Book of Mormon geography

[livy111us]

FAIR just posted a couple quick videos on their Youtube site on BOM geography.

The first is on a few of Joseph Smiths quotes advocating a Mesoamerican setting for The Book of Mormon (they do acknowledge that he placed The Book of Mormon from North to South America.)

The second is on Temple dedicatory prayers which place the Lehites in Central America.

According to the Encyclopedia of Mormonism:

[nosmelone]

I actually replied directly to the youtube links yesterday in regards to this same thing. Running with this same idea presented by the FAIR group I pulled the dedicatory prayers on the Mesa Arizona and the Snowflake Arizona and they both speak on the lineage of Lehi as well. I find this interesting because of the ties to the Hopi in the same area (or close by) the Snowflake Temple. Here's what it says about the Snowflake area dedicated on March 2002 by President Hinckley,

"We are grateful that this Thy house will be available to the sons and daughters of Lehi who live nearby. Let the scales of darkness fall from their eyes and bring a fulfillment of the ancient promises made concerning them. May this house become a hallowed sanctuary for many of these, our brothers and sisters."

And the Mesa Arizona Temple dedicated in October 1927 by President Heber J Grant states,

"We beseech Thee, O Lord, that Thou wilt stay the hand of the destroyer among the descendants of Lehi who reside in this land and give unto them increasing virility and more abundant health, that they may not perish as a people but that from this time forth they may increase in numbers and in strength and in influence, that all the great and glorious promises made concerning the descendants of Lehi may be fulfilled in them; that they may grow in vigor of body and of mind, and above all in love for Thee and Thy Son, and increase in diligence and in faithfulness in keeping the commandments which have come to them through the gospel of Jesus Christ, and that many of them may have the privilege of entering this holy house and receiving ordinances for themselves and their departed ancestors."

I understand that many of the Polynesian temples have this same information as well.

[MichaelM]

No mention of children of Lehi, Lamanites, nothing in the Bismark North Dakota dedicatory prayer. South Dakota has the third highest proportion of Native Americans of any state, behind Alaska and New Mexico. The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe is in both South and North Dakota. The North Dakota American Indian numbers are not to be ignored either.

How can living people be ignored? Book of Mormon geography is only where people lived until 421 AD. But a dedicatory prayer implies where they are living right now. How about D&C 28? Oliver Cowdery's mission took him among United States tribes. He did not ever go to Mexico or Central America.

Sorry, but playing "proof" games with dedicatory prayers is silly. Should you suggest that the Bismark prayer proves that the Sioux are not from Book of Mormon people? You might as well tell the Lakota LDS members their Patriarchal Blessing lineage is wrong.

[Bob Crockett]

No mention of children of Lehi, Lamanites, nothing in the Bismark North Dakota dedicatory prayer. South Dakota has the third highest proportion of Native Americans of any state, behind Alaska and New Mexico. The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe is in both South and North Dakota. The North Dakota American Indian numbers are not to be ignored either.

How can living people be ignored? Book of Mormon geography is only where people lived until 421 AD. But a dedicatory prayer implies where they are living right now. How about D&C 28? Oliver Cowdery's mission took him among United States tribes. He did not ever go to Mexico or Central America.

Sorry, but playing "proof" games with dedicatory prayers is silly. Should you suggest that the Bismark prayer proves that the Sioux are not from Book of Mormon people? You might as well tell the Lakota LDS members their Patriarchal Blessing lineage is wrong.

To add to this, I don't think the absence of reference to Lamanites in a temple prayer means a thing at all. The presence of a reference to the Lamanites surely doesn't mean there is a Mesoamerican basis for the Book of Mormon. The last time I looked, references to Lamanites are contained in South American prayers.

[livy111us]

To add to this, I don't think the absence of reference to Lamanites in a temple prayer means a thing at all. The presence of a reference to the Lamanites surely doesn't mean there is a Mesoamerican basis for the Book of Mormon. The last time I looked, references to Lamanites are contained in South American prayers.

I agree. It does, however, give more credence to the Mesoamerican theory. It does not mean that the Lehites did not migrate to North and South America, or the Islands for that matter. I think it doesn't discount other geographies by any stretch, but only gives more evidence for the Central American setting. Personally, I think it is pretty cool.

[MichaelM]

I agree. It does, however, give more credence to the Mesoamerican theory. It does not mean that the Lehites did not migrate to North and South America, or the Islands for that matter. I think it doesn't discount other geographies by any stretch, but only gives more evidence for the Central American setting. Personally, I think it is pretty cool.

I always thought Mark E. Peterson's Christ in America pamphlet was "pretty cool" because both he and Marion G. Romney made it clear that "all" from the tip of South America to the Artic were Book of Mormon people.

I don't think giving more credence to one geography is helpful, in fact it is harmful as I pointed out with the Bismark temple example. Your migration ideas do not fit the DNA. Haplogroup x is not found in Meso-America. It did not "migrate" into the U.S. and Canada from "Book of Mormon lands" of the Mayan people. Likewise, Meldrum's ideas favoring haplogroup x leave out those in Meso-America and are just as wrong.

I guess it will never be like it was in the days of Peterson's Christ in America. It is sad that so much effort is spent trying to find "cool" things about a geography. Personally, the Bismark temple dedicatory prayer was disappointing by not acknowledging the indigenous people in the region.

[Anijen]

I always thought Mark E. Peterson's Christ in America pamphlet was "pretty cool" because both he and Marion G. Romney made it clear that "all" from the tip of South America to the Artic were Book of Mormon people.

I don't think giving more credence to one geography is helpful, in fact it is harmful as I pointed out with the Bismark temple example. Your migration ideas do not fit the DNA. Haplogroup x is not found in Meso-America. It did not "migrate" into the U.S. and Canada from "Book of Mormon lands" of the Mayan people. Likewise, Meldrum's ideas favoring haplogroup x leave out those in Meso-America and are just as wrong.

I guess it will never be like it was in the days of Peterson's Christ in America. It is sad that so much effort is spent trying to find "cool" things about a geography. Personally, the Bismark temple dedicatory prayer was disappointing by not acknowledging the indigenous people in the region.

MichaelM, I agree with you and livey111us about central america and migrating however I do not think it is harmful to favor one theory over another, in fact choosing Mark E Peterson's view is still choosing or as you put it "favoring" a side (the hemispheric model)over another, so I really think one can distance his/her self from one model over another without being an apostate. We all have our opinions on the matter. I am curious about your knowledge on DNA as to state with absolute certainty that you know that migration could not have happened. Could you please cite a source for this view?. Myself I only know what I have read on the matter and leave that up to the experts such as David Stuart and Ugo Perego. I like this quote by David Stuart;

The recent explosion of molecular DNA data has led to a considerable increase in knowledge about our roots. However, some individuals have drawn, and widely publicized, conclusions far beyond those validated by the existing data. The claims of critics that DNA evidence disproves traditional Latter-day Saint teachings about Native American ancestry are based in a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of science and an ignorance of history and scripture. There is still much that we do not know about the genetics of ancient and modern populations, but a careful examination of existing DNA data demonstrates that the teachings of Latter-day Saint prophets are fully consistent with existing DNA data.

source here

[MichaelM]

MichaelM, I agree with you and livey111us about central america and migrating however I do not think it is harmful to favor one theory over another, in fact choosing Mark E Peterson's view is still choosing or as you put it "favoring" a side (the hemispheric model)over another, so I really think one can distance his/her self from one model over another without being an apostate. We all have our opinions on the matter. I am curious about your knowledge on DNA as to state with absolute certainty that you know that migration could not have happened. Could you please cite a source for this view?. Myself I only know what I have read on the matter and leave that up to the experts such as David Stuart and Ugo Perego. I like this quote by David Stuart;

source here

It is probably not harmful to you, you are not an enrolled tribal member from a Dakota reservation. Do you think it might be harmful to the tribes in the Dakotas? Making a case out of temple dedicatory prayers is a problem. The Bismark temple prayer did not mention the tribal people at all. This silly attempt to prove a geography is harmful to the faithful LDS members on the reservations. It is not a matter of personal harm by favoring one theory over another. The harm comes when LDS members set up biases of one group of people over another.

You misunderstood me on the Mark E. Peterson view. I was not talking at all about the geography of where the Book of Mormon events occurred. I was talking about which of the living indigenous people in America are from the Book of Mormon. Peterson and Romney covered all of them. But when one makes a hobby of examining temple dedication prayers it is harmful to those who get left out.

As for the DNA, do I really need to cite a source for the fact that haplogroup x is not found in Meso-America? It is not. Haplogroup x did not migrate north from Mayan people. Ask Ugo Perego if you wish. He will agree.

His report in the below source clearly states that haplogroup x is only in the Northern regions. Perego is an exceptional scientist. Also, his position is in agreement with the peer reviews.

The Phylogeny of the Four Pan-American MtDNA Haplogroups: Implications for Evolutionary Disease Studies (Perego)

Plos One, March 2008

More on Perego's incredible work and the migration models -

Distinctive Paleo-Indian Migration Routes from Beringia Marked by Two Rare mtDNA Haplogroups (Perego)

Current Biology, January 13, 2009

[livy111us]

I am glad you are familiar with Perego's work, so you should know that the X haplogroup in America (X2a) arrived MUCH earlier to have any impact on Book of Mormon geography, whatsoever. Since the X2a is not found anywhere else in the world, tracing it's entrance into America is debatable, but it is generally accepted that it crossed Berengia, and made it's way down the ice-free corridor between the Laurentide and Cordilleran glaciers. This is a very different story than a implantation from a boat 600 bc. If you want to accept your tribe as having Lehite blood, and want to be taken seriously, you should distance yourself from Meldrum. That is a sinking ship. There is not one geneticist who actually backs up his claims. As a matter of fact, they actually explain how his theory is inaccurate.

I am curious, what difference would it make if you were had Lehite blood in you or your tribe, or not? I don't have a drop in me, but still have a testimony and believe The Book of Mormon with all my heart. Why do you think it will be "harmful"?

Also, I see nothing wrong with making a case from Temple dedicatory prayers. They are inspired, and men under that inspiration said that certain groups in Central America (and elsewhere), were descendants of Lehi. Take that in addition to the evidence that has already been provided, I think Mesoamerica makes a strong case. You are free to believe whatever geography you would like, but there is no reason to dismiss these inspired comments.

It seems you are a Hemispheric geography theorist. I believe your strongest claims are the comments by Joseph Smith, and following prophets and leaders. They have generally stated, and believed, in a similar model.

I am sure the purpose of the video is to counter Meldrums claims that there are no Joseph Smith quotes which place the BOM in Mesoamerica. These videos answer that claim, and probably are not intended to disregard any other THEORY, since they are all just that, theories.

[Calm]

Is there any reason to discount the presence of Lehite ancestry among one group in the Americas simply because it is explicitly stated about another group?

If any Lehite descendants survived and did not live in a very isolated community, would not it be likely that by the time of over 1500 years later that his descendants would have been spread thoughout the Americas (consider Charlemagne, also this seems to be likely to have been more efficiently done from a more central location such as Mesoamerican as well...just saying)

What the dedicatory prayers demonstrate to me is excluding the living Mesoamericans or any other population mentioned in these prayers as recipients of the blessings promised in the Book of Mormon is highly problematic (as is done by some claimants of the USA LGT theories when they insist that it is only the US that any BoM prophecies can be applied to). Even if their current homeland isn't the site of the original Lehite colony, their right to the blessings and prophecies of the BoM are firmly established by latter-day prophecy.

[Bob Crockett]

I always thought Mark E. Peterson's Christ in America pamphlet was "pretty cool" because both he and Marion G. Romney made it clear that "all" from the tip of South America to the Artic were Book of Mormon people.

I'd like to add that to my collection; if anybody has a link to this pamphlet please post.

[MichaelM]

I am glad you are familiar with Perego's work, so you should know that the X haplogroup in America (X2a) arrived MUCH earlier to have any impact on Book of Mormon geography, whatsoever. Since the X2a is not found anywhere else in the world, tracing it's entrance into America is debatable, but it is generally accepted that it crossed Berengia, and made it's way down the ice-free corridor between the Laurentide and Cordilleran glaciers. This is a very different story than a implantation from a boat 600 bc. If you want to accept your tribe as having Lehite blood, and want to be taken seriously, you should distance yourself from Meldrum. That is a sinking ship. There is not one geneticist who actually backs up his claims. As a matter of fact, they actually explain how his theory is inaccurate.

I am curious, what difference would it make if you were had Lehite blood in you or your tribe, or not? I don't have a drop in me, but still have a testimony and believe The Book of Mormon with all my heart. Why do you think it will be "harmful"?

Also, I see nothing wrong with making a case from Temple dedicatory prayers. They are inspired, and men under that inspiration said that certain groups in Central America (and elsewhere), were descendants of Lehi. Take that in addition to the evidence that has already been provided, I think Mesoamerica makes a strong case. You are free to believe whatever geography you would like, but there is no reason to dismiss these inspired comments.

It seems you are a Hemispheric geography theorist. I believe your strongest claims are the comments by Joseph Smith, and following prophets and leaders. They have generally stated, and believed, in a similar model.

I am sure the purpose of the video is to counter Meldrums claims that there are no Joseph Smith quotes which place the BOM in Mesoamerica. These videos answer that claim, and probably are not intended to disregard any other THEORY, since they are all just that, theories.

I am stunned that you cannot see outside of yourself to recognize the harm. You have just stated that those with haplogroup x are not even from Adam and Eve.

You incorrectly assume that I follow Meldrum. I despise him. As I have already stated on an earlier comment, his position leaves out all of the Mayan people. Haven't they already been through enough with the genocide of the Guatemalan civil war?

As I stated already, this is not about a hemispheric or LGT model for where the Book of Mormon events occurred, ending in A.D. 421. The hobby you are playing with is an attempt to identify who the living Book of Mormon people are right now.

Assuming that temple dedicatory prayers are revelation, you discard the Bismark temple and ask what difference it makes. In doing this, you are discarding the words of the Savior. How does your hobby of prayers square with the Doctrine and Covenants?

D&C 54

1 BEHOLD, thus saith the Lord, even Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, even he who was crucified for the sins of the world