Has Roper refuted Potter and Meldrum?

[Olavarria]

Joseph Smith, Revelation, and Book of Mormon Geography by: Matthew Roper, 15-85 A review of "Prophecies and Promises: The Book of Mormon and the United States of America" by: Bruce H. Porter and Rod L. Meldrum

Losing the Remnant: The New Exclusivist "Movement" and the Book of Mormon by: Matthew Roper, 87-124 A review of "Prophecies and Promises: The Book of Mormon and the United States of America" by: Bruce H. Porter and Rod L. Meldrum

Has anyone else read these papers in the latest Farms Review?

[livy111us]

How many times does Meldrum need to be proven false before he gets the hint? He has had archaeologists, geneticists, BOM scholars, etc... nicely speak to him about his problems. He has either ignored them, or dismissed them by claiming that they have an ulterior motive by opposing him. If the entire world of scholarship says you are wrong, perhaps you should take a second look at your theory.

I've read these articles and think that they are absolutely amazing. Matthew Roper does a wonderful job at researching the origins of the claims that Manti is in Missouri, and Zarahemla is across the river from Nauvoo. His work on Joseph Smith as the author of the Sept/Oct 1842 Times and Seasons is phenomenal. Actually, all the information in both articles is superb and would recommend them to anyone interested in BOM geography, or who has been in contact with Meldrums theory.

[Daniel Peterson]

I've read them.

There's nothing in them but name-calling and ad hominem insults.

That's all there ever is in the FARMS Review.

It's just a vehicle through which Internet Mormons ridicule and attack humble, faithful Chapel Mormons like Rod Meldrum, devout followers of Joseph Smith who believe in an entirely different religion than the arrogant prophet-denying Internet Mormons do.

I think I've got the mantra down . . .

.

[Mortal Man]

I've read them.

There's nothing in them but name-calling and ad hominem insults.

That's all there ever is in the FARMS Review.

It's just a vehicle through which Internet Mormons ridicule and attack humble, faithful Chapel Mormons like Rod Meldrum, devout followers of Joseph Smith who believe in an entirely different religion than the arrogant prophet-denying Internet Mormons do.

As Will Schryver once said, "So shines a flash of truth in an otherwise darkened soul..."

[cinepro]

How many times does Meldrum need to be proven false before he gets the hint? He has had archaeologists, geneticists, BOM scholars, etc... nicely speak to him about his problems. He has either ignored them, or dismissed them by claiming that they have an ulterior motive by opposing him. If the entire world of scholarship says you are wrong, perhaps you should take a second look at your theory.

Wait, I've got a friend who doesn't believe in the Book of Mormon for almost the exactly same reason.

Weird.

[Olavarria]

I got this from Meldrum's website, emphasis added:

HOW TO PROPERLY INVITE A FRIEND OR FAMILY MEMBER TO WATCH THE DVD OR COME TO A PRESENTATION

Many people who have viewed the DVD's or seen the live presentation become very excited to share this information with others. While this is commendable, if done improperly this could lead to putting others in a defensive position because audience survey's indicate that 95% of everyone that comes to a live presentation or is invited to watch the DVD presentation believe at the onset that Central America or Mesoamerica was where the Book of Mormon took place, while nearly 100% of those leaving indicate their paradigm has completely changed in 4 hours.

Rather than trying to 'explain' what you heard and saw during the presentation, I suggest taking the following approach to inviting people to see the presentation. Simply say one of the following:

"Have you heard about the exciting new research that shows that there is a possible genetic link between ancient Jewish populations and Native Americans? It is very interesting. And guess what?......its right where Joseph Smith indicated it would be!"

"Do you know where the Book of Mormon's "Promised Land" is located? Did you know that there are 36 prophecies about this new world "Promised Land" that clearly establish which Latter-day nation it is? Would you be surprised to find that it may be the same sacred ground where the Book of Mormon occurred?"

Then when their interest is piqued, simply invite them to watch the upcoming DVD or presentation and let it do the work. Don't attempt to answer questions because this information has to be built properly, line upon line, and precept upon precept, all atop a firm foundation of truth. That way they get all the information they need to make a 'new paradigm shift', rather than parts and pieces that you can remember and may present in an unorganized fashion. Don't tell them the outcome of where the research has lead, but let them make the discovery for themselves as you and I did while seeing the presentation and doing the research. That is a thousand times more powerful then 'telling' them where it happened and why they should want to watch it. This has been the case for thousands who now have seen the presentation.

SAMPLE INVITATION

Hello Friends,

You are cordially invited to participate in a special presentation titled 'DNA Evidence for Book of Mormon Geography; New scientific support of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon'. This new research validates the Book of Mormon as both a spiritual and historical record and testifies of the Prophetic calling of The Prophet, Joseph Smith Jr. This was accomplished through DNA, Prophetic, Scriptural, Historical, Climatological, Archaeological, Social and Cultural evidences found as a result of four years of research.

We will address questions such as:

Where is the 'Promised Land' of the Book of Mormon?

What Latter-day nation qualifies to be this "Promised Land' according to its 36 prophecies and promises?

Did the Book of Mormon account take place on this 'Promised Land?'

What clues does the book itself give us about where the Book of Mormon took place?

What did the Prophet, Joseph Smith know about the books geography?

What is the controversy surrounding DNA and the Book of Mormon?

Why is finding 'Lamanite' DNA in the America's important?

Could genetics help us discover where the Book of Mormon may have taken place?

What indications does the book itself give about climate?

Are there any civilizations that qualify as being 'Nephite', 'Lamanite', or 'Jaredite'?

if so, what archaeological evidence is there for these civilizations?

Are there any 'Book of Mormon' archaeological artifacts?

Is knowing the geography of the Book of Mormon important?

Will this information lead to a greater understanding of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon, the Prophet, Joseph Smith and to the church he organized?

And most importantly, can the answers to these questions help to bring people to Christ?

This presentation addresses these questions and much more. It has now been seen by numerous members of the church, from general members to General Authorities, including Stake Presidents, Bishop's, and Mission Presidents.

All who have seen it have been very moved and excited about the information and how it 'just makes sense' intellectually as well as spiritually. For most, it will feel like you have always known these things to be true, and for others, these new insights and information may completely change your paradigm!

This is a great opportunity to do some missionary work, or bring anyone who is struggling with the gospel, or the Book of Mormon's authenticity as an actual historical document and spiritual record. It is also hoped that it will strengthen your own testimony of the truth's found in the gospel. Please contact us to let us know if you are planning to attend, and how many to expect. We are very excited about sharing this information with you. You are encouraged to come and bring your family, friends and neighbors. Please no children under 16 years old. Admission is free.

NOTE: To get some idea of the magnitude of the problem of ignoring the geography of the Book of Mormon, go to youtube.com (click link below) and type in 'book of mormon' and 'DNA'. The highest viewing numbers are for an anti-Mormon DVD titled "DNA vs. The Book of Mormon. Youtube shows over 156,000 viewings in the past year. This DVD has sold thousands of copies in the past 4 years! So the question is...Who is buying this documentary, even when anyone can view if free online? The answer is...other 'Christian' denominations. Why? Because up until now, there has been no real answer, only explanations of why no DNA evidence in support of the Book of Mormon has been found in Mesoamerica, the favored theoretical location by the LDS scholarly community. Is this the message we want the world to see when they are looking for information on the Book of Mormon?

Does anyone else think that is a little weird or inappropriate?

[Bob Crockett]

I got this from Meldrum's website, emphasis added:

Does anyone else think that is a little weird or inappropriate?

Yeah. The word "Bishop's" is in the possessive rather than the plural.

[erichard]

...

Hi,

A little minor detail:

your title says "Potter" but you mean "Porter".

we must not mix George Potter up with Bruce Porter.

Richard

[livy111us]

I got this from Meldrum's website, emphasis added:

Does anyone else think that is a little weird or inappropriate?

Not when your salary depends on the sale of your product.

[Nenahnezad]

I've read them.

There's nothing in them but name-calling and ad hominem insults.

That's all there ever is in the FARMS Review.

It's just a vehicle through which Internet Mormons ridicule and attack humble, faithful Chapel Mormons like Rod Meldrum, devout followers of Joseph Smith who believe in an entirely different religion than the arrogant prophet-denying Internet Mormons do.

I think I've got the mantra down . . .

The LGT is challenged and they all arise breathing out murmurings calling it a "mantra." Nice. You claimed on PBS the Book of Mormon is full of errors. Is that your mantra?

Here's more LGT "Mantra" i.e. "name-calling and ad hominem insults."

Louis Midgley:

"Heartlanders" again "Heartlanders" and again "Heartlander ideology"

"A Trendy Jingo Geography" (Strange a member of the LDS Church objects to Jingo - as if he doesn't know the origin of the word.)

"Much like what we have done with other amateur, ephemeral efforts to locate a place for the events described in the Book of Mormon" (outside of Mesoamerica).

Then Louis Midgley changes the tune. When it didn't before, now the LGT Theory, upheld by the challenged & scattered remnants of FARMS, also accounts for it being outside of Mesoamerica. Wow. That's new. I wonder why:

"Heartlanders downplay or even brush aside the host of geographical clues in the Book of Mormon in favor of what is considered proof that the promises to the remote descendants of the Lehites must now be known solely through DNA. The Heartland must necessarily be located only in the United States of America, where it is claimed there is now compelling evidence of their existence, and hence not in Central and South America or in the islands of the Pacific.

http://maxwellinstit...22&num=1&id=789

This is a blatant missrepresentation by Midgley; to claim Porter & Meldrum believe promises to "remote descendants" of the Lehites is other than based on DNA, when the Book of Mormon states otherwise, and is claiming Porter and Meldrum don't believe in the Book of Mormon (which Dr. Peterson claimed is full of errors).

And this when the "heartland" of the LGT is within Mesoamerica? A hypocritical LGT that changes year to year? Just when did the LGT give credence to remote descendants of the Lehites outside of Mesoamerica, in North and South America and in the islands of the Pacific? You, Midgley nor anyone else haven't even come up with a reasonable explanation of how Moroni traveled to New York. And now the claim the LGT promotes the promised blessings to Lehite descendants outside of Mesoamerica?

You LGT advocates haven't even found Lehites IN Mesoamerica. This is because "the Nephites were not the Maya."

I think I've got the mantra down . . .

[Daniel Peterson]

You claimed on PBS the Book of Mormon is full of errors. Is that your mantra?

Nope.

Would you like to supply the exact language where I made that claim?

claiming Porter and Meldrum don't believe in the Book of Mormon

I'm unaware of anybody claiming that Porter and Meldrum don't believe in the Book of Mormon. I'm quite confident that they do, and would be deeply shocked to discover otherwise.

Such insinuations seem, rather, to be more your style:

which Dr. Peterson claimed is full of errors).

Suggesting that faithful Latter-day Saints who lean toward a limited Mesoamerian geography have rejected Joseph Smith and the prophets or don't really believe in the Book of Mormon is one of the most objectionable habits of some in the "Heartland movement." I haven't encountered it so much from Porter or Meldrum directly, but I've run into it quite a bit from some of their more intemperate followers.

I don't believe that anybody's salvation hinges on getting the GPS co

[Olavarria]

Hello Nenah:)

The LGT is challenged and they all arise breathing out murmurings calling it a "mantra." Nice. You claimed on PBS the Book of Mormon is full of errors. Is that your mantra?

Here's more LGT "Mantra" i.e. "name-calling and ad hominem insults."

The main problem I see with the HLT is in the methodology. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Meldrum separates verses detailing geography as "spirtual" vs "geographic" ie prophesies about the future of the promised land vs the actual geographic descriptions. He then favors the prophesies and virtually ignores the "geographic" verses. The problem with this method is that it uses only a small, unrepresentative, sample of geographic descriptions and then superimposes them on to a North American setting ONLY because Joseph may have "claimed", in earlier years, that such land was the place.

The beauty of Sorenson's approach is to

1)Create a map, independent of the real world, solely based on ALL geographical references.

2)Once you have created the map, see IF it fits anywhere in the real world.

In other words, Sorenson, and others make the BoM the ultimate authority on what it says about it's own geography. Meldrum makes Joseph Smith the ultimate authority, and that just doesn't work. Joseph was the translator, not the writer of the book.

Then Louis Midgley changes the tune. When it didn't before, now the LGT Theory, upheld by the challenged & scattered remnants of FARMS, also accounts for it being outside of Mesoamerica. Wow. That's new. I wonder why:

I don't know about Midgley's paper. Maybe I should read it. Have you read Roper's? I don't ask that in a snide way. Just curious about what you think:)

And this when the "heartland" of the LGT is within Mesoamerica? A hypocritical LGT that changes year to year? Just when did the LGT give credence to remote descendants of the Lehites outside of Mesoamerica, in North and South America and in the islands of the Pacific?

Mesoamericans in Pre-Spanish South America

Mesoamericans in Pre-Columbian North America

You, Midgley nor anyone else haven't even come up with a reasonable explanation of how Moroni traveled to New York.

Do we need an explanation? Maybe he walked, used rafts etc. Maybe he delivered the plates to that location, as an angel.

And now the claim the LGT promotes the promised blessings to Lehite descendants outside of Mesoamerica?

I don't think anyone ever claimed that the only people descendant from Lehi are mexicans and Guatemalans. If anyone has, I'd like to know.

For what it's worth, Mexico has 12 operating temples and 1 planned/under construction in Tijuana.

You LGT advocates haven't even found Lehites IN Mesoamerica.

Besides divine revelation, could you please explain how we are supposed to positively identify Lehites anywhere?

Spencer W. Kimball

"I should like to address my remarks to you, our kinsmen of the isles of the sea and the Americas. Millions of you have blood relatively unmixed with gentile nations. Columbus called you "Indians," thinking he had reached the East Indies. Millions of you are descendants of Spaniards and Indians, and are termed "mestizos," and are called after your countries, for instance: Mexicans in Mexico; Guatemalans in Guatemala; Chilianos in Chile.

You Polynesians of the Pacific are called Samoan or Maori, Tahitian or Hawaiian, according to your islands. There are probably sixty million of you on the two continents and on the Pacific Islands, all related by blood ties.

The Lord calls you "Lamanites."

He goes on...

I was in Arizona at the temple. As I thought and prayed and studied, I had what I thought was a dream, maybe a vision. There were many Mexican people in the temple on that same day. As I looked into the future, I saw that the Lamanites were going to grow and develop.49

When I was in Mexico in 1946, I was dreaming for the people of Mexico. I had a dream of your progress and development. Now, this is precisely what I dreamed; this was my vision for the people of the Lamanites. I got up from my bed and wrote my dream. Maybe it was a vision rather than a dream. This is what I wrote:

As I looked into the future, I saw the Lamanites from the isles of the sea and the Americas rise to a great destiny. I saw great numbers of Lamanites and Nephites in beautiful homes that have all the comforts that science can afford.

I could see you children of Lehi with your herds and flocks on a thousand hills. . . .

I saw the Church growing with rapid strides, and I saw them organized in wards and stakes. (I think there was not a single stake or ward in all of Mexico when I dreamed this dream.) I saw a temple of God and expect to see it filled with men and women and young people.

[Olavarria]

I don't believe that anybody's salvation hinges on getting the GPS co

[Olavarria]

"the Nephites were not the Maya."

I don't think anyone has made that claim. LGT people sometimes use the Maya to study BoM peoples the way Biblical scholars use Ugaritic or Akkadian to study the Bible.

[Sargon]

You LGT advocates haven't even found Lehites IN Mesoamerica.

Let's be clear about something. The Heartland model is a LGT.

[David Bokovoy]

For those interested, LDS author Chris Heimerdinger has posted some interesting thoughts on these issues in his blog.

http://frostcave.blogspot.com/2009/09/lost-generation-of-scholarship.html

And incidentally, by referring to this movement as " trendy jingo geography," I believe Midgley hit the nail on the head. There's clearly a direct correspondence to the rise of Tea Party nationalism and this pseudo-scientific fanaticism.

[Olavarria]

Let's be clear about something. The Heartland model is a LGT.

true

[David Bokovoy]

I also enjoyed Brother Heimerdinger's Book of Mormon Archeological Foundation talk connecting the Heartland Religious Movement with the rise of American Exceptionalsim:

http://www.bmaf.org/node/341

It's a good read.

[Olavarria]

For those interested, LDS author Chris Heimerdinger has posted some interesting thoughts on these issues in his blog.

http://frostcave.blogspot.com/2009/09/lost-generation-of-scholarship.html

And incidentally, by referring to this movement as " trendy jingo geography," I believe Midgley hit the nail on the head. There's clearly a direct correspondence to the rise of Tea Party nationalism and this pseudo-scientific fanaticism.

[livy111us]

Wow. Not that I trusted Glen Beck before, but to see him grab onto this stuff without researching it at all, that would call into question everything he has said with confidence in the past.

Also, doesn't block hebrew post-date BOM times? If it were coming from the Lehites, wouldn't it be written in paleo-Hebrew? How could that even be used as evidence for The Book of Mormon?

[WalkerW]

I also enjoyed Brother Heimerdinger's Book of Mormon Archeological Foundation talk connecting the Heartland Religious Movement with the rise of American Exceptionalsim:

http://www.bmaf.org/node/341

It's a good read.

David Bentley Hart has a thought-provoking article at First Things entitled "Charity and Patriotism: Further Reflections."

What is unfortunate is that people don't use "American Exceptionalism" in the same way. Many are nationalistic in their use, meaning that America is superior. I find this dangerous. Others use it to refer to the American experiment, founding, and ideal, which has more to do with a political philosophy than the nation itself.

[Sargon]

For those interested, LDS author Chris Heimerdinger has posted some interesting thoughts on these issues in his blog.

http://frostcave.blogspot.com/2009/09/lost-generation-of-scholarship.html

And incidentally, by referring to this movement as " trendy jingo geography," I believe Midgley hit the nail on the head. There's clearly a direct correspondence to the rise of Tea Party nationalism and this pseudo-scientific fanaticism.

But let's be careful not to totally conflate the two. Perhaps Meldrum and his followers do, but I for one sympathize with Tea Party concerns but I certainly do not buy into Meldrum's Heartland model.

[WalkerW]

But let's be careful not to totally conflate the two. Perhaps Meldrum and his followers do, but I for one sympathize with Tea Party concerns but I certainly do not buy into Meldrum's Heartland model.

The main problem is defining "the Tea Party." It has largely become the new name of "the Right." I happen to agree with economist Thomas Sowell:

"One of the fertile sources of confusion in discussions of ideological issues is the dichotomy between the political left and the political right. Perhaps the most fundamental difference between the left and the right is that only the former has even a rough definition. What is called "the right" are simply the various and disparate opponents of the left. These opponents of the left may share no particular principle, much less a common agenda, and they can range from free-market libertarians to advocates of monarchy, theocracy, military dictatorship or innumerable other principles, systems and agendas...But the designation as being on the left has at least some historical basis in the views of those deputies who sat on the left side of the president's chair in France's Estates General in the eighteenth century. A rough summary of the vision of the political left today is that of collective decision-making through government, directed toward - or at least rationalized by - the goal of reducing economic and social inequalities. There may be moderate or extreme versions of the left vision or agenda but, among those designated as "the right," the difference between free market libertarians and military juntas is not simply one of degree in pursuing a common vision, because there is no common vision among these and other disparate groups opposed to the left - which is to say, there is no such definable thing as "the right," though there are various segments of that omnibus category, such as free market advocates, who can be defined" (Sowell, Intellectuals and Society, Basic Books, 2009: pgs. 90-91).

There are, however, heavily religious nationalists in the Tea Party movement. In that sense, I think David has a point.

[SkepticTheist]

What is transitory or ephemeral or amateurish about disagreeing with something in the overconfident, lockstep so-called "mainstream"? Especially if one has good rational reasons for one's beliefs? Not that I agree with Meldrum. But I believe that my book Resurrecting Cumorah presents a rational challenge to the mainstream ideology of Cumorah. And when I wrote This Land: Zarahemla and the Nephite Nation (though I retracted that theory), I was equally as jaded against the mainstream Mesoamericanists for their contempt and lack of Christlike rhetoric and their condescension towards my heartfelt and serious efforts. Each person makes an effort to have rationality on their side. Mesoamericanists are overconfident and unchristlike in their efforts to lambast the honest and sincere efforts of other honest researchers who disagree with them. Is there any wonder why we continue to be jaded?

Ed Goble

Louis Midgley:

"Heartlanders" again "Heartlanders" and again "Heartlander ideology"

"A Trendy Jingo Geography" (Strange a member of the LDS Church objects to Jingo - as if he doesn't know the origin of the word.)

"Much like what we have done with other amateur, ephemeral efforts to locate a place for the events described in the Book of Mormon" (outside of Mesoamerica).

Then Louis Midgley changes the tune. When it didn't before, now the LGT Theory, upheld by the challenged & scattered remnants of FARMS, also accounts for it being outside of Mesoamerica. Wow. That's new. I wonder why:

"Heartlanders downplay or even brush aside the host of geographical clues in the Book of Mormon in favor of what is considered proof that the promises to the remote descendants of the Lehites must now be known solely through DNA. The Heartland must necessarily be located only in the United States of America, where it is claimed there is now compelling evidence of their existence, and hence not in Central and South America or in the islands of the Pacific.

http://maxwellinstit...22&num=1&id=789

[Obiwan]

For those interested, LDS author Chris Heimerdinger has posted some interesting thoughts on these issues in his blog.

http://frostcave.blogspot.com/2009/09/lost-generation-of-scholarship.html

And incidentally, by referring to this movement as " trendy jingo geography," I believe Midgley hit the nail on the head. There's clearly a direct correspondence to the rise of Tea Party nationalism and this pseudo-scientific fanaticism.

Malarky bull-pucky!

Nothing related or "corresponding" at all, etc. accept in your own mind.