BoM Geography: The Gloves are Off...

[cinepro]

Recent discussions on Book of Mormon geography scarcely prepared me for this weekend. While staying with some friends for the Thanksgiving holiday, we were enjoying some BoM reading on Wednesday evening when the a verse under consideration (in Helaman 3) caused the father to comment on the probable location of these events being in the northeastern portion of what is now the USA. By way of background, this family is very, very "TBM" (the father is serving his second call as Bishop), and they are especially well read in "Deseret Book" type stuff.

Intrigued by his comment, I asked where that came from. He then told me how a member of his ward had lent them a DVD that argued for a "Great Lakes" location for the BoM, and he was very convinced by it. The DVD was produced by "Wayne May", apparently a precursor to Rodney Meldrum. I was able to watch about 25 minutes of it (it's 2 hours long!), and found it to be very interesting.

Then, this afternoon, a book came in the mail. Turns out the video had been convincing enough for my host to order one of Wayne May's books! It's about 200 pages, with lots of pictures, but I found the most interesting points to be in the introduction. Here are some excerpts:

A major question in Book of Mormon studies is, "where was the Land of Zarahemla really?" There can be no real Book of Mormon Archaeology until the true real world setting of the Book of Mormon is identified. It will not do to just dig up any arcaheological site in the Americas and call it a Book of Momron site. there have been many theories in the past about this, but none has been able to answer the question to the satisfaction of the authors. the theory that is presented in this book harmonizes things that were previously misunderstood. This book shows that the Hill Cumorah where the Nephites were destroyed really was in New York, an that the heartland of the Npehite culture, being the land of Zarahemla, was not too far from it.

For over 100 years, the majority of people did not doubt that Cumorah was really in New York, and the prophets were consistent in their teachings about that fact. The only thing that was ever in doubt was how far south the rest of the lands mentioned in the Book of Mormon were from Cumorah in New York. the popular theory that the Land Southward including Zarahemla was in Mesoamerica started in 1842 with some speculation in the church. Later, certain people identified the Isthmus of Panama as the "obvious" narrow neck mentioned in the Book of Mormon. From this promiscuous mix of speculation spawned the idea the the Book of Mormon Lands covered the whole hemisphere.

Then the Mesoamericanists came along with the idea of a theory that the Book of Mormon Lands only took up a few hundred miles. They believe that Cumorah and all the rest of the lands were actually down in Mesoamerica, so they have dispensed entirely with a Cumorah in New York state.

.....

Unlike previous researchers, we have directly challenged the notions of the Mesoamericanists and taken their dogmatism head-on that it was impossible that the Book of Mormon Lands could be in the Great Lakes region. Previous researchers seemed to not dare to take on the Mesoamericanists, but seemed to pretend that there was no need to challenge them. They seemed to believe it was enough that prophets said Cumorah was in New York, so that was all the evidence they needed, when it was only one of the spices in the soup, not all the ingredients. The fact is, if the Mesoamericanists are never directly challenged, their theory will always dominate the scholarly opinion in the church. If there is never a paradigm shift in the scholarly opinion of the church towards a Great Lakes setting, the church will forever be held in the clutches of an incorrect theory.

If any revelation is ever to be had on the geography by a prophet to tell us finally how it is, surely some kind of research would have to come out some time beforehand to show the plausibility of such a revelation, to prepare the minds of the people for it. Otherwise, such a revelation would probably be doubted because "everybody knows it's in Mexico". Such a thing would be a preparatory work. We make no special claims ,but we do see the potential need for such a thing. If so, perhaps this book will fill the void, and who the need for further research in this long ignored area of North America. If FARMS is going to spend large sums in their research in Mexico, all we ask is that they spend an equal amount of money on the United States. What they will find just may surprise them. Perhaps if they won't take it seriously yet because of their pet theory, eventually someone will have to give them a good enough reason.

"This Land: Zarahemla and the Nephite Nation - Only One Cumorah!" by Edwin Goble and Wayne May

Introduction

2002

Beyond the introduction, the book goes into great detail arguing for the different aspects of the Great Lakes theory, but most surprisingly (and disturbingly), it is very, very dependent on the Michigan Relics. Not a good sign. (Also, you can read this review by Mesoamericanist Brant Gardner.)

Beyond the DVD and book, I was also surprised to peruse the latest issue of the LDS-targeted newspaper "Mormon Times", and found two ads for Great Lakes-promoting books (including an ad occupying no less than a half-page of space for Rodney Meldrum's latest and something called "Choice Above All Other Lands" by Vincent Coon).

These are definitely interesting times for Book of Mormon archaeology, and it's been an interesting couple of days for Cinepro!

[Calm]

You might be interested in this:

http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Geography/Models/Limited/Goble-May_2002

Goble has pointed out that one of his ideas is quite unique, and matches the Heartland model's claim:

[Honorentheos]

These are definitely interesting times for Book of Mormon archaeology, and it's been an interesting couple of days for Cinepro!

I am friends with Wayne May's son and we were in the military (army reserve) together. I found him to be very respectful of other LDS's views of the BoM geography and only once had a long, indepth discussion with him on the topic where I got a sense that he saw things as being fiercely divided. In that discussion he didn't have much good to say for the Mesoamerican LTG model. At the time, I was very TBM and also generally agreed with him broadly though my views then were that the geography was a secondary concern to the spiritual message and if I had a model in my sub-conscious it was something that was a North American hybrid of the Hemispheric model and the stuff he was sharing. After a while he could tell I didn't share his "enthusiasm" for that particular subject and let it go.

Wayne gave a talk in my parent's stake I think, (his son lives in it now with his family) about two years or so ago. My parents were very convinced that he had it right. They brought it up and I questioned it at a family picnic just to see how versed they were and didn't get the impression they were deeply engaged in the debate and it was more of a personal thing for them. The Brother May they know is a good guy, his dad makes a good case, and in the end, it's a secondary matter to them compared to the spiritual aspects of the book.

My dad asked what I thought, and my response was, "You really don't want to know that, do you?" Might as well debate if Narnia was actually in the Wardrobe...

Anyway, I'm not sure if this represents a resurge by the May's or is just an isolated case of someone being made aware of their material. They have been around for quite a while, and I don't know that I have heard much new from back home about it to be able to say.

[Daniel Peterson]

Those particular gloves came off in 2002, according to the copyright date.

Incidentally, what research is FARMS doing in Mesoamerica? I'm supposed to be a leader of the organization. I need to know.

[ed2276]

Recent discussions on Book of Mormon geography scarcely prepared me for this weekend. While staying with some friends for the Thanksgiving holiday, we were enjoying some BoM reading on Wednesday evening when the a verse under consideration (in Helaman 3) caused the father to comment on the probable location of these events being in the northeastern portion of what is now the USA. By way of background, this family is very, very "TBM" (the father is serving his second call as Bishop), and they are especially well read in "Deseret Book" type stuff.

Intrigued by his comment, I asked where that came from. He then told me how a member of his ward had lent them a DVD that argued for a "Great Lakes" location for the BoM, and he was very convinced by it. The DVD was produced by "Wayne May", apparently a precursor to Rodney Meldrum. I was able to watch about 25 minutes of it (it's 2 hours long!), and found it to be very interesting.

Then, this afternoon, a book came in the mail. Turns out the video had been convincing enough for my host to order one of Wayne May's books! It's about 200 pages, with lots of pictures, but I found the most interesting points to be in the introduction. Here are some excerpts:

Beyond the introduction, the book goes into great detail arguing for the different aspects of the Great Lakes theory, but most surprisingly (and disturbingly), it is very, very dependent on the Michigan Relics. Not a good sign. (Also, you can read this review by Mesoamericanist Brant Gardner.)

Beyond the DVD and book, I was also surprised to peruse the latest issue of the LDS-targeted newspaper "Mormon Times", and found two ads for Great Lakes-promoting books (including an ad occupying no less than a half-page of space for Rodney Meldrum's latest and something called "Choice Above All Other Lands" by Vincent Coon).

These are definitely interesting times for Book of Mormon archaeology, and it's been an interesting couple of days for Cinepro!

How would the heartland location in the Great Lakes account for the division into the land northward and the land southward, separated by a narrow neck of land?

Also, Helaman records that timber was scarce in the land northward and that "... they did send forth much by the way of shipping."( Helaman 3:10) Is there anything about the Great Lakes region that tells us timber was scarce there or that the inhabitants of the area were shipping goods?

Watching the videos, Dawn of the Maya, it is shown that deforestation was going on in order to make lime cement to coat Mayan buildings. This would result in a scarcity of timber, as Helaman tells us. There is some indication that there was a shipping trade going on, at least from South America (Ecuador) toward West Mexico.

The Israelites had a sea-faring trade history, which would seem to suggest it would be possible for the Nephites to develop a shipping trade, especially since we have the account of Hagoth, and that more than one ship was built:

" And in the thirty and eighth year, this man built other ships." (Alma 63:7)

" But behold, a hundredth part of the proceedings of this people... and their shipping and their building of ships...cannot be contained in this work." (Helaman 3:14)

Then there is a paper which demonstrates there was an active pre-Columbian maritime trade along the South American/Mexican coastline:

Recent anthropological and archaeological research has provided multiple and independent lines of evidence to support the proposition that sustained, pre-Columbian communications existed between regions that are today Ecuador and West Mexico...

The conclusive evidence, however, is found in the typological and technical matches of metal artifacts between these two regions. Exhaustive research carried out by archaeometallurgist Dorothy Hosler (Massachussets Institute of Technology) has shown that the techniques of metal artifact production and the alloy compositions in these two areas are virtually identical, and further, that metallurgy was apparently introduced to West Mexico, most likely from West Ecuador, around 800AD (Hosler 1988). Hosler suggests that while it is clear raw material in the form of ore was not transported North from Ecuador to West Mexico, metallurgical technology was, probably in the form of smiths physically transported aboard merchant ships." Manteno Expedition, 1998-1999, Smith, pg. 4-5)

and,

It is clear that an active, organised maritime trade operated out of Ecuador, dating to at least 1500BC (Paulsen 1977), and possibly as early as 2500BC (Zeidler 1991). Manteno Expedition, 1998-1999, Smith, pg. 5)

However, it is pointed out that the evidence seems to show that the maritime trade that was going on between pre-Columbian Ecuador and West Mexico originated in Ecuador, rather than from the Mexican region.

The lack of evidence for aboriginal sailing craft North of Ecuador, and the long record of historic accounts of native sailing craft operating from Ecuador, suggests that contact was initiated by Ecuadorean mariners headed North, rather than West Mexican mariners headed South.

Manteno Expedition, 1998-1999, Smith, pg. 5)

I wonder, does anyone know of more recent evidence that might show an active maritime trade of Mexican/Mesoamerican origin that might fit with the BoM account of a shipping trade?

The link to the entire paper from which I quoted: here

[handys003]

How would the heartland location in the Great Lakes account for the division into the land northward and the land southward, separated by a narrow neck of land?

Also, Helaman records that timber was scarce in the land northward and that "... they did send forth much by the way of shipping."( Helaman 3:10) Is there anything about the Great Lakes region that tells us timber was scarce there or that the inhabitants of the area were shipping goods?

Watching the videos, Dawn of the Maya, it is shown that deforestation was going on in order to make lime cement to coat Mayan buildings. This would result in a scarcity of timber, as Helaman tells us. There is some indication that there was a shipping trade going on, at least from South America (Ecuador) toward West Mexico.

The Israelites had a sea-faring trade history, which would seem to suggest it would be possible for the Nephites to develop a shipping trade, especially since we have the account of Hagoth, and that more than one ship was built:

" And in the thirty and eighth year, this man built other ships." (Alma 63:7)

" But behold, a hundredth part of the proceedings of this people... and their shipping and their building of ships...cannot be contained in this work." (Helaman 3:14)

Then there is a paper which demonstrates there was an active pre-Columbian maritime trade along the South American/Mexican coastline:

and,

However, it is pointed out that the evidence seems to show that the maritime trade that was going on between pre-Columbian Ecuador and West Mexico originated in Ecuador, rather than from the Mexican region.

I wonder, does anyone know of more recent evidence that might show an active maritime trade of Mexican/Mesoamerican origin that might fit with the BoM account of a shipping trade?

The link to the entire paper from which I quoted: here

Have you seen Peru: Land of the BoM by George Potter? He also has other DVD's from the www.NephiProject.com particularly the Trail of Lehi (6 parts). It explains very well maritime from Bountiful in Khori Rohr to the New World. He is also by e-mail I received working on ancient sailing techniques and routes possibly used by those ancient mariners. he is also discussing these with the Polynesian Voyaging Society.

[ed2276]

Have you seen Peru: Land of the BoM by George Potter? He also has other DVD's from the www.NephiProject.com particularly the Trail of Lehi (6 parts). It explains very well maritime from Bountiful in Khori Rohr to the New World. He is also by e-mail I received working on ancient sailing techniques and routes possibly used by those ancient mariners. he is also discussing these with the Polynesian Voyaging Society.

No, I haven't seen that. This possibility of a Nephite merchant marine is all completely new to me. I had never considered that there might be a maritime trade going on in these pre-Columbian societies. I was reading from Helaman 3 after someone on the board had quoted it for a different reason, and I noticed "shipping". When I saw it, I was shocked that it never registered with me before. How did I miss that?

I never considered that Israel was a sea-faring nation either. I went back to the Bible and, remembering the "ships of Tarshish", saw that they did have a maritime trade also. So, this would not be a foreign concept that needed to be developed from scratch by the Nephites. I just didn't know if there was any evidence for such pre-Columbian/ Mesoamerican trade.

I find this pretty fascinating, and I will definitely check out the link you provided.

thanks,

ed

[Mordecai]

I think that New York is one place where the BoMormon last battle couldn't possibly have occurred. Why would Moroni travel around for so long only to come back to the place where he started, especially when he was being hunted by Lamanites? Also, the BoMormon says that the OTHER records were hidden in the hill Cumorah. So the plates Moroni took with him would have had to have been placed in a different hill. The New York Hill Comorah is not the BoMormon Cumorah.

[Maya]

I find this very interesting. Thank you.

[ed2276]

Have you seen Peru: Land of the BoM by George Potter? He also has other DVD's from the www.NephiProject.com particularly the Trail of Lehi (6 parts). It explains very well maritime from Bountiful in Khori Rohr to the New World. He is also by e-mail I received working on ancient sailing techniques and routes possibly used by those ancient mariners. he is also discussing these with the Polynesian Voyaging Society.

Oh my! PERU!? I went to Potter's site and didn't imagine I would be up until 4am reading his articles, one after the other!

On the surface, he seems to make a good case for the Jaredite lands and Nephite lands in Peru. I'll have to dig deeper into it...after I get some sleep.

[Anijen]

IMO New York is to me without a doubt a very problematical setting. I find the Peru setting much better than the New York one, however it too isn't without its problems. The one that fits perfectly for me is Mesoamerica. Just my two cents.

[cdowis]

I never considered that Israel was a sea-faring nation either. I went back to the Bible and, remembering the "ships of Tarshish", saw that they did have a maritime trade also. So, this would not be a foreign concept that needed to be developed from scratch by the Nephites. I just didn't know if there was any evidence for such pre-Columbian/ Mesoamerican trade.

One criticism of the the BOM is that it contains the name Timothy, an obviously Greek name.

Someone suggested that the Mulekites went to the local Greek sailors, who then took them on their ships. These sailors remained with the Mulekites, and may have brought their sailing skills as a basis for the shipping trade.

[erichard]

Oh my! PERU!? I went to Potter's site and didn't imagine I would be up until 4am reading his articles, one after the other!

On the surface, he seems to make a good case for the Jaredite lands and Nephite lands in Peru. I'll have to dig deeper into it...after I get some sleep.

Hi ed,

It will be interesting to see what conclusions George Potter comes up with as he explores Peru.

I emailed him once and mentioned the Priddis model, and he surprised me in saying he did not remember it. Then later he did admit he had heard of it long before-- just after his mission to Bolivia (as I remember), but was not particularly convinced by it. He said he would read it again, however.

The Priddis model has one major problem in many people's minds: it requires that the Amazon basin and other South American lands were underwater before the time of Christ (when the land was changed to the way it is today). To those who trust science religiously, this is completely ridiculous. But not to me.

If believing in the Book of Mormon itself contradicts "science" in many ways, and takes faith, then does it take more faith to believe catastrophic events could have occurred only 2000 years ago-- especially when the Book of Mormon mentions some version of them?

It is not even debatable scientifically, by the way, that the Andes rose greatly at some point. And there are farming terraces in the Andes at 12,000 feet-- about 3,000 feet higher than farming can take place. This is evidence that the Andes rose in human history.

You can get the Priddis book pretty cheap.

Richard

[livy111us]

John Sorensons new paper goes over some interesting evidences of pre-columbian voyages to and from the Americas. Some of it was published in his last book, but he hits the main points.

http://sino-platonic.org/complete/spp195_mesoamerica.pdf

[cinepro]

Those particular gloves came off in 2002, according to the copyright date.

I was commenting more on the prominent advertising in the "Mormon Times" newspaper; while this book is obviously a few years old, it seems to be a more recent "push" with firesides and advertising not just for Meldrum but for all the different Great Lakes promoters.

Incidentally, what research is FARMS doing in Mesoamerica? I'm supposed to be a leader of the organization. I need to know.

I wondered about that as well. Would he have been talking about the NWAF?

[Wiki Wonka]

Quoting Wayne May's book:

Later, certain people identified the Isthmus of Panama as the "obvious" narrow neck mentioned in the Book of Mormon.

One of those "certain people" was Joseph Smith (the "Isthmus of Darien" is the "Isthmus of Panama"):

[W]e have found another important fact relating to the truth of the Book of Mormon. Central America, or Guatimala [Guatemala], is situated north of the Isthmus of Darien and once embraced several hundred miles of territory from north to south.-The city of Zarahemla, burnt at the crucifixion of the Savior, and rebuilt afterwards, stood upon this land as will be seen from the following words in the book of Alma...It is certainly a good thing for the excellency and veracity, of the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon, that the ruins of Zarahemla have been found where the Nephites left them: and that a large stone with engravings upon it as Mosiah said; and a 'large round stone, with the sides sculptured in hieroglyphics,' as Mr. Stephens has published, is also among the left remembrances of the, (to him,) lost and unknown. We are not going to declare positively that the ruins of Quirigua are those of Zarahemla, but when the land and the stones, and the books tell the story so plain, we are of opinion, that it would require more proof than the Jews could bring to prove the disciples stole the body of Jesus from the tomb, to prove that the ruins of the city in question, are not one of those referred to in the Book of Mormon...It will not be a bad plan to compare Mr. Stephens' ruined cities with those in the Book of Mormon: light cleaves to light, and facts are supported by facts.

"Zarahemla," Times and Seasons 3/23 (1 October 1842): 927 (emphasis added)

Page 942 of this issue of the Times and Seasons states: "The Times and Seasons, Is edited, printed and published about the first fifteenth of every month, on the corner of Water and Bain Streets, Nauvoo, Hancock County, Illinois, by JOSEPH SMITH."

In order to discount this statement, one has to assume that Joseph Smith had no interaction with the newspaper because he was in hiding and that this was really John Taylor's idea.

Nevertheless, the Church continued down this path. I have a 1970 edition of the Book of Mormon which includes dozens of full-color photographs of ruins and artifacts from Mesoamerica and Peru. Then, of course, there was the 1970s era filmstrip "Ancient America Speaks." During my mission in 1979, we showed this to every investigator:

This is showing a limited geography at least 15 years before the Mesoamerican limited geography was published in a two-part series in the Ensign in 1984.

John L. Sorenson, "Digging into the Book of Mormon: Our Changing Understanding of Ancient America and Its Scripture, Part 1," Ensign (September 1984): 27. link.

John L. Sorenson,

[Honestly]

How would the heartland location in the Great Lakes account for the division into the land northward and the land southward, separated by a narrow neck of land?

They don't. A Mississippi River based model cannot fit. No head, flows the wrong way, no sea to the west and east of it.

Also, Helaman records that timber was scarce in the land northward and that "... they did send forth much by the way of shipping."( Helaman 3:10) Is there anything about the Great Lakes region that tells us timber was scarce there or that the inhabitants of the area were shipping goods?

Good points. Only in the Jaredite Land Northward do we learn of shipping and a need for timber. The River Sidon however was never used for shipping. The River Sidon did not flow into the Land Northward. May/Meldrum are oblivious to these facts.

Watching the videos, Dawn of the Maya, it is shown that deforestation was going on in order to make lime cement to coat Mayan buildings. This would result in a scarcity of timber, as Helaman tells us. There is some indication that there was a shipping trade going on, at least from South America (Ecuador) toward West Mexico.

Two points, Book of Mormon lands were "hidden" not along common trade routes. They did replant so deforestation was overcome.

I think that New York is one place where the BoMormon last battle couldn't possibly have occurred. Why would Moroni travel around for so long only to come back to the place where he started, especially when he was being hunted by Lamanites? Also, the BoMormon says that the OTHER records were hidden in the hill Cumorah. So the plates Moroni took with him would have had to have been placed in a different hill. The New York Hill Comorah is not the BoMormon Cumorah.

Easy. Moroni hid in a cave where the other records were hid. He stayed behind and watched their warring, he did not run. David Whitmer said there was a cave near Palmyra where the plates were returned. Both depositories were in Palmyra.

I

- Where are the plates now?

He

- In a cave, where the angel has hidden them up till the time arrives when the plates, which are sealed, shall be translated. God will yet raise up a mighty one, who shall do his work till it is finished and Jesus comes again.

I

- Where is that cave?

He

- In the State of New York.

I

- In the Hill of Cumorah?

He

-

No, but not far from that place.

(P. Willhelm Poulson letter of August 13, 1878 to Editor of

Deseret Evening News

, August 16, 1878)

[Wiki Wonka]

Easy. Moroni hid in a cave where the other records were hid. He stayed behind and watched their warring, he did not run.

For over 30 years? Hiding in a small drumlin?

[handys003]

No, I haven't seen that. This possibility of a Nephite merchant marine is all completely new to me. I had never considered that there might be a maritime trade going on in these pre-Columbian societies. I was reading from Helaman 3 after someone on the board had quoted it for a different reason, and I noticed "shipping". When I saw it, I was shocked that it never registered with me before. How did I miss that?

I never considered that Israel was a sea-faring nation either. I went back to the Bible and, remembering the "ships of Tarshish", saw that they did have a maritime trade also. So, this would not be a foreign concept that needed to be developed from scratch by the Nephites. I just didn't know if there was any evidence for such pre-Columbian/ Mesoamerican trade.

I find this pretty fascinating, and I will definitely check out the link you provided.

thanks,

ed

Type in Nephi Project on YouTube and there will be short videos on Lehi's trail. It's not as detailed as the DVD package and Potter has copyrights. he has to fund his projects so more than likely you have to buy. I'd upload some pics of Incan voyaging canoes and Hawaiian voyaging canoes but right now there is an issue of my attachment space is overloaded and needs to be resolved. When you look at the two both are very similar in hull, rudder, sail rigging, and deck shape. The only difference is the Incans due to lack of hardwood trees and used reeds. Hawaiians had unlimited access to Koa trees and made suitable for sailing. Even though it is maintained by mainlanders that Hawaiians only came to Hawaii about CE it is maintained through Hula chants of Ioa sailing to Hawaii from the Land of Uru (Western S. America) in 55 BCE. Also Matu Hatoa sailed to Rapa Nui (Easter Islands) in 250 BCE and their descendent's spread out among Polynesia.

[John T]

Threads like this intrigue me.

This is not to be argumentative, but to ask a simple question, "Why is it so that you can not difinitively locate Cumorah, or any other LDS artifact, city etc? We can sing "Oh Little town of Bethlehem" and are able to point to it today. Likewise we can point to Jericho on a map, likewise Tyre, likewise Damascus, etc.

Nothing similar can be said of Zarhema, Bountiful or other stuff, with the exception of Cumorah, since JS clearly placed it about 25 miles from where I live according to JSH1:52ff. One might think that as many times as I have on top of the hill, overlooking the area, for there is a great view next to the Moroni statue that there would be some sings saying "Here it was!"

So why do any of you suppose that there is a significant absence of physical data regarding the stuff in the BoM?

As I said at the top, this is not going to be an argumentative attack on anything, so please do not reply on the "we do not need proof" sort of polemic, for that is not my purpose in posting this. But as Solomon said, "There is a reason for everything under the sun..."

What reasons do you propose for the remarkable inability to point the stuff mentioned in the BoM, excepting Jerusalem, and say, "There it is"?

[LeSellers]

"Why is it so that you can not difinitively locate Cumorah, or any other LDS artifact, city etc?

Because we do not have the information needed to do so.

Jerusalem, Tyre, etc., have all been under "western eyes" since their founding 5 0r 6,000 years ago. Zarahemla has not.

If one were to look at Pompeii, we'd see a similar thing. Pompeii was buried by Vesuvius in ad 79. It was a well known city and anyone from Roma to Napoli could point it out. However, until it was accidentally located in the mid XIX, no modern Europeans knew where it was, even though searches were common.

Troy is another example of a city's being lost. The examples, I'm sure, are multitudinous.

The fact that we are unsure of Zarahemla's location does not mean Zarahemla did not exist any more than Troy's location's having been forgotten made it a fable.

I do hasten to point out, though, that this part of your assertion is wholly misleading:

What reasons do you propose for the remarkable inability to point the stuff mentioned in the BoM, excepting Jerusalem, and say, "There it is"?

We have found remarkably plausible candidates for many of the Old World locales described by Nephi: The Valley of Lemuel/River Laman, Shazer, Nahom, Bountiful.

Lehi

[stn9]

I may misrecall, but doesn't Meldrum use the Michigan Relics to support his theory? I attended one of his meetings years ago so I may be wrong.

[cinepro]

I may misrecall, but doesn't Meldrum use the Michigan Relics to support his theory? I attended one of his meetings years ago so I may be wrong.

His list of books for sale include two books that mention the Michigan relics in their description.

IMO, any theory of geography that even mentions the Michigan Relics is in serious trouble. That is a huge red flag.

[John T]

Because we do not have the information needed to do so.

Jerusalem, Tyre, etc., have all been under "western eyes" since their founding 5 0r 6,000 years ago. Zarahemla has not.

If one were to look at Pompeii, we'd see a similar thing. Pompeii was buried by Vesuvius in ad 79. It was a well known city and anyone from Roma to Napoli could point it out. However, until it was accidentally located in the mid XIX, no modern Europeans knew where it was, even though searches were common.

Troy is another example of a city's being lost. The examples, I'm sure, are multitudinous.

The fact that we are unsure of Zarahemla's location does not mean Zarahemla did not exist any more than Troy's location's having been forgotten made it a fable.

I do hasten to point out, though, that this part of your assertion is wholly misleading:

We have found remarkably plausible candidates for many of the Old World locales described by Nephi: The Valley of Lemuel/River Laman, Shazer, Nahom, Bountiful. Lehi

Thank you for your reasoned response, Lehi.

The problem with your explanation is that Pompeii is not mentioned in the Bible; otherwise, it would be an acceptable analogy. We do agree that the ancient city of Tyre (Troy) is "lost" but its demise is exactly in keeping with the prophecy in Ezekiel (ch 38?). With Tyre, anyone can see that it was here, then there.

However the whole "second Cumorrah" stuff has me wondering. Since JS was very specific, why should others try to find another site? Does the very fact that others are trying to find other explanations basically cast aspersions against what JS wrote, and ultimately against his person?

Really that opens up more questions than it purports to solve

[Kevin Christensen]

SNIP

However the whole "second Cumorrah" stuff has me wondering. Since JS was very specific, why should others try to find another site? Does the very fact that others are trying to find other explanations basically cast aspersions against what JS wrote, and ultimately against his person?

Really that opens up more questions than it purports to solve

You cited JSH 1:52 which refers to Joseph Smith removing the record from a hill. You do not cite Joseph Smith specifically identifying this hill as the same hill around which the Nephite and Jaredite destructions occured. Nor do you cite the Book of Mormon passages which describe the hill. If the New York hill and the the Book of Mormon hill are the same, the descriptions should fit. They don't, which is one reason why those claiming that the New York hill is the one always neglect such things in favor of heresay. However, there is a very good candidate in Mesoamerica.

http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon_geography/New_World#Is_there_an_.22official.22_or_revealed_geography.3F

I find it remarkable that the first serious attempt to read the Book of Mormon comprehensively for geographic information, and to create a complete internal map did not appear until 1938? The Mormons simply assumed what the text was saying without taking a careful look.

On another current thread, I have cited Larry Poulsen's matching up the Book of Mormon Sidon with the Mesoamerican Grihalva.

The river Sidon , however, occurs

37 times in 28 different verses with accompanying directional and geographic information related to at least

six different geographical locations. Using satellite maps, a 3D satellite mapping program and the text of the

Book of Mormon, the geography of the Americas was analyzed in an attempt to find unique areas that

correlate with the textual descriptions of the river Sidon. The following comparison with the Grijalva River is

the result of that investigation.

http://www.poulsenll.org/bom/grijalvasidon.html

What these approaches do is to take Joseph Smith seriously as a translator of a real document. They take him very seriously.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA