Joseph's visions of the Nephite Civilization...

[BOMG]

Mola I am glad your getting that vibe from him too. I thought is it only me that this guy seems to be so condescending?

Wrong!!! Oooookkkkkaaaayyyyyy. You are grasping at straws here. "Large or to exceed all" does not describe Lake Ontario no matter how hard you try. I even gave 2 very good valid reason why that lake does not fit. The Pacific ocean makes a whole lot more sense that taht is Ripliancum, as that ocean is large or "to exceed all".

I tell you what, take yout 'tude some were else. I don't need it.

True motive(s) revealed. I tried to flush you two/three out at the start, oh well, gosh, did I offend someone.

[Anijen]

True motive(s) revealed. I tried to flush you two/three out at the start, oh well, gosh, did I offend someone.

Ha, I wouldn't know your motives to try to flush us out at the start. But I will take it as a compliment that I showed extremely great wisdom and debating skills supported by real evidence and backed by LDS viewpoints so two words bro; neener neener.

Yes I am being intentionally facetious.

[Anijen]

If anyone wants to know my true motives, they are;

I post a lot in the threads about Book of Mormon geography. It is an interest of mine, even a hobby that I have invested way too much money. I love the Book of Mormon! My motive is like unto it, to bring people to Christ through it. The BoM is a brilliant diamond and the geography is but a small portion of a facet which enhance the shape and light reflecting appearance of it.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

True motive(s) revealed. I tried to flush you two/three out at the start, oh well, gosh, did I offend someone.

And what did you flush out? All I showed is that Lake Ontario does not fit the bill for being identifed as Ripliancum, and you think you have flushed it out?

Is that seriously the best argument you have got?

I don't perscribe to any one theory because, as I explained earlier the BoM is too vague to pin point the location of the land. And everybodies theory has a few porblems with them, yours included. That is due to the lack of information in the BoM.

If Ripliancum meant "If you stand where they did on the south shore of Lake Ontario, you cannot see its boundary anywhere, it appears to go forever!" then you what have a bulls eye and I would not be having this discussion with you. But it doesn't mean that. It means "large or to exceed all" How does Lake Ontario fit that bill? It doesn't because Lake Superior exceeeds the size of Lake Ontario. This is obvious. And this is not my problem it is yours, you need to deal with it.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Ha, I wouldn't know your motives to try to flush us out at the start. But I will take it as a compliment that I showed extremely great wisdom and debating skills supported by real evidence and backed by LDS viewpoints so two words bro; neener neener.

Yes I am being intentionally facetious.

Ha.

[Sevenbak]

I never included Ripliancum in my list of descriptors of the ocean they crossed. Ripliancum is the Jaredite name of the Nephite Sea North. (Ether 15:8 )

It may, or it may not be. Who is to say there wasn't a Northern ocean past Ripliancum. Still, I have no problem with a large combined inland Great Lake being considered Ripliancum or even the sea north.

True, "sea" does not mean "salt water ocean." Consider the "Sea" of Galilee, which is merely a fresh water lake - no offense.

None taken, I don't necessarily disagree.

You're in the dark. Our model is here: www.bookofmormongeography.org

You're model seems way too small, and is too similar to the NY LGT. The artifacts recovered from the culture in the area also extend from New York to the Gulf of Mexico.

.

[Sevenbak]

For one reason, it's a joke because the archaeology of the Baja area is COMPLETELY inconsistent with the text of the BOM. I'm currently reading the proceedings of a conference that just took place down there and you'll never get it to fit.

John Clark is right, you need to use the archaeological evidence as an initial filter for any candidates for BOM lands. This one doesn't fit.

I don't believe archeology and science is the end all in discovering truth, especially when theories and methods change over time. And, there is so much yet to be found.

No offense, that's just me.

[Sevenbak]

You asked the question: Do we trust the visions of Joseph Smith?

Now I'll tell you the question that I think you should have asked instead:

Do you have faith from God to assure you that Joseph Smith saw what he said he saw?

My short answer to that question would be and now is: Yes

Yes, I think that questions serves the same purpose. And to that end, I will agree with you completely!

[Sevenbak]

Lehi and the Mulekites left Lebanon where there was ore and wood for ship building. Spain was known in Biblical times (perhaps further areas), thus they sailed out the Mediterranean Sea and ventured north following the coast line before heading west. This was a common route for mariners.

That fulfills the prophecy that at the coming of Jesus the earth/rocks would crack "both above and below" and Niagara Falls was part of that result. Prior to that, yes, the St. Lawrence and the Niagara gorge were navigable.

Ripliancum (I agree that it was the Great Lakes) may very well have been navigable in ancient times, but I have a real problem with the direction you have Lehi and company coming.

First off, they both didn't arrive in the same place. Helaman 6:10 clearly says the Lord brought Mulek into the land north, and Lehi into the land south.

Further, you would have Lehi and Co. leaving Lebanon and traveling through the Mediterranean? Let's look at the directional clues from the text after they left Jerusalem.

1 Nephi 16:13

And it came to pass that we traveled for the space of four days, nearly a south-southeast direction, and we did pitch our tents again; and we did call the name of the place Shazer.

1 Nephi 16:14

And we did go forth again in the wilderness, following the same direction, keeping in the most fertile parts of the wilderness, which were in the borders near the Red Sea.

1 Nephi 17:1 And it came to pass that we did again take our journey in the wilderness; and we did travel nearly eastward from that time forth. And we did travel and wade through much affliction in the wilderness; and our women did bear children in the wilderness.

1 Nephi 17: 4 And we did sojourn for the space of many years, yea, even eight years in the wilderness.

Then they came to the sea. I don't know what map you think fits Lebanon, but from Jerusalem, South East following the Red Sea, and then straight East into the wilderness puts them on the Gulf of Oman or the Arabian Sea.

Where do you get Lebanon and the Mediterranean?

[Sevenbak]

It flies against the current LDS mindset of a New Jerusalem yet to be built in Independence Missouri.

The verse cited on our web site regarding the New Jerusalem did refer to Book of Mormon lands. I highlighted that AND substantiate it with a verse from Ether:

22 But if they (Gentiles) will repent and hearken unto my words, and harden not their hearts, I will establish my church among them, and they shall come in unto the covenant and be numbered among this the remnant of Jacob (Indians), unto whom I have given

THIS LAND

for their inheritance; (3 Nephi 21)

1 And now I, Moroni, proceed to finish my record concerning the destruction of the people of whom I have been writing. 2 For behold, they rejected all the words of

Ether

; for he truly told them of all things, from the beginning of man; and that after the waters had receded from off the face of

THIS LAND

it became a choice land above all other lands, a chosen land of the Lord; wherefore the Lord would have that all men should serve him who dwell upon the face thereof; 3 And that it was the

place of the New Jerusalem, which should come down out of heaven

, and the holy sanctuary of the Lord. 4 Behold, Ether saw the days of Christ, and he spake concerning a

New Jerusalem upon

THIS LAND

. <a name="5"> 5 And he spake also concerning the house of Israel, and the Jerusalem from whence Lehi should come

[Sevenbak]

Missouri is certainly a land of promise. However, Missouri is not the only land of promise

Further, I'd like to know how exactly he interprets D&C 42:62. Does he accept this scripture from Joseph Smith, or does he think Joseph was already fallen?

Clearly, the location of the New Jerusalem hadn't been revealed yet, and if it's supposed to be the Constitution, rather than a location, then how does that work?

[Sevenbak]

You think you do. What about Hyrum, who was never there. What say Hyrum?

As a follower of Whitmer, do you accept David Whitmer's testimony as one of the 3 witnesses that saw the angel and said that the work was translated by the power of God?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Further, I'd like to know how exactly he interprets D&C 42:62. Does he accept this scripture from Joseph Smith, or does he think Joseph was already fallen?

Clearly, the location of the New Jerusalem hadn't been revealed yet, and if it's supposed to be the Constitution, rather than a location, then how does that work?

The place of the New Jeruslam is identified as Missouri. Consider these verse of scripture.

D&C 84:2-4

2 Yea, the word of the Lord concerning his church, established in the last days for the restoration of his people, as he has spoken by the mouth of his prophets, and for the gathering of his saints to stand upon Mount Zion, which shall be the city of New Jerusalem.

3 Which city shall be built, beginning at the temple lot, which is appointed by the finger of the Lord, in the western boundaries of the State of Missouri, and dedicated by the hand of Joseph Smith, Jun., and others with whom the Lord was well pleased.

4 Verily this is the word of the Lord, that the city New Jerusalem shall be built by the gathering of the saints, beginning at this place, even the place of the temple, which temple shall be creared in this generation.

As far as "and if it's supposed to be the Constitution, rather than a location, then how does that work?" There is no way the the New Jerusalem is refering to the constitution. The chonology is off for one, and Missouri has nothing to do with the constitution.

[Sevenbak]

Was it you ???

Peace,

Ceeboo

This reminds me of a fav line from 1776.

John Adams: Good GOD! A whole week! The entire earth was created in a week!

Thomas Jefferson: Someday, you must tell me how you did it.

[Calm]

Many countriest fail that test. US of A works.

If the only reason the US of A works is because it as a country as opposed to a land/territory never had kings or queens, then pretty much every country currently in the North and South Americas works except for Canada and the Falklands.

[Sevenbak]

The place of the New Jeruslam is identified as Missouri. Consider these verse of scripture.

D&C 84:2-4

2 Yea, the word of the Lord concerning his church, established in the last days for the restoration of his people, as he has spoken by the mouth of his prophets, and for the gathering of his saints to stand upon Mount Zion, which shall be the city of New Jerusalem.

3 Which city shall be built, beginning at the temple lot, which is appointed by the finger of the Lord, in the western boundaries of the State of Missouri, and dedicated by the hand of Joseph Smith, Jun., and others with whom the Lord was well pleased.

4 Verily this is the word of the Lord, that the city New Jerusalem shall be built by the gathering of the saints, beginning at this place, even the place of the temple, which temple shall be creared in this generation.

Right, but I'm trying to give him the benefit of the doubt, as section 42 was given much earlier. This is why I keep asking him at what point he stops believing Joseph was a prophet.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

If the only reason the US of A works is because it as a country as opposed to a land/territory never had kings or queens, then pretty much every country currently in the North and South Americas works except for Canada and the Falklands.

And Venezuela.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Right, but I'm trying to give him the benefit of the doubt, as section 42 was given much earlier. This is why I keep asking him at what point he stops believing Joseph was a prophet.

Oh, good point.

[Sevenbak]

They cite the story of Zelph, but why is not Onandagus not mentioned in the Book of Mormon if he was so well known?

Not even a hundredth part is recorded. It's not a history text. Mormon doesn't mention those general killed in battle by name prior to the final battle. The final war lasted a long time. Why is this a problem, not having Onandagus mentioned by name?

In the Old World, Jews could be found throughout the Roman Empire. Paul and other apostles even journeyed to Rome, Syria, Greece and Egypt. Mormon was from the land north of the primary Book of Mormon lands, which means more likely northern Mexico or even further north. He was very familiar with the land of Desolation and Cumorah, and he knew the mountain well enough to conceal a great number of records. After the great battle there, Moroni fled north and likely traversed the area from the Rocky Mountains through the great plains and finally to New York, dedicating temples as he went.

Brigham Young, who mentioned Moroni dedicating Manti, also mentioned the Npehites (plural) dedicating the St. George temple. Why so many think Moroni wandered alone through Utah after the battle is beyond me. I read both descriptions as a dedication as they were fleeing north and east.

How could hundreds of thousands of soldiers encamp around about this small hill while, during the pageant, the place is swamped with far few numbers!

The text say they gathered to the Land of Cumorah, not just the Hill Cumorah.

[Sevenbak]

The Book of Mormon "Promised Land" references are specific. We respect their promises, on their lands. For example, there would be no kings/queens. They would be owned by white Gentiles. The BoM would come forth on it. It would become greater than all other nations. Jesus would be their king of it. God would led people to it. People would flee their captive nations to go to it. Their mother countries would come to battle against them, on the land and the sea. All fulfilled in Western New York, but impossible in Mesoamerica.

I'm curious, since you are bringing up the promises about this land... in addition to the many references to the USA (the Gentiles establishing a great nation here on this land, etc), how do you interpret Nephi's prophesy about Columbus and this land? He never landed anywhere near as far north as your model.

[Sevenbak]

Save your bandwidth.

The route of early American explorers is well known, like Henry Hudson.

He's talking about crossing the ocean, not how Hudson traversed the waterways once here.

[Sevenbak]

"So you're saying they went arctic? and coastal hopped Iceland, Greenland and the North American coast and then upriver at the St Lawrence?"

You're on the right track IMO.

So how does Lehi and company get from the Arabian Sea, up to Lebanon, through the Mediterranean, up through northern Europe, land hopping across near the Arctic, all the while with Nephi only mentioning they left land south east of Jerusalem, sailed many days, and they arrived at the promised land.

You lost me somewhere...

[BOMG]

Ripliancum (I agree that it was the Great Lakes) may very well have been navigable in ancient times, but I have a real problem with the direction you have Lehi and company coming.

They "wandered in the wilderness" to get to Lebanon. They followed the Liahona, not established trade routes. Duane Aston has elaborated on this greatly with many confirmations. I'll post details and a trail later since he doesn't on his site.

First off, they both didn't arrive in the same place. Helaman 6:10 clearly says the Lord brought Mulek into the land north, and Lehi into the land south.

Right. God led Lehi beyond where the Jaredites and Mulekites landed.

BOMG, what is the official name of your church? This interpretation is interesting to say the least, but I'd like to know more about what the followers of Whitmer denomination believe.

I don't want to hi-jack the thread, but to satisfy your questions for the moment, this is what Book of Mormon Christians believe:

1. Joseph's only call was to transcribe the Book of Mormon, then use his charisma to convert the world to it, not a church.

2. The Urim and Thummim were returned to God because Joseph was not a prophet called to lead anyone.

3. Joseph changed early revelations and can't be trusted.

4. God used an unbaptized "Gentile" (with flaws) to do the work of "translation," so no man who trust in Joseph more than the Book of Mormon.

5. We accept the Book of Mormon, Bible and the few revelations that pertain to the Book of Mormon for salvation. Beyond those, discernment must be used.

Clearly, the location of the New Jerusalem hadn't been revealed yet, and if it's supposed to be the Constitution, rather than a location, then how does that work?

Joseph did not study the Book of Mormon, nor follow its teachings. In fact, due to disobedience, he was led off Book of Mormon land when he united with Rigdon. But that's another dynamic. Suffice to say, he missed the mark regarding the New Jerusalem, even going so far as to move beyond its borders, which says a lot.

As a follower of Whitmer, do you accept David Whitmer's testimony as one of the 3 witnesses that saw the angel and said that the work was translated by the power of God?

I don't follow Whitmer, but do respect his courage to stand for truth against the odds, and learn where Joseph went wrong. All who knew David vouched for his honesty, and yes, I respect his and the rest of his family's testimonies how the record came forth.

[Sevenbak]

And as for your 900 drumlins, only one of them is Cumorah, not all 900 of them. Or do you consider them all to be Cumorah?

Perhaps "Land of Cumorah", yes.

[Sevenbak]

Anijen

Ambassador of the one true geography theory (this is sarcasm for those who might not know me)

I know we disagree, but that was funny!