Mound Builders

[Bob Crockett]

1000 AD is not a Book of Mormon time. Show me a citation that has the mound builders in the large populations that the Book of Mormon requires and during the times of the Book of Mormon. The two authoritative books I have on the mound builders both state that they had rather low populations.

Your request is impossible, as one cannot divine population counts from the Book of Mormon.

Suffice it to say, the history of the mounds spans a couple of thousand years. Native American population theorists range from low counters to high counters (Anna Roosevelt), so I can quote you any authority you want on population counts. Do you want a low count? I can provide. Do you want a high count? I can provide.

[Bob Crockett]

Why aren't the cites provided good enough. My use of the word "vast" was not mine; I quoted it.

[Anijen]

I find this to be a very dangerous premise. That one would put up their own knowledge about what the scriptures mean against a 'thousand' authorities that that are called as prophets seers or revelatory is disturbing.

Take McConkie or Talmage for example, who were preeminent scriptural scholars of their time. To pit our own understanding of the text, as if we know more than they do, is not a road I want to go down. yet you yourself are willing to go down this road when it supports your view. The fact that they have the added witness of prophetic interpretation also speaks volumes as to why I will not go down the path you are suggesting. Would that be the same path that Elder Oaks takes or President Mosnon, President Hinckley, Elder Neal A. Maxwell?

And since I brought them up by example, we might as well hear what they said on the issue:

James Talmage Died 1933 77 years ago, there have been remarks from Pres Hinckley and ensign that are more current

"The hill, which was known by one division of the ancient peoples as Cumorah, by another as Ramah, is situated near Palmyra in the State of New York ." (Apostle James E. Talmage, Articles of Faith, chapter 14)

Bruce McConkie 44 years ago and before he was an Apostle

"Both the Nephite and Jaredite civilizations fought their final great wars of extinction at and near the Hill Cumorah (or Ramah as the Jaredites termed it), which hill is located between Palmyra and Manchester in the western part of the State of New York." (Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, page 174-175, Bookcraft 1966)

If it so blasphemous and faith weakening I would think it would be spoken of more currently because BofM geography has only grown larger in these days than when these quotes were given.

[Anijen]

Your request is impossible, as one cannot divine population counts from the Book of Mormon.

Suffice it to say, the history of the mounds spans a couple of thousand years. Native American population theorists range from low counters to high counters (Anna Roosevelt), so I can quote you any authority you want on population counts. Do you want a low count? I can provide. Do you want a high count? I can provide.

yes, that is what a CFR is please provide a high count that is during say 350-400 AD please cite your source, publication and Pg. number if possible.

[Anijen]

Really now, this is an unfair comparison.

My position is what it is. Those who subscribe to the LGT theory are butting heads directly against the Brethren What about the brethren who believe in a LGT if I take one side I am still butting heads... Easy to accuse me the weak faith member, a blasphemer, close to apostasy, So I take it those who hold a view of some of the brethren are okay but other of the brethren are not? and the official church position. Not true, CFR But I do note that the Brethren don't really seem to care all that much about it and have permitted at least the publication of one LGT Ensign article. Which makes me wonder why, If those who adhere to a LGT are labled blasphemers by Sevenbak and weak in the faith by others including church leaders, then why if it is so faith destroying are they publishing it a LGT model in the ensign and twice no less? .should say that

[Bob Crockett]

yes, that is what a CFR is please provide a high count that is during say 350-400 AD please cite your source, publication and Pg. number if possible.

I think I have provided my sources in my post above. In the moundbuilding area, population discussions are had in the Milner book, although it seems impossible to have any accurate measurement.

Anna Roosevelt is considered a high counter. Amazonian Indians from Prehistory to the Present (editor, U. Arizona Press), The Ancestors: Native Artisans of the Americas (co-editor with J.G.E. Smith, Museum of the American Indian and U. Washington Press), Moundbuilders of the Amazon (Academic Press), Parmana: Manioc and Maize Subsistence along the Orinoco (Academic Press), The Excavations at Corozal, Venezuela: Stratigraphy and Ceramic Seriation (Yale University Publications in Anthropology), Ancient Lakes: Cultural and Biological Diversity (co-editor with H. Kawanabe and G. Coulter, Kenobi Press). Her specialty is Amazonia, however.

What about the brethren who believe in a LGT if I take one side I am still butting heads... Easy to accuse me the weak faith member, a blasphemer, close to apostasy, So I take it those who hold a view of some of the brethren are okay but other of the brethren are not? and the official church position. Not true, CFR But I do note that the Brethren don't really seem to care all that much about it and have permitted at least the publication of one LGT Ensign article. Which makes me wonder why, If those who adhere to a LGT are labled blasphemers by Sevenbak and weak in the faith by others including church leaders, then why if it is so faith destroying are they publishing it a LGT model in the ensign and twice no less? .should say that

I haven't said anything these topics.

What Brethren have gone public with the LGT?

[Anijen]

I am not arguing against a hemispheric model and I am not promoting solely only a LGT. What I have a problem with is heartlanders who follow Meldrum believe in a LGT in North Eastern United States But those who adhere to a LGT in Mesoamerica are labeled blasphemers and weak in their faith. Why do the Meldrum crowd omit the many quotes of church leaders from Joseph Smith to President Hinckley about some of the BofM locations being in Mesoamerica.

If I sound perturbed well I consider myself very strong in the faith, very active, temple recommend holder, I am a early morning seminary teacher and the ward mission leader, yet I am a blasphemer and weak in my faith. I didn't know.

[Anijen]

Why aren't the cites provided good enough. My use of the word "vast" was not mine; I quoted it.

huh? Perhaps I missed your post please tell me the post you are referring to. I want cites that date to the same time as the Book of Mormon.

[Bob Crockett]

I am not arguing against a hemispheric model and I am not promoting solely only a LGT. What I have a problem with is heartlanders who follow Meldrum believe in a LGT in North Eastern United States But those who adhere to a LGT in Mesoamerica are labeled blasphemers and weak in their faith. Why do the Meldrum crowd omit the many quotes of church leaders from Joseph Smith to President Hinckley about some of the BofM locations being in Mesoamerica.

If I sound perturbed well I consider myself very strong in the faith, very active, temple recommend holder, I am a early morning seminary teacher and the ward mission leader, yet I am a blasphemer and weak in my faith. I didn't know.

Well, I'm glad you are strong in the faith but my posts have nothing to do with that. One of the best Saints I know, strongest in the faith, believes that chocolate is against the Word of Wisdom and I can't hold that to be gospel truth.

I will retract all that I have written in this thread if you will point to one General Authority who has publicly endorsed the LGT. Merely pointing to a general authority who has spoken about Mesoamerica is meaningless. The hemispheric theory encompasses the entire hemisphere. Rather, you'll need to show me somebody who says that this Hill Cumorah is some sort of fiction. I mean, in a published talk or book. Not some unreported comment.

[Bob Crockett]

huh? Perhaps I missed your post please tell me the post you are referring to. I want cites that date to the same time as the Book of Mormon.

I have provided all that I know at this time. Start with Milner.

I really don't want to ruffle any feathers. Isn't this all just angels dancing on the head of a pin? What does it really matter that I think that Sorenson's book is a bunch of nonsense? n Just because I think the LGT is a bunch of nonsense doesn't mean I think that those who believe it in are weak in the faith. (I think the origins of such nonsense demonstrate weakness, but those who sign on today are entitled to be enthusiastic about it.) Except for the internal mapping information, that is, which is very valuable to an understanding of the BoM.

[Anijen]

I think I have provided my sources in my post above. In the moundbuilding area, population discussions are had in the Milner book, although it seems impossible to have any accurate measurement.

Anna Roosevelt is considered a high counter. Amazonian Indians from Prehistory to the Present (editor, U. Arizona Press), The Ancestors: Native Artisans of the Americas (co-editor with J.G.E. Smith, Museum of the American Indian and U. Washington Press), Moundbuilders of the Amazon (Academic Press), Parmana: Manioc and Maize Subsistence along the Orinoco (Academic Press), The Excavations at Corozal, Venezuela: Stratigraphy and Ceramic Seriation (Yale University Publications in Anthropology), Ancient Lakes: Cultural and Biological Diversity (co-editor with H. Kawanabe and G. Coulter, Kenobi Press). Her specialty is Amazonia, however.

Okay let me rearrange my CFR what are the url addresses of these sites so I can look up what they say, or you could be kind and provide quotes that have a date corresponding with anytime in the BofM. prehistory? uh that would be 5000 years ago and these experts state that the populations were in the millions? CFR and yes populations can be determined by such things as where they hunter gatherers (foragers) (which is what my books say they were) or did they practice domesticated agriculture and did they domesticate animals? Did they have complex political structure? All these are indicators of very large populations. Every single book I have read on the mound builders that existed during the times of the BofM do not have these indicators.

I haven't said anything these topics.

What Brethren have gone public with the LGT?

Public in what sense? I know from reading dedicatory prayers President Hinckley called the people of Mexico the descendants of Lehi, something that was not done for New York. I know from speaking with his daughter personally that President Hinckley believed in Cumorah in Mesoamerica as does his daughter does today. I know that my good friend a upper CES employee that he heard Thomas S Monson (apostle at the time) while visiting Guatemala also said the same thing to the missionaries down there. But none that I can think of in a more public setting. Probably because it isn't pertinent to our salvation and the main purpose of the BofM is to bring people to Christ and not to a knowledge of a location. But hey you don't have to believe me, I mean as a blasphemer and a weak faithed member I could be lying.

[Bob Crockett]

Public in what sense? I know from reading dedicatory prayers President Hinckley called the people of Mexico the descendants of Lehi, something that was not done for New York. I know from speaking with his daughter personally that President Hinckley believed in Cumorah in Mesoamerica as does his daughter does today. I know that my good friend a upper CES employee that he heard Thomas S Monson (apostle at the time) while visiting Guatemala also said the same thing to the missionaries down there. But none that I can think of in a more public setting. Probably because it isn't pertinent to our salvation and the main purpose of the BofM is to bring people to Christ and not to a knowledge of a location. But hey you don't have to believe me, I mean as a blasphemer and a weak faithed member I could be lying.

No. I don't believe anonymous posters about their personal recollections. It is no slam on you, either. I just object to the anonymity of internet speech, but that's my problem.

Public: A talk. A sermon. A book. Just one?

I've seen those dedicatory prayers about the Lamanites in Mesoamerica. The same verbiage is used in the south pacific prayers, as well as South America. These statements are consistent with the hemispheric model, not the LGT.

[Calm]

That is a secular view, yes. But when you're dealing with prophets and apostles and such things as General Conference, priesthood manuals and Deseret Books publication statements, and you're dealing with many of them, it is an entirely different ballgame than the secular one.

I suppose one could dispose of the Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul and Peter by dismissing them as "tradition" or "particular teachers."...

No, we have a former priesthood manual, still in publication today, published by Deseret Books, which squarely takes on the LGT. ...

First, the church does have an "official" position on the topic and has taken it. That is buttressed by the statements of prophets and apostles, and which it comes to church teachings and doctrine, we look to prophets and apostles, and not to the intelligentsia of Tullidge or Harrison or Nibley or Sorenson.

Those who subscribe to the LGT theory are butting heads directly against the Brethren and the official church position.

These comments and one or two others, IIRC, led me to read your position as different than the one stated as below:

Just because I think the LGT is a bunch of nonsense doesn't mean I think that those who believe it in are weak in the faith.

Serious question: I am curious as to why you think the Church allows the Maxwell Institute to spend significant monies on publishing and promoting of the Mesoamerican and LGT theories if the official position of the Church contradicts that theory. Just a word or two in the ear of Maxwell editors could shift the research into more productive, less confusing areas.

[Anijen]

Anijen, I'm sure you mean well, but

You then go on to talk about intellectualism and anti's. Yup makes me feel really warm and fuzzy inside.

I guess I am a heretic also because I once claimed to be real proud of my sons after President Benson's pride talk yet but before President Uchtdorf pride talk. hmm, it seems these leaders can change their minds or provide further clarification, yet listening to you guys they cant do that with a hemispheric model?

Oh and the CFR that I need to provide a quote that says they support a LGT, you know I cant because there is no official church position on the geography of the BofM, they our leaders in whom I fully support and sustain and contrary to your opinion do not feel they are out of touch stress the purpose of the BofM is to bring people to Christ.

[Bob Crockett]

Serious question: I am curious as to why you think the Church allows the Maxwell Institute to spend significant monies on the Mesoamerican and LGT theories if the official position of the Church contradicts that theory. Just a word or two in the ear of Maxwell editors could shift the research into more productive, less confusing areas.

I don't think that is a particular test for truth. I fully respect the MI, but I have personally disagreed with some of the output of the Maxwell Institute. I mean, I myself am published there and as my scholarship improves in my particular field there are things I now wish I could have said better in my MI papers. I'd like to substitute the two papers I have there for two more up-to-date and error-free statements. The MI is a platform for scholarly discussion, not for the statement of emerging doctrinal truths.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

You then go on to talk about intellectualism and anti's. Yup makes me feel really warm and fuzzy inside.

I guess I am a heretic also because I once claimed to be real proud of my sons after President Benson's pride talk yet but before President Uchtdorf pride talk. hmm, it seems these leaders can change their minds or provide further clarification, yet listening to you guys they cant do that with a hemispheric model?

Oh and the CFR that I need to provide a quote that says they support a LGT, you know I cant because there is no official church position on the geography of the BofM, they our leaders in whom I fully support and sustain and contrary to your opinion do not feel they are out of touch stress the purpose of the BofM is to bring people to Christ.

Call me a Mesoamerican LGTer but did they not publish Sorensen's *sp work in the Ensign?

[Anijen]

No. I don't believe anonymous posters about their personal recollections. It is no slam on you, either. I just object to the anonymity of internet speech, but that's my problem.

Public: A talk. A sermon. A book. Just one?

I've seen those dedicatory prayers about the Lamanites in Mesoamerica. The same verbiage is used in the south pacific prayers, as well as South America. These statements are consistent with the hemispheric model, not the LGT.

the op is on Meldrums theory which holds to a LGT in the United States only, that is why I am quoting them. I fully realize the hemispheric model incorporates Mesoamerica. Although I believe that the mound builders possibly were influenced by migrating Nephites and Lamanites from Mesoamerica and that the Savior possibly could have visited both those in the US and in South america and other places (in which I do believe He did) it is my belief as to date that most of the events of the BofM occurred in a limited area and that was Mesoamerica. But for subscribing to such a view as do many stake presidents, bishops, mission presidents etc we are weak in our faith and blasphemers.

[livy111us]

[Bob Crockett]

Call me a Mesoamerican LGTer but did they not publish Sorensen's *sp work in the Ensign?

I have certainly acknowledged that. Point me to a general authority who has endorsed this publicly and I'll stop talking. Elder Oaks' statement is the closest and it is not an endorsement at all.

But for subscribing to such a view as do many stake presidents, bishops, mission presidents etc we are weak in our faith and blasphemers.

Oh, stop it. I've already said you're not a blasphemer. Is it blasphemy to come out publicly against the Brethren? I don't think so. (I'm just kidding; I know the last statement was long ago)

But, name one stake president or mission president who has come out in a public sermon and endorsed the LGT. Just one.

[poulsenll]

I have certainly acknowledged that. Point me to a general authority who has endorsed this publicly and I'll stop talking. Elder Oaks' statement is the closest and it is not an endorsement at all.

General authorities do not preach sermons on Book of Mormon geography.

However, consider the following three emeritus members of the First Quorum of Seventy. You can't get more public than publishing your name on the internet as supporting an organization dedicated to supporting and defending an LGT Mesoamerican geography.

http://www.bmaf.org/node/75?q=node/3

Steering Committee

Elder William R. Bradford

Elder Ted E. Brewerton

Elder Robert E. Wells

I recently attended the BMAF conference where I met Elder Brewerton and discussed briefly the Mesoamerican LGT.

Edited to add the BMAF mission statement to remove all doubt that it supports Mesoamerican context for the Book of Mormon.

MISSION STATEMENT

The Book of Mormon Archaeological Forum (BMAF) is a 501©(3) not for profit organization dedicated as an open forum for presentation, dissemination, and discussion of research and evidences regarding Book of Mormon archaeology, anthropology, geography and culture within a Mesoamerican context. Our goals are (1) to increase understanding of the Book of Mormon as an ancient Mesoamerican document, (2) to correlate and publish works of LDS scholars, (3) to help promote unity and cooperation among scholars and students of the Book of Mormon, and (4) to provide a forum where responsible scholars can present current ideas and discoveries.

Larry P

[Anijen]

I have certainly acknowledged that. Point me to a general authority who has endorsed this publicly and I'll stop talking. Elder Oaks' statement is the closest and it is not an endorsement at all.

Oh, stop it. I've already said you're not a blasphemer. Is it blasphemy to come out publicly against the Brethren? I don't think so. (I'm just kidding; I know the last statement was long ago)

But, name one stake president or mission president who has come out in a public sermon and endorsed the LGT. Just one.

I agree I played the blasphemer card to exhaustion, I admit it percolated my emotions a bit and was surprised when Sevenbak used it. As far as your last CFR for just one Stake or Mission President, again I can think of three who personally told me but over the pulpit they reserved their remarks for the welfare of the entire stake or mission (imagine that).

[Bob Crockett]

General authorities do not preach sermons on Book of Mormon geography.

Yes they have. And they've published books and priesthood manuals on the topic. One as a president of the Q12, to boot. And, he took on the LGT at the same time and derided it as faithlessness.

So, under what is known as the "equal dignities doctrine" I'd like to see a similar defense by a general authority for the LGT. A book, a sermon, an Ensign article.

Or, even a stake president.

The BMAF certainly looks interesting, however. I don't see a study of Mesoamerican archeology as inconsistent with the Brethren's published views on Book of Mormon geography. I certainly am willing to concede that a good place for what occurred happened there, but I am not willing to give up on the Cumorah issue.

[Sevenbak]

What did Talmage know about the Dead Sea Scrolls? Did he know more about them than I do? Have the Victorian lives of Jesus upon which he relied for writing Jesus the Christ been supplemented or surpassed in their reconstruction of the times of Jesus by the finding of records unknown in Talmage's day?

Talmage wrote Jesus the Christ from a room given to him in the Salt Lake Temple, by the First Presidency, for that very purpose. I'm saying there is a lot more to knowledge than the secular learning of men.

I wrote an long article on Biblical Keys for Discerning True and False Prophets. Does it contain any fresh insights? Or should I not have dared publish on grounds that someone, somewhere, with authority, would have already told us if it was important, or even notable? No, but I would not pit my knowledge against a thousand General Authorities. That's just asking for trouble.

Fine. But where is the beef? Since Talmage and McConkie were both able and dedicated scriptorians, where is their work on this specific question? Where did they work with the relevant Book of Mormon passages? If you want to quote them to respond to the scriptural arguments in something like Palmer's In Search of Cumorah (1981), or to be fair, Sidney Sperry's earlier essay on "Were there Two Cumorahs?", fine. But let's see the actual work. Not just a wet blanket-statement, used to douse the question. Let's see a close reading of the text that explains how the eye-witness accounts left by Mormon and Moroni and Ether and company fit the New York Hill and no other. Let's see the knowledge that demonstrates that the authority actually speaks with authority, and not just office or tradition.

Or, if it happens that neither of them actually provided any work on the topic it, why not admit it?

The fact that Talmage hasn't done what you suggesting is addressed by Talmage himself, in General Conference no less. He's all for learning and studying these issues, but certainly not for proclaiming them as proof above what the prophets have said. Talmage agreed that the battle was in NY, but that the text doesn't give enough information to make any other definitive claims.

April 1929: James E. Talmage, General Conference

"I sometimes think we pay a little undue attention to technicalities, and to questions that cannot be fully answered with respect to the Book of Mormon. It matters not to me just where this city or that camp was located. I have met a few of our Book of Mormon students who claim to be able to put their finger upon the map and indicate every land and city mentioned in the Book of Mormon. The fact is, the Book of Mormon does not give us precise and definite information whereby we can locate those places with certainty. I encourage and recommend all possible investigation, comparison and research in this matter. The more thinkers, investigators, workers we have in the field the better; but our brethren who devote themselves to that kind of research should remember that they must speak with caution and not declare as demonstrated truths points that are not really proved. There is enough truth in the Book of Mormon to occupy you and me for the rest of our lives, without giving too much time and attention to these debatable matters."

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[Sevenbak]

Anijen, it would seem that thou doth protest too much.

I never said you or anyone else was a blasphemer. I also didn't refer to you an an anti. In fact, I mentioned anti because it was you who referred to me as using that type of language, I just said you would have to call the brethren antis if you wanted to go down that road. You tried to turn it around.

If you have a problem with Elder Peterson's statement, you can take it up with headquarters and lds.org, but even I said it was stronger language than I would use. I did say that, if you recall.

I don't doubt your faith in the Church, the BoM, Christ, or anything else. I hold to a conviction that the prophets know more by the source of true knowledge than we do. Yes, I'm old fashioned, old school, cut and dry, but that's my position. It will not change. I don't think it healthy to 2nd guess the prophets. Secular knowledge will always come in 2nd to me. I know I rub you the wrong way, and I apologize for that.

Sevenbak

[Kevin Christensen]

My point is that while I can and have learned a lot by sitting at Talmage's feet (by reading his books), I can also learn even more by standing on his shoulders. I think he would have enjoyed the additional resources that have come along since he wrote.

And regarding Talmage's apt caution which you quoted:

The fact is, the Book of Mormon does not give us precise and definite information whereby we can locate those places with certainty. I encourage and recommend all possible investigation, comparison and research in this matter. The more thinkers, investigators, workers we have in the field the better; but our brethren who devote themselves to that kind of research should remember that they must speak with caution and not declare as demonstrated truths points that are not really proved.

This is another place where time and context have not remained static. A lot of work that had not yet been done when Talmage wrote can and should be considered. Talmage died in 1933, not only 15 years before the Dead Sea Scrolls arrived on the scene, providing a new contemporary context for New Testament writings, but 5 years before the first serious attempt to build a comprehensive internal Book of Mormon map (the Washburns in 1938), fifty-two years before Sorenson published Ancient American Setting, and around seventy-five years before Larry Poulson used a 3D Satellite map of the Western Hemisphere and a computer search capability to find candidates for the Sidon that matched the textual requirements and found only one. I see nothing in the Talmage quote that requires me to put a wet blanket over work he clearly encouraged and did not live to see. And I notice that one of the things that people sometimes criticize FARMS for, speaking in terms of "plausibility" rather than proof, is consistent with Talmage's concern.

Since the Book of Mormon mentions Jerusalem, Talmage, I think would not have us over generalize that we cannot ever know any Book of Mormon locations. And he did not know about Nahom, nor the interesting candidate locations for Bountiful that the Aston's and Wellington and Potter have shown us.

And for that matter, he didn't live to see the work that raised questions about whether the New York Hill can be reconciled with the Book of Mormon description. He might have recognized that for that particular instance, some have declared as "demonstrated truths points that are not really proved." And those same persons seem remarkably reluctant work with the Book of Mormon texts that have raised those questions.

Creeds, as Joseph Smith said, put up stakes and bounds to the work of the Almighty, saying, 'Hitherto thou shalt come, and no further.'

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA