5 But it came to pass that whatsoever lands we had passed by, and the inhabitants thereof were not gathered in, were destroyed by the Lamanites, and their towns, and villages, and cities were burned with fire; and thus three hundred and seventy and nine years passed away.

6 And it came to pass that in the three hundred and eightieth year the Lamanites did come again against us to battle, and we did stand against them boldly; but it was all in vain, for so great were their numbers that they did tread the people of the Nephites under their feet.

7 And it came to pass that we did again take to flight, and those whose flight was swifter than the Lamanitesâ?? did escape, and those whose flight did not exceed the Lamanitesâ?? were swept down and destroyed.

8 And now behold, I, Mormon, do not desire to harrow up the souls of men in casting before them such an awful scene of blood and carnage as was laid before mine eyes; but I, knowing that these things must surely be made known, and that all things which are hid must be arevealed upon the house-topsâ??

Allow me to repeat my CFR with some emphasis added.

CFR that stragglers who were not fast enough were slaughtered en route to Cumorah.

The Nephites began gathering to Cumorah in Mormon 6. These verses in Mormon 5 occurred prior to the gathering at Cumorah. Normally I would not split hairs like this, but your original intent was a commentary on what went on during the journey to Cumorah. The only thing that the text says about the journey is this.

Mormon 6

4 And it came to pass that we did march forth to the land of Cumorah, and we did pitch our tents round about the hill Cumorah; and it was in a land of amany waters, rivers, and fountains; and here we had hope to gain advantage over the Lamanites.

5 And *when athree hundred and eighty and four years had passed away, we had gathered in all the remainder of our people unto the land of Cumorah.

We know almost nothing about the trip to Cumorah other than the period of time it took to gather all the Nephites there. You cannot assume that active Nephite-Lamanite hostilities continued during the period of gathering to Cumorah.

[Freedom]

Freedom, for you to make the argument that because the brethren are wrong on the homosexual issue, then they are also wrong on the Cumorah issue will take you nowhere with me, and I suspect most on this board, even though they may not share the single Cumorah belief.

Again, this isn't a Prop 8 thread.

So you are arguing that they can be wrong about anything but Cumorah? My comments that you just quoted never mentioned the homosexual issue, I simply pointed out the error in your logic. You grab onto Talmage as a great scholar on an issue that he knew nothing about but you reject the more recent scholars that new plenty about the issue. In fact you simply created a convenient straw man to hide behind because you realize the serious flaw in your claims. The simple fact is that church leaders can express their opinions and unless their comments are presented to the church and approved by the brethren they are just opinions of no greater value then your own. You are cherry picking the comments to support your point of view and giving these comments more wait that other comments these same leaders have made on other issues such as evolution, the catholic church, card games, politics, was and so forth.

[cinepro]

Here's a fun trivia question:

Which is mentioned more in the Book of Mormon: "Horses", or "Cement"?

[LeSellers]

Which is mntioned more in the Book of Mormon: "Horses", or "Cement"?

Far and away, it's "horses".

Three mentions of "cement" (all in Helaman 3), and 11 of "horses" (including quotes from the Old Testament — three in Alma 18).

Lehi

[cinepro]

Far and away, it's "horses".

Three mentions of "cement" (all in Helaman 3), and 11 of "horses" (including quotes from the Old Testament ? three in Alma 18).

Lehi

Which makes me wonder, is our understanding of "cement" in the Book of Mormon as tentative and flexible as that of "horse"?

[Calm]

Haven't caught up with all the replies yet, but wanted to make a comment about how the LGT appears to diminish the message to Native Americans with their ties to Israel, etc.

Assuming an original LGT, this does not stop those who migrated from Israel from being ancestors of the vast majority of NAs (if not all) anymore than it stops the Jews from the limited geography of Israel from being the ancestors of a huge portion of the world's population.

It would seem that the relationship for believers among NAs to the BoM would be much like the relationship with the Bible for those of us who in our patriarchal blessing have been told we belong to a particular tribe of Israel. There is a lineage connection that is established through a blessing in the latter case, there is a lineage connection established through teachings in the other. I don't see any difference beneficially speaking between those of us like me who can trace our ancestry back to Israel through genealogy and those who must rely on their blessing to make that connection for them.

[Calm]

In 4 years? I give a a nation fleeing and gathering for their lives much more credit that that. The pioneers traversed half the US in a few months. Even with long stops to regroup, 4 years is easily enough time to move that kinds of mass.

Why would they chose to travel so long and so far? What advantage would that give them? What advantage would it provide for the Lamanite king (and I have a real hard time believing that even given colonies scattered all over, that one king in that day and age would have enough power over that large of area to threaten and then ultimately exterminate. Look how long it took the US to do it to the native population at the time and that covered less area and the natives were much less technologically developed.

Are you suggesting that Cumorah was out in the boondocks in relation to the rest of the civilization? If so, why is it used as a gathering place for all? Why not something more central that would likely allow more to gather together rather than die or at least be delayed on the way getting there.

edit: removed last question due to confusion with Shim.

[Calm]

There is also the issue of how far Coriantumr after the battle at Ramah/Cumorah had to travel to hook up with the group he met later on (Zarahemla) and Ether having to place his record where Limhi's group found them: "Ether 15:33 And the Lord spake unto Ether, and said unto him: Go forth. And he went forth, and beheld that the words of the Lord had all been fulfilled; and he finished his record; (and the hundredth part I have not written) and he hid them in a manner that the people of Limhi did find them."

also:

Mosiah 21:25 Now king Limhi had sent, previous to the coming of Ammon, a small number of men to search for the land of Zarahemla; but they could not find it, and they were lost in the wilderness.

26 Nevertheless, they did find a land which had been peopled; yea, a land which was covered with dry bones; yea, a land which had been peopled and which had been destroyed; and they, having supposed it to be the land of Zarahemla, returned to the land of Nephi, having arrived in the borders of the land not many days before the coming of Ammon.

27 And they brought a record with them, even a record of the people whose bones they had found; and it was engraven on plates of ore.

It seems strange that they found the Jaredite land which would be north of Ramah/Cumorah while they were looking for Zarahemla which would be way, way south of Ramah/Cumorah. They certainly had not had the four years in which to travel that the later Nephites had either.

I am lost when it comes to the HGT locations. Where is it suggested Coriantumr ended up and where are the Limhites supposed to have wandered and how long and how far?

[Calm]

According to Ether, Cumorah and the hill Shim were south of the central Jaredite occupation.

Where is Shim supposedly located in regards to the HGT?

Here are the mentions made of Shim in the BoM:

Morm. 1: 3

3 Therefore, when ye are about twenty and four years old I would that ye should remember the things that ye have observed concerning this people; and when ye are of that age go to the land Antum, unto a hill which shall be called Shim; and there have I deposited unto the Lord all the sacred engravings concerning this people.

Morm. 4: 23

23 And now I, Mormon, seeing that the Lamanites were about to overthrow the land, therefore I did go to the hill Shim, and did take up all the records which Ammaron had hid up unto the Lord.

Ether 9: 3

3 And the Lord warned Omer in a dream that he should depart out of the land; wherefore Omer departed out of the land with his family, and traveled many days, and came over and passed by the hill of Shim, and came over by the place where the Nephites were destroyed, and from thence eastward, and came to a place which was called Ablom, by the seashore, and there he pitched his tent, and also his sons and his daughters, and all his household, save it were Jared and his family.

add-on: Shim would also appear to be north of Ramah/Cumorah which contradicts the premise that Mormon and his people were more or less traveling north from Shim to Cumorah and places Cumorah closer to the main population centers (which makes sense for a gathering place) to the general population. (I am making an assumption because the battle is described as moving southward and I am assuming that Shim was in the area previously settled, however if it only functioned as a landmark on the way to a place of refuge and it wasn't a center of population, no such conclusions can be drawn...except perhaps it needs to be relatively close to Ramah/Cumorah.)

add-on and on: Hagoth was mentioned above in a post--

5 And it came to pass that Hagoth, he being an exceedingly curious man, therefore he went forth and built him an exceedingly large ship, on the borders of the land Bountiful, by the land Desolation, and launched it forth into the west sea, by the narrow neck which led into the land northward.

6 And behold, there were many of the Nephites who did enter therein and did sail forth with much provisions, and also many women and children; and they took their course northward. And thus ended the thirty and seventh year.

7 And in the thirty and eighth year, this man built other ships. And the first ship did also return, and many more people did enter into it; and they also took much provisions, and set out again to the land northward.

8 And it came to pass that they were never heard of more. And we suppose that they were drowned in the depths of the sea. And it came to pass that one other ship also did sail forth; and whither she did go we know not.

Even assuming that the first ship returned in the second year, we don't know how long it was gone as it may have left late in the first year and returned early in the second year. There is also no reason to assume the ship would have returned immediately on the disembarking of the colonists and their possessions. They may have wanted all the manpower available to help them get established or wanted to live aboard the ships until they had established a safe haven. Also note that it only says they lost contact with the second voyage of the first ship and the one other ship that left after its return and second departure. It does not say the original parties were lost total contact with though this might have been the case.

[Sevenbak]

Here's a fun trivia question:

Which is mentioned more in the Book of Mormon: "Horses", or "Cement"?

Horses.

I think we should include chariots in that. Horses and Chariots are mentioned together as late as right before the birth of Christ as the people were gathering together for protection from the robbers.

[Sevenbak]

Why would they chose to travel so long and so far? What advantage would that give them? What advantage would it provide for the Lamanite king (and I have a real hard time believing that even given colonies scattered all over, that one king in that day and age would have enough power over that large of area to threaten and then ultimately exterminate. Look how long it took the US to do it to the native population at the time and that covered less area and the natives were much less technologically developed.

Are you suggesting that Cumorah was out in the boondocks in relation to the rest of the civilization? If so, why is it used as a gathering place for all? Why not something more central that would likely allow more to gather together rather than die or at least be delayed on the way getting there.

edit: removed last question due to confusion with Shim.

No, I've never said the land was devoid of people. They were gathering continually.

I believe the Hopewellian culture or mound builders who disappeared about 400 AD matches the those who lived and died in the land northward, and that the "great slaughter" described by Mormon and Moroni as they fled and gathered to cumorah included these peoples.

[shrff]

No, I've never said the land was devoid of people. They were gathering continually.

I believe the Hopewellian culture or mound builders who disappeared about 400 AD matches the those who lived and died in the land northward, and that the "great slaughter" described by Mormon and Moroni as they fled and gathered to cumorah included these peoples.

This statement is not entirely accurate. First, Hopewell was not a culture, it was an exchange system or interaction sphere that included a good chunk of the eastern US. Referring to a "Hopewell Culture" is a misnomer. There are several archaeoloigcal cultures within the Hopewell system, most notably the Ohio Hopewell. Are you referring to one of these archaeological cultures?

Second, neither the Moundbuilders nor the people participating in the Hopewell system disappeared. What declined and eventually disappeared was the exchange system. Mound construction slowed way down, but there are some mounds that were constructed during the succeeding Middle Woodland. Moundbuilding ramped up again many years later in places, most notably at Cahokia and Moundville.

[Sevenbak]

This statement is not entirely accurate. First, Hopewell was not a culture, it was an exchange system or interaction sphere that included a good chunk of the eastern US. Referring to a "Hopewell Culture" is a misnomer. There are several archaeoloigcal cultures within the Hopewell system, most notably the Ohio Hopewell. Are you referring to one of these archaeological cultures?

Second, neither the Moundbuilders nor the people participating in the Hopewell system disappeared. What declined and eventually disappeared was the exchange system. Mound construction slowed way down, but there are some mounds that were constructed during the succeeding Middle Woodland. Moundbuilding ramped up again many years later in places, most notably at Cahokia and Moundville.

I concur it wasn't just a culture, but a broad network that included both the midwest and Northeast. Here's a pic from wiki:

For Moroni to have to travel 2000 miles though these people and places, and not mention them is just astounding to me, especially since he says he was alone except for the Lamanites. Then there's the fact that he had just translated the Book of Ether, who stated that the New Jerusalem was to be upon this land is also astounding. Having Moroni walk 2000 miles alone with the heavy plates, sword, Liahona, U&T just adds many problems to the modern theory.

[Sevenbak]

I'll add this statement by Joseph Smith as well, since we've progressed to Mound Builder issues. This goes much further than "Plains of the Nephites" or Zelphs mound statements.

"If men, in their researches into the history of this country, in noticing the mounds, fortifications, statues, architecture, implements of war, of husbandry, and ornaments of silver, brass, &c. - were to examine the Book of Mormon, their conjectures would be removed, and their opinions altered; uncertainty and doubt would be changed into certainty and facts; and they would find that those things that they are anxiously prying into were matters of history, unfolded in that book. They would find their conjectures more than realized - that a great and mighty people had inhabited this continent-that the arts sciences and religion, had prevailed to a very great extent, and that there was as great and mighty cities on this continent as on the continent of Asia."

"American Antiquities", Times and Seasons, Joseph Smith (editor), Vol. 3., No. 18, July 15, 1842, pg 860

[shrff]

Are you interested in supporting your proposition that the "Hopewellian Culture or Mound Builders... disappeared"? The current data suggest that following the breakdown of the Hopewell Exchange Network, the successive Late Woodland populations dispersed rather than decreased. The people spread out on the landscape, their exchange system disappeared, but the people did not.

[JarMan]

It matters to me, because I think the modern view somehow diminishes from the truths known and taught by the prophets, as if they couldn't possibly know, and we are so much smarter than them because we have "modern science".

Just a pet peeve of mine

Here's a pet peeve of mine: Insisting that GA's are necessarily authorities on non-doctrinal matters.

Here's another one: Straw men. As far as I can tell nobody in this thread said the earlier prophets couldn't possibly know or that we are so much smarter than them because of modern science.

One more for good measure: Putting quotes around the words "modern science" in a way that suggests that it is neither modern nor science.