Jump to content

Book of Mormon Geography Theories


Anijen

Recommended Posts

I'd like to try a different tactic, one less controversial. The Book of Mormon geography, what do we agree on? Using the Book of Mormon as our source to get our facts, and ideas from.

I think if we could establish the standard of using the Book of Mormon as our source it would educate us and we might even learn more about that wonderful book. By quoting verses from the actual writings from those who lived, fought and died in those lands. Perhaps we can pull closer together in our theories and ideas.

Here are the major theories mostly subscribed to;

The LGT (Limited Geography Theory) and the two hill theory

In a nut shell it is the idea that most of the Book of Mormon events and sites take place within a smaller area in Mesoamerica approximately 500 square miles. In the end all the plates are buried in a hill the ancient Jaredites called Ramah and the Nephites called Cumorah. The exception is for the small portion that Moroni carried with him for 36 years were he probably made his way up to New York and buried the plates and other items in a hill now called Cumorah. This same hill is where Joseph Smith recovered the plates.

This is entirely plausible and actually has a similar precedence with the story of shipwrecked sailor David Ingram who made a similar trip in eleven months from Tampico Mexico to the St John River near Canada and Maine

This theory also leaves room for Hagoth and North America being slowly populated and with that the possible expansion into the isles of the sea. Though a little more problematic it could even include Zelph.

Strengths;

- The Olmec Civilization coincides with the Jaredites

- The Mayan Civilization coincides with the Nephites and Lamanites

- Written language

- Astronomy

- Populations that fit with the Book of Mormon

- Domesticated agriculture that could feed such population

- Most Book of Mormon apologist seem to accept this theory in way or another.

- Fits time schedule for traveling the distances described in the Book of Mormon.

- Ensign published a strong article advocating it.

- Is slowly getting recognition.

- Many scholarly works to read on the subject.

Weaknesses;

- Not popular until mid twentieth century.

- Not very well known among the majority of the membership of the church.

The GLT (Great Lakes Theory)

While less plausible is widely held by those such as Rodney Meldrum. It is the theory that the Book of Mormon events were in the finger lake areas. It has the final battle of the Jaredites at the hill Ramah and the final battle between the Nephites and Lamanites at that same hill many centuries later. It has Moroni eluding capture for 36 years where he makes his way back to the same hill and buries the plates where Joseph Smith recovered them.

Strengths;

- The Hopewell Civilization roughly corresponds with Book of Mormon times.

- Traditionally is the most accepted theory (next to the hemispheric model) by early church leaders.

Weaknesses;

-Archeology it is a bit weaker for there is not much to go on as far as things like cement.

- Population does not match the requirement for the Book of Mormon.

- The Hopewell people were hunter gatherers which would not sustain enough food for such population.

- No written language.

- Geographically it is much harder to place in specific terms as far as naming Book of Mormon sites.

The Hemispheric Model

It is the believe that all of South America and North America is the whole area were the events of the Book of Mormon took place.

Strengths;

- Arguably the most widely held belief of early church leaders and members.

Weaknesses;

- The magnitude of area weakens this theory when reading about distances and time it took to travel.

Hybrid Model a mixture between the popular theories;

Strengths;

Weaknesses;

In an effort to be fair I will let Sevenbak describe this model. I cannot because of my own personal bias and I believe Sevenbak has some good points and it contains much plausibility. In fact if it were not for the one Hill theory I would think its weaknesses would be just slightly problematic.

Link to comment

While it can be (and is) argued. Statements made by JS tend to give support the Hemispheric theory.

I agree that Joseph in earlier history did this however after John L. Stephens' publication of Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas and Yucatan Joseph seemed to change his mind on that account. Like one poster said he was very excited when he read and saw some of the illustrations in that book. Perhaps there was recognition.

Noel B. reynolds writes; Enthusiastic comments published at Nauvoo showed that the Church's leaders, including Joseph Smith, were immensely stimulated by the new information. Within a few weeks of the first notice, they announced they had just discovered, by reading Stephens's book, that the Nephites' prime homeland must have been in Central, not South, America. [see Times and Seasons, Vol. 3, No. 22, 15 Sept. 1842, pp. 921-922. Later, the October 1st issue indicated that the editors had learned another important fact relating to the Book of Mormon from studying Stephens' work, namely, that "Central America, or Guatimala [sic]" was where the city of Zarahemla had been. Maps of Guatemala in that day tended to show Chiapas in southern Mexico as part of Guatemala, according to Sorenson.] An implication was that South America might not have been involved to a major degree, or perhaps not at all. (Also implicit was the point that the old interpretation was not considered by them to have come by revelation.)

I actually wanted to just use the Book of Mormon for the source of discussion here but I wont disregard other sources. Thanks for your input.

Anijen

Link to comment

The Great Lakes Theory was *not* the most accepted theory in the early Church. The most accepted theory was a Hemispheric Geography Theory. A quick read through the Times and Seasons has Joseph Smith, the Apostles, and other leaders/members placing it in Canada, Florida, Ohio, Kentucky, Mesoamerica, and South America. The trend is that a North American setting was most popular until about 1840, when a Mesoamerican setting became more popular. That doesn't mean the geography of The Book of Mormon changed, but just that more information about Mesoamerica was being published. They took in anything that could be related to The Book of Mormon and placed the geography there. To them, there didn't seem to be any boundries to it's geography. So, Josiah Priests work had just as much validity as Stephens and Catherwoods book. Catherwoods did not replace Priests info, but added to it.

One thing I do like about these accounts, is that Catherwoods book was used as evidence of the Book of Mormon in missionary work and converted Orson Spencer to the Gospel, from being a Baptist minister for 12 years.

Link to comment

I'd like to try a different tactic, one less controversial. The Book of Mormon geography, what do we agree on? Using the Book of Mormon as our source to get our facts, and ideas from.

...

Here are the major theories mostly subscribed to; ....

Wait, please let the South Amercian LGT get on board before your ship sails....

I have no idea how many subscribe to it, but clearly some of us do. Besides me, I am certain that George Potter and some of his friends do in some way. It is usually listed as one possiblity. This version is significantly different than the Hemispheric model, in that Panama is NOT the narrow neck of land, and the original hill Cumorah is in South America.

The South American LGT

In these versions the Book of Mormon took place in the Andes Mountains, with Cusco as the ancient city of Nephi. The Priddis version is that the Amazon basin was underwater before the geographic catastrophies at time of Christ, and that the bay of Quayaquil was where the narrow neck of land was. With that basis, she determines possible sites for many Book of Mormon places. Potter and his group, having done well in the Middle East finding possible BoM sites, are now focusing on the Andes, and are still working on their model.

Strengths;

The Manco Capac legends have remarkable similarites with the Book of Mormon account of Nephi and his brothers.

The Prophet Joseph reportedly received a revelation that Lehi landed in Chile.

The current body of archaeological evidence suggests that the dominate flow of culture and technology was from Peru northward, not the other way around.

The Peruvians are known to have worked metals as far back as 1400 B.C. There is scant evidence of metalwork in Mesoamerica before A.D. 900

Early Spanish accounts recorded that the pre-Incas did indeed have a written language that was lost before the Spanish arrived. Many believe evidence of it was destroyed by some Spanish priests.

The road system of the Andes is in harmony with the claims of 3 Nephi 6:8

The earliest archeological evidence of a belief in a bearded white god in the Americas is found in Peru, not Mesoamerica. Every Viracocha image at Tiahuanacu is clearly of a god in the form of a man, many with tears. Quetzalcoatl did not become the dominant Mesoamerican god until A.D. 700. It is difficult to associate Jesus Christ with the image of a snake head wearing feathers.

(some of this was lifted from Potter's site)

Weaknesses;

Was not considered by early church leaders

Requires faith in catastrophic events having altered the landscape (which, however, the BoM itself supports)

No actual evidence of a written language in that area.

Has not been researched as much as other models

I am sure other weaknesses and strengths could be found.

Richard

Link to comment

Anijen, in addition to skipping the Potter theory, you have also skipped the Miraculous-Transport LGT Variation, wherein Moroni never travels to Cumorah in New York at all: the plates are just put there miraculously by God. I have heard that idea expressed multiple times by actual Church members, so I'd say it would be right to consider it major. Also, of course, there are variations within the Mesoamerican LGT between various scholars of which rivers are which, which hills go where, where the land northward is, etc.

There are so many possible theories! What I contended in the other thread, and I still hold, is that the Book of Mormon has very few solid, unequivocal constraints geographically. Many clues it has, yes, but few absolute facts.

What about this theory I presented in the other thread (Is the LGT the only plausible geographical theory for the BOM): the Panama as Narrow Neck Medium-Size Geography Theory. Panama could be the narrow neck, and the land of Zarahemla would be the Columbia region, and the Lamanite lands somewhat further south.

You could also easily have a Panama LGT, with Panama as narrow neck and the field of action just as small -- 500 sq. mi. or whatever -- as the Mesoamerican models.

One man has put forth and written a book about a Malay Peninsula Theory. So since there's a book on that one, it could be considered semi-major.

Link to comment

There are at least two events described in the Book of Mormon that must be explained by and integrated into any geography based on the text of the Book of Mormon.

Event 1 - The search party sent out by King Limhi in an attempt to find the city of Zarahemla.

What does the text say about this event?

Mosiah 7:1-4

1 AND now, it came to pass that after king Mosiah had had continual peace for the space of three years, he was desirous to know concerning the people who awent up to dwell in the land of bLehi-Nephi, or in the city of Lehi-Nephi; for his people had heard nothing from them from the time they left the land of cZarahemla; therefore, they wearied him with their teasings.

2 And it came to pass that *king Mosiah granted that sixteen of their strong men might go up to the land of Lehi-Nephi, to inquire concerning their brethren.

3 And it came to pass that on the morrow they started to go up, having with them one aAmmon, he being a strong and mighty man, and a bdescendant of Zarahemla; and he was also their leader.

4 And now, they knew not the course they should travel in the wilderness to go up to the land of Lehi-Nephi; therefore they wandered many days in the wilderness, even aforty days did they wander.

It took at a maximum 40 days to travel from Zarahemla to the Land of Nephi.

Mosiah 21:24-27

25 Now king Limhi had sent, previous to the coming of Ammon, a asmall number of men to bsearch 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 abones; 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 bcoming of Ammon.

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

Mosiah 8:7-11

7 And the king said unto him: Being grieved for the afflictions of my people, I caused that aforty and three of my people should take a journey into the wilderness, that thereby they might find the land of Zarahemla, that we might appeal unto our brethren to deliver us out of bondage.

8 And they were lost in the wilderness for the space of amany days, yet they were diligent, and found not the land of Zarahemla but returned to this land, having traveled in a land among many waters, having discovered a land which was covered with bbones of men, and of beasts, and was also covered with ruins of buildings of every kind, having discovered a land which had been peopled with a people who were as numerous as the hosts of Israel.

9 And for a testimony that the things that they had said are true they have brought atwenty-four plates which are filled with engravings, and they are of pure gold.

10 And behold, also, they have brought abreastplates, which are large, and they are of bbrass and of copper, and are perfectly sound.

11 And again, they have brought swords, the hilts thereof have perished, and the blades thereof were cankered with rust; and there is no one in the land that is able to interpret the language or the engravings that are on the plates. Therefore I said unto thee: Canst thou translate?

King Limhi sent out a search party to find Zarahemla. They traveled until they found ruins that they assumed were the remains of the city of Zarahemla. During their trip they passed through a land of many waters, presumably before finding the ruins since they turned back and returned to King Limhi once they had found the presumed city of Zarahemla. Although the text mentions that they were lost in the wilderness, they apparently knew how to get back to King Limhi, presumably by recording details of their trip out and were therefore ably to retrace their journey and return safely to the Land of Nephi.

Questions:

What characteristic of the geography caused them to get lost and travel to where Ether had presumably hidden the plates?

How far did they travel before turning back?

What might they have known about the city of Zarahemla that caused them to think that the ruins they found were the result of the destruction of the city of Zarahemla?

Event 2 ? The war with the Amlicites and where is the wilderness of Hermounts relative to the city of Zarahemla.

Alma 2:34-38

34 And thus he cleared the ground, or rather the bank, which was on the west of the river Sidon, throwing the bodies of the Lamanites who had been slain into the waters of Sidon, that thereby his people might have room to cross and contend with the Lamanites and the Amlicites on the west side of the river Sidon.

35 And it came to pass that when they had all crossed the river Sidon that the Lamanites and the Amlicites began to flee before them, notwithstanding they were so numerous that they could not be numbered.

36 And they fled before the Nephites towards the wilderness which was west and north, away beyond the borders of the land; and the Nephites did pursue them with their might, and did slay them.

37 Yea, they were met on every hand, and slain and driven, until they were scattered on the west, and on the north, until they had reached the wilderness, which was called Hermounts; and it was that part of the wilderness which was infested by wild and ravenous beasts.

38 And it came to pass that many died in the wilderness of their wounds, and were devoured by those beasts and also the vultures of the air; and their bones have been found, and have been heaped up on the earth.

What does the text say about this event?

The battle took place on the left bank of the river Sidon. There was a wilderness west and north of the battles scene beyond the borders of the land, presumably the land of Zarahemla. Further north and west was a wilderness of wild beasts called Hermounts.

Questions:

What is the significance of the use of the term ?north and west? rather than just northward, northwest or westward?

Does this tell us anything about how the Nephites (Mormon) viewed directional terms?

Do north and west refer to directions or do they refer to the quarter system mentioned elsewhere in the text?

Answers to these questions and incorporation of the geographic details are necessary for there to be any element of confidence in a geographic theory.

Larry P

Link to comment

Thanks erichard and Helmuth those theories are certainly welcome.

Larry, I appreciate your effort in actually bringing Book of Mormon scripture into the discussion.

Mosiah here is referencing the second expedition to Zerahemla.

Mosiah 7:1 And now, it came to pass that after king Mosiah had had continual peace for the space of three years, he was desirous to know concerning the people who went up to dwell in the land of Lehi-Nephi, or in the city of Lehi-Nephi; for his people had heard nothing from them from the time they left the land of Zarahemla; therefore, they wearied him with their teasings.

Let us compare it also to Omni 1:27-30, which gives us some more info.

27 And now I would speak somewhat concerning a certain number who went up into the wilderness to return to the land of Nephi; for there was a large number who were desirous to possess the land of their inheritance.

28 Wherefore, they went up into the wilderness. And their leader being a strong and mighty man, and a stiffnecked man, wherefore he caused a contention among them; and they were all slain, save fifty, in the wilderness, and they returned again to the land of Zarahemla.

29 And it came to pass that they also took others to a considerable number, and took their journey again into the wilderness.

30 And I, Amaleki, had a brother, who also went with them; and I have not since known concerning them. And I am about to lie down in my grave; and these plates are full. And I make an end of my speaking.

We can also read more about this in Mosiah 9:1-2

1 I, Zeniff, having been taught in all the language of the Nephites, and having had a knowledge of the land of Nephi, or of the land of our fathers? first inheritance, *and having been sent as a spy among the Lamanites that I might spy out their forces, that our army might come upon them and destroy them?but when I saw that which was good among them I was desirous that they should not be destroyed.

2 Therefore, I contended with my brethren in the wilderness, for I would that our ruler should make a treaty with them; but he being an austere and a blood-thirsty man commanded that I should be slain; but I was rescued by the shedding of much blood; for father fought against father, and brother against brother, until the greater number of our army was destroyed in the wilderness; and we returned, those of us that were spared, to the land of Zarahemla, to relate that tale to their wives and their children.

Brant Gardner writes; ...this contains no geographic information, it implies that the land of Nephi was not within easy reach of Zerahemla, either because of of forbidden terrain or because of distance. I would have to agree with brother Gardner here. Mosiah 7:2-3 also collaborates with Omni and Mosiah 9.

Continuing on;

Mosiah 7:4 And now, they knew not the course they should travel in the wilderness to go up to the land of Lehi-Nephi; therefore they wandered many days in the wilderness, even forty days did they wander.
Would I be out of touch if I said if they new their way they could have reached their destination in less time? We have to be very careful here and not liken distance in which we travel in our day to the length it would be in their day. We measure distance in miles, kilometers,etc they measured it in in time more specifically in the number of days. We know that this route was traveled in 21 days with women and children and flocks (Mosiah 18:1-7, 23:1-3, 24:20,25) so we can assume the wandering as mentioned above was significant and that 21 days is a good measuring stick to say how long these two distances should be.

What does this tell us?

From the land of Nephi to Zerahemla approximately 21 days

What characteristic of the geography caused them to get lost and travel to where Ether had presumably hidden the plates?

Perhaps they followed the wrong river Brother Gardner has an excellent talk on the matter. the heads of two major rivers are close together, it is very plausible.

Does this tell us anything about how the Nephites (Mormon) viewed directional terms?

Do north and west refer to directions or do they refer to the quarter system mentioned elsewhere in the text?

I would agree it skewers our modernistic perspective of direction. I grew up looking at maps with North and South America center of my maps, but if I were from Turkey that would not be the perspective they would use. The far East to me is the Orient but if I am standing on top of Mt. Fuji the far East would be more East... Yadi yadi yadi.... Larry has a great essay here.
Link to comment

The Great Lakes Theory was *not* the most accepted theory in the early Church. The most accepted theory was a Hemispheric Geography Theory.A quick read through the Times and Seasons has Joseph Smith, the Apostles, and other leaders/members placing it in Canada, Florida, Ohio, Kentucky, Mesoamerica, and South America. The trend is that a North American setting was most popular until about 1840, when a Mesoamerican setting became more popular. That doesn't mean the geography of The Book of Mormon changed, but just that more information about Mesoamerica was being published. They took in anything that could be related to The Book of Mormon and placed the geography there. To them, there didn't seem to be any boundries to it's geography. So, Josiah Priests work had just as much validity as Stephens and Catherwoods book. Catherwoods did not replace Priests info, but added to it.

One thing I do like about these accounts, is that Catherwoods book was used as evidence of the Book of Mormon in missionary work and converted Orson Spencer to the Gospel, from being a Baptist minister for 12 years.

My post agrees with this and that is what I wrote.

The Hemispheric Model Strengths;

- Arguably the most widely held belief of early church leaders and members.

Link to comment

The land of bones found were the remnants of the Jaredites and Either had hid writings in a way and place to be found by this group and these records were taken to Mosiah for translation then we must assume;

Regarding the Hemispheric Theory;

Then we know that Zerehemla is not longer than 40 days distance from this land of desolation (if we are assuming this land of desolation was the final battle place of the Jaredites, the Hill Cumorah or that area in New York).

Could a group who wandered from New York get to Mesoamerica in that amount of time? I think not. So;

1 The Hemisphere model is wrong

2 Or Zerahemla is not in Mesoamerica

3 Or(but unlikely)these guys had a long stride that President Kimball would be very proud of.

regards

Anijen ~I am on some pain killers from a back injury so I could be missing something here, bear with me on this.

Link to comment

It just occurred to me I might be confusing the Jaredites withe Mulekites please ignore my last post if that is the case.

regards

Anijen ~ highly embarrassed but fully using the excuse of a prescription drugs LOL......

Narrow neck of land is were I need to study oops until next time...

Hmm I think I will bow out until I am in a more cognizant frame of mind (no drugs). adieu

Link to comment

My theory...most popular among myself...is that the Nephites WERE in the Great Lakes Area, but the Lord also led other groups of Israelites out of Jerusalem to inhabit other parts of this continent.

LOL

Would these be the strengths and weaknesses?

Strengths;

most popular among myself

Weaknesses;

most popular among myself

Of course all theories are welcome I just have to say yours can be proven true (not specifically about thee Great Lakes)

3rd Nephi 16:1-3

1 And verily, verily, I say unto you that I have other sheep, which are not of this land, neither of the land of Jerusalem, neither in any parts of that land round about whither I have been to minister.

2 For they of whom I speak are they who have not as yet heard my voice; neither have I at any time manifested myself unto them.

3 But I have received a commandment of the Father that I shall go unto them, and that they shall hear my voice, and shall be numbered among my sheep, that there may be one fold and one shepherd; therefore I go to show myself unto them.

Link to comment

Man after rereading and reediting I am still making blunders. to figbearing thistle I quoted a scripture where the savior visits other people and you were saying other people came to the Americas man I am off it today...

Regards

Anijen~ who needs just to stop typing and clear his head. The site was down so long that when it came back I was excited, I rushed into posting while still under the influence of my pain killers arrrgh.

Link to comment

What characteristic of the geography caused them to get lost and travel to where Ether had presumably hidden the plates?

Perhaps they followed the wrong river Brother Gardner has an excellent talk on the matter. the heads of two major rivers are close together, it is very plausible.

I would agree it skewers our modernistic perspective of direction. I grew up looking at maps with North and South America center of my maps, but if I were from Turkey that would not be the perspective they would use. The far East to me is the Orient but if I am standing on top of Mt. Fuji the far East would be more East... Yadi yadi yadi.... Larry has a great essay here.

The idea that they took the wrong river did not originate with Gardner. He was quoting information published on my web site.

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

Brant and I have collaborated on BofM textual interpretations for several years now. He does the Anthropology and I do the geography. We both follow most of what Sorencon has to say, however his take on directions ignored the fact that ancient cultures always used sunrise as their primary directional reference. This was especially true of ancient Mesoamerica. They thought of the world as a rectangular cube with tehmselves at the center of four quarters formed by diagonal lines based on the summer and winter solstices.

directmeso.jpg

This concept of directions is supported by the distribution of directional references found in the text as explained in a short article on my web site.

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

Larry P

Link to comment

Here are the major theories mostly subscribed to;

The LGT (Limited Geography Theory) and the two hill theory

Weaknesses;

- Not popular until mid twentieth century.

- Not very well known among the majority of the membership of the church.

The GLT (Great Lakes Theory)

Strengths;

- The Hopewell Civilization roughly corresponds with Book of Mormon times.

- Traditionally is the most accepted theory (next to the hemispheric model) by early church leaders.

[

This is what I was responding to. Particularly the Mesoamerican model not being "popular" until the twentieth century, and the GLT being second only to the HGT. There really weren't any theories other than the HGT. It was placed in all areas, so proponents of the theories where the quotes place them, use them as evidence for their pet theories and tend to ignore the rest. It would be quite the stretch to argue that it was taught to have happened in only one LGT area.

A Mesoamerican setting, at least in part, was more popular than a Great Lakes setting in Joseph Smiths lifetime. Actually, let me re-phrase that. There are more recorded instances of it happening in Mesoamerica than in the Great Lakes region, and became a strong point of interest the last 4 years of Joseph Smiths life.

Link to comment

A Mesoamerican setting, at least in part, was more popular than a Great Lakes setting in Joseph Smiths lifetime. Actually, let me re-phrase that. There are more recorded instances of it happening in Mesoamerica than in the Great Lakes region, and became a strong point of interest the last 4 years of Joseph Smiths life.

Certainly the artwork both placed in the BoM and the displays of the Visitor Center in SLC indicate this.
Link to comment

Hybrid Model a mixture between the popular theories;

Strengths;

Weaknesses;

In an effort to be fair I will let Sevenbak describe this model. I cannot because of my own personal bias and I believe Sevenbak has some good points and it contains much plausibility. In fact if it were not for the one Hill theory I would think its weaknesses would be just slightly problematic.

As I see it, the hybrid theory is pretty much the same as the Hemispheric Model, only that the inhabitants didn't live in the North Country for more than 400 years or so to the end of the text, beginning with the mass migrations at the end of Alma. It's still the one that makes the most sense to me, given the teachings of the brethren and the numerous references to the promised land, great nation on this land, New Jerusalem, etc. found in the BOM.

Link to comment

Certainly the artwork both placed in the BoM and the displays of the Visitor Center in SLC indicate this.

I don't know. I've always found the maple leaf from the big tree atop Cumorah and the snow as Moroni is burying the plates to be subtle references by Arnold Friberg in those two paintings.

Link to comment

I don't know. I've always found the maple leaf from the big tree atop Cumorah and the snow as Moroni is burying the plates to be subtle references by Arnold Friberg in those two paintings.

Arnold Frieberg (whom I know personally) painted all his art without any influence from the church. Besides nobody I know here who believes in the LGT theory has a problem with Moroni burying the plates at Cumorah in New york. In fact it is what makes the most logical sense, he is being hunted and he flees northward after 36 years he ends up in upstate NY and there is where he buries the plates and a few other items.

Oh and BTW welcome back.

Link to comment

Arnold Frieberg (whom I know personally) painted all his art without any influence from the church. Besides nobody I know here who believes in the LGT theory has a problem with Moroni burying the plates at Cumorah in New york. In fact it is what makes the most logical sense, he is being hunted and he flees northward after 36 years he ends up in upstate NY and there is where he buries the plates and a few other items.

Oh and BTW welcome back.

Thanks, good to be back, it's been busy.

I agree it's just his ideas, but I was responding to the BOM art post. I know him too, did a documentary on his work once. He's pretty eccentric, kicked over my very expensive camera because he didn't like the way the yellowing white paint was captured on tape referencing his Christ descending to the Nephites piece. I didn't say anything, as I still had hours to shoot with him. It chapped my hide though!

BTW, he did have several sessions with the art committee (which included some Apostles) in doing the commissioned works for the Book of Mormon, which were done for the Primary originally. He was pretty feisty with them on suggested changes. Some he caved, others he didn't.

Link to comment
Weaknesses;

- Not popular until mid twentieth century.

- Not very well known among the majority of the membership of the church.

I actually see this as a strenth.

-NOTHING was known about the Olmec and Pre-Classic Maya until the 20th century.

-Joseph didn't know about it either. Which is to be expected; he didn't write the book. He only translated it.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...