cursor Posted July 20, 2012 Author Posted July 20, 2012 FYI, Zarahemla does not match "Cumorah." There is no contrary statement I assure you.Do you at all understand the internal geography of the Book of Mormon peoples? Both Nephi and Zarahemla are south of the narrow neck. If Zarahemla was in what is now Guatemala, then exactly what might be the narrow neck?
Calm Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 Already tested the waters here. I don't feel this sample represents the general membership. And by Meldrum's success, I believe the general membership will gladly accept it, no offense.So you are a fan of Rod Meldrum's?
ERayR Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 I'm confused, cause if you look at history, the members certainly did embraced many new ideas. I have faith that when the general membership reads a reprint of the first history that Joseph and Oliver published, they will be amazed a small cell of academics were ever allowed to froth at the mouth.That I can agree with.
Calm Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 (edited) they will be amazed a small cell of academics were ever allowed to froth at the mouth.And why is that? Why are they allowed to "froth at the mouth"? Why don't the prophets shut them down? It would be very easy. President Hinckley went so far as to invite FARMS to join BYU. If he didn't like what they were putting out there about Mesoamerican, why didn't he speak to them about it rather than allowing them to continue on with the idea they were doing everything just right? Bruce R. McConkie was not shy about scolding professors who he felt had crossed the line and yet he never said a thing to the Mesoamerican scholars or those who were publishing their materials. Even the Ensign published Dr. Sorenson's work. Edited July 20, 2012 by calmoriah 2
123 Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 Unfortunately BOM scholarship has never been my forte...Does anyone know what's wrong with the idea that the "narrow neck of land" was the area between Lake Erie and Lake Ontario- which is near where Joseph found the plates?I suppose it is because there is no evidence of large pre-columbian cities and the use of cement etc in that area?How savvy for one not into BoM scholarship. There are more cobblestone, i.e. cement homes in western NY than anywhere else. There are also more ancient fortifications as described in the BoM in western NY than anywhere else. (I realize you already knew this information.)Because Cumorah is supposed to be far north of the narrow neck of land, not East of it.Your sure? Where's the verse(s)? Thanks!
Calm Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 One thing that recently came to light is the fact that Moroni was still in Lamanite territory 20 years after the battle. In other words, he was not walking hundreds of miles to NY. He was IN New York all the while:What do you mean by "recently came to light". Depending how Moroni defined "Lamanite" would determine the actual territory he was moving through or around in.
Calm Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 Ivins or anyone else you quote is not equal to the statement by the prophet or BoM witness Cowdery. Unless you can find a contrary statement by Joseph or Oliver stating that Cumorah or the final Nephite battle was somewhere else, this case is closed.So as far as you are concerned revelation on the BoM stopped with Joseph and/or Oliver. I am curious as to why you think Oliver is equal to Joseph in this. Do you believe Oliver had the same visions that gave Joseph all this detail information?
cursor Posted July 20, 2012 Author Posted July 20, 2012 Mormon provides us with quite a comprehensive picture of the geographic relationships in Book of Mormon. A very major point he makes is that the [real] hill Ramah/Cumorah is not at all far from the narrow neck of land. Are you still "confused?"I'll be more than happy to help you out, if you need.
123 Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 So you are a fan of Rod Meldrum's?Not!Do you at all understand the internal geography of the Book of Mormon peoples? Both Nephi and Zarahemla are south of the narrow neck. If Zarahemla was in what is now Guatemala, then exactly what might be the narrow neck?You're kidding me. I haven't swallowed the second cumorah line, not the hook or the sinker, so it's of no use to ask a question from within that mindset. Your father was woefully ignorant of the location and size of the Narrow Neck, no offense. Want to open a can of worms?
Calm Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 One thing that recently came to light is the fact that Moroni was still in Lamanite territory 20 years after the battle. In other words, he was not walking hundreds of miles to NY. He was IN New York all the while:If one accepts the Zelph comments as revelation from Joseph, than it doesn't have to be New York. Lamanite territory at least extended to Illinois.
123 Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 What do you mean by "recently came to light". Depending how Moroni defined "Lamanite" would determine the actual territory he was moving through or around in.So as far as you are concerned revelation on the BoM stopped with Joseph and/or Oliver. I am curious as to why you think Oliver is equal to Joseph in this. Do you believe Oliver had the same visions that gave Joseph all this detail information?You've made it clear, you have no faith in the statements of Joseph and Oliver and I find your sliding scale to be less than faith promoting.
Calm Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 What my father did was to indicate that there are past and current GAs who consider that thoughtful adjustment to some of the traditional ways that we look at and interpret the ancient record are appropriate -- that includes the possibility that the hill in NY state may not actually be the final battleground of the Jaredites and Nephites.Only Joseph and Oliver count for some reason. No one else has been given or could be given revelation on the matter it would seem according to 123's position.
ERayR Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 Not!You're kidding me. I haven't swallowed the second cumorah line, not the hook or the sinker, so it's of no use to ask a question from within that mindset. Your father was woefully ignorant of the location and size of the Narrow Neck, no offense. Want to open a can of worms?Folks if it acts like a troll and smells like a troll it has to be a troll.
Calm Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 You're making this more than necessary. You either believe Joseph and Oliver or you don't. Feel free to share whether you do.Let's make it really easy....we either accept your interpretation about what two prophets have said about the topic and only those aspects that you accept as legitimate and we must disregard all further comments by later prophets for some reason or we will end up in hell, burning in the flames of remorse until we repent and accept the gospel according to 123....is that about right, because that is how it looks from here and if this is not what you mean, you should probably take some time to clarify what you really do mean. 2
cursor Posted July 20, 2012 Author Posted July 20, 2012 (edited) Open your Book of Mormon to Mosiah 8 and read the account of the 43 scouts that were sent from the land of Nephi get help from those in the city of Zarahemla (which their ancestors migrated from, just two generations earlier).Where did they actually go?What did they find?Where did they think they had gone?How far could they have actually traveled? Edited July 20, 2012 by cursor
123 Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 If one accepts the Zelph comments as revelation from Joseph, than it doesn't have to be New York. Lamanite territory at least extended to Illinois.No, the Zelph account substantiates what the nephite record said, the Lamanites were a preexisting people and were large in number, which facts have zero bearing on Joseph and Oliver's comments about the location of the final battle.Only Joseph and Oliver count for some reason. No one else has been given or could be given revelation on the matter it would seem according to 123's position.Here are their words, read it and weep bitterly:BETWEEN THESE HILLS (Palmyra), THE ENTIRE POWER AND NATIONAL STRENGTH OF BOTH THE JAREDITES AND NEPHITES WERE DESTROYED. (Messenger & Advocate, vol. 1, no. 1)
Calm Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 FYI, Zarahemla does not match "Cumorah." There is no contrary statement I assure you.So you are okay with placing a good deal of the action in the text in Central America as stated by Joseph? From the quote given above: Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan, which John Bernhisel had sent to him from the East. In a letter dated 16 November 1841, the Prophet thanked Bernhisel and wrote about the book that "of all histories that had been written pertaining to the antiquities of this country it is the most correct" and it "supports the testimony of the Book of Mormon."
Calm Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 (edited) No, the Zelph account substantiates what the nephite record said, the Lamanites were a preexisting people and were large in number, which facts have zero bearing on Joseph and Oliver's comments about the location of the final battle.But it would have bearing on your claim that Moroni was only wandering around in New York. According to your interpretation Moroni could have gone over a huge expanse of the current US, Canada, Mexico, Central America? Right? Because Joseph indicated at various times these included Lamanite lands.Here are their words, read it and weep bitterly:BETWEEN THESE HILLS (Palmyra), THE ENTIRE POWER AND NATIONAL STRENGTH OF BOTH THE JAREDITES AND NEPHITES WERE DESTROYED. (Messenger & Advocate, vol. 1, no. 1)Why should I weep? Are you under the impression I have sold my firstborn to the Mesoamericanists so I can be part of their club? Edited July 20, 2012 by calmoriah
123 Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 Folks if it acts like a troll and smells like a troll it has to be a troll.Leave then. I'm contributing facts not innuendo.Let's make it really easy....we either accept your interpretation about what two prophets have said about the topic and only those aspects that you accept as legitimate and we must disregard all further comments by later prophets for some reason or we will end up in hell, burning in the flames of remorse until we repent and accept the gospel according to 123....is that about right, because that is how it looks from here and if this is not what you mean, you should probably take some time to clarify what you really do mean.It's not even that hard. There are no subsequent statements by any prophet that the final battle or Cumorah was not in Palmyra, you know, where the statue of Moroni is, where the pageant is yearly held - THAT ONE. Based on fulfilled land prophecies, yes, I do believe that it IS important. Anyone contradicting truth is of the devil. Anyone confusing the BoM is evil.Open your Book of Mormon to Mosiah 8 and read the account of the 43 scouts that were sent from the land of Nephi get help from those in the city of Zarahemla (which their ancestors migrated from, just two generations earlier).Where did they actually go?What did they find?Where did they think they had gone?How far could they have actually traveled?You stepped in it now. You know your father's model I take it. You want readers to believe that a group of scouts left from the SW quadrant and traveled to the NE corner and saw no one????
Tacenda Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 (edited) As I see the arguments about the theory of the two Cumorahs unfold, it makes me wonder if the same people that think the other Cumorah is in Mesoamerica also think that Noah's flood only happened in a localized area which according to scientists probably happened that way.And for those that believe that there is only one Cumorah and it sits on a hill in New York, believe that without any current evidence one must believe on faith alone.Do any of these scenarios work with anyone? Edited July 20, 2012 by Tacenda
robuchan Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 So I got a little lost in this. Who named the hill in Palmyra "Cumorah" and when and why?
Calm Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 (edited) You've made it clear, you have no faith in the statements of Joseph and Oliver and I find your sliding scale to be less than faith promoting.So you are not going to explain your reasoning? And you are not going to try and promote my less than worthy faith. You either don't seem to have much faith in your own position or much desire to bring others to a greater understanding and confidence in Joseph and Oliver. A strange attitude for someone who proclaims faith in them is everything. Or maybe you like the idea of being one of the few elite who really get it? Edited July 20, 2012 by calmoriah
123 Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 So I got a little lost in this. Who named the hill in Palmyra "Cumorah" and when and why?As stated earlier, it is recorded in Church History that Oliver stated that Moroni identified to Joseph the name of the hill as "Cumorah."
123 Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 As I see the arguments about the theory of the two Cumorahs unfold, it makes me wonder if the same people that think the other Cumorah is in Mesoamerica also think that Noah's flood only happened in a localized area which according to scientists probably happened that way.And for those that believe that there is only one Cumorah and it sits on a hill in New York, believe that without any current evidence one must believe on faith alone.Do any of these scenerios work with anyone?Are you the type of person that always rephrases things to their own way of thinking? If so, state why?
Calm Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 Leave then. I'm contributing facts not innuendo.It's not even that hard. There are no subsequent statements by any prophet that the final battle or Cumorah was not in Palmyra, you know, where the statue of Moroni is, where the pageant is yearly held - THAT ONE. Based on fulfilled land prophecies, yes, I do believe that it IS important. Anyone contradicting truth is of the devil. Anyone confusing the BoM is evil.So all we had to know about the BoM geography is contained in that one statement, we can disregard anything else? There is no reason to attempt to place any other locations in the text?
Recommended Posts