cinepro Posted November 27, 2011 Posted November 27, 2011 You may remember a few years ago when I reported on a family relative who had traditionally followed a mesoamerican geography for the Book of Mormon, but after being introduced to the videos and books of Rod Meldrum and Wayne May had begun to be convinced of a Heartland geography.This past week I was once again visiting them for Thanksgiving. The subject came up when said family member was reading a Deseret Book ad and said "I can't believe Deseret Book is still selling books that teach a central American location for the Book of Mormon". I was interested in how he felt so strongly on the subject, and he was very critical of the mesoamerican supporters on these points:- "I can't understand how they ignore the statements of Joseph Smith"- "Zelph! What about Zelph? I've been to where they found him".- "In Ohio you can see the fortifications just like they describe in the Book of Mormon. There's nothing like it in central america."I tried my best to explain the idea that Joseph Smith was just mistaken in his assumptions about the locations and later made statements possibly supporting a central american geography. But I don't think I sold him on the idea.
Bob Crockett Posted November 27, 2011 Posted November 27, 2011 Heh heh. The disingenuous post snares a few, I suppose. I'm as guilty of that tactic as anybody else.
livy111us Posted November 27, 2011 Posted November 27, 2011 I think that is a big problem with Meldrum. Alternate theories are fine, but when it is based on pitting his audience against anyone who believes differently, particularly calling into question their belief in the Prophet Joseph Smith when they don't accept his theory, that is when the trouble starts. If he would have just stated his theory without the animosity and spreading it to his audience, I don't think anyone would have had much of a problem with him.
Log Posted November 27, 2011 Posted November 27, 2011 (edited) Cinepro is the best troll on this site. Edited November 27, 2011 by Log 2
cinepro Posted November 27, 2011 Author Posted November 27, 2011 (edited) Cinepro is the best troll on this site.I don't know what you're talking about. Everything in my post actually happened. As a further note, a family member on the other side of the family is a believer in the mesoamerican geography, and when I told him about the other guy, he said he had a hard time with the heartland theories because of the problem of the narrow neck of land and the River Sidon. So I pulled up the maps of the geography to show him how they worked it out.So over the course of the weekend, I found myself arguing for both geographies. Ironically, there are only a few people in this forum who I could possible hope to provide any type of verification of the story, and one of them is in this thread. So we'll see if it works out... Edited November 27, 2011 by cinepro
Bob Crockett Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 I like you Cinepro but your posts are often disingenuous. The fact that you draw from a personal experience makes a disingenuous post much less likely to be detected. But again I'm no innocent lamb in the flock.
kolipoki09 Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Ironically, there are only a few people in this forum who I could possible hope to provide any type of verification of the story, and one of them is in this thread. So we'll see if it works out...I believe you cinepro. As a matter of fact, I remember your thread from a few years ago discussing family members that were committed to the Meldrum theory. Don't ask me how or why, but it may have been one of the first times I was exposed to the Meldrum/Sorenson debate. I had encountered it before, but was (for the most part) unaware of the depths some were willing to go. At one point I was aware of a family in Texas where a father and son had virtually stopped talking to each other because one was a Meldrumite and the other was a FARMS subscriber. The son (a Meldrumite) went to far as to not allow his father into his home. It was a sad state of affairs. No adherence to a particular theory is worth losing family over. But enough with anecdotes. Glad to see you had a lively Thanksgiving! 1
cinepro Posted November 28, 2011 Author Posted November 28, 2011 I like you Cinepro but your posts are often disingenuous. The fact that you draw from a personal experience makes a disingenuous post much less likely to be detected. But again I'm no innocent lamb in the flock.Since you know someone in my ward, and the person under discussion will be attending my ward on Christmas day, there is a high probability that you can talk with our mutual friend (if you are so inclined) and find out for yourself whether I do have such a relative and they are as committed to Meldrum's theory as I present.Everyone else will just have to take my word for it.
Kenngo1969 Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 I think that is a big problem with Meldrum. Alternate theories are fine, but when it is based on pitting his audience against anyone who believes differently, particularly calling into question their belief in the Prophet Joseph Smith when they don't accept his theory, that is when the trouble starts. If he would have just stated his theory without the animosity and spreading it to his audience, I don't think anyone would have had much of a problem with him.Perhaps he thinks if he were to do that, his theory would not have garnered the attention it has. Sometimes beliefs, tenaciously held, attract more attention (albeit perhaps not the right kind of attention) than simply saying, "This is my 'theory among theories.'"
cinepro Posted November 28, 2011 Author Posted November 28, 2011 Perhaps he thinks if he were to do that, his theory would not have garnered the attention it has. Sometimes beliefs, tenaciously held, attract more attention (albeit perhaps not the right kind of attention) than simply saying, "This is my 'theory among theories.'" Meldrum probably knows that having a "one true geography" attitude won't make him as many friends as a "one book, many geographies" approach, but it could be he is more worried about being right than popular.
kolipoki09 Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 I think that is a big problem with Meldrum. Alternate theories are fine, but when it is based on pitting his audience against anyone who believes differently, particularly calling into question their belief in the Prophet Joseph Smith when they don't accept his theory, that is when the trouble starts. If he would have just stated his theory without the animosity and spreading it to his audience, I don't think anyone would have had much of a problem with him.I think you've summarized it quite clearly. As far as laying out an intelligible theory for the location of various Book of Mormon events, I think Sorenson's model works the best. Of course, Sorenson's Mesoamerican model for the Book of Mormon may very well be wrong (in the same sense that Ptolemy's model for charting the movements of the heavenly bodies was wrong) but still make sense given past and present naked-eye observations. However, I don't think Meldrum's model takes into consideration a large body of data suggesting otherwise. Yes, one could theoretically rely on accounts from Joseph Smith and many of his contemporaries to chart a probable location for Book of Mormon events, but unless one is willing to take them all into consideration (something Meldrum appears unwilling to do), the likelihood of presenting an accurate picture is significantly decreased. Meldrum's distinctly anti-science stance also draws into question a large body of his work that I cannot presently reconcile. In my own experiences with Meldrum, it is not a stretch in any sense of the word to note that Meldrum does call into question the faithfulness of those who disagree with him. Furthermore, that rhetoric has also extended to his followers. I find it incredibly unfortunate.
Mariner Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 I really sympathize with you, cinepro. I can't figure it out either.Does it not seem strange to anyone that Joseph Smith didn't seem to have inquired of the Lord regarding where the events in the Book of Mormon narrative might have taken place?Does the Mesoamerica LGT really make sense given the fact that Joseph Smith himself identified Hill Cumorah as being located near Palmyra, NY and identified bones from a mound near Griggsville IL as those of Zelph, a Lamanite prophet and warrior?Does anyone know why the current leaders of the LDS Church don't simply inquire of the Lord as to where the events described in the Book of Mormon actually took place?Why should something as simple as where the Book of Mormon events took place be such a point of contention and cause harmful riffs among the members of otherwise faithful families?
LeSellers Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Why should something as simple as where the Book of Mormon events took place be such a point of contention and cause harmful riffs among the members of otherwise faithful families?I didn't know that there was a whole lot of Book of Mormon-based Jazz out there. And how any riff would be harmful is a bigger puzzle. At worst, a malodious (a play on "melodious") riff would cause a minor headache.Lehi
Nathair/|\ Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 (edited) I didn't know that there was a whole lot of Book of Mormon-based Jazz out there. And how any riff would be harmful is a bigger puzzle. At worst, a malodious (a play on "melodious") riff would cause a minor headache.LehiThere are legends of a brown note whose powers range from necessitating a change of pants to insanity to death. The Barney song has been used in enhanced interrogations.http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BrownNote Edited November 28, 2011 by Nathair
Mariner Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 (edited) I didn't know that there was a whole lot of Book of Mormon-based Jazz out there. And how any riff would be harmful is a bigger puzzle. At worst, a malodious (a play on "melodious") riff would cause a minor headache.LehiThere are legends of a brown note whose powers range from necessitating a change of pants to insanity to death. The Barney song has been used in enhanced interrogations.http://tvtropes.org/.../Main/BrownNoteThanks, guys.(I meant "rift" instead of riff.) Edited November 28, 2011 by Mariner
Mark Beesley Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 (edited) The subject came up when said family member was reading a Deseret Book ad and said "I can't believe Deseret Book is still selling books that teach a central American location for the Book of Mormon".I can't believe Deseret Book sells books by Glenn Beck, Newt Gingrich and George Bush. Other customers can't believe we sell books by Barak Obama and Harry Reid. Faithful members complain all the time about this that or the other book that Deseret Book sells. Sometimes they get pulled, sometimes not. Anyway . . .Do the heartland theorists try to explain why and how Lehi, et al. got to the heartland in the first place after landing on the coast? Do they postulate about where the initial landing was? What do they say about Hagoth? Edited November 28, 2011 by Mark Beesley
cinepro Posted November 28, 2011 Author Posted November 28, 2011 Do the heartland theorists try to explain why and how Lehi, et al. got to the heartland in the first place after landing on the coast? Do they postulate about where the initial landing was? What do they say about Hagoth?Why, what do the mesoamerican theorists say about Hagoth?
LeSellers Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Thanks, guys.Always ready to lend a helping hand(I meant "rift" instead of riff.)Yeah, we know.Lehi
LeSellers Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Do [the heartland theorists] postulate about where the initial landing was?If they are true to the "Joseph said it, it must be accurate" theory, then the only option is "Peru" (which covered a much larger area, mostly going further north, than today's country of the same name).What do they say about Hagoth?I suspect there are many theories out there on this, but some believe he went north as Alma recorded for us; his colonists settled present-day Mexico City and areas further north.Kon Tiki may or may not have had anything to do with Hagoth.Lehi
livy111us Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 (edited) I can't believe Deseret Book sells books by Glenn Beck, Newt Gingrich and George Bush. SERIOUSLY!!! I wish the political realm would stay out of Deseret Book.Do the heartland theorists try to explain why and how Lehi, et al. got to the heartland in the first place after landing on the coast? Do they postulate about where the initial landing was? What do they say about Hagoth?Meldrum has the landing in the Florida, Alabama area http://www.firmlds.o...ature.php?id=14He believes Hagoth "could have just followed the Great Lakes all the way out to the ocean, and from there he could go anywhere." The FAIR review of his work says:"According to Alma 63:5, Hagoth launched his boat into the west sea, which the LNAM (Heartland model) identifies as Lake Michigan. His boat was not small, as Alma 63:6 indicates that many Nephites entered into it and it held "much provisions" and held "many women and children." This would make it impossible to navigate natural obstacles such as Niagara Falls (which connects Lake Erie and Lake Ontario), and such navigation would be necessary in order to get to the ocean.Thus, this claim for the LNAM is impossible; it violates points C and D. When Hagoth was building and sailing boats (approximately 55 BC) it was impossible to navigate a ship from the Great Lakes to the ocean. Such navigation was not possible until the construction of the Erie Canal in 1825." Edited November 28, 2011 by livy111us
Popular Post poulsenll Posted November 28, 2011 Popular Post Posted November 28, 2011 Meldrum sees Joseph Smith as the prime and possibly only authority on Book of Mormon geography. In doing this he refuses to accept the words of Book of Mormon prophets as having any revelence to where the Book of Mormon culture was located. This is a logical fallacy in that how can the words of prophets in a record translated by Joseph smith whom he accepts as his prime authority be rejected as important.In Alma 22:27, Mormorn describes the lands of the Nephites and Lamnites as being divided by a narrow strip of wilderness that reaches from an east sea to a west sea and that it contains the source of the river Sidon. The river Sidon is described elsewhere as running through or by the land of Zarahemla. In all my search of the territory covered by Meldrums model, using Google maps, I have been unable to find any geographic feature that agrees with this description. However, Searching the entire North and South American continents only one featrure that fits this description is found. It is found on the border between Guatemala and Mexico and has served as a defining border between cultures since before the time of Christ.If we1. Accept Joseph Smith as a prophet2. Accept that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon by the power of God3. Accept that Mormon is a prophet and accurately described the lands of the Book of Mormon4. Accept the evidence of our own eyes using Google EarthThenWe must accept Joseph Smith's and Mormon's statements that the Book of Mormon culture was located in Mesoamerica.Unfortunately many people are unwilling to study the text, translated by Joseph Smith, and to learn to use Google Earth to examine the real geography of the Americas as portrayed by satelite maps but prefer to accept the word of a self described expert on the Book of Mormon without any personal critical examination of his claims.Larry P 7
Anijen Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 (edited) He believes Hagoth "could have just followed the Great Lakes all the way out to the ocean, and from there he could go anywhere." The FAIR review of his work says:"According to Alma 63:5, Hagoth launched his boat into the west sea, which the LNAM (Heartland model) identifies as Lake Michigan. His boat was not small, as Alma 63:6 indicates that many Nephites entered into it and it held "much provisions" and held "many women and children." This would make it impossible to navigate natural obstacles such as Niagara Falls (which connects Lake Erie and Lake Ontario), and such navigation would be necessary in order to get to the ocean.Thus, this claim for the LNAM is impossible; it violates points C and D. When Hagoth was building and sailing boats (approximately 55 BC) it was impossible to navigate a ship from the Great Lakes to the ocean. Such navigation was not possible until the construction of the Erie Canal in 1825."What route goes all the way to the ocean? I do not think there is one. Let us even take Niagara Falls and Erie canal out of the equation, is there a route a ship or even a canoe can navigate from the great lakes to the West Coast without getting out of the ship? As far as I know there is not one. The Missouri, Columbia, or Snake do not work without going over some land to each other at some point, even at the Lemhi Pass (Lewis and Clarks route connection) would not accommodate a medium ship let alone a large one. Many of these places the rivers are too shallow. Just thinking out loud, I could be wrong. I have studied Lewis and Clark pretty extensively and they did reach the Pacific Ocean but had to carry or stash their boat or canoes overland in some places. But that is a bad comparison a ship the size Hagoth used as described in the Book of Mormon would be much bigger that Lewis and Clarks..."They needed horses to pack eight boat loads of stuff. And so all the preparation, study of astronomy and navigation took a back seat to an unexpected turn... The Lewis and Clarke party united and again crossed Lemhi Pass a third time, to the Snake River, after having cached all the boats near the mouth of Horse Prarie Creek."source herethis is the largest boat used on L&C expedition. Edited November 28, 2011 by Anijen
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Cinepro is the best troll on this site. Or this one.
Kenngo1969 Posted November 29, 2011 Posted November 29, 2011 (edited) What route goes all the way to the ocean? I do not think there is one. Let us even take Niagara Falls and Erie canal out of the equation, is there a route a ship or even a canoe can navigate from the great lakes to the West Coast without getting out of the ship? As far as I know there is not one. The Missouri, Columbia, or Snake do not work without going over some land to each other at some point, even at the Lemhi Pass (Lewis and Clarks route connection) would not accommodate a medium ship let alone a large one. ... .Aha! "The Lemhi Pass" = (More or Less) King Limhi! King Limhi is in the Book of Mormon! The Lemhi pass is in the continental United States! Ergo, the correct setting for the Book of Mormon is in the continental United States! Q.E.D.! Edited November 29, 2011 by Kenngo1969
KevinG Posted November 29, 2011 Posted November 29, 2011 I'm still stuck on discussing apologetics with the inlaws at Thanksgiving dinner! Who does that?
Recommended Posts