The Narrow Neck Debate Continues...

[Rob Osborn]

Is [are] ... located from where, exactly?

 

 

Sounds like you need to work on your reading comprehension skills, Rob. There are a number of very strong pointers within the codex that suggest that 1) the hill Cumorah/Ramah is not far at all from the narrow neck of land, and that 2) that maximal travel distances for Jaredites, Nephites, and "Mulekites" could never have been in terms of thousands of miles, and that 3) the distance from Nephi to Cumorah/Ramah ... is not nearly as far as you think.

 

 

So, if the Nephites/Lamanites/Jaredites/"Mulekites" were confined to a relatively restricted geography (like in southern Mexico), how might they have any idea that the Great Lakes even existed? Certainly they didn't have access to Google Earth! The term "to exceed all" is a relative term. What matters is what is standard in one's surrounding/known geography. Right?

 

To simplistically pick the Great Lakes as the Nephites' Ripliancum, based on your modern-day perspective (and by ignoring Mormon's potentially limited perspective ... I mean, he had no internet access, afterall) ... then selecting the hill Cumorah/Ramah based on that is ... well ... not very logical.

 

 

Sorry, but this makes no sense to me whatsoever, Rob.

First of all, anything that Ether would have said would have had connection to the hill named Ramah. Perhaps you can clarify further.

Sorenson makes claims about knowing how far in total length the land southward is based on the text. All we have from reading the text is a distance of some approximate 21 days travel from some location in Nephi to some location in Zarahemla. Thats all! I live in Idaho and travel frequently to Utah. I tell peopke from other parts of the world that we are about 3 hours away from Salt Lake. Now, this statement does not say how far it is from the most northern parts of Idaho to the most southern parts of Utah. If I were to say though it woyld be substantially farther than 3 hours drive and more like 10-12 hours. Applying tjis same logic to Zarahemla and the land of Nephi we could be talking a very substancially greater distance. Of importance though, we truly do not know and shouldnt place assumed limits on the maximum lengths of their known lands.

As for Cumorah and the waters of Ripliancum we know that no known activities were spoken of north of these waters regardless of if there actually was or wasnt activity north. The ancients did just fine with directions, maps, etc without "google maps". We shouldnt assume they wete idiots and didnt know the complete layout of the land from ocean to ocean. Of special intetest is that the waters of ripliancum were given a different distinction from the "sea" which they knew was thousands of miles across. So what then did they mean? Once again the aid of a lack of modern technology comes into pkay. The "Great Lakes" were considered and explained as such long before sattelites, planes, etc, were invented. How then did they know they were great? Because they werent idiots, they had skilled mapmakers using rather rudimentary means, horses for travel, etc. The ancient inhabitants knew very well what the great lakes were even using them anciently as ports for shipment of rich ore, especially copper, to places as far away as Central America. Of interest is that the BoM speaks a few times specifically of shipping goods.

[Rob Osborn]

According to the actual text found in Mormon and Ether There is no mention of great large bodies of water. It says "Ripliancum, which, by interpretation, is large".

Following is the actual Book of Mormon text and a description of an area in Mexico that corresponds to the description found in the text.

 

The above citation is found in

Ether 15:7-11

7 And when Coriantumr saw that he was about to fall he fled again before the people of Shiz.

8 And it came to pass that he came to the waters of Ripliancum, which, by interpretation, is large, or

to exceed all; wherefore, when they came to these waters they pitched their tents; and Shiz also

pitched his tents near unto them; and therefore on the morrow they did come to battle.

9 And it came to pass that they fought an exceedingly sore battle, in which Coriantumr was wounded

again, and he fainted with the loss of blood.

10 And it came to pass that the armies of Coriantumr did press upon the armies of Shiz that they beat

them, that they caused them to flee before them; and they did flee southward, and did pitch their tents

in a place which was called Ogath.

11 And it came to pass that the army of Coriantumr did pitch their tents by the hill Ramah; and it was

that same hill where my father Mormon did ahide up the records unto the Lord, which were sacred.

 

An additional scripture related to a description of the Land of Cumorah is found in

Mormon 6:2-4

2 And I, Mormon, wrote an epistle unto the king of the Lamanites, and desired of him that he would grant unto us that we might gather together our people unto the ^aland of ^bCumorah, by a hill which was called Cumorah, and there we could give them battle.

 3 And it came to pass that the king of the Lamanites did grant unto me the thing which I desired.

 4 And it came to pass that we did march forth to the land of Cumorah, and we did pitch our tents around about the hill Cumorah; and it was in a land of ^amany waters, rivers, and fountains; and here we had hope to gain advantage over the Lamanites.

 

The following list, extracted from the words bolded in these texts , describes the land of

Cumorah/Ramah and can be compared to any  proposed candidate.

1. It is a land of many waters, rivers, and fountains

2. It is located in the land northward in a place where Mormon resided as a child.

3. It is south of the borders of the waters of Ripliancum.

The following  location has never been proposed as the land of Cumorah/Ramah, although extensive

information is available for this area. The majority of this information is only available in Spanish and this

may be one of the reasons for it remaining in obscurity. Fortunately, the Viceroy of Mexico , shortly after

the Spanish conquest, required that a report be submitted answering 50 questions about all locations

still inhabited by Mesoamerican language groups. These were called Relaciones and are filed in the

various archives throughout Mexico and in the Royal Archives in Spain.

Information about this location is found in the "Relacion de Misantla" prepared by Diego Perez de

Arteaga and presumably was never submitted to the Royal Archives. It was eventually sold along with

other "Relaciones" from Veracruz to the University of Texas at Austin for $10,000.

After acquiring copies of the "Relacion de Misantla" David Ramirez Lavoignet prepared a revision of the

relacion and after adding extensive notes to bring it up to date, published it in 1962.

Using the information in Lavoignet's publication and that obtained from modern three dimensional

maping programs eg Google Earth, a comparison can be made with the following three textual requirements for the Land of Cumorah/Ramah, with the following results.

1. It is a land of many waters, rivers, and fountains.

Beginning on page 70, the hydrographics of Mislanta are described as follows"

Unos de los aspectos mas prominentes de la region de Misantla, es la abundancia de agua, pues es undistrito, humedo por naturaleza, donde jamas han existidos los problemas dificiles de otros lugares. En todo su jurisdiccion abunden manantiales, lagunas, y arroyos. Los grandes rios forman una verdadera red  hydrographica, y es notable que aun en los cerros, se encuentran pequeños fuentes.

 

 

Compare it to the Spanish version  of Mormon 6:4

 4  Y ocurrió que emprendimos la marcha a la tierra de Cumorah, y plantamos nuestras tiendas en derredor del cerro de Cumorah; y se hallaba en una región de muchas aguas, ríos y fuentes; y aquí esperábamos obtener ventaja sobre los lamanitas.

(Rough translation).

One of the aspects most prominent of the region, is the abundance of water, yes it is a district, humid by

nature, where have existed the difficult problems of other places.

In the entire jurisdiction there are abundant springs, lagoons, and streams. The great rivers form a true

hydrographic net and it is notable that even in the hills, little fountains are found.)

He continues describing the sources and effect this abundance of water has on the area and its

inhabitents.

 2. It is located in the land northward in a place where Mormon resided as a child.

Misantla is located about 200 miles northwest of the northern end of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, the

generally accepted narrow neck of land that separated the land northward from the land southward in

the Book of Mormon.

3. It is not part of the Land of Zarahemla.

It is about 400 miles northwest of the Grijalva river valley and Santa Rosa, proposed by Sorenson as the

City of Zarahemla. The area of multiple rivers and streams extends

north to the Rio Remolino-Tecolutla and is described by Padre Motolinia during his travels through the

area shortly after the Spanish conquest as:

"... aunque quisieramos volver por otro camino, no podiamos, porque despues que entramos en aquella

tierra, habia llovido mucho, y habian crecido los rios, que eran muchas y muy grandes: ... Uno de estos

rios es el que los espanoles llamaron Almeria (Nautla), el cual es un rio muy poderoso...

Translation

"even though we wanted to return by another road, we could not, because after we entered in that

land, it had rained a great amount, and the rivers had grown, such that there were many and very

large... one of these rivers is called by the Spaniards Almeria (Nautla), it is a very powerful river..."

Relacion de Misantla , page 71

 

The Relacion de Misantla describes an área in Mexico that  fits the description of the land of Cumorah found in the text.

Although one might have a different interpretation of the words used to describe the Land of Cumorah, this location is described using the same or similar words as found in the Text.

 

Larry P

 

We are not sure where in the land northward Mormon grew as a child before being carried into the land southward. We are also best not to assume that just because the text speaks of a land of many waters hat it autmatically would be grouped geographically close to the land of Cumorah. It is very possible that the land northward had many areas that could be described as a land of many waters besides just Cumorah.

[ERayR]

A mesoamerica setting doesnt make sense. The surviving 24 Nephites from the battle at Cumorah fled south. Why? When Moroni allegedly fled north eventually to New York? Why didnt his father with the remaining Nephites also flee northward? Why didnt they retreat into Mexico or farther? There was no geographical features to stop them. It allegedly didnt stop Moroni. Why was Moroni the only Nephite ever to leave a 500 x 200 mile area which confined his ancestors?

The reason the surviving 24 Nephites fled south, is because they lost access to the narrow neck of land (Alma 52:9) which was at the time in the middle or center of the Nephite Lands. The Land of Zarahemla was long ago captured and occupied by the Lamanites. Mormon himself made a treaty with the Lamanites (Mormon 2:28-29). The surviving 24 Nephites fled south because Lake Ontario was to their north and the narrow neck of land to their northwest. The Lamanite King allowed the remaining Nephites to assemble in Cumorah which Mormon knew would be their last struggle because they had lost the narrow neck of land which would have allowed them some defense. But once they lost that point, the Nephites were swept down. (Mormon4:18)

This does not fit a mesoamerica setting, because the Nephites could have simply continued northward, as Moroni allegedly did.

 

The reason they fled south is because that is where they came from.  They were headed home, to familiar surroundings. 

[thesometimesaint]

This does not compute.  About 960 miles from Winter Quarters to Salt Lake Valley at 3 miles per day would be 320 days.  The trip was made in much less time than 320 days.  The journey started in April and they arrived in the valley July 26.  This is approx. 117 days less 16 days for The Sundays they did not travel.  This leaves approx 100 days of travel or 9.6 (aprox 10) miles per day.  The company included women, children and livestock.

My mistake I meant to type about 10 miles per day. A senior moment I guess.

[Anijen]

 I am extremely skepticle of archeologists opinions on dates and their opinions on culture.

I can understand and respect your skepticism, I on the other hand have much more acceptance to archaeology. To me if one throws out all evidence that pre-dates 6000 years ago then they are throwing out  a huge amount of evidence that they probably do not understand the magnitude of evidence out there. There are many ways to date items and when one cross dates a single item using a variety of methods and the dates still come out about the same it is hard to argue against such methods.

 

 

 Proof? Ask 100 of them to find the evidences for the great BoM battles and probably 98% of them will laugh or state the BoM is a piece of fiction.

 

I agree. Ask LDS archaeologist and you might receive a different answer. They being LDS does not make them less of an archaeologist as their Jewish, Hindu, Muslim, and atheist peers.

 

 

I have several books on the ancient inhabitants ofthe Americas including books on the Maya, Olmec, etc, and not a one of them mention anything about the Nephites, Jaredites, sea travel, etc.

 

Why should they? What is the purpose of the author, who is his audience? These are some of the questions to ask when reading critically. If you read Mark Wright. Brant Gardner, Jon Clark and others you will notice that they will mention those things.  

 

 

This proves to me (I already assume 100% that the BoM is historically correct) that archaeologists and their work has a lot of flaws in it.

 

Every scientist will have flaws in their thesis, that is why they objectively study until they have to change their theory because the evidence does not support it or they will have to change their theory here and there until it matches all evidence (one can not change the evidence). It is weak and the complete opposite of scholarly work to only take the evidence that supports a pet theory and worse to add fake evidence to support their pet theories, and lastly throw out all evidence that goes against their theories.

 

To base ones archaeological convictions and theories only on scripture is weak as well. When I use the word scripture here I mean any historical record that a group may feel sacrosanct such as the Quran, Bhagavad gita, Book of Mormon, Bible etc....  The way scripture is taken literally or for spiritual up-liftment etc will change over time as mankind is more educated, if it wasn't we would still believe donkeys talked to humans, that the sun moves around the earth etc. As we have been more enlightened it has not weakened the scriptures once we found out that these were no longer true.

 

As I look at a six "day" chronology of creation, and as those scripture verses contradict archaeology evidence I have to look at both and see where the I can learn. I find that the Hebrew word used for day in the translation does not mean day as in the sense we know it, but as a period of time (and not all equal periods of time). This in no way destroys my faith in scripture but enhances it and fits into what archaeology is telling me.

[cursor]

My mistake I meant to type about 10 miles per day. A senior moment I guess.

 

Whew! I'm glad that I'm not alone ...

[Robert F. Smith]

I have never been a big fan of Sorensons work. He is trying to make a shoe fit where it possibly cant. His assumptions on certain aspects are just bad conjecture in my opinion. He does a pretty decent job of trying to tally up the distance from Zarahemla to the Land of Nephi. But then he assumes to know conpleyely how far north and south the Land of Nephi and Zarahemla is. These figures are never mentioned nor is there any text with how many days travel these distances may have been. The worst comes from his assumptions on how far the land northward and Cumorah are from Zarahemla. There is absolutely no text in the BoM relating any idea as to how close or far way these lands were. The only thing we have is a single word " exceedingly" far away. We cannot know what exceedingly far means other than it was more than likely way way farther than the distance of Zarahemka to Nephi which is assumed to be no less than a couple hundred miles. We know that Cumorah was south of the waters of Ripliancum which means to exceed all. There is no such place in Mexico that has a land north of it with great large bodies of water. The proposed idea that it was swampy waters is ludicrous! Swampy waters plague a lot of the entire areas of Central America.

There is only one text with relation to Cumorah in that Ether writes from his account by day what he sees. The problem with this though is that one person going out from one location by night cant possibly record all the battles and carnage strewn all over the land. More than likely this cave where Ether dwelt was his home base and there were times when he was indeed far away from home base recording the war.even this though does not tell what approximation his cave was from either Cumorah or the Narrow neck.

You speak of John Sorenson's geographical correlations as though he just came up with them like falling off a log, that "he is trying to make a shoe fit where it possibly cant. His assumptions on certain aspects are just bad conjecture."  You follow that with a list of several wrong "assumptions" you say he made.  I suppose these are examples of your contention of making the shoe fit where it cannot.

 

Actually, Sorenson spent over 30 years of research on these geographical issues before they were published in the Ensign and in his An Ancient American Setting.  He visited the areas concerned and even did archeology there.  He submitted his views to peer review and in competition with another view in 1975 (twenty scholars were asked to respond), and he has always shown a willingness to consider the real world first in any correlation.

 

The systematic reading on distances within the Book of Mormon is merely the sine qua non of any further discussion.  Unless that is mastered, it makes very little difference what else is said.  Once that is taken into account, it becomes clear that the other distances in the Book of Mormon (even though we are not given specific times of travel) must be part of the overall matrix of the narrow neck and of the lands northward and southward.  It makes no rational sense to posit them at great distances away from the cities and regions we can place within reasonable limits.  They are simply an integral part of the region.  Moreover, we know of no reason to suggest that there would be long treks such as you suggest.  Except for migrations of ruling elites (Toltecs, for example), the peoples of this area did not engage in such long treks.

 

As to your false notion that "There is no such place in" Mesoamerica that has a land northward from the Waters of Ripliancum, which could be to the north of Ramah-Cumorah, simply because the Sorenson proposal that the many waters of lowland Veracruz "is ludicrous" due to the "swampy waters" which "plague" entire areas of Central America.  If you will pull down a world atlas and take a look at the numerous rivers feeding into that area, it certainly looks like a land of many waters, with lots of fresh water constantly flowing through the area.  Sorenson proposes Cerro el Vigia (the modern name) in the coastal Tuxtlas mountains as Ramah-Cumorah.  You suggest that that is "ludicrous" because swamps are horrible places where no one can live due to plague, if I understand you correctly.  Of course, the lowland Veracruz area is precisely where the great Olmec cities were built and flourished, and to which they floated their huge stone blocks from the Tuxtlas range.  Perhaps it was "ludicrous" of the "mother culture" of Mesoamerica to have been located there, but that is the nature of the real world.  For some reason, the Olmec didn't consider it "ludicrous."

[Rob Osborn]

You speak of John Sorenson's geographical correlations as though he just came up with them like falling off a log, that "he is trying to make a shoe fit where it possibly cant. His assumptions on certain aspects are just bad conjecture."  You follow that with a list of several wrong "assumptions" you say he made.  I suppose these are examples of your contention of making the shoe fit where it cannot.

 

Actually, Sorenson spent over 30 years of research on these geographical issues before they were published in the Ensign and in his An Ancient American Setting.  He visited the areas concerned and even did archeology there.  He submitted his views to peer review and in competition with another view in 1975 (twenty scholars were asked to respond), and he has always shown a willingness to consider the real world first in any correlation.

 

The systematic reading on distances within the Book of Mormon is merely the sine qua non of any further discussion.  Unless that is mastered, it makes very little difference what else is said.  Once that is taken into account, it becomes clear that the other distances in the Book of Mormon (even though we are not given specific times of travel) must be part of the overall matrix of the narrow neck and of the lands northward and southward.  It makes no rational sense to posit them at great distances away from the cities and regions we can place within reasonable limits.  They are simply an integral part of the region.  Moreover, we know of no reason to suggest that there would be long treks such as you suggest.  Except for migrations of ruling elites (Toltecs, for example), the peoples of this area did not engage in such long treks.

 

As to your false notion that "There is no such place in" Mesoamerica that has a land northward from the Waters of Ripliancum, which could be to the north of Ramah-Cumorah, simply because the Sorenson proposal that the many waters of lowland Veracruz "is ludicrous" due to the "swampy waters" which "plague" entire areas of Central America.  If you will pull down a world atlas and take a look at the numerous rivers feeding into that area, it certainly looks like a land of many waters, with lots of fresh water constantly flowing through the area.  Sorenson proposes Cerro el Vigia (the modern name) in the coastal Tuxtlas mountains as Ramah-Cumorah.  You suggest that that is "ludicrous" because swamps are horrible places where no one can live due to plague, if I understand you correctly.  Of course, the lowland Veracruz area is precisely where the great Olmec cities were built and flourished, and to which they floated their huge stone blocks from the Tuxtlas range.  Perhaps it was "ludicrous" of the "mother culture" of Mesoamerica to have been located there, but that is the nature of the real world.  For some reason, the Olmec didn't consider it "ludicrous."

I am not arguing that there are not areas of many waters in Mexico. In fact I readily agree there are indeed many areas in Mexico and Central America that could be considered to have many waters. My argument is that a strictly meso-Amercan model for the entire BoM lands is ludicrous. As I mentioned previously, there are no Ripliancum waters in Mexico. The Nephites were well accustomed to lands of many waters in the Norrh country. But we know a few facys too. Namely- the hill Ramah/ Cumorah was north of the narrow neck and also north of Desolation it being exceedingly far away. We also know that Cumorah was just south of the waters of Ripliancum. There are no large bodies of water in Mexico that could possibly be described different than the ocean but greater in size over all other bodies of water.

When Nephites first went to inhabit the land northward it speaks of them traveling an exceedingly great diatance to get to a land of many waters, etc. The area Sorenson suggests cannot be considered an exceedingly great distance. Very few actual migrations areas are spoken of in the BoM history. I therefore find it of interest when valuable gold pages were inscribed to speak of these few migrations. These migrations were no simple 100-200 mile treks, that woyld be rather ridiculous to waste valuable space to relate how a few brother Nephites went to live on the other side of a mountain a few walking days away. Remember, under Sorensons model, his idea of a day and a half journey is in the 75-125 mile range. So, if that truly was how far a Nephite could travel in a day and a half then the exceedingly great distance proposed would be less than a weeks walk away. Missionaries in the BoM did that all the time! It just doesnt add up. The waters of Ripliancum can be none other than the Great Lakes which truly are fresh water bodies that exceed all in size.

[cursor]

I am not arguing that there are not areas of many waters in Mexico.

... there are indeed many areas in Mexico and Central America that could be considered to have many waters.

... there are no Ripliancum waters in Mexico.

 

So ... there are "indeed many water areas in Mexico and Central America that could be considered to have many waters" ... but none of them could possibly be the waters of Ripliancum. 

 

Exactly which waters might qualify as those of Ripliancum would totally depend on 1) the geographic scope of Mormon's life experience, and 2) what HE considered to be large bodies of water.

 

The Nephites were well accustomed to lands of many waters in the Norrh country.

But we know a few facys too. Namely- the hill Ramah/ Cumorah was north of the narrow neck and also north of Desolation it being exceedingly far away. We also know that Cumorah was just south of the waters of Ripliancum. There are no large bodies of water in Mexico that could possibly be described different than the ocean but greater in size over all other bodies of water.

When Nephites first went to inhabit the land northward it speaks of them traveling an exceedingly great diatance to get to a land of many waters, etc. The area Sorenson suggests cannot be considered an exceedingly great distance. Very few actual migrations areas are spoken of in the BoM history. 

 

Known geography northward had its limits. Consider how little was known of Hagoth's migrations. Much of what was on the north of the narrow neck was not well known by Book of Mormon peoples.

 

"Exceedingly far away" is a relative term that must be interpreted based on a Nephite perspective, not ours.

 

Consider the account of Limhi's (king Noah's son, Zeniff's grandson) attempt (in the land of Nephi) to seek help from the folks in the Land of Zarahemla (from which his grandfather Zeniff had left two generations previous). Zarahemla was "in the heart of the land," and Nephi was south of that. Limhi sends scouts to look for Zarahemla. They got lost, went through the narrow neck of land, then found the destroyed Jaredites at the hill Ramah/Cumorah. They returned with 24-gold plates that was a history of the destroyed people. When they got back, they reported that they'd found Zarahemla (again, which was "in the heart of the land" ... southward) and that it had been destroyed.

 

Mosiah 21:25-26

 

Now king Limhi had sent, previous to the coming of Ammon, a small number of men to search for the land of Zarahemla; but they could not find it, and they were lost in the wilderness.

 

Nevertheless, they did find a land which had been peopled; yea, a land which was covered with dry bones; yea, a land which had been peopled and which had been destroyed; and they, having supposed it to be the land of Zarahemla, returned to the land of Nephi, having arrived in the borders of the land not many days before the coming of Ammon.

 

If the hemispheric model it at all valid, then one must explain how it is that these scouts

1. left from an area south of the central/"heart" area of South America,
2. missed Zarahemla (in the heart of the land southward),
3. passed through the narrow neck of land,
4. hoofed it across North America to what is now Palmyra NY,
5. discovered the destroyed Jaredites, 
6. returned across North America (and didn't get lost),
7. passed through the narrow neck of land,
8. found their way back to Nephi (south of Zarahemla ... missing it again) ...
9. then reported that they'd found Zarahemla destroyed.

If they had any clue how far away Zarahemla was from Nephi (and I'm certain that they did) before initiating their search, how in the world might these scouts have been convinced, after traveling 12,000 miles (6,000 each way)—that's nearly half way around the Earth—that they'd found the destroyed city of Zarahemla?!  

Edited September 6, 2013 by cursor

[Rob Osborn]

So ... there are "indeed many water areas in Mexico and Central America that could be considered to have many waters" ... but none of them could possibly be the waters of Ripliancum. 

 

Exactly which waters might qualify as those of Ripliancum would totally depend on 1) the geographic scope of Mormon's life experience, and 2) what HE considered to be large bodies of water.

 

 

 

Known geography northward had its limits. Consider how little was known of Hagoth's migrations. Much of what was on the north of the narrow neck was not well known by Book of Mormon peoples.

 

"Exceedingly far away" is a relative term that must be interpreted based on a Nephite perspective, not ours.

 

Consider the account of Limhi's (king Noah's son, Zeniff's grandson) attempt (in the land of Nephi) to seek help from the folks in the Land of Zarahemla (from which his grandfather Zeniff had left two generations previous). Zarahemla was "in the heart of the land," and Nephi was south of that. Limhi sends scouts to look for Zarahemla. They got lost, went through the narrow neck of land, then found the destroyed Jaredites at the hill Ramah/Cumorah. They returned with 24-gold plates that was a history of the destroyed people. When they got back, they reported that they'd found Zarahemla (again, which was "in the heart of the land" ... southward) and that it had been destroyed.

 

Mosiah 21:25-26

 

Now king Limhi had sent, previous to the coming of Ammon, a small number of men to search for the land of Zarahemla; but they could not find it, and they were lost in the wilderness.

 

Nevertheless, they did find a land which had been peopled; yea, a land which was covered with dry bones; yea, a land which had been peopled and which had been destroyed; and they, having supposed it to be the land of Zarahemla, returned to the land of Nephi, having arrived in the borders of the land not many days before the coming of Ammon.

 

If the hemispheric model it at all valid, then one must explain how it is that these scouts

1. left from an area south of the central/"heart" area of South America,
2. missed Zarahemla (in the heart of the land southward),
3. passed through the narrow neck of land,
4. hoofed it across North America to what is now Palmyra NY,
5. discovered the destroyed Jaredites, 
6. returned across North America (and didn't get lost),
7. passed through the narrow neck of land,
8. found their way back to Nephi (south of Zarahemla ... missing it again) ...
9. then reported that they'd found Zarahemla destroyed.

If they had any clue how far away Zarahemla was from Nephi (and I'm certain that they did) before initiating their search, how in the world might these scouts have been convinced, after traveling 12,000 miles (6,000 each way)—that's nearly half way around the Earth—that they'd found the destroyed city of Zarahemla?!  

I am sure that Mormon, as leader of the Nephites, knew the land well. There were probably also maps that they used. The waters of Ripliancum were described as " to exceed all". This would not be describing the ocean nor rivers or swamps.

 

Do you even proof what you type afterwords??

 

Limhi's group didn't travel to the land of what is now New York, they went into desolation which is near to the narrow neck. They probably never even made it further north than southern Mexico then went back down through the narrow neck. They didn't have a clue where or how far away Zarahemla was obviously if they mistook Desolation for Zarahemla. Its very well possible that they missed the valley with the River Sidon (Magdalena) and instead funneled down to the narrow neck and supposed that there was no other way but north through the narrow neck to find Zarahemla. Even in the hemispheric model, the land of Desolation is not that far from the land southwards

[SeekingUnderstanding]

I am sure that Mormon, as leader of the Nephites, knew the land well. 

 

I'm sure he did.  So when Mormon wrote his epistle to the King of the Lamonites asking that he could gather his people to the land of Cumorah, by a hill called Cumorah, you think he meant the teeny nondescript drumlin (one of hundreds or thousands of similar nondescript drumlins in the area).  Mormon, knowing the geography of North and South America, a brilliant military general chose as a place to make a last stand the small drumlin in New York? That small hill which was likely unnamed before Joseph extracted the plates was known throughout North and South America? The entire region round about it was named after this one small hill? Have you been to the hill in New York?

[cursor]

Do you even proof what you type afterwords??

 

Um ... what?! 

I tried processing your written message through Google Translate ... but it came up with diddly-squat.

 

Limhi's group didn't travel to the land of what is now New York, they went into desolation which is near to the narrow neck. They probably never even made it further north than southern Mexico then went back down through the narrow neck. They didn't have a clue where or how far away Zarahemla was obviously if they mistook Desolation for Zarahemla. Its very well possible that they missed the valley with the River Sidon (Magdalena) and instead funneled down to the narrow neck and supposed that there was no other way but north through the narrow neck to find Zarahemla. Even in the hemispheric model, the land of Desolation is not that far from the land southwards

 

Limhi's scouts found the destroyed Jaredites at the hill Ramah/Cumorah, which according to you and many others is in NY. You say, "they probably never even made it further north than southern Mexico then went back down through the narrow neck." How is that at all possible if they came upon the destroyed Jaredites ... and upon the 24-gold plates of Ether ... that they never came near to NY?  

 

Ether 13:13-14

 

And I was about to write more, but I am forbidden; but great and marvelous were the prophecies of Ether; but they esteemed him as naught, and cast him out; and he hid himself in the cavity of a rock by day, and by night he went forth viewing the things which should come upon the people.

 

And as he dwelt in the cavity of a rock he made the aremainder of this record, viewing the destructions which came upon the people, by night.

 

Have you even read the Book of Mormon?

 

Hey, there's clearly no reason to continue chatting with you. Over and out, Sky King. 

Edited September 6, 2013 by cursor

[SeekingUnderstanding]

Here is a shot of the southern half of the hill from the road (about 500 ft away from the hill).  Notice anything?
http://goo.gl/maps/vfbs8

 

Here is a shot of the northern half of the hill from the road (about 300 ft away)

http://goo.gl/maps/OHfMg

 

This was a hill that was known throughout North and South America? 

[Rob Osborn]

Um ... what?! 

I tried processing your written message through Google Translate ... but it came up with diddly-squat.

 

 

Limhi's scouts found the destroyed Jaredites at the hill Ramah/Cumorah, which according to you and many others is in NY. You say, "they probably never even made it further north than southern Mexico then went back down through the narrow neck." How is that at all possible if they came upon the destroyed Jaredites ... and upon the 24-gold plates of Ether ... that they never came near to NY?  

 

Ether 13:13-14

 

And I was about to write more, but I am forbidden; but great and marvelous were the prophecies of Ether; but they esteemed him as naught, and cast him out; and he ahid himself in the cavity of a rock by day, and by night he went forth viewing the things which should come upon the people.

 

And as he dwelt in the cavity of a rock he made the aremainder of this record, viewing the destructions which came upon the people, by night.

 

Have you even read the Book of Mormon?

 

Hey, there's clearly no reason to continue chatting with you. Over and out, Sky King. 

Limhis group found a lost civilization. It never said they went to Cumorah. Show me the text please

[cursor]

Limhis group found a lost civilization. It never said they went to Cumorah. Show me the text please

 

You have to be kidding ...

 

I guess I'll toy with this sometime this weekend. I'll make it totally clear that the scouts missed Zarahemla, went through the narrow neck of land, traveled to where the Jaredites were destroyed (hill Ramah/Cumorah), returned with the 24 gold plates of Ether ... and reported that they'd found the destroyed city of Zarahemla. No "lost civilization" in Mexico is at all involved in this episode.

 

"Do you even proof what you type afterwords??"

Google Translate THAT!

Edited September 7, 2013 by cursor

[Rob Osborn]

I'm sure he did.  So when Mormon wrote his epistle to the King of the Lamonites asking that he could gather his people to the land of Cumorah, by a hill called Cumorah, you think he meant the teeny nondescript drumlin (one of hundreds or thousands of similar nondescript drumlins in the area).  Mormon, knowing the geography of North and South America, a brilliant military general chose as a place to make a last stand the small drumlin in New York? That small hill which was likely unnamed before Joseph extracted the plates was known throughout North and South America? The entire region round about it was named after this one small hill? Have you been to the hill in New York?

Its quite possible that the hill and area held some significance amongst the Nephites and Lamanites. Possible theories are that the Nephites new this was where the Jaredites had their last battle and so it became a well known hill. Regardless of where the hill was or how small it was is of no consequence in battle. A lot of insignificant hills end up being strategic or noteworthy in battle. The hill Cumorah isnt a small hill by any means and is one of the larger ones in the area. One could easily lead an army of tens of thousands in this area from a command point upon the hill.

[Robert F. Smith]

I am not arguing that there are not areas of many waters in Mexico. In fact I readily agree there are indeed many areas in Mexico and Central America that could be considered to have many waters. My argument is that a strictly meso-Amercan model for the entire BoM lands is ludicrous. As I mentioned previously, there are no Ripliancum waters in Mexico. The Nephites were well accustomed to lands of many waters in the Norrh country. But we know a few facys too. Namely- the hill Ramah/ Cumorah was north of the narrow neck and also north of Desolation it being exceedingly far away. We also know that Cumorah was just south of the waters of Ripliancum. There are no large bodies of water in Mexico that could possibly be described different than the ocean but greater in size over all other bodies of water.

When Nephites first went to inhabit the land northward it speaks of them traveling an exceedingly great diatance to get to a land of many waters, etc. The area Sorenson suggests cannot be considered an exceedingly great distance. Very few actual migrations areas are spoken of in the BoM history. I therefore find it of interest when valuable gold pages were inscribed to speak of these few migrations. These migrations were no simple 100-200 mile treks, that woyld be rather ridiculous to waste valuable space to relate how a few brother Nephites went to live on the other side of a mountain a few walking days away. Remember, under Sorensons model, his idea of a day and a half journey is in the 75-125 mile range. So, if that truly was how far a Nephite could travel in a day and a half then the exceedingly great distance proposed would be less than a weeks walk away. Missionaries in the BoM did that all the time! It just doesnt add up. The waters of Ripliancum can be none other than the Great Lakes which truly are fresh water bodies that exceed all in size.

It is one thing to have real world discussions based on actual maps (topographical) or areas which archeologists and anthropologists have visited and understand.  It is quite another to just automatically reject any view which does not comport with someone else's.  I have suggested that all the requirements of the text are met within Mesoamerica.  You are certainly free to ignore geographical reality, and to ignore the reality which the Conquistadores found when they came to Mexico.  You can certainly claim that only the Great Lakes fit the Book of Mormon waters of Ripliancum.  You no doubt have a number of other correlations based on your reading and interpretation of the BofM.  That is your right.  What you have suggested thus far, however, doesn't fit the real world.

 

In the midst of all that, perhaps you could explain to us how we are to interpret Alma 22:32's day & half "journey for a Nephite, on the line Bountiful and the land Desolation, from the east to the west sea."  Should we consider the suggestion of Sorenson and Gardner that this may represent the speed of a messenger running that distance?  And what is the actual distance?  It doesn't say that we are dealing with an entire isthmus, but speaks of "the line Bountiful and the land Desolation."  What does that mean?  And it speaks not of the east sea to the west sea, but "from the east to the west sea."  Does this include the entire isthmus, from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific?  Or does it include the tremendous amount of water in the Veracruz basin -- from there to the Pacific, thus measuring a much more limited distance from around Bountiful to the Pacific?  All that could also include messengers.

 

In that context, those living in the region would have no knowledge of the Great Lakes, and would certainly not be thinking of them when judging their waters of Ripliancum in Veracruz to "exceed all."  Nor would they have to judge exceedingly long distances to be hemispheric in nature, nor would that make any rational sense to them or to modern anthropologists.  In actual context, Ripliancum would thus be just to the north of Ramah-Cumorah, which is north of the Narrow Neck of Land.

 

Is it possible that you have become confused by the ease of modern travel and thus mistakenly believe that such travel from Mexico to the Great Lakes is not a "ludicrous" suggestion (to borrow your favorite word)?

[canard78]

Alma 50:34

And it came to pass that they did not head them until they had come to the borders of the land Desolation; and there they did head them, by the narrow pass which led by the sea into the land northward, yea, by the sea, on the west and on the east.

The phrasing doesn't require the 'east sea' and the 'west sea'. In fact, the wording and punctuation suggest otherwise:

1. Note that the narrow pass "lead by the sea" – singular.

2. a comma separates any mention of "the sea", from "on the west and on the east."

Instead consider,

"and they did head them by the narrow pass which lead ... by the sea — and met them on the west and on the east."

(compare with Alma 2:37, Helaman 8:31, and ...)

Sorry if I'm joining late and it's been said already, but this has caught my imagination.

The 'pincer' ambush (attack from left and right flank, or east and west flank) is certainly used on other occasions in Alma. Is this the first mention of Teancum, the master tactician?

It's significant that they waited for a very specific point to launch the attack. If this narrow pass is in a place that he knew Morianton had to follow, because there was no other viable route north, then Teancum picked the perfect spot to lay wait and ambush the Lamanites.

33 Therefore Moroni sent an army, with their camp, to head the people of Morianton, to stop their flight into the land northward.

34 And it came to pass that they did not head them until they had come to the borders of the land Desolation; and there they did head them, by the narrow pass which led by the sea into the land northward, yea, by the sea, on the west and on the east.

35 And it came to pass that the army which was sent by Moroni, which was led by a man whose name was Teancum...

Thanks cursor. I'll look forward to more of the same I imagine in Mormon's Codex. Ever since I started reading Alma (aged 8 or 9) I've wanted to map out the wars. They were so well described that I had a mental map and no-one ever seemed to 'go missing.'

[canard78]

Cursor, you said:

"Exceedingly far away" is a relative term that must be interpreted based on a Nephite perspective, not ours.

I agree. I'd imagine this is especially hard for some Americans who think it's perfectly normal to do a weekend trip to see friends or family 1,000 miles away. My mind boggles. My father is a 4 hour drive away. As a Brit, that's "Exceedingly far away."

I could be in Paris before the end of the day if I got in the car and set off now. But if I suggested it my family would think me mad. We're not even out of our PJs yet and it would take at least an hour to pack the cucumber sandwiches!

[prismsplay]

After skimming through this discussion, I did not find any reference to Alma 46:40 (emphasis mine):

 

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 plants and roots which God had prepared to remove the cause of diseases which was subsequent to man by the nature of the climate - but there were many who died with old age.

 

If all Nephite lands, which were nearly surrounded by water, had basically one climate, that one climate would obviously result from their lands being nearly surrounded by water, which would tend to lessen differences in temperature through the seasons of the year.

 

I grew up in Missouri, which, far from any ocean, has a continental climate with temperatures ranging about 100 degrees from the cold of winter to the heat of summer. When our family moved to near the Atlantic coastline of Maryland, the temperature range was less extreme, due to the nearness of the ocean. Nephite lands, nearly surrounded by water, have an even narrower range in temperatures.

 

In Missouri, outdoor water is limited to freshwater rivers and streams and manmade lakes. Steel vehicles abandoned in fields take many years to rust away. Along the Maryland coast, warm rising air over the land can be replaced with salty air from over the ocean. Steel vehicles abandoned in fields rust away within a few years. In Mesoamerica, Nephite lands were so surrounded by salt water that anything made of iron or steel, if abandoned, would quickly rust away.

 

Those who claim that Nephite lands were spread over continents have apparently not considered the implications of "the nature [singular] of the climate [singular]". Missouri has a continental climate, the coastline of Maryland has an oceanside climate, and Nephite lands in Mesoamerica can get salty air from every side.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

The hill Cumorah isnt a small hill by any means and is one of the larger ones in the area. One could easily lead an army of tens of thousands in this area from a command point upon the hill.

 

Can you pick out the "hill cumorah" on this map? 

 

Its quite possible that the hill and area held some significance amongst the Nephites and Lamanites. Possible theories are that the Nephites new this was where the Jaredites had their last battle and so it became a well known hill. Regardless of where the hill was or how small it was is of no consequence in battle. A lot of insignificant hills end up being strategic or noteworthy in battle. 

You have already stated that Limhi's people found the Jaredite plates somewhere besides cumorah right? So they must have figured it out based on a textual description in the text? Now please provide a detailed written description of how to walk from south america to the hill cumorah using only natural landmarks. Too hard? How about written directions from someplace nearby like Rochester using only natural landmarks? 

 

One could easily lead an army of tens of thousands in this area from a command point upon the hill. 

I'm pretty sure the army numbered in the hundreds of thousands (on just one side) plus women and children...

 

I await your directions to Cumorah with eager anticipation.

[ERayR]

Its quite possible that the hill and area held some significance amongst the Nephites and Lamanites. Possible theories are that the Nephites new this was where the Jaredites had their last battle and so it became a well known hill. Regardless of where the hill was or how small it was is of no consequence in battle. A lot of insignificant hills end up being strategic or noteworthy in battle. The hill Cumorah isnt a small hill by any means and is one of the larger ones in the area. One could easily lead an army of tens of thousands in this area from a command point upon the hill.

 

It would be some feat to get15,000 to 20,000 combatants, fighting, on that hill.  Now try getting a couple of hundred thousand fighting each other. 

[Rob Osborn]

It would be some feat to get15,000 to 20,000 combatants, fighting, on that hill.  Now try getting a couple of hundred thousand fighting each other.

The text doesnt say they all battled on the hill. In fact it never says they battled on the hill at all.

[ERayR]

The text doesnt say they all battled on the hill. In fact it never says they battled on the hill at all.

 

OK it has been some time since I read the accounts so will take your word for now.

[Rob Osborn]

It is one thing to have real world discussions based on actual maps (topographical) or areas which archeologists and anthropologists have visited and understand.  It is quite another to just automatically reject any view which does not comport with someone else's.  I have suggested that all the requirements of the text are met within Mesoamerica.  You are certainly free to ignore geographical reality, and to ignore the reality which the Conquistadores found when they came to Mexico.  You can certainly claim that only the Great Lakes fit the Book of Mormon waters of Ripliancum.  You no doubt have a number of other correlations based on your reading and interpretation of the BofM.  That is your right.  What you have suggested thus far, however, doesn't fit the real world.

 

In the midst of all that, perhaps you could explain to us how we are to interpret Alma 22:32's day & half "journey for a Nephite, on the line Bountiful and the land Desolation, from the east to the west sea."  Should we consider the suggestion of Sorenson and Gardner that this may represent the speed of a messenger running that distance?  And what is the actual distance?  It doesn't say that we are dealing with an entire isthmus, but speaks of "the line Bountiful and the land Desolation."  What does that mean?  And it speaks not of the east sea to the west sea, but "from the east to the west sea."  Does this include the entire isthmus, from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific?  Or does it include the tremendous amount of water in the Veracruz basin -- from there to the Pacific, thus measuring a much more limited distance from around Bountiful to the Pacific?  All that could also include messengers.

 

In that context, those living in the region would have no knowledge of the Great Lakes, and would certainly not be thinking of them when judging their waters of Ripliancum in Veracruz to "exceed all."  Nor would they have to judge exceedingly long distances to be hemispheric in nature, nor would that make any rational sense to them or to modern anthropologists.  In actual context, Ripliancum would thus be just to the north of Ramah-Cumorah, which is north of the Narrow Neck of Land.

 

Is it possible that you have become confused by the ease of modern travel and thus mistakenly believe that such travel from Mexico to the Great Lakes is not a "ludicrous" suggestion (to borrow your favorite word)?

It is entirely possible that a day and a half journey for a nephite meant the pace of a runner but who is to know? It is also entirely possible that it was the distance a marching soldier in the army could make in that time. It also could mean the typical amount of distance averaged by a normal person used as a measure of distance for the masses as a general rule. We just cant be sure exactly. As for the line upon this narrow neck as measured by a day and a half- was it between some point in the east to the west sea or was it from sea to sea? Here is text from Alma 50:34 stating exactly there being a sea on the west and on the east in describing the narrow neck-

34 And it came to pass that they did not head them until they had come to the borders of the land Desolation; and there they did head them, by the narrow pass which led by the sea into the land northward, yea, by the sea, on the west and on the east.

I tend to believe that the Nephites and Lamanites knew well of geographical areas far away from meso-America. We knew that BoM peoples traded. We also know that mining for ore around the Great Lakes was known far and wide anciently by people living in meso-America because it is a known fact that they were trading for copper over this great distance in BoM times. This means there were quite a few individuaks that frequented both areas in ancient times. We tend to limit knowledge of the ancients but it is even held by some notable historians that ore from the Great Lakes was traded over the oceans into Europe anciently. We need to get out of this dogmatic approach of severly limiting the range and greatness of ancient BoM civilizations.