The Narrow Neck Debate Continues...

[poulsenll]

Here is the NY Cumorah at 1.2 enhancement and same magnification.

Not very impressive to say the least.

Larry P

[cursor]

Yes. I totally agree with you Larry.

[Bikeemikey]

The relevance of the quotes is in that they show that even Joseph Smith had evolving views in the light of scholarship of the period, and that he at that period held to an LGT of some kind. The relevance of the latter quote is in that Joseph Smith did not at that time hold a Hemispheric geographical view of the Book of Mormon that makes Panama the narrow neck of land. That he posited a Mesoamerican view of the location of Zarahemla eliminates South America and Panama from the equations of "narrow neck" and "land south" in Joseph Smith's view at the time. That alone is wherein the relevance lies. In other words, he knew no more than did we. That is the whole point.

Or that JS did have a hemispheric view and did think the narrow neck was related to panama but did not know enough about meso-American geography and anthropology to realize the issues with the locations he was postulating. .

[MormonMason]

Or that JS did have a hemispheric view and did think the narrow neck was related to panama but did not know enough about meso-American geography and anthropology to realize the issues with the locations he was postulating. .

Joseph Smith owned a personal copy of the following work (his personal copy is sitting in the Community of Christ archive):

 

Royal Robbins, The World Displayed in its History and Geography, Embracing a History of the World, from the Creation to the Present Day, with General View of the Politics, Religion, Military and Naval Affairs, Arts, Literature, Manners, Customs and Society of Ancient as well as Modern Nations, to which is added, An Outline of Modern Geography, 2 vols. in 1 (New York, W.W. Reed, 1832).

 

I think he knew where South America, North America, and the Isthmus of Darien were located and how they were arranged, because the above book (in a section headed "A System of Modern Geography") details the locations of North America and South America, mentioning the connection of the two continents by the Isthmus of Darien, as well as the whole length and width of America in miles, from 56th degree latitude to "the Frozen Ocean north," as well as stating the country composition of each continent.

 

So, I highly doubt that he held a hemispheric view regarding the Book of Mormon in 1842.  And, the above book shows that he could easily have known details about where the Isthmus of Darien was located in relation to what was being stated by Stephens in that author's book that he owned.  Joseph Smith would have known exactly how the Americas were laid out to know that he was leaving the Isthmus of Darien out of the picture so far as the narrow neck of land was concerned.  In the editorial it is clearly stated how and where the land of Zarahemla was situated.  See the original of the Times and Seasons article here.

Edited September 11, 2013 by MormonMason

[Rob Osborn]

[Not] Addressing this specific point, you totally ignored my former post regarding the scouts of Limhi who were sent to find the land of Zarahemla for relief. In review, from a southward position, they traveled north, missed the land of Zarahemla (which was in the land southward), traveled through the narrow neck of land, then continued north and east for a freakin' 6,000 miles to upstate NY .... grabbed the 24 gold plates left by Ether (the history of the Jaredites ... at the hill Raman/Cumorah), then returned to the land of Nephi (again missing the land of Zarahemla), and reported that they'd found the destroyed land of Zarahemla. 

 

Will you address it now, responsibly?

I believe I already answered this before. Limhis group came up through the narrow neck, found a destroyed nation in. Central America and Mexico then they went back down through he narrow neck to their homelands. They never went clear to New York.

[Rob Osborn]

Lets establish some logic. You are goibg to be hard pressed tohalf a million people around any hill be it in New York or Mexico and live in that spot together for any prolonged length of time. It took roughly 4 years for Mormon to gather his peopke to Cumorah. So, no matter where the hill is, they peobably werent all within some very small vicinity of land. As the battled culminated defensive lines were probably pushed back to some base location such as the hill of Cumorah. Even with Mormon looking out over his dead from the hill he probably saw his last great generals with their waning numbers slaughteref at this point.

The hill Cumorah in New York is a pretty good sized hill but not so big that it was considered a mount. The Hill Vumorah is 1.7 miles long and over a hundred feet high. We have hills that big where I live and one can see for a long ways from the tops of them. So far there have been two witnesses to the truth on this board with what actually seen in Western New York. The myriads of remains of bones and war relics from farmers plows is witness to me that ancient wars did tak placw just as the BoM states they did. A lot of posters keep saying western New York wasnt defenseable. Perhaps they need to read about the 5 nations who stationed themselves in that land and were the most powerful Indian force in North America when the white man found them. Seems that they had no problems defending that region for hundreds of years with great success.

All the references from the times and seasons just tells me that a lot of guessing was taking place obviously.

[canard78]

I believe I already answered this before. Limhis group came up through the narrow neck, found a destroyed nation in. Central America and Mexico then they went back down through he narrow neck to their homelands. They never went clear to New York.

 

So are you saying Limhi's group found a different destroyed nation in central america that had the Jaredite record or that the destroyed nation they found in central america was the dead Jaredites? Are you saying the Jaredites were predominantly living in Central America too? Did they also migrate their entire nation to New York for their final battle? Why bother? And if they went to the New York drumlin for the final battle, how did Limhi's group find them destroyed in central america?

 

The Book of Mormon says that both the Jarendites and Nephites/Lamanites had their "last battle" in the same place. On the same hill. Why would both nations trawl armies, women and children from meso/central america all the way up to the New York drumlin? And how do the Jaredite's remains get back down to central america for the Limhites to find on their trip?

 

I'm not a 'stakeholder' in this debate and it's useful to have a hemispheric proponent in the discussion. But at the moment I'm not quite following your logic.

[canard78]

 

 

For the record, it should be noted that the Google Earth perspective that you've supplied sports a 3x vertical scaling/exageration. A 1.2x vertical scaling (much more normal) looks like this (much less dramatic):

 

 

 

 

And it also looks much more like a hill in the 1.2x scaling. Important given there are at least 4 verses that mention the hill Cumorah and none that talk about it being a mountain. 

 

The Book of Mormon makes a distinction between hills and mountains - though we don't know what their distinction is. If we it happens to be similar to to the English (a hill being lower than a mountain) then the 1.2x image looks more like a hill than the mountain in the 3x scaling.

 

E.g.

3 Nephi 4:1

1 And it came to pass that in the latter end of the eighteenth year those armies of robbers had prepared for battle, and began to come down and to sally forth from the hills, and out of the mountains, and the wilderness, and their strongholds...

 

 

The Gadiantons are frequently referred to as being in the mountains (hills are less often mentioned):

 

Helaman 11:31

31 And they were again obliged to return out of the wilderness and out of the mountains unto their own lands, because of the exceeding greatness of the numbers of those robbers who infested the mountains and the wilderness.

 

Helaman 11:25

25 And they did commit murder and plunder; and then they would retreat back into the mountains, and into the wilderness and secret places, hiding themselves that they could not be discovered, receiving daily an addition to their numbers, inasmuch as there were dissenters that went forth unto them.

 

3 Nephi 3:20

20 Now the people said unto Gidgiddoni: Pray unto the Lord, and let us go up upon the mountains and into the wilderness, that we may fall upon the robbers and destroy them in their own lands.

 

3 Nephi 2:17

17 And it came to pass in the commencement of the fourteenth year, the war between the robbers and the people of Nephi did continue and did become exceedingly sore; nevertheless, the people of Nephi did gain some advantage of the robbers, insomuch that they did drive them back out of their lands into the mountains and into their secret places.

 

 

In fact, having just searched "mountain" in the Book of Mormon it seems to have only 2 types of reference:

 

1. Where Nephi went to pray while still in the near east.

2. Metaphorically (used in Isaiah type chapters, mountain of the Lord)

3. Refuge for the Gadiantons

 

On the other hand, results for "hill" return a very different (and very consistent) set of results:

 

1. Metaphorically in scripture (often "hills and mountains")

2. As a place for teaching/social gathering - Nehor is tried on a hill, Alma teaches on a hill, Noah's tower is on a hill

3. Tactically leveraging terrain in war

 

Ether 15:11

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 hide up the records unto the Lord, which were sacred.

 

Ether 14:28

28 And they pitched their tents in the valley of Corihor; and Coriantumr pitched his tents in the valley of Shurr. Now the valley of Shurr was near the hill Comnor; wherefore, Coriantumr did gather his armies together upon the hill Comnor, and did sound a trumpet unto the armies of Shiz to invite them forth to battle.

 

Alma 43:35

35 And as the Lamanites had passed the hill Riplah, and came into the valley, and began to cross the river Sidon, the army which was concealed on the south of the hill, which was led by a man whose name was Lehi, and he led his army forth and encircled the Lamanites about on the east in their rear.

 

Alma 43:31

31 Therefore, he divided his army and brought a part over into the valley, and concealed them on the east, and on the south of the hill Riplah;

 

Alma 43:34

34 And it came to pass that the Lamanites came up on the north of the hill, where a part of the army of Moroni was concealed.

 

Alma 2:15

15 And it came to pass that the Amlicites came upon the hill Amnihu, which was east of the river Sidon, which ran by the land of Zarahemla, and there they began to make war with the Nephites.

 

Alma 2:17

17 And they began to slay the Amlicites upon the hill east of Sidon. And the Amlicites did contend with the Nephites with great strength, insomuch that many of the Nephites did fall before the Amlicites.

 

 

That's impressively consistent.

[canard78]

The following scripture has always intrigued me.

 

The phrase "which shall be called shim" suggests the hill was not called Shim at that time but would be so called at some future date. If the linguists are correct that shim translated to English is "corn" and it is possible that would be called shim because it would be believed to be where corn originated. A few miles west of the above shown location is another hill that is called "Paxil" pronounced pashil. It is one of several locations in Mexico called "corn hill". This particular one is mentioned in the Popul Vu as the place where con originated.

 

This is speculation but the proximity of the two locations and the scripture describing Omer's trip to the east sea where traveling east he passed by Shim and then Cumorah strongly suggests that this location may be the Land of Cumorah described in the Book of Mormon.

 

Larry P

 

Not sure that verse can be treated as a prophecy as a couple of chapters later it's not being referred to as a future name:

 

Mormon 4:23

23 And now I, Mormon, seeing that the Lamanites were about to overthrow the land, therefore I did go to the hill Shim, and did take up all the records which Ammaron had hid up unto the Lord.

 

 

Mormon also references it as Shim when describing the Jaredite movements:

 

Ether 9:3

3 And the Lord warned Omer in a dream that he should depart out of the land; wherefore Omer departed out of the land with his family, and traveled many days, and came over and passed by the hill of Shim, and came over by the place where the Nephites were destroyed, and from thence eastward, and came to a place which was called Ablom, by the seashore, and there he pitched his tent, and also his sons and his daughters, and all his household, save it were Jared and his family

 

 

Having said that, they go passed Shim, then past the place of the Nephite destruction (Cumorah), and from there eastward to the sea.

 

The images shared above have a river from "Cumorah" that goes east to the sea (if I've got my directions right from the image). A family fleeing might be quite reasonable to find and follow a river until they eventually to the sea.

 

The geography still fits, but it may have already been called Shim (but possibly for the same reasons as you hypothesise).

[Rob Osborn]

So are you saying Limhi's group found a different destroyed nation in central america that had the Jaredite record or that the destroyed nation they found in central america was the dead Jaredites? Are you saying the Jaredites were predominantly living in Central America too? Did they also migrate their entire nation to New York for their final battle? Why bother? And if they went to the New York drumlin for the final battle, how did Limhi's group find them destroyed in central america?

 

The Book of Mormon says that both the Jarendites and Nephites/Lamanites had their "last battle" in the same place. On the same hill. Why would both nations trawl armies, women and children from meso/central america all the way up to the New York drumlin? And how do the Jaredite's remains get back down to central america for the Limhites to find on their trip?

 

I'm not a 'stakeholder' in this debate and it's useful to have a hemispheric proponent in the discussion. But at the moment I'm not quite following your logic.

Just takes a different way of looking at it. We tend to think of civilizations like the Nephites and Jaredites as living in these very small confined areas whete their entire civilization was only 300 miles wide by 500 miles in length. So then when it comes to having war in some far remote place thousands of miles away then yeah- its quite ridiculous. But, look at it this way-

I am of the belief based upon my own research and deciphering the evidence that these civilizations cultures or "empires" spanned verylarge geographical areas. Evidence of South Americas ancient Gold artifacts were found over very large trading zones spanning great distances- far greater than some small meso-American limited geography. All the evidence from artifacts, cultures, art, etc, show that the ancients of the Americas got around and traveled very great distances. Taking into account the reality of ancient American culture, civilizations did spread out over thousands of miles.

So, we do not know a few very important facts. We do not know where the Nephite places of great population were outside of the narrow neck area northward. All we are told is that for several hundred years there were various migrations northward to people the land and that they had become very numerous. We also do not know where the Nephite capital cities were in the land northward. We also dont know how far northward Mormon was pushed before his epistle to the Lamanites to go to Cumorah. Based off of ancient findings, we know that the Great Lakes area was a major hub for mining ore and as such the area was truly known far and wide into Mexico. It was probably also an area of very large ancient populations at different times. We know as fact that the Mississippi and Ohio river valleys along the major trade routes of these tributaries had and did support large popultations in ancient times. Mormon and his peopke werent being pushed into foreign lands, they were being pushed back on their own country, their own people.

One of the major points is the reasoning of it taking both The Jaredites and the Nephites four years to gather their people for the great last battles. I am sorry but if your whole nation is at war in a limited meso-American setting thete is no way its going to take 4 years to gather your people to a location a hundred miles away! Taking this one step farther, per haos the Nephites were truly spread out over all North America but indeed the hill Cumorah is in Mexico, why would Mormon go and get all the North American Nephites to come to Mexico to fight?

It thus makes more sense that the Nephites were fighting this great war over the better part of a century and that it involved very large armies and that this war was being fought over a constant etreat of the Nephites losing their lands. After losing many battles and tens of thousands of lives the lamanites are so numerous that they are literally going from one large city to the next and anhilating them. Mormon has no choice but to try to make a surrender and migration of his people to an area everyone knew about as a means of stopping the destruction of his people. As said before, we do not know how far or close to Cumorah Mormon was when he wrote the epustle. All we can surmise with logic is that Cumorah was still far enough away that it would provide some protection from the ever hoarding forces of the Lamanites. We can also surmise that it was yet far enough away that a few years would be required to gather all his nation to that general area of Cumorah. New York does fit when you begin factoring in reality.

As for Limhis group, they found a "part" of the destroyed Jaredite civilization. Limhi didnt need to find Cumorah, but rsther just the large city the Jaredites had built by the narrow neck which was obviously destroyed in the midst of all their far reachibg battles. We have talked about this in previous threads but armies in ancient times needed large geographical means of support from their people to sustain their warring. You just cant assemble armies in the hundreds of thousands and sustain them day to day from small geographical areas. Look at the Jaredites, at one point in their warring, on one side only, nearly 2,000,000 soldiers along with their families had been killed in battle. When the white men came to America, large Indian armies were in the less than a thousand number and their tribes came from quite substantial geographicak areas. General Washington fought the Revolutionary war with less than 24,000 men and had difficult times sustaining his army from resources spread out over nearly half the United States. So, when we read about armies in the BoM in tje hundreds of thousands and millions we should be able to realize these wars werent some small meso-American tribal battles but in fact epic wars between very advanced and large nations spread out over thousands of miles. Logic supports no other alternative.

[prismsplay]

I am of the belief based upon my own research and deciphering the evidence that these civilizations cultures or "empires" spanned verylarge geographical areas. Evidence of South Americas ancient Gold artifacts were found over very large trading zones spanning great distances- far greater than some small meso-American limited geography. All the evidence from artifacts, cultures, art, etc, show that the ancients of the Americas got around and traveled very great distances. Taking into account the reality of ancient American culture, civilizations did spread out over thousands of miles....

Logic supports no other alternative.

 

Since there are huge differences in climate across the nearly pole-to-poll stretch of the American continents, when Mormon mentions "the nature [singular] of the climate [singular]" (Alma 46:40), Mesoamerica makes good sense. With seas north, south, east, and west of Nephite lands, there would be one general climate, just as Mormon indicated.

[MormonMason]

Something being far away does not offer additional protection if your enemies know how to get there, and worse your thinking on the matter, the Lamanite King agreed to Mormon's request.  Cumorah was not going to be too far from where the Lamanites could get to them.

 

The only logical reason for going to Cumorah was for its strategic value.  Remember, Mormon hoped to gain advantage over the Lamanites there.  It was not distance that was going to protect his people but the strategic value of the land of Cumorah.  There is no need to postulate the battles being spread over thousands of miles when the Book of Mormon flat out states that Mormon and his people were gathered together in one, roundabout the hill Cumorah, in the land of Cumorah.  That is reading way beyond what the Book of Mormon states happened.

 

The Book of Mormon states in no uncertain terms that the whole remainder of the Nephite people were gathered together in one place round about the hill Cumorah, and that they pitched tents.  No fortifications were made or mentioned.  There were not battles scattered for thousands of miles across half the country like you posit.  The Book of Mormon says that they were gathered together "in one" and that they pitched tents "round about" the hill Cumorah.

 

Something about that territory made it unnecessary to fortify their position.  That is not the case with the hill in New York or the region round about that hill.  Easy access for attack on nearly all sides--by even children!--is the norm for that New York location.

 

And, worse for your proposal, the region that Limhi's men visited matches "the land of many waters" description of the land of Cumorah.  Ether was hanging around Ramah/Cumorah to watch the final end of his people.  Coriantumr and his people were camped around Ramah/Cumorah and that is where the Jaredites met their demise and near where Corintumr killed Shiz and fainted from loss of blood.  Ether was hiding in a nearby cave to watch what was going on in the vicinity of Ramah/Cumorah and record the details.  Ether completed the record on the 24 plates of pure gold and hid them in a way that Limhi's men would find them when they got there.  Coriantumr also managed to survive but was so badly wounded that he would not have been able to travel very far.  He met the "Mulekites" and lived among them for nine months before dying.  The landing place of the "Mulekite" people was in Desolation (Alma 22:30), where they came across the scattered bones of the Jaredites on their way down from their place of landing in Desolation, and where they ran into Coriantumr.  This lends considerable weight to the position that Cumorah was not all that far from the narrow neck of land.

 

This creates a rather serious problem for your view, because you either have to posit a Cumorah somewhere on or near Panama, or you have to posit that either Ether migrated for thousands of miles from his place of viewing of the final fall of the Jaredites to South America, or that Limhi's men traveled a lot further than you are willing to admit.

 

The collective internal, geographical evidence of the Book of Mormon text infers that Cumorah is not very far from the narrow neck of land by the way its surrounding land is described as well as the description of the region where the 24 plates were found, and the scattered bones and weapons of the dead, and the fact that Coriantumr was very badly wounded (implying that that he could not have traveled very far from the location of the land of Cumorah where he slew Shiz), and not far from where the "Mulekites" landed, which was in Desolation, which was the land northward, before Coriantumr ended up even unable to survive more than nine months of being among them.

 

The Mesoamerican view makes far more sense in light of the internal evidence of the text of the Book of Mormon.  The New York postulation makes little sense in the way of this internal evidence and provides little to no military advantage over a Lamanite attack.

[Rob Osborn]

With either model you have a prophet traveling thousands of miles be it Ether or Moroni. So, we shouldnt disagree that distance was not an issue for either model. Also, with each model you have to gather people from thousands of miles anyway because these nations werent stuck on some small real estate in Southern Mexico. You also have the issue of placing hundreds of thoysands of troops with their families for an extended period of time- badically, you arent going to encamp that many people in a small geographical space for very long without having some major issues. Also, if you were a great general do you really think you wouldnt erect some defensive works in defense of your nation?

[Anijen]

With either model you have a prophet traveling thousands of miles be it Ether or Moroni. So, we shouldnt disagree that distance was not an issue for either model. Also, with each model you have to gather people from thousands of miles anyway because these nations werent stuck on some small real estate in Southern Mexico. You also have the issue of placing hundreds of thoysands of troops with their families for an extended period of time- badically, you arent going to encamp that many people in a small geographical space for very long without having some major issues. Also, if you were a great general do you really think you wouldnt erect some defensive works in defense of your nation?

This is completely absurd to assume such a theory. With in depth study of the Book of Mormon one can easily come to a conclusion that to purpose a final battle thousands of miles away is not sensible. To move entire families over that distance would weaken them too skin and bones and utter exhaustion. It would offer no such advantage Mormon wished to obtain.

 

 

because these nations werent stuck on some small real estate in Southern Mexico.

 

Yet you are arguing for an even more ludicris idea, that is they were stuck on some small real estate in New York (a smaller hill at that).

[Questing Beast]

And the conclusion, to the interested outsider, is that JS composed the text without sufficient knowledge of the implications the details demand. That he possessed a two volume set of world history and geography only points out that he obtained any knowledge from such a set several years too late (1832 publication date). "Oopsie, did I really say that?" Coriantumr indeed must be on hand for the Mulekites to bump into him. Ether's plates must indeed be on hand for the Limhite explorers to discover them, which requires either an impossibly huge trek to NY or a bringing of the Ether plates closer, but then we still have the problem of Corantumr bumbling his way for thousands of miles into southern Mexico. None of it is plausible and only makes a good story if you "don't examine the bones from which the stew is made" (Tolkien). Too late for that now....

Edited September 11, 2013 by Questing Beast

[Tacenda]

Throwing this out there...I remember there were BoM land maps included in the scriptures several years ago, don't know how long ago.   Were they of the New York area?  I haven't googled it yet, but wanted to say that we need revelation on this.  If we continue to say that we only believe the Bible to be correct as far as translated correctly, we must also include the BoM the same way.  I call for that clause to be taken out of the AoF, if we aren't going to correct our confusion with the BoM lands.  JS should never have caused doubt on the Bible to be correct in places, now we don't know what is correct and what isn't.  Until we get the BoM situated to be the most correct book, we better back up the Bible just as much!  If I had clout, I would admonish the church to put the Bible right up there with the BoM.  At least in the bible we look at those maps and know where they are.   

[Questing Beast]

http://quantumleap42.blogspot.com/2012/07/orson-hyde-and-fourteen-articles-of.html Orson Hyde agreed with you, and changed the Article of Faith to read: "We believe the word of God recorded in the Bible, we also believe the word of God recorded in the Book of Mormon, and in all other good books."

[MormonMason]

With either model you have a prophet traveling thousands of miles be it Ether or Moroni. So, we shouldnt disagree that distance was not an issue for either model. Also, with each model you have to gather people from thousands of miles anyway because these nations werent stuck on some small real estate in Southern Mexico. You also have the issue of placing hundreds of thoysands of troops with their families for an extended period of time- badically, you arent going to encamp that many people in a small geographical space for very long without having some major issues. Also, if you were a great general do you really think you wouldnt erect some defensive works in defense of your nation?

No, distance is a major problem for a large group of people in the hundreds of thousands, not for individuals or small groups.  You are forgetting what would happen when hundreds of thousands of people travel through the Mexican desert.  Smaller groups could make it because smaller numbers are manageable with such limited resources as would be there.  You would have had tens of thousands of people dropping like flies on the way through that desert when there would not have been enough water to go around.  There is nothing in the Book of Mormon about tens of thousands of people dying from thirst on the way to Cumorah.  Bet you didn't think about that, did you?

 

It also is true that very large groups of people would have serious problems in a relatively small geographical space, unless the ground were very fertile and there was plenty of fresh, uncontaminated water in the region.  You would need the fountains because that water would not become contaminated with E. Coli and cause cholera.  You would need the fertile ground for supplies and food.  That is why the New York hill fails the test and why you must claim that the Nephites were spread around for hundreds of miles.  The ground could not sustain a population of hundreds of thousands of people in that time period around that New York hill.  Many thousands more would have been dying from pestilence, plague, and hunger, before the Lamanites ever got there!

 

But, like it or not, the Book of Mormon clearly states that they were anything but scattered around.  It clearly states in no uncertain terms that they were gathered together "in one" as a whole people, and that they were camped in tents round about the hill Cumorah.  You cannot ignore all that and remai logical about any of this.  And yet, you must insist that they had to have been scattered around because deep down you know that New York Cumorah could not pass the requirements of the region from the Book of Mormon.  New York's hill and environs could not have sustained so large a population for any great length of time.  They could not even get enough fresh, uncontaminated water there in New York without traveling for miles around away from the hill, rendering them susceptible to attack and attrition.  There was nothing defensible about the place in New York.  Most of the rivers and brooks there are very easy to cross.  There is nothing in the way of natural barriers that would have provided a tactical advantage.

 

On the other hand, in the particular region proposed for the land of Cumorah in Mesoamerica, the soil there is very fertile (volcanic soil is among the most fertile soils in the world) and the climate is favorable for two and even three growing seasons a year.  The big plus is the extent of fresh water there and massive, difficult to cross, watersheds in relatively close proximity to the defensible hill for supply and defense.  No wonder Mormon had had hope that there he would gain an advantage over the Lamanites!

 

Mormon liked fortifications.  He mentioned them often.  They were a popular subject with him.  And, yet, not even so much as a peep about building a single one can be seen in the entire section of the Book of Mormon where they are camped around Cumorah.  Not one mention of even one fortification whatsoever.  That is quite odd, if he in fact were building them.  Not a single word about it, though, from our Nephite General in chief.

 

And remember, any model proposed must meet the requirements of the written text and what it actually says, not what we think might be logical even when it isn't.  The New York hill and environs fails the test of the Book of Mormon and that it why you must insist on the Nephites being spread about so far for hundreds of miles with fortifications all over the place--notwithstanding the Book of Mormon mentions not a single fortification and clearly states that the Nephites were gathered together in one place and were camped in tents around the hill Cumorah.  It is what the text says and does not say that is important.

 

The Book of Mormon is silent on fortifications there.  We should not be looking for them or for a land and undefensible hill in the midst of that land that would require them.  Also, the Book of Mormon is clear that a large population (by ancient standards) of people were in a single, large group who were camped in tents around the hill Cumorah.  We should not be looking for structures and we should be looking for lands that easily could sustain such large populations of people for more than a few months time.  New York's hill and surrounding land just doesn't cut it and by no means meets what the Book of Mormon requires.  Please try to think logically about this. You aren't thus far.

[MormonMason]

And the conclusion, to the interested outsider, is that JS composed the text without sufficient knowledge of the implications the details demand. That he possessed a two volume set of world history and geography only points out that he obtained any knowledge from such a set several years too late (1832 publication date). "Oopsie, did I really say that?" Coriantumr indeed must be on hand for the Mulekites to bump into him. Ether's plates must indeed be on hand for the Limhite explorers to discover them, which requires either an impossibly huge trek to NY or a bringing of the Ether plates closer, but then we still have the problem of Corantumr bumbling his way for thousands of miles into southern Mexico. None of it is plausible and only makes a good story if you "don't examine the bones from which the stew is made" (Tolkien). Too late for that now....

If you place it in Mesoamerica, it all falls together and makes more and more sense as elements of the Book of Mormon are compared with the internal and external evidences and the geography.  But, more convincing evidence only can come with consensus.  We only can dig when we know precisely where to dig.  We are a long way away from that yet.  The Bible had thousands of years to wait for archaeological evidences to begin pouring forth.  The Book of Mormon so far less than a couple hundred since it came out.  With the evidences that are being found in the text itself, as well as from without, and elements of geography that seem to be coming together the more the subject and text are studied, we can afford to be patient.

[Questing Beast]

I have never been very good at "patient". But knowing that about myself, I do make the effort to discipline myself to patience. For decades I was patiently living with the fact that I didn't know so could not bear testimony. So I read/listened to others who claimed that they "know", and I studied the BoM with their words of exegesis and testimony in mind. Meanwhile my religious world view was expanding enough to notice the "problem areas" and to find a few on my own. I discounted the counsel to not study "non faith promoting" materials. Yet I went not after anti-Mormon stuff, deeming it too agenda-based and slanted to be reliable. I ran into enough of that stuff just reading Nibley anyway! But when I realized that my trouble believing in Jesus Christ was core, I studied JS to learn more about Jesus Christ, and found out instead that JS was too mired in his own ignorance and inconsistency to be a clear guide or prophet for me. With that, I discounted all prophets as man-made. When people get too caught up in their need for guidance from God they look for prophets, even when the object of their veneration is reluctant or far less than they make him out to be.

 

At this point, the BoM does not require a historical setting for me. So I do not expect any of the evidence from the ground to prove it to be historical. Most of the Bible is not historical either.

 

A limited geography, even a Mesoamerican one, for the BoM, does not solve the problems of historicity, because such a setting goes against the early views on BoM geography, the very source of those views originating from inspired "prophets seers and revelators", especially "the author" himself. He obviously did not know enough about geography to understand the implications of the details of the Book itself, which he dictated. The entire pursuit of a plausible setting for the BoM arose out of a need to keep JS's role as "prophet seer and revelator" intact. Ironically, it involves dismissal and cherry picking in order to uphold the LGT, just as the hemispheric model requires dismissing the sources supporting a LGT model. In other words, "who are you choosing to believe"?...

Edited September 11, 2013 by Questing Beast

[MormonMason]

Throwing this out there...I remember there were BoM land maps included in the scriptures several years ago, don't know how long ago.   Were they of the New York area? I haven't googled it yet, but wanted to say that we need revelation on this.  If we continue to say that we only believe the Bible to be correct as far as translated correctly, we must also include the BoM the same way.  I call for that clause to be taken out of the AoF, if we aren't going to correct our confusion with the BoM lands.  JS should never have caused doubt on the Bible to be correct in places, now we don't know what is correct and what isn't.  Until we get the BoM situated to be the most correct book, we better back up the Bible just as much!  If I had clout, I would admonish the church to put the Bible right up there with the BoM.  At least in the bible we look at those maps and know where they are.   

 

I recall no land maps in the Book of Mormon years ago.  I have in my collection copies of every major edition, and a few missionary editions such as the one that was bound to look like the surface of a gold plate, with lots of pictures in the front, and none of them had maps.  The most that occurred was in the 1879, edition where Orson Pratt added geographical footnotes which were yanked out by the next edition.  That edition had had notes that, for instance, had a footnote that said that Sidon was the Magdalena River in South America.  But, I recall no maps.

 

Yes, it would be nice for there to be revelation but the Lord is not forthcoming at the present.  He was quite clear that the ultimate test of our faith was the book itself, and that if we accepted it on faith, the greater things would be revealed, and so forth.  We are supposed to take the book on faith and apply it in our lives, and not rely on external evidences to build up our faith and testimonies.

 

I disagree with you that "as far as it is translated correctly" should be taken out of Articles of Faith 8.  It is an accurate statement.  The confusion on the location of the Book of Mormon is of our own making.  But, those questions never can be settled without debate and discovery, sans revelation.

 

I also do not agree that Joseph Smith should not have caused doubt on the Bible and its correctness in places.  Why castigate him for telling the truth? The fact is, he was right all along.  There are problems with portions of the text and with the manuscripts that are far more serious than people are willing to admit.  All the more reason for faith and for the Book of Mormon as a second witness to the truthfulness of the Bible overall.

 

And, the Book of Mormon is the most correct book.  In spite of its meager textual issues, it is a single translation of an original text and not a translation of a translation of a translation in most of its parts, unlike the King James Version of the Bible, which is exactly that!  And, it is true that a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts than by any other book.  But, taking it together with the Bible and it strengthens the witness for a living Christ for the masses.  If the Book of Mormon has any chance of being what it claims, Jesus Christ is very much a living Christ and not a dead one.  Yes, we must walk by faith and not by sight (2 Corinthians 5:7).

 

As to the maps in the Bible, they are by no means complete and 100% accurate.  If you think they are you are sadly mistaken.  Archaeologists cannot even agree on the precise location of the temple on the Temple Mount.  There are at least four differing theories and several other variants thereof!  They cannot agree on the size of the Fortress of Antonia.  Many even are willing to contradict what Josephus the Jewish Historian, an eyewitness of the temple and its attached fortress, said about it.

 

Archaeologists cannot even agree on the location of the land where Abraham was born and many even deny that he existed at all! There are multiple different versions of the Bible maps even among our own Bibles, some of which conflict with one another, and more so when you compare to Bible maps in other Bibles older and newer.  And less than 55% of biblical sites have even been plausibly identified.

 

But, consider again that the Bible has had thousands of years to wait for even one evidence to come forth, and many of the sites preserved for all time by interested pilgrims unlike the Book of Mormon, which has been out for less than 200 years and the peoples of the Book of Mormon were bent upon destroying all memory of the Nephites.  They are two very different scenarios, which we now have need to debate and piece back together.

[Tacenda]

http://www.ldsces.org/inst_manuals/bm-ssg/images/p-203.pdf

 

So this map of Daniel H. Ludlow's is the only map available of possible BoM land? 

[Questing Beast]

That is merely a relationship map of named places. Many maps of equally vague or unjustified specificity exist. But it is correct to say that no edition of the BoM ever included any sort of map....

[Calm]

http://www.ldsces.org/inst_manuals/bm-ssg/images/p-203.pdf

 

So this map of Daniel H. Ludlow's is the only map available of possible BoM land? 

There are a number of other people who have developed maps based on internal evidence but the point is there has never been any official connection with 'on the ground' locations.  There were created for the most part to help people visualize what was going on in the text, not to find some real world correspondence.

Note to the disclaimer that went along with it at the bottom:

 

 

 

Possible relationships of sites in the Book of Mormon based on internal evidence. No effort should be made to identify points on this map with any existing geographical location. Originally prepared by Daniel H. Ludlow and used by his permission.

 

 

[Calm]

Here are other similar efforts:

 

https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/content/images/gospel-library/manual/34588/095.gif

 

http://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/content/images/gospel-library/manual/34187/p-089-1.gif

 

https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/content/images/gospel-library/manual/34187/p-139-3.gif

 

http://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/content/images/gospel-library/manual/09411_000_064_01-journey.gif

 

https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/content/images/gospel-library/magazine/ensignlp.nfo:o:334e.jpg

 

https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/content/images/gospel-library/manual/34594/34594_000_027_01-battle.gif

 

This is the closest thing to what you are looking for, I expect:

 

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1984/09/digging-into-the-book-of-mormon-our-changing-understanding-of-ancient-america-and-its-scripture?lang=eng

Edited September 11, 2013 by calmoriah