Just where is the Hill Cumorah?

[thesometimesaint]

To come directly to the point. It would not bother me in the slightest if God were to announce that area surrounding that little hill in upstate New York is the correct location for the main events of the Book of Mormon. Nor would it bother me in the slightest if he were to announce that Mesoamerica is it. It is sufficient to me to know that the events actually did happen as the Prophets in the Book of Mormon describe.

Ps. But it does make for an interesting idea/discussion.

[Kevin Christensen]

Now, using some basic logic, knowing the Nephites themselves built roads everywhere, it is not hard to imagine them ruling very extensive land areas including thousands of miles in distance. If any hint of what the europeans found has anything to do with how the ancient Nephites lived, then it is a no-brainer to believe the Nephite and Lamanite nations ruled areas thousands of miles in distance and fought their wars over these broad areas. In this manner, speaking of different lands, we graduate from tens to perhaps hundreds of miles into hundreds of miles into thousands of miles. Obviously the Incan government knew their cities and lands in their empire and probably talked of them daily. Why would it be any different than the ancients?

If the distance from Nephi to Zarahemla had a road to follow, Limhi's explorers would not have gotten lost. So the roads between cities described in a later part of the book do not affect the limitations imposed by the marches for which we have telling details. With Limhi's 53 men going, they must have had at least grandparents, and in some cases (older men whose parents had been younger than Zeniff), parents who had made the foot journey. If you take a much closer at the South American map, and look at the kind of foot journey that would be happening, breaking it into daily marches on actual ground, rather than just looking from afar at map, thinking through the landscapes, river crossings, extreme direction changes just getting through Panama, lakes, mosquitos, oceans on either side that Grandma, or even Dad, did not bother to mention, it just does not work for me. Not in the way that working around the Grijalva does.

If any of the Nephite Lamanite wars covered three thousand miles, they failed to mention it. I've been reading Mormon's Map. Before Mormon's time, the most of the wars take place in and around one river valley, an 80 mile strip of coastline on the east, a 240 mile strip of coast line to the south, back and forth across the Narrow Neck between Zarahemla and Cumorah. Most of the Jaredite wars seem to be between highlanders in Desolation and Moron, and lowlanders South of Riplackish, which is a day from Cumorah, and north of the narrow neck. A close reading convinces of a limited area.

John Clark on New York

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/jbms/?vol=13&num=1&id=347

"These findings support Ritchie's earlier reports for New York. The population of the Genesee Valley was always small and dispersed in small bands. The food quest involved hunting and gathering of wild plants, fruits, nuts, and berries. During the key time period (ca. AD 100

[Anijen]

I am curious as to what one would expect to find some 1600 years later? As far as I know, studies in meso-america regarding the supposed Cumorah site haven't revealed anything either. Am I wrong?

Fair question so I will answer;

• What I would expect to find around the hills is graves, weapons, skeletal remains, fortresses, signs of a mass group of people, legends from the Indian tribes that speak of a great warfare and two distinct groups of people. What have they found some arrow heads and most do not date to the BofM and the source for these arrowheads are also suspect. The countless skulls is a not true either, there has not been one skull found at Cumorah, nope not one. In Western New York please site where these skulls were found and please tell me what or how many you feel countless is. I feel that countless is well a lot more than ten.
  
• What else would I expect to find? I would expect to find a place North of the hill signs of deforestation and a large city of cement, nope nothing found like that either.
  
• What else would I expect to find? A large body of water that cuts off an escape route to the East. Nope none unless you travel a ways but then it really wouldn't be close nor a cut off from escape, is it?
  
• Something anything that dates back to the Book of Mormon and there is nothing!
  
• What else would I expect to find? I would expect to find a hill that is unique from the ones around it one that gives a strategical advantage over the others in the area. Do we find this? Nope Cumorah is rather plain and small a little larger than a few others but nothing at all that distinguishes it as a major strategic advantage.
  
• I would expect to find crevices and caves a place where men can hide and escape detection from their enemies, can we find these? Nope. No evidence and the hill does not match the Book of Mormon. I have to come to the conclusion it is not the same hill.
  

Of note, No archaeological digs have taken place on or immediately around the hill in New York.

Which is not evidence that this is the hill (it is not evidence that it is not the hill either). There have been claims of baskets of arrowheads which I disputed earlier as not credible. However in the vicinity some of these arrow heads have been dated most date from approximately 1300-1700 AD.

It has been well documented however that countless skulls,

No it hasn't. Squires book is not a source for "well documented" and again you love to use the word "countless." That does not work. show me where numberless skulls have ever been found in the entire history of the entire area of New York. There is no such evidence at all.

spear-points and other signs of ancient warfare did take place in New York

Well not much, truthfully almost none. There have been some small tribal skirmishes but there is no evidence of any ancient warfare in New York and none at the scale needed for the size the Book of Mormon requires. The spear points again were found in hunting groups and areas and again most do not date to the time of the Book of Mormon.

How much evidence are we talking that would convince you?

Well I already answered that, see my first paragraph.

And- What evidence of warfare is there in the meso-american cumorah setting that does convince you?

Since I do not know where the Mesoamerica Cumorah is and I have never said I did know its kind of hard to answer. But I do believe it was there because I do not believe that a Lamanite King nor a Prophet of God would agree to travel over two thousand miles away passing up plenty of other better sites along the way to fight at an unseen location. However the facts of warfare in Mesoamerica during the time of the BofM is undisputed. In fact the agreeing to fight out a final battle and time to prepare has been documented in that area as well.

[Bob Crockett]

This Joseph Fielding Smith quote places blame for troubled faith on an emerging theory. Those troubled by the weakness of some traditional ideas, and impressed by the emerging theory I suppose, being expendable. Joseph Smith put the responsibility elsewhere.

That is a pretty unreasonable reading of Pres. Smith's views. Very unreasonable.

He put in italics the following: "the Prophet Joseph Smith himself is on record, definitely declaring the present hill caled Cumorah to be the exact hill spoken of in the Book of Mormon." (DOS 3:234.)

Again, in italics: "In the light of revelation it is absurd for anyone to maintain that the Nephites and the Lamanites did not possess this northern land." DOS 3:238.

Again, in italics: "the final battles did take place within the borders of what is now the United States." DOS 3:240.

Again, in italics: "these final battles took place in the territory known as the United States and in the neighborhood of the Great Lakes and the hills of Western New York. And here Moroni found the resting place for the sacred instruments which had been commmitted to his care." DOS 3:241.

In all Caps: "CUMORAH ONCE SITE OF CARNAGE AND DESTRUCTION." DOS 3:242.

And yet you and Pahoran argue that JSF meant somehow to remain ambivalent about the two Cumorahs theory with the following statement: "Because of this theory some members of the Church have become confused and greatly disturbed in their faith in the Book of Mormon." -- Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 3:233." Really? You think he was ambivalent and meant, as you say, to place blame on weak souls encountering an "emerging [and possibly true] theory"?

Isn't this a tad disingenuous?

I mean, I am fully sympathetic with your view, and I acknowledge it, that the location of Cumorah is not a matter of revelation and can be made a subject of logical discourse. I acknowledge your view that Presidents Ivins, Smith and Elder Talmage were blowing smoke with their theories because it was just a matter of speculation. I get that. But you should at least acknowledge the full import of what these brethren have actually said instead of traslating it into something else.

Regarding Doctrines of Salvation, Deseret Books says: "A three-volume set of authoritative sermons that is a must for every LDS library. The path to salvation and happiness is explored and explained. This book provides a rich treasury of President Smith's timeless gospel insights." I can see for myself many cites in general conference to this three-volume set. Not one reference to "Mesoamerica" or "Mesoamerican" in General Conference.

Who has the upper hand in the appeal to authority? I mean, isn't that all we should have in our faith -- appeal to the proper authorities? Or should we rely upon anthropologists, geneticists, linguists, diffusionists, and the like? I mean, why not just rely upon Fawn Brodie and her scientific approach to Joseph Smith?

[ELF1024]

That is a pretty unreasonable reading of Pres. Smith's views. Very unreasonable.

He put in italics the following: "the Prophet Joseph Smith himself is on record, definitely declaring the present hill caled Cumorah to be the exact hill spoken of in the Book of Mormon." (DOS 3:234.)

Again, in italics: "In the light of revelation it is absurd for anyone to maintain that the Nephites and the Lamanites did not possess this northern land." DOS 3:238.

Again, in italics: "the final battles did take place within the borders of what is now the United States." DOS 3:240.

Again, in italics: "these final battles took place in the territory known as the United States and in the neighborhood of the Great Lakes and the hills of Western New York. And here Moroni found the resting place for the sacred instruments which had been commmitted to his care." DOS 3:241.

In all Caps: "CUMORAH ONCE SITE OF CARNAGE AND DESTRUCTION." DOS 3:242.

And yet you and Pahoran argue that JSF meant somehow to remain ambivalent about the two Cumorahs theory with the following statement: "Because of this theory some members of the Church have become confused and greatly disturbed in their faith in the Book of Mormon." -- Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 3:233." Really? You think he was ambivalent and meant, as you say, to place blame on weak souls encountering an "emerging [and possibly true] theory"?

Isn't this a tad disingenuous?

I mean, I am fully sympathetic with your view, and I acknowledge it, that the location of Cumorah is not a matter of revelation and can be made a subject of logical discourse. I acknowledge your view that Presidents Ivins, Smith and Elder Talmage were blowing smoke with their theories because it was just a matter of speculation. I get that. But you should at least acknowledge the full import of what these brethren have actually said instead of traslating it into something else.

Regarding Doctrines of Salvation, Deseret Books says: "A three-volume set of authoritative sermons that is a must for every LDS library. The path to salvation and happiness is explored and explained. This book provides a rich treasury of President Smith's timeless gospel insights." I can see for myself many cites in general conference to this three-volume set. Not one reference to "Mesoamerica" or "Mesoamerican" in General Conference.

Who has the upper hand in the appeal to authority? I mean, isn't that all we should have in our faith -- appeal to the proper authorities? Or should we rely upon anthropologists, geneticists, linguists, diffusionists, and the like? I mean, why not just rely upon Fawn Brodie and her scientific approach to Joseph Smith?

John L Sorenson's articles were published in the Ensign/Liahona...

[Bob Crockett]

John L Sorenson's articles were published in the Ensign/Liahona...

And I have acknowledged that many times. And my search through church publications on the Mesoamerican issue seems to yield results all pointing to Sorenson's research. And, of course, I saw the Church video along with all other members set in Mexico.

I happen to agree that the structures and battlements in Mesoamerica are great possibilities for Nephite and Lamanite locations. But Sorenson's 1984 article carefully skirts the two Cumorahs issue and doesn't even mention the hill by name. It is plain to me what Sorenson believes about the matter but he doesn't squarely put the pickle on the plate in the 1984 article.

[Anijen]

"the Prophet Joseph Smith himself is on record, definitely declaring the present hill caled Cumorah to be the exact hill spoken of in the Book of Mormon." (DOS 3:234.)

I realize President Smith said this but I cant find it. The DOS refers to History of the Church, 1948 ed., vol. 2, pp. 79-80

After researching this no where does Joseph even imply the hill called Cumorah as the exact hill. If you don't believe me check out History of the Church, 1948 ed., vol. 2, pp. 79-80 yourself. To summarize it is the story of Zelph, they were not in New York but in Illinois and they are not quotes of Joseph himself but 2nd and third hand accounts written down years later after the fact. And answer me if Zelph was died in the last battle and that was in Cumorah NY, why was his body found in Illinois? This seems to indicate to me that then the hill Cumorah is that mound that they found Zelph in? Hmmm raises more questions.....

[Bob Crockett]

I realize President Smith said this but I cant find it. The DOS refers to History of the Church, 1948 ed., vol. 2, pp. 79-80

After researching this no where does Joseph even imply the hill called Cumorah as the exact hill. If you don't believe me check out History of the Church, 1948 ed., vol. 2, pp. 79-80 yourself. To summarize it is the story of Zelph, they were not in New York but in Illinois and they are not quotes of Joseph himself but 2nd and third hand accounts written down years later after the fact. And answer me if Zelph was died in the last battle and that was in Cumorah NY, why was his body found in Illinois? This seems to indicate to me that then the hill Cumorah is that mound that they found Zelph in? Hmmm raises more questions.....

I am not here to question what JFS said or his basis for it. He could be wrong; he could be right. My point only is that JFS was fairly adament about his views, instead of the equivocal view advanced by Kevin and Pahoran, so much so that JFS cited Joseph Smith as his authority.

[Rob Osborn]

Fair question so I will answer;

• What I would expect to find around the hills is graves, weapons, skeletal remains, fortresses, signs of a mass group of people, legends from the Indian tribes that speak of a great warfare and two distinct groups of people. What have they found some arrow heads and most do not date to the BofM and the source for these arrowheads are also suspect. The countless skulls is a not true either, there has not been one skull found at Cumorah, nope not one. In Western New York please site where these skulls were found and please tell me what or how many you feel countless is. I feel that countless is well a lot more than ten.
  
• What else would I expect to find? I would expect to find a place North of the hill signs of deforestation and a large city of cement, nope nothing found like that either.
  
• What else would I expect to find? A large body of water that cuts off an escape route to the East. Nope none unless you travel a ways but then it really wouldn't be close nor a cut off from escape, is it?
  
• Something anything that dates back to the Book of Mormon and there is nothing!
  
• What else would I expect to find? I would expect to find a hill that is unique from the ones around it one that gives a strategical advantage over the others in the area. Do we find this? Nope Cumorah is rather plain and small a little larger than a few others but nothing at all that distinguishes it as a major strategic advantage.
  
• I would expect to find crevices and caves a place where men can hide and escape detection from their enemies, can we find these? Nope. No evidence and the hill does not match the Book of Mormon. I have to come to the conclusion it is not the same hill.
  

Which is not evidence that this is the hill (it is not evidence that it is not the hill either). There have been claims of baskets of arrowheads which I disputed earlier as not credible. However in the vicinity some of these arrow heads have been dated most date from approximately 1300-1700 AD.

No it hasn't. Squires book is not a source for "well documented" and again you love to use the word "countless." That does not work. show me where numberless skulls have ever been found in the entire history of the entire area of New York. There is no such evidence at all.

Well not much, truthfully almost none. There have been some small tribal skirmishes but there is no evidence of any ancient warfare in New York and none at the scale needed for the size the Book of Mormon requires. The spear points again were found in hunting groups and areas and again most do not date to the time of the Book of Mormon.

Well I already answered that, see my first paragraph.

Since I do not know where the Mesoamerica Cumorah is and I have never said I did know its kind of hard to answer. But I do believe it was there because I do not believe that a Lamanite King nor a Prophet of God would agree to travel over two thousand miles away passing up plenty of other better sites along the way to fight at an unseen location. However the facts of warfare in Mesoamerica during the time of the BofM is undisputed. In fact the agreeing to fight out a final battle and time to prepare has been documented in that area as well.

Nice sidestep! You know, I find it interesting that those who propose a meso-american cumorah site don't have any evidence for it. How can one defend something in which he has no idea where it may be?

[Rob Osborn]

If the distance from Nephi to Zarahemla had a road to follow, Limhi's explorers would not have gotten lost. So the roads between cities described in a later part of the book do not affect the limitations imposed by the marches for which we have telling details. With Limhi's 53 men going, they must have had at least grandparents, and in some cases (older men whose parents had been younger than Zeniff), parents who had made the foot journey. If you take a much closer at the South American map, and look at the kind of foot journey that would be happening, breaking it into daily marches on actual ground, rather than just looking from afar at map, thinking through the landscapes, river crossings, extreme direction changes just getting through Panama, lakes, mosquitos, oceans on either side that Grandma, or even Dad, did not bother to mention, it just does not work for me. Not in the way that working around the Grijalva does.

If any of the Nephite Lamanite wars covered three thousand miles, they failed to mention it. I've been reading Mormon's Map. Before Mormon's time, the most of the wars take place in and around one river valley, an 80 mile strip of coastline on the east, a 240 mile strip of coast line to the south, back and forth across the Narrow Neck between Zarahemla and Cumorah. Most of the Jaredite wars seem to be between highlanders in Desolation and Moron, and lowlanders South of Riplackish, which is a day from Cumorah, and north of the narrow neck. A close reading convinces of a limited area.

John Clark on New York

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/jbms/?vol=13&num=1&id=347

"These findings support Ritchie's earlier reports for New York. The population of the Genesee Valley was always small and dispersed in small bands. The food quest involved hunting and gathering of wild plants, fruits, nuts, and berries. During the key time period (ca. AD 100

[Anijen]

Nice sidestep! You know, I find it interesting that those who propose a meso-american cumorah site don't have any evidence for it. How can one defend something in which he has no idea where it may be?

You call me sidestepping? Um wow! I give you reasons (like you asked of me) why NY is not the hill. I give you reasons (like you asked of me) to why I think it is in Mesoamerica and you do not answer one of my questions (not one) and have the audacity to accuse me of sidestepping? Also to note, I gave you plenty of evidence why I feel the hill is in Mesoamerica.

Anijen, the Sidestepping Mesoamericanist

[Anijen]

What about the Inca in their battles- they were able to battle over thousands of miles and not write about it or make any big deal over it- it was just part of everyday life.

Um the Inca's didn't even come in to existence until the 12 century.

[Anijen]

I am not here to question what JFS said or his basis for it. He could be wrong; he could be right. My point only is that JFS was fairly adament about his views, instead of the equivocal view advanced by Kevin and Pahoran, so much so that JFS cited Joseph Smith as his authority.

I agree with you, JFS was adamant about his views.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I am not here to question what JFS said or his basis for it. He could be wrong; he could be right. My point only is that JFS was fairly adament about his views, instead of the equivocal view advanced by Kevin and Pahoran, so much so that JFS cited Joseph Smith as his authority.

You know what is interesting about all this. You quote JFS and his works which are non doctrinal and you are trying to shoe horn that we know were the Hill Cumorah is. The church currently has no offical position. Does that in and of it's self tell you anything?

[Bob Crockett]

You know what is interesting about all this. You quote JFS and his works which are non doctrinal and you are trying to shoe horn that we know were the Hill Cumorah is. The church currently has no offical position. Does that in and of it's self tell you anything?

I say it has an official position.

[Pahoran]

That is a pretty unreasonable reading of Pres. Smith's views. Very unreasonable.

So the only possible interpretation based upon what the words actually say is "very unreasonable" is it?

Who knew?

He put in italics the following: "the Prophet Joseph Smith himself is on record, definitely declaring the present hill caled Cumorah to be the exact hill spoken of in the Book of Mormon." (DOS 3:234.)

So he did. But where is this record? As a lawyer, you know perfectly well that first-hand testimony is better than second-hand testimony. What JS said necessarily carries more evidentiary weight than what JFS tells us that JS said.

But apart from that, this does not support the claim that those who advocated for a Mesoamerican Cumorah did so because they were "weak in the faith." That is a paltry attack upon your intellectual opponents, and you have provided no reason for us to suppose that Elder Smith made it.

Again, in italics: "In the light of revelation it is absurd for anyone to maintain that the Nephites and the Lamanites did not possess this northern land." DOS 3:238.

Perhaps it would be, if only we knew what the revelation in question was, who received it, and what it actually said.

But apart from that, this does not support the claim that those who advocated for a Mesoamerican Cumorah did so because they were "weak in the faith." That is a paltry attack upon your intellectual opponents, and you have provided no reason for us to suppose that Elder Smith made it.

Again, in italics: "the final battles did take place within the borders of what is now the United States." DOS 3:240.

No doubt that was his view.

But apart from that, this does not support the claim that those who advocated for a Mesoamerican Cumorah did so because they were "weak in the faith." That is a paltry attack upon your intellectual opponents, and you have provided no reason for us to suppose that Elder Smith made it.

Again, in italics: "these final battles took place in the territory known as the United States and in the neighborhood of the Great Lakes and the hills of Western New York. And here Moroni found the resting place for the sacred instruments which had been commmitted to his care." DOS 3:241.

No doubt that was his view.

But apart from that, this does not support, etc.

In all Caps: "CUMORAH ONCE SITE OF CARNAGE AND DESTRUCTION." DOS 3:242.

No doubt that was his view.

But apart from that, this does not support, etc.

And yet you and Pahoran argue that JSF meant somehow to remain ambivalent about the two Cumorahs theory with the following statement: "Because of this theory some members of the Church have become confused and greatly disturbed in their faith in the Book of Mormon." -- Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 3:233." Really? You think he was ambivalent and meant, as you say, to place blame on weak souls encounterin an "emerging [and possibly true] theory"?

Not only is such not my argument, it is not apparent to me that Kevin was making such an argument, either.

It is apparent to me that JFS was in nowise "ambivalent" about any so-called "two Cumorah theory;" at least, as of 1938. It is apparent to me that he opposed the emergence of newfangled ideas that contradicted the traditions in which he believed, and that he squarely blamed the ideas themselves for the loss of faith the aforementioned weak souls suffered.

This is apparent to me because that is what the words of the quote you are abusing actually say.

Isn't this a tad disingenuous?

I'm sorry Mr. Pot, my whistle stopped me from hearing what you were saying.

I mean, I am fully sympathetic with your view, and I acknowledge it, that the location of Cumorah is not a matter of revelation and can be made a subject of logical discourse. I acknowledge your view that Presidents Ivins, Smith and Elder Talmage were blowing smoke with their theories because it was just a matter of speculation. I get that. But you should at least acknowledge the full import of what these brethren have actually said instead of traslating it into something else.

You mean -- like taking a sentence that begins "Because of this theory," and "translating" it to mean "This theory is the result of?".

Because that is so obviously "something else" as to require no commentary.

Regarding Doctrines of Salvation, Deseret Books says: "A three-volume set of authoritative sermons that is a must for every LDS library. The path to salvation and happiness is explored and explained. This book provides a rich treasury of President Smith's timeless gospel insights." I can see for myself many cites in general conference to this three-volume set. Not one reference to "Mesoamerica" or "Mesoamerican" in General Conference.

Who has the upper hand in the appeal to authority? I mean, isn't that all we should have in our faith -- appeal to the proper authorities?

Umm, Rob? Geography is not a matter of faith; it is a matter of science. When you are sick, do you open a volume of GC talks, or do you go to a doctor? As genuine, committed Book of Mormon believers, the LGT advocates in every generation are unanimous in their view that the Book of Mormon is true, no matter where the Nephites actually happened to live. And the more you bang on about this, the more I wonder whether the faith of the traditionalists is quite so robust.

If it makes you feel happier, I will cheerfully grant that the traditionalist view "has the upper hand in the" fallacious "appeal to authority" you are relying upon. Your authorities can beat up our authorities.

And in the same way, Cardinal Bellarmine's authorities could beat up Galileo's authorities in an earlier controversy. I seem to remember that the outcome of that one did not end up covering the traditionalists in glory.

Or should we rely upon anthropologists, geneticists, linguists, diffusionists, and the like? I mean, why not just rely upon Fawn Brodie and her scientific approach to Joseph Smith?

And so, after the fallacy of appeal to authority comes the "Slippery slope" fallacy. And the hits just keep on comin'.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Rob Osborn]

You call me sidestepping? Um wow! I give you reasons (like you asked of me) why NY is not the hill. I give you reasons (like you asked of me) to why I think it is in Mesoamerica and you do not answer one of my questions (not one) and have the audacity to accuse me of sidestepping? Also to note, I gave you plenty of evidence why I feel the hill is in Mesoamerica.

Anijen, the Sidestepping Mesoamericanist

Certainly if you are arguing for a meso-american view of Cumorah, shouldn't there be some location for it? What about all the other evidence that would be found around it?

[Nenahnezad]

Certainly if you are arguing for a meso-american view of Cumorah, shouldn't there be some location for it? What about all the other evidence that would be found around it?

Wikipedia states it's Cerro Vigia in Veracruz, Mexico: http://en.wikipedia....rah#Cerro_Vigia LOL!

Look it up "Cerro Vigia, Veracruz, Mexico" using Google Earth. It's hill in a volcanic field surrounded by cinder cones southeast of and obviously a product of a nearby volcano called San Martin.

This is the Hill Cumorah of Mesoamerica, around which were the last battles of both the destroyed Jaredite and Nephite nations - even though "The Nephites were not the Maya." LOL!

You Mesoamerica believers know more about New York geography, which you don't believe in and less about Mesoamerica geography, which you do believe in. All you have are responses as to why the New York location "doesn't work" when you don't even have a working model for a hill in Mesoamerica. "This doesn't work. That doesn't work." So your conclusion leads to what? To another location that doesn't work? Ha.

[mapman]

Wikipedia states it's Cerro Vigia in Veracruz, Mexico: http://en.wikipedia....rah#Cerro_Vigia LOL!

Look it up "Cerro Vigia, Veracruz, Mexico" using Google Earth. It's hill in a volcanic field surrounded by cinder cones southeast of and obviously a product of a nearby volcano called San Martin.

This is the Hill Cumorah of Mesoamerica, around which were the last battles of both the destroyed Jaredite and Nephite nations - even though "The Nephites were not the Maya." LOL!

You Mesoamerica believers know more about New York geography, which you don't believe in and less about Mesoamerica geography, which you do believe in. All you have are responses as to why the New York location "doesn't work" when you don't even have a working model for a hill in Mesoamerica. "This doesn't work. That doesn't work." So your conclusion leads to what? To another location that doesn't work? Ha.

Not all those who favor Mesoamerican models think that the hill Cumorah was Cerro Vigia. Larry Poulsen suggested that a hill next to Misantla, Veracruz, for Cumorah, and I think it fits well. Mesoamerican theorists actually vary widely in opinions between people. There is not one model.

Also, I don't see what the location of Cumorah has to do with the Nephites not being the Maya.

[SkepticTheist]

I agree with you that the Hill in NY is the Hill Cumorah. But we can't take the word of the prophets on this thing as evidence. We have to actually separate out all the real evidences from things that are secondary and not binding to make the case, and do so very carefully. We cannot follow the old "Cumorah is Cumorah because the Prophet's said so" argument. The Church has retracted the old belief. My new book called "Resurrecting Cumorah" takes on the Mesoamericanist arguments on point by point. No doubt it will not be convincing to them, but I view it as a good rational starting point for those like me who still believe, and my intent is to create a new rational paradigm for a basis for maintaining belief in the hill in NY as the ancient site of the Nephite destruction. See my site at http://edwingoble.com

Ed

Another thread talked about evidences of the Book of Mormon and the importance of looking for the right things.

I agree with that sentiment, and looking for the Hill Cumorah seems a very simple thing to do because we know where it is:

''CUMORAH, Hill

A small hill located in western New York, United States of America. Here an ancient prophet named Moroni hid the gold plates containing some of the records of the Nephite and Jaredite nations. Joseph Smith was directed to this hill in 1827 by the resurrected Moroni to get these plates and translate a portion of them. This translation is the Book of Mormon''

(taken from the official LDS website 10th January 2011)

or do we?

''The Cumorah of the Book of Mormon is the same hill in New York from which Joseph retrieved the plates.

This claim is problematic on several levels''

(taken from an article by Mike Ash on the official LDS outlet for 'trusted news' Mormon Times)

In his article entitled 'Cumorah claims can't sustain Great Lakes Model' it would seem that Mr Ash is attemting to say that the Church (and therefore the First Presidency) is wrong about this.

I think this is worthy of discussion because the location of the Hill Cumorah and the undoubted wealth of archeological evidence that must abound in and around it's vicinity would undoubtedly provide proof of the Book of Mormon's truthfulness.

[SkepticTheist]

Mormon 6:6

By this scripture we know that it is very likely that Mormon gave a portion of the plates of Mormon to Moroni and then sometime after this verse was written, The remaining large portion of all the plates (the plates of Nephi, small and large, the plates of Ether and the plates of brass) were hidden in the hill Cumorah. We then know that Moroni fled the Lamanites and wandered approximately 37-38 years(dedicating future temple sites along the way)and more than likely arrived in upstate New York where he at some point buried the plates he had and 1430 years later Joseph retrieved them. This to me is the most plausible theory and supports a Mesoamerican model very well.

Reasons NY does not fit;

1.If one is to believe the hill Cumorah is in New York, where Mormon hid the majority of the plates, it becomes very problematic. IMO it is highly unlikely that Moroni wandered those long years fleeing Lamanites just to end up back in the same area from which he first fled.

2. The hill Cumorah in NY does not have any cavities or caves to hide the plates and there is no evidence of large populations nor of warfare on a grand scale that the text of the Book of Mormon requires.

3. Climate of the Book of Mormon suggests tropical which NY is not.

4. Other verses suggests volcanic activity The great Lakes model has only had three volcanoes ever erupt in that proposed area but the last eruption was over 65 million years ago, long before the BofM time.

5. The East sea (Atlantic Ocean) is not close as the Book of Mormon suggests. The BofM implies it is very close to the hill probably within fifteen to thirty miles would be a good estimate, Palmyra is hundreds of miles from the Atlantic.

6. There is no city of cement North of Palmyra (it least we haven't found one as yet).

7. The Hopewell tradition's population in that area of the hill was very sparse probably 1000 max (and I am being generous) around the time of the Book of Mormon.

8. other mismatching criteria.

I want to point out that Mesoamerica fits all of these criteria exceptionally well against all the available models put forth. It is my opinion that Mesoamerica is the only place that fits and is corroborated by the text of the Book of Mormon and the present available archeological evidence.

My response:

1- Why not? It is just as easy for him to return in his wanderings as it would be for him to go in any other direction.

2- the Adena mounds have man-made burial chambers in them demonstrating the plausibility of a man-made chamber according to the archaeology of the area in the Hill Cumorah.

3- The climate of the Land southward was tropical. Cumorah is an exceedingly great distance away right south of one of the large bodies of water. the climate for the Land southward has nothing to do with the climate there.

4- the land southward has volcanic activity. Cumorah is an exceedingly great distance from there, according to an absolutely reasonable reading of the text, notwithstanding you don't agree with it. just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean it isn't a reasonable reading of the text.

5- Cumorah in New York is relatively close to the East Sea compared to a great many other places in eastern North America and you are just quibbling on this one

6- The generalized description of the land northward above the narrow neck of land (tehantepec) in the book of Mormon includes cement cities. There is no requirement in the text that makes us conclude that this generalized requirement for cement must extend an exceedingly great distance to Cumorah.

7-We aren't talking about the New York natives. We are talking about the Nephite populations of Mesoamerica and the Great Lakes region being pushed into a rural area in the backyard of the Hopewell Ceremonial Complexes in Ohio. Well within their sphere of influence

Ed Goble

[Anijen]

7-We aren't talking about the New York natives. We are talking about the Nephite populations of Mesoamerica and the Great Lakes region being pushed into a rural area in the backyard of the Hopewell Ceremonial Complexes in Ohio. Well within their sphere of influence

Hi Ed, Thanks for the thought out response. I will answer later when I have more time. In the mean time could you be more descriptive here in your answer for #7. What do you mean when you write; "being pushed into a rural area"

Are you implying that these massive armies started in Mesoamerica and ended up at the battle site in NY? In so doing pushed out the Hopewell? And if this is so, would you then imply that the Lamanites went all the way back to Mesoamerica?

Thanks Anijen

[SkepticTheist]

Hi Ed, Thanks for the thought out response. I will answer later when I have more time. In the mean time could you be more descriptive here in your answer for #7. What do you mean when you write; "being pushed into a rural area"

Are you implying that these massive armies started in Mesoamerica and ended up at the battle site in NY? In so doing pushed out the Hopewell? And if this is so, would you then imply that the Lamanites went all the way back to Mesoamerica?

Thanks Anijen

There were Nephites among the Hopewell, because the text says that they inhabited the area of the Land Northward from the southern point of desolation Northward. Precisely what political complexities there were among the Hopewell and what allegiances they all had, we don't know, but at least some were Nephite. The Nephites from the south fled to the forts and centers occupied by their brethren in the North. The Lamanites brought all the forces they neeeded northward to defeat the Nephites. Since the text is silent on where the Lamanites went afterward, then we are left with nothing but assumptions. But somebody occupied the land afterward. If you want me to comment on what the text doesn't say, then you are just baiting me into a territory where there is nothing but assumptions. But I don't know why some of them would have not returned to Mesoamerica.

Ed Goble

[LDS Guy 1986]

Another thread talked about evidences of the Book of Mormon and the importance of looking for the right things.

I agree with that sentiment, and looking for the Hill Cumorah seems a very simple thing to do because we know where it is:

''CUMORAH, Hill

A small hill located in western New York, United States of America. Here an ancient prophet named Moroni hid the gold plates containing some of the records of the Nephite and Jaredite nations. Joseph Smith was directed to this hill in 1827 by the resurrected Moroni to get these plates and translate a portion of them. This translation is the Book of Mormon''

(taken from the official LDS website 10th January 2011)

or do we?

''The Cumorah of the Book of Mormon is the same hill in New York from which Joseph retrieved the plates.

This claim is problematic on several levels''

(taken from an article by Mike Ash on the official LDS outlet for 'trusted news' Mormon Times)

In his article entitled 'Cumorah claims can't sustain Great Lakes Model' it would seem that Mr Ash is attemting to say that the Church (and therefore the First Presidency) is wrong about this.

I think this is worthy of discussion because the location of the Hill Cumorah and the undoubted wealth of archeological evidence that must abound in and around it's vicinity would undoubtedly provide proof of the Book of Mormon's truthfulness.

As far as I understand and have read, the Hill Cumorah in New York is not the Hill Cumorah of the Book of Mormon where the last battles of the Jaradites and Nephites took place. As far as I know the Hill Cumorah was never called Cumorah till well after the martyrdom of Joseph Smith. This is a not a title given through scripture or by ancient prophets but by the modern Church for the sacred site of when Moroni buried the golden plates.

[SkepticTheist]

Hi Ed, Thanks for the thought out response. I will answer later when I have more time. In the mean time could you be more descriptive here in your answer for #7. What do you mean when you write; "being pushed into a rural area"

Are you implying that these massive armies started in Mesoamerica and ended up at the battle site in NY? In so doing pushed out the Hopewell? And if this is so, would you then imply that the Lamanites went all the way back to Mesoamerica?

Thanks Anijen

Oh, and as for the rural area issue, I am saying that Mormon took his people into a relatively rural area in New York compared to the ceremonial centers and population centers to the west in Ohio and Illinois. And don't try to tell me that there weren't enough of a population there in the Ohio and Illinois centers.

And don't try to tell me that there wasn't enough population in New York, because we are talking about an entire people who fled from Mesoamerica and whatever domains they had in the Great Lakes region, to congregate in New York. Yes, I know, this is the traditional interpretation. So what?

Because you aren't dealing with somebody that believes in the Heartland or New York limited geography. I am the one that wrote a book that I retracted that Rod Meldrum used as the basis of his geography. And I retracted the Heartland Geography. You are talking to a person that believes everything you do about the Land Southward below the Narrow Neck of Land of Tehuantepec. I am a Mesoamericanist in every respect except for Land Northward issues. I only differ with you on Land Northward issues and how far northward Cumorah was.

Ed Goble