Anijen Posted November 29, 2011 Posted November 29, 2011 (edited) 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.! I thought that someone would jump on that. The Lemhi pass was named after Fort Lemhi or river of the same name, in which in turn they were named by an LDS missionary given to the Shoshone Indians in that area. Oh and it was not named that during Lewis and Clarks expedition, but came later about 1850 IIRC.Edited to say sadly IMO this is the type of substance Meldrum would use to promote his DVDs. Edited November 29, 2011 by Anijen
erichard Posted November 29, 2011 Posted November 29, 2011 ...I forget, now what is the difference between a Meldrum Thanksgiving and a Humdrum one?Fwiw, I believe in a revelation that states that the true descendants of Laman and Lemuel today reside mainly in South America. It implies that the Book of Mormon history took place in South America. I haven't found anyone that has really figured out the geography of it. Except that Cuzco is almost certainly the choice for the City of Nephi.Richard
kolipoki09 Posted November 29, 2011 Posted November 29, 2011 I thought that someone would jump on that. The Lemhi pass was named after Fort Lemhi or river of the same name, in which in turn they were named by an LDS missionary given to the Shoshone Indians in that area. Oh and it was not named that during Lewis and Clarks expedition, but came later about 1850 IIRC.Edited to say sadly IMO this is the type of substance Meldrum would use to promote his DVDs.Hence, why Sacajawea's band was later referred to as the Lemhi-Shoshone.It was Mormon missionaries who had moderate success working with their direct descendants in the area 50+ years later that prompted the name change - and of course, a belief that the Shoshone were the literal descendants of Lehi through Laman. Of course, Shoshone represents the northernmost dialect of the Uto-Aztecan family of languages - that some have argued as having (partly) Hebrew origins. But Meldrum would never consider the Book of Mormon peoples as being anywhere outside any known areas where Joseph Smith traveled. According to Meldrum, Joseph definitively answered the approximate locations of Book of Mormon events during his lifetime, though the evidence to support this is selective at best. 2
Scott Lloyd Posted November 29, 2011 Posted November 29, 2011 (edited) Fwiw, I believe in a revelation that states that the true descendants of Laman and Lemuel today reside mainly in South America.I'm unacquainted with such a revelation. Do you have a reference? Edited November 29, 2011 by Scott Lloyd
Scott Lloyd Posted November 29, 2011 Posted November 29, 2011 (edited) 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.Such dogmatizing on matters on which there is no official Church stance is an example of trying to establish a para-church within the Church of Jesus Christ.And it's not new. Gospel hobbyism has been around for a long, long time. Edited November 29, 2011 by Scott Lloyd 2
Vance Posted November 29, 2011 Posted November 29, 2011 (edited) 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 PWe also have this, 1 Nephi 13:12And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land. We understand this to be Columbus visiting the promised land.Columbus did visit Meso-America but not North America. Edited November 29, 2011 by Vance
kolipoki09 Posted November 29, 2011 Posted November 29, 2011 We understand this to be Columbus visiting the promised land.Columbus did visit Meso-America but not North America.It's a common belief, but there's no official proclamation that the "man among the Gentiles" actually referred to Columbus. I think it's an entirely reasonable conclusion, but I think the text leaves a little wiggle room for the possibility of others.Though I've heard it argued that Columbus never reached the continent, but rather made it no further than the Caribbean, his fourth and final voyage route skirted most of the eastern coast of Mesoamerica.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted November 29, 2011 Posted November 29, 2011 It's a common belief, but there's no official proclamation that the "man among the Gentiles" actually referred to Columbus. I think it's an entirely reasonable conclusion, but I think the text leaves a little wiggle room for the possibility of others.Though I've heard it argued that Columbus never reached the continent, but rather made it no further than the Caribbean, his fourth and final voyage route skirted most of the eastern coast of Mesoamerica.I have heard of no other people other than Columbus for this prophecy. I would love another name.
rodheadlee Posted November 30, 2011 Posted November 30, 2011 Alma 46:40 And there were some who died with fevers, which at some seasons of the year were very frequent in the land—but not so much so with fevers, because of the excellent qualities of the many aplants and roots which God had prepared to remove the cause of bdiseases, to which men were subject by the nature of the climate—Could this help decide on a setting for the Nephites? When I read this I thought of malaria and dengue fever. Or could this also be true in the north eastern US? Flu season?
kolipoki09 Posted November 30, 2011 Posted November 30, 2011 I have heard of no other people other than Columbus for this prophecy. I would love another name.I think it could refer to Leif Erikson or a host of others who established pre-Columbian contact in the Americas, but for the most part, Columbus fits the criteria. Of course, the underlying question remains - did Columbus appear in the Book of Mormon by revelation in a text pre-dating him, or did Joseph knowingly write Columbus into the text to add credence to the notion of the Book of Mormon's divine authenticity? Though I'm a believer in the Book of Mormon representing actual history, I cannot reconcile the possibility that Joseph could have integrated the story of Columbus into the text. As a habitual skeptic, the thought still looms.
poulsenll Posted November 30, 2011 Posted November 30, 2011 (edited) It's a common belief, but there's no official proclamation that the "man among the Gentiles" actually referred to Columbus. I think it's an entirely reasonable conclusion, but I think the text leaves a little wiggle room for the possibility of others.Though I've heard it argued that Columbus never reached the continent, but rather made it no further than the Caribbean, his fourth and final voyage route skirted most of the eastern coast of Mesoamerica.If we take the entire citation into consideration there is little doubt that it refers to either Columbus or one of his contemporaries and not Leif Erickson or some one else:11 And it came to pass that the angel said unto me: Behold the wrath of God is upon the seed of thy brethren.wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land.14 And it came to pass that I beheld many amultitudes of the Gentiles upon the bland of promise; and I beheld the wrath of God, that it was upon the seed of my brethren; and they were cscattered before the Gentiles and were smitten.no other contact with the new world except that by Columbus resulted in mass migragtion of gentiles from the old world and the resultant decimation of new world (lamanite) cultures. Edited November 30, 2011 by poulsenll 3
LeSellers Posted November 30, 2011 Posted November 30, 2011 Giovanni Caboto, John Cabot to you and me, an Italian explorer flying the British flag in 1497 is a reasonable candidate, as he sailed most of the North American coast that year.The rest of Nephi's prophecy/vision deals with rebellion against the mother country. In North America, this happened in 1775, in South and Central America, it was several decades before the last European flag was furled, but those revolutions still fit.Lehi
Robert F. Smith Posted November 30, 2011 Posted November 30, 2011 Posted An hour agokolipoki09, on 29 November 2011 - 03:25 PM, said:It's a common belief, but there's no official proclamation that the "man among the Gentiles" actually referred to Columbus. I think it's an entirely reasonable conclusion, but I think the text leaves a little wiggle room for the possibility of others.Though I've heard it argued that Columbus never reached the continent, but rather made it no further than the Caribbean, his fourth and final voyage route skirted most of the eastern coast of Mesoamerica.If we take the entire citation into consideration there is little doubt that it refers to either Columbus or one of his contemporaries and not Leif Erickson or some one else:Quote11 And it came to pass that the angel said unto me: Behold the wrath of God is upon the seed of thy brethren.wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land.14 And it came to pass that I beheld many amultitudes of the Gentiles upon the bland of promise; and I beheld the wrath of God, that it was upon the seed of my brethren; and they were cscattered before the Gentiles and were smitten.no other contact with the new world except that by Columbus resulted in mass migragtion of gentiles from the old world and the resultant decimation of new world (lamanite) cultures. Giovanni Caboto, John Cabot to you and me, an Italian explorer flying the British flag in 1497 is a reasonable candidate, as he sailed most of the North American coast that year.The rest of Nephi's prophecy/vision deals with rebellion against the mother country. In North America, this happened in 1775, in South and Central America, it was several decades before the last European flag was furled, but those revolutions still fit.LehiYes, but is North America actually included in those prophecies? Could it be that we are to consider only Gentile incursions and later revolutions in the immediate Mesoamerican area? In that case, the mother country would be Spain (at that time the world's greatest power), and perhaps briefly the powerful French Army of Napoleon III -- defeated by 33-year-old General Ignacio Zaragoza on cinco de Mayo 1862 at the Battle of Puebla (still celebrated by Alta Californios and other Mexican-Americans, even though that was not the end of the war against French imperialism) -- which likewise allowed American Union troops to defeat the Confederacy.
kolipoki09 Posted November 30, 2011 Posted November 30, 2011 If we take the entire citation into consideration there is little doubt that it refers to either Columbus or one of his contemporaries and not Leif Erickson or some one else:no other contact with the new world except that by Columbus resulted in mass migragtion of gentiles from the old world and the resultant decimation of new world (lamanite) cultures.But that seems to imply that God foreordained the destruction of the Native American peoples and their cultures, which I don't conceive a just God doing. There's little doubt that Columbus laid the groundwork for transoceanic migrations to the New World, and I think it's reasonable (as I said before) to believe the text refers to Columbus, but I think the text is ambiguous enough to allow for other alternatives, which is why I'm hesitant to use the text as an outright prophecy about Columbus. It's much easier for an outsider to assume Joseph incorporated Columbus into the text than it is to argue that the text definitively refers to Columbus (or one of his contemporaries) resulting from a prophecy believed to have been uttered 2,000 years before the fact.
Calm Posted November 30, 2011 Posted November 30, 2011 Is there a quote from JS that he interpreted the verse as referring to Columbus? I know there are quotes from later prophets.
Scott Lloyd Posted November 30, 2011 Posted November 30, 2011 But that seems to imply that God foreordained the destruction of the Native American peoples and their cultures, ....Hardly. A prophecy of future events does not necessarily carry the implication that such events are God-ordained.For example, did God ordain the presence of gross wickedness in the latter days, or is this a function of men's own misuse of their moral agency?
Recommended Posts