Two Cumorahs?

[inquiringmind]

Here's something I don't understand about the Mesoamerican theory.

There would have to be two hill Cumorahs, right?

The one where Moroni burried the gold plates before his death, and the one where Joseph found them, right?

The plates would have to be miraculously transported from the one hill (in central or South America) to the other (in upstate New York), right?

An Angel could have done this, but why take such care in hidding the plates, and burrying them, if the place where they were actually burried meant nothing?

Moroni could have just left them in a cave, or on a rock, or handed them to an angel (or St. John the Divine, or one of the three Nephites.)

And why translate the contents of the plates, written in a language Joseph couldn't understand without some miraculous tools, if those plates were gonna be re-hidden (or taken to heaven) when he was done with them?

The words of the Bible were copied and preserved from generation to generation by human scribes, but we actually needed the scrolls and manuscripts they left us.

We'd have no Bible today without them.

The contents of the plates--the whole history of the Lehites and the Jaredites, Christ's visit to this hemisphere, and the fulness of the Gospel--could have been dictated to Joseph by the angel Moroni, St. John, one of the three Nephites, or Our Resurrected Lord Himself.

The plates seem entirely superfluous--especially if they weren't even burried where Joseph found them.

What purpose did the gold (and or brass) plates really serve?

What purpose would preseving these plates for fouteen hundred years (and transporting them thousands of miles from under one hill to under another) serve if Joseph and elevan witnesses were the only ones who were ever to see them?

If God intended the contents of the book of Mormon to be written and preserved on these plates, and to come forth in this way, why didn't He leave the plates here to be displayed in a Museum in Salt Lake City?

I just don't see what purpose the plates really served.

Could anyone explain this to me?

Edited June 23, 2012 by inquiringmind

[Kevin Christensen]

The Book of Mormon also has two Jerusalems, two lands Bountiful, several Nephis, and two Moronis. No one is confused because the descriptions in the text make it clear that each one is distinctive. The Book of Mormon has two names for its Cumorah, and no one is confused because they are described as being in the same place. The description of the hill in the Book of Mormon also makes it clear that the hill in New York is not the same as the hill in the book (see In Search of Cumorah, for example), just as the descriptions of General Moroni make it clear that he is not the same as Mormon's son, who was in fact named after General Moroni. LDS social history makes it clear that the early Saints named the New York hill.

Why the plates? To satisfy the Biblical law of witnesses. Notice that none of the other modern gospels that RIchard L. Anderson discusses in his important article on the topic has anything like it. I heard Blake Ostler point out that with the plates and the witnesses, we have to rule out a Joseph Smith who was delusional.

The Testimony of Three Witnesses

Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come: That we, through the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, have seen the plates which contain this record, which is a record of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites, their brethren, and also of the people of Jared, who came from the tower of which hath been spoken. And we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true. And we also testify that we have seen the engravings which are upon the plates; and they have been shown unto us by the power of God, and not of man. And we declare with words of soberness, that an angel of God came down from heaven, and he brought and laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates, and the engravings thereon; and we know that it is by the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, that we beheld and bear record that these things are true. And it is marvelous in our eyes. Nevertheless, the voice of the Lord commanded us that we should bear record of it; wherefore, to be obedient unto the commandments of God, we bear testimony of these things. And we know that if we are faithful in Christ, we shall rid our garments of the blood of all men, and be found spotless before the judgment-seat of Christ, and shall dwell with him eternally in the heavens. And the honor be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God. Amen.

Oliver Cowdery

David Whitmer

Martin Harris

The Testimony of Eight Witnesses

Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come: That Joseph Smith, Jun., the translator of this work, has shown unto us the plates of which hath been spoken, which have the appearance of gold; and as many of the leaves as the said Smith has translated we did handle with our hands; and we also saw the engravings thereon, all of which has the appearance of ancient work, and of curious workmanship. And this we bear record with words of soberness, that the said Smith has shown unto us, for we have seen and hefted, and know of a surety that the said Smith has got the plates of which we have spoken. And we give our names unto the world, to witness unto the world that which we have seen. And we lie not, God bearing witness of it.

Christian Whitmer

Jacob Whitmer

Peter Whitmer, Jun.

John Whitmer

Hiram Page

Joseph Smith, Sen.

Hyrum Smith

Samuel H. Smith

Their existence makes a difference.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[Brant Gardner]

Here's something I don't understand about the Mesoamerican theory.

There would have to be two hill Cumorahs, right?

The one where Moroni burried the gold plates before his death, and the one where Joseph found them, right?

Not quite. There is the hill Cumorah that is mentioned in the text and is part of the action. Then there is the hill in New York which has been given the name Cumorah by early saints because the plates were found there. The assumption was that because the plates came from that hill that it must have been the one named in the Book of Mormon where burying plates is mentioned.

Unfortunately, the textual basis for that assumption is based on an incomplete reading of the text, which says that all but the plates that were later given to Joseph were buried in the text's hill Cumorah. It is possible that Moroni physically walked to New York to deposit them where Joseph found them. How the plates arrived in the New York hill is not stated.

And why translate the contents of the plates, written in a language Joseph couldn't understand without some miraculous tools, if those plates were gonna be re-hidden (or taken to heaven) when he was done with them?

The point was the translation, regardless of the mechanics of creating it. The plates connected the translation to a tangible antiquity. The plates served both as a source for the translation (depending upon your understanding of the translation process, the nature of the source can be different) and as a touchstone for faith in a translation that every early believer understood couldn't have happened by purely human means.

The words of the Bible were copied and preserved from generation to generation by human scribes, but we actually needed the scrolls and manuscripts they left us.

And the languages have been known since antiquity and there has never been a question about the ability to translate, even if quality varies.

If God intended the contents of the book of Mormon to be written and preserved on these plates, and to come forth in this way, why didn't He leave the plates here to be displayed in a Museum in Salt Lake City?

God could have done so many things that I think would have made the world better. Couldn't he have created Christianity without requiring the crucifixion?

[Tacenda]

Ok, this is also new to me in my confused faith crisis. Why have plates at all, if JS looked in a hat the entire time?

[cdowis]

Ok, this is also new to me in my confused faith crisis. Why have plates at all, if JS looked in a hat the entire time?

Excellent question.

He used the plates at the beginning of the translation process, but as he gained experience in spiritual and translation process, the direct presence of the plates was unnecessary. But the actual possession of the plates was necessary.

Edited June 23, 2012 by cdowis

[Freedom]

Ok, this is also new to me in my confused faith crisis. Why have plates at all, if JS looked in a hat the entire time?

Plausible reasons were given above. I feel that the primary reason is, as was stated, to provide a witness. The plates prove that the record actually existed. They were not needed to produce the english text but they were needed to prove to Joseph, and later others, that these people were real and there truly was an ancient source for the scripture. If I were to write a paper on ancient roman military practices, having the actual weapons on hand would be of tremendous value. Writing a history of the City of Quebec would be greatly aided by a visit to the city. It provides a powerful visual aid and a physical confirmation of the story being told. Nevertheless, having the weapons or visiting the city does not provide any significant data for reconstructing historical events.

The physical record impacted Joseph's life in a significant way. 5 minutes on a roller coaster will provide greater insight than reading all the books ever written on the ride.

[theplains]

The Book of Mormon has two names for its Cumorah, and no one is confused because they are described as being in the same place. The description of the hill in the Book of Mormon also makes it clear that the hill in New York is not the same as the hill in the book

Who named the hill in New York as Cumorah and why?

Thanks,

Jim

[Brant Gardner]

Who named the hill in New York as Cumorah and why?

The who and why are lost to history. It can be determined that it was late - post publication of the Book of Mormon. Assuming that it is comparable to other similar namings (the interpreters being called the urim and thummim, for example) the name was applied based on someone's reading of the Book of Mormon and the identification became popular. As with urim and thummim, it eventually worked its way into Joseph's vocabular (but apparently later than it was originally being used).

[Muc'ul Ajwalil]

From the time of the Battle of Cumorah (385 AD) to the burying of the plates (421 AD) there were 36 years difference, if one looks at the text of the Book of Mormon. If one walks even one mile a day every day for 36 years, you get to 13,149 miles accounting for leap years. That is half the circumference of the earth. Assuming Moroni walked ten miles a day, it is perfectly conceiveable that one could travel from a hill in southern Mexico to New York, stopping by many places along the way. Even a Andean setting for the Book of Mormon is plausible when you look at this fact.

[poulsenll]

Inquiring mind

This topic has been discussed adnauseum on this and other boards.

Please learn to use the search function. It will answer many of your queries.

See:

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/52287-cumorah-ramah-revisited/page__hl__%20two%20%20cumorahs

Larry P

[Aliwe]

From the time of the Battle of Cumorah (385 AD) to the burying of the plates (421 AD) there were 36 years difference, if one looks at the text of the Book of Mormon.

There seems to be an error in the liner notes of my Book of Mormon. The Battle of Cumorah as you indicate is given in 385 AD, but when Moroni reprints the epistle of his father describing the last battle, the date given is 400 and 421. Since the dates span two years, it could not refer to the date Moroni received the epistle, but has to refer to the events described therein.

[BCSpace]

The plates would have to be miraculously transported from the one hill (in central or South America) to the other (in upstate New York), right?

How would that be miraculous? The plates themselves may have only weighed as little as 55-60 pounds. And, according to BoM chronology, the last battle was 385 AD and Moroni's last contributions may have come as late as 421 AD. That's up to 36 years to have made the trip.

[BCSpace]

Why have plates at all, if JS looked in a hat the entire time?

There was a USB cable or at least an RS-232 serial connection between the stone and the urim and thummim being moved across the plates. There were no contrast or brightness dials and so a hat had to be rigged to view the results.

But seriously, have you actually read what David Whitmer (iirc) reported?

Edited June 23, 2012 by BCSpace

[bcuzbcuz]

How would that be miraculous? The plates themselves may have only weighed as little as 55-60 pounds. And, according to BoM chronology, the last battle was 385 AD and Moroni's last contributions may have come as late as 421 AD. That's up to 36 years to have made the trip.

How true. And we know that Joseph Smith ran through the woods with the plates in a pillow slip slung over his back. We know Joseph ran at least 2 miles.

[theplains]

The who and why are lost to history. It can be determined that it was late - post publication of the Book of Mormon

I found a mention in the church history, volume 1. Oliver Cowdery said, "This Book, which contained these things was hid in

the earth by Moroni, in a hill called by him Cumorah, which hill is now in the state of New York, near the village of Palmyra, in

Ontario county".

It looks like it was Moroni who referred to this hill by the name.

Regards,

Jim

[Brant Gardner]

I found a mention in the church history, volume 1. Oliver Cowdery said, "This Book, which contained these things was hid in

the earth by Moroni, in a hill called by him Cumorah, which hill is now in the state of New York, near the village of Palmyra, in

Ontario county".

It looks like it was Moroni who referred to this hill by the name.

In which conversation with Oliver? It is very certain that there was an early conflation of the names. It wouldn't be surprising if Oliver believed that Moroni had named it, but I don't know of any occasion where Oliver would have heard it from Moroni. That makes it Oliver's impression without really knowing how he came to that conclusion. Joseph's usage would be more determinative.

See Reeve, Rex C., Jr., and Richard O. Cowan. “The Hill Called Cumorah.” In Regional Studies in LDS History: New York and Pennsylvania. Edited by Larry C. Porter, Milton V. Backman Jr., and Susan Easton Black. Provo, Utah: BYU Department of Church History and Doctrine, 1992, 71‑89.

[theplains]

In which conversation with Oliver?

I did a search in the file and it it labelled "Oliver Cowdery's Speech to the Delawares."

It wouldn't be surprising if Oliver believed that Moroni had named it, but I don't know of any occasion where Oliver would have heard it from Moroni.

The account is not recorded but it does appear to be a firsthand account rather than heresay.

See Reeve, Rex C., Jr., and Richard O. Cowan. “The Hill Called Cumorah.” In Regional Studies in LDS History: New York and Pennsylvania. Edited by Larry C. Porter, Milton V. Backman Jr., and Susan Easton Black. Provo, Utah: BYU Department of Church History and Doctrine, 1992, 71‑89.

Thanks. I found this one at BYU.

About this statement of Pratt:

"And all the ancient plates, Mormon deposited in Cumorah, about three hundred and eighty-four years after Christ. When

Moroni, about thirty-six years after, made the deposit of the book entrusted to him, he was, without doubt, inspired to select

a department of the hill separate from the great sacred depository of the numerous volumes hid up by his father. The

particular place in the hill, where Moroni secreted the book, was revealed, by the angel, to the Prophet Joseph Smith, to

whom the volume was delivered in September, A.D. 1827. But the grand repository of all the numerous records of the ancient

nations of the western continent, was located in another department of the hill, and its contents under the charge of holy angels,

until the day should come for them to be transferred to the sacred temple of Zion".

This is purely speculation on his part. The author and Pratt do the same thing which they insinuate Cowdery was doing.

But I was wondering ... suppose that Cowdery was true in his record of what Moroni said (and this statement is recorded in

official church history)... why would others want to come along and say that there is another hill or "department" farther away

in some other state? Is Book of Mormon history invalidated in any way if there is only one Hill Cumorah?

Thanks,

Jim