Topographic Information In The Book Of Mormon

[Rob Osborn]

They were brought to the same "good spot of ground" according to the Book of Mormon, as I pointed out:

 

The long quotation from the writings of Zenos, taken from the brass plates, in the Book of Jacob, describes a second set of migrations, this time from the house of Israel. That panomamic revealment mentions "many" graftings of "tender" branches of the house of Israel. One of these graftings was into "the poorest spot in all the land of thy vineyard" (Jacob 5:21). Another was into a spot of ground "poorer than the first". The "last" of the "many" graftings was into a "good spot of ground, yea, even that which was choice unto me above all other parts of the land of my vineyard" (Jacob 5:43), the same spot of ground that the Jaredites were brought into, North America. Notice the very next verse: "And thou beholdest that I also cut down that which cumbered this spot of ground [the Jaredites] that I might plant this tree in the stead thereof [the Lehites and the Mulekites]".

 

While the Jaredites were headed for destruction, the Lord was already bringing in the Mulekites and Lehites to replace them.

 

The topographic information in the Book of Mormon makes no sense when applied over whole continents. It makes perfect sense when confined to Mesoamerica

 

 

"And I beheld the Spirit of the Lord, that it was upon the Gentiles, and they did prosper and obtain the land for their inheritance" (1Nephi 13:15). When we read this in context, it is clear that the reference is to the founding of the United States of America in North America, because it mentions that "their mother Gentiles was gathered together upon the waters and upon the land also, to battle against them" (verse 17). This is a prophecy fulfilled during the American Revolution in North America, which is the land of promise.

 

2 Nephi 10:11,14:

And this land shall be a land of liberty unto the Gentiles, and there shall be no kings upon the land which shall raise up unto the Gentiles.

 

This applies to North America. South America has been cursed with dictatorships, and is therefore not the land of promise. The present attempts to make Obama a dictator will fail after much turmoil, even if Christ Himself has to intervene to stop it.

 

2 Nephi 10:15:

Wherefore for this cause that my covenants may be fulfilled which I have made unto the children of men that I will do unto them while they are in the flesh, I must needs destroy the secret works of darkness and of murders and of abominations.

 

2 Nephi 10:19:

Wherefore I will consecrate this land unto thy seed - and they which shall be numbered among thy seed - forever, for the land of their inheritance; for it [North America] is a choice land, saith God, unto me, above all other lands. Wherefore I will have all men that dwell thereon that they shall worship me, saith God.

Well, under your own definition, mesoamerica isnt the United States. Will reply more later.

[prismsplay]

Well, under your own definition, mesoamerica isnt the United States. Will reply more later.

 

But it is a part of North America.

 

Ether 13:4:

Behold, Ether saw the days of Christ. And he spake concerning a New Jerusalem upon this land.

 

We know from Doctrine and Covenants that Independence, Missouri will be the centerplace of the New Jersusalem, and Independence, Missouri is near the center of North America, the land of promise.

[Rob Osborn]

But it is a part of North America.

Ether 13:4:

Behold, Ether saw the days of Christ. And he spake concerning a New Jerusalem upon this land.

We know from Doctrine and Covenants that Independence, Missouri will be the centerplace of the New Jersusalem, and Independence, Missouri is near the center of North America, the land of promise.

But, both north and south america is the "land of promise/ promised land" -

17 And it came to pass that when he had poured out his soul to God, he named all the land which was south of the land Desolation, yea, and in fine, all the land, both on the north and on the south—A chosen land, and the land of liberty (Alma 46:17)

" Ether 1:38–42. A Chosen Land

•Just as members of the house of Israel are called a chosen people—chosen to do the Lord’s work—the Book of Mormon refers to the Americas as a chosen land—chosen to be the place for the Restoration of the gospel and, eventually, the New Jerusalem. Both the members of the house of Israel and the Americas have been chosen to assist Heavenly Father in spreading the gospel throughout the world.

•President Joseph Fielding Smith explained that all of North and South America is a choice land: “The Book of Mormon informs us that the whole of America, both North and South, is a choice land above all other lands, in other words—Zion. The Lord told the Jaredites that he would lead them to a land ‘which is choice above all the lands of the earth’ [Ether 1:42]” (Doctrines of Salvation, comp. Bruce R. McConkie, 3 vols. [1954–56], 3:73).

•President Ezra Taft Benson (1899–1994) also spoke of the Americas being chosen lands: “In 1844, the Prophet Joseph Smith made this solemn proclamation: ‘The whole of America is Zion itself from north to south’ (Teachings [of the Prophet Joseph Smith], p. 362). The Lord Himself decreed: ‘This is a land which is choice above all other lands’ (Ether 2:10). This nation is part of the land of Zion. This is a land dedicated by God’s servants. When a Book of Mormon prophet referred to the nations of the world, this hemisphere was designated as ‘good’ (Jacob 5:25–26)” (The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson [1988], 123)." http://www.lds.org/manual/book-of-mormon-student-manual/chapter-50-ether-1-5?lang=eng

Edited October 13, 2013 by Rob Osborn

[prismsplay]

But, both north and south america is the "land of promise/ promised land" -

17 And it came to pass that when he had poured out his soul to God, he named all the land which was south of the land Desolation, yea, and in fine, all the land, both on the north and on the south—A chosen land, and the land of liberty (Alma 46:17)

 

The "land northward" was everything west of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. The "land southward" was everything east of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Within the "land southward", "north" referred to Nephite territory, and "south" referred to Lamanite territory. The entire "land southward" including both Nephite and Lamanite territories was north of the Isthmus of Panama.

 

Within Lamanite territory were places precious in Nephite heritage. So Captain Moroni thought of Lamanite lands as part of a chosen land of liberty.

 

History has shown that South America has not been a part of the decree concerning the land of promise.

 

Ether 2:7-12:

 

 7 And the Lord would not suffer that they should stop beyond the sea in the wilderness, but he would that they should come forth even unto the land of promise, which was choice above all other lands, which the Lord God had preserved for a righteous people.

 

 8 And he had sworn in his wrath unto the brother of Jared, that whoso should possess this land of promise, from that time henceforth and forever, should serve him, the true and only God, or they should be swept off when the fulness of his wrath should come upon them.

 

 9 And now, we can behold the decrees of God concerning this land, that it is a land of promise; and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall serve God, or they shall be swept off when the fulness of his wrath shall come upon them. And the fulness of his wrath cometh upon them when they are ripened in iniquity.

 

 10 For behold, this is a land which is choice above all other lands; wherefore he that doth possess it shall serve God or shall be swept off; for it is the everlasting decree of God. And it is not until the fulness of iniquity among the children of the land, that they are swept off.

 

 11 And this cometh unto you, O ye Gentiles, that ye may know the decrees of God—that ye may repent, and not continue in your iniquities until the fulness come, that ye may not bring down the fulness of the wrath of God upon you as the inhabitants of the land have hitherto done.

 

 12 Behold, this is a choice land, and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall be free from bondage, and from captivity, and from all other nations under heaven, if they will but serve the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ, who hath been manifested by the things which we have written.

 

This specific decree has applied only to North America. The Jaredites could not escape it. the Nephites could not escape it. And the United States of America cannot escape it. Whatever decree exists concerning South America, we do not yet have a record of it.

Edited October 13, 2013 by prismsplay

[Rob Osborn]

The "land northward" was everything west of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. The "land southward" was everything east of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Within the "land southward", "north" referred to Nephite territory, and "south" referred to Lamanite territory. The entire "land southward" including both Nephite and Lamanite territories was north of the Isthmus of Panama.

 

Within Lamanite territory were places precious in Nephite heritage. So Captain Moroni thought of Lamanite lands as part of a chosen land of liberty.

 

History has shown that South America has not been a part of the decree concerning the land of promise.

 

Ether 2:7-12:

 

 7 And the Lord would not suffer that they should stop beyond the sea in the wilderness, but he would that they should come forth even unto the land of promise, which was choice above all other lands, which the Lord God had preserved for a righteous people.

 

 8 And he had sworn in his wrath unto the brother of Jared, that whoso should possess this land of promise, from that time henceforth and forever, should serve him, the true and only God, or they should be swept off when the fulness of his wrath should come upon them.

 

 9 And now, we can behold the decrees of God concerning this land, that it is a land of promise; and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall serve God, or they shall be swept off when the fulness of his wrath shall come upon them. And the fulness of his wrath cometh upon them when they are ripened in iniquity.

 

 10 For behold, this is a land which is choice above all other lands; wherefore he that doth possess it shall serve God or shall be swept off; for it is the everlasting decree of God. And it is not until the fulness of iniquity among the children of the land, that they are swept off.

 

 11 And this cometh unto you, O ye Gentiles, that ye may know the decrees of God—that ye may repent, and not continue in your iniquities until the fulness come, that ye may not bring down the fulness of the wrath of God upon you as the inhabitants of the land have hitherto done.

 

 12 Behold, this is a choice land, and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall be free from bondage, and from captivity, and from all other nations under heaven, if they will but serve the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ, who hath been manifested by the things which we have written.

 

This specific decree has applied only to North America. The Jaredites could not escape it. the Nephites could not escape it. And the United States of America cannot escape it. Whatever decree exists concerning South America, we do not yet have a record of it.

You do realize the church recognizes all of both north and south America as being the land of promise?

And what about all of Mexico and central America and the corruption of their countries? There is no difference in styles of government, peoples, etc, between Mexico, Central America and those of South America. I should also remind you that more gold artifacts have come out of South America than norrh America or the whole world. Colonbia actually ia home to the gold museum of antiquity. Remember both the land northward and land southward were blessed with an abundance of gold, silver, etc.

[Tiki]

Sorry Rob.

President Ezra Taft Benson said otherwise:

http://www.lds.org/general-conference/1987/10/our-divine-constitution

[Rob Osborn]

Sorry Rob.

President Ezra Taft Benson said otherwise:

http://www.lds.org/general-conference/1987/10/our-divine-constitution

Hum...according to this conference talk by ETB, he calls the Americas, the western hemisphere, the land of promise as prophesied by ancient prophets- http://www.ldsinfobase.net/liberty/ETB_62apr.html

" To the peoples who should inhabit this blessed land of the Americas, the Western Hemisphere, an ancient prophet uttered this significant promise and solemn warning: "Behold, this is a choice land, and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall be free from bondage, and from captivity, and from all other nations under heaven if they will but serve the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ, . . ."

[Tiki]

Hum...according to this conference talk by ETB, he calls the Americas, the western hemisphere, the land of promise as prophesied by ancient prophets- http://www.ldsinfobase.net/liberty/ETB_62apr.html

" To the peoples who should inhabit this blessed land of the Americas, the Western Hemisphere, an ancient prophet uttered this significant promise and solemn warning: "Behold, this is a choice land, and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall be free from bondage, and from captivity, and from all other nations under heaven if they will but serve the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ, . . ."

That doesn't mean the Nephites occupied all of it. The Lamanites, yes. (1 N 12:20)

President Ezra Taft Benson was specific as to where the Mighty Nation was located. (1 N 22:7)

[Rob Osborn]

That doesn't mean the Nephites occupied all of it. The Lamanites, yes. (1 N 12:20)

President Ezra Taft Benson was specific as to where the Mighty Nation was located. (1 N 22:7)

If the "promised land" is both north and south America then it places BoM events on both continents.

[Calm]

If the "promised land" is both north and south America then it places BoM events on both continents.

Or those who inherited the promises of the Promised Land spread throughout the two continents carrying the promises with them while the BoM took place in a limited area of the eventual PL.

[prismsplay]

If the "promised land" is both north and south America then it places BoM events on both continents.

 

Nothing could have placed Book of Mormon events on both continents except human realities. And the human realities are that we leave behind an archaeological record of our existence. The archaeological record of Mesoamerica generally fits the geography, the topography, and the time periods described in the Book of Mormon. The overlay of human activity by the surviving Lamanites complicates, but does not destroy, the record. Interpreting the record brings into play preconceived notions by the interpreters. But in the long run, false interpretations are weeded out, and what remains is trending toward, not away from correspondencies with the Book of Mormon account. Examples of this are the previous theories of sparse populations and slash-and-burn agriculture being refuted by clear evidence of dense populations and intensive agriculture.

 

The continental geographical theory exists in human imaginations only, having no sharp connection with what the Book of Mormon describes. The key point upon which it is based is absurd. Reconciling an over 400 mile long impassable isthmus with what the Book of Mormon says about a narrow neck of land through which competing armies can quickly pass is impossible.

Edited October 16, 2013 by prismsplay

[Rob Osborn]

Nothing could have placed Book of Mormon events on both continents except human realities. And the human realities are that we leave behind an archaeological record of our existence. The archaeological record of Mesoamerica generally fits the geography, the topography, and the time periods described in the Book of Mormon. The overlay of human activity by the surviving Lamanites complicates, but does not destroy, the record. Interpreting the record brings into play preconceived notions by the interpreters. But in the long run, false interpretations are weeded out, and what remains is trending toward, not away from correspondencies with the Book of Mormon account. Examples of this are the previous theories of sparse populations and slash-and-burn agriculture being refuted by clear evidence of dense populations and intensive agriculture.

 

The continental geographical theory exists in human imaginations only, having no sharp connection with what the Book of Mormon describes. The key point upon which it is based is absurd. Reconciling an over 400 mile long impassable isthmus with what the Book of Mormon says about a narrow neck of land through which competing armies can quickly pass is impossible.

If one is merely looking for dates, one can find compatibke dates on both continents. As for some "impassable" isthmus, the panama isthmus is far from that. Indian cultures have been found on every part of the isthmus. If it were impassable then it would also be unlivable.

What doesnt make sense is a tehuantepec isthmus where one cannot even tell there is a narrow pass from the ground. Its a hilly mountainous region spanning a distance of a 140 miles. Thats almost a completely undefendable point! Then you have the problem of a nephite being able to travel over this mountainous terrain in a day and a half. Forget it, not gonna happen.

[cdowis]

What doesnt make sense is a tehuantepec isthmus where one cannot even tell there is a narrow pass from the ground. Its a hilly mountainous region spanning a distance of a 140 miles. Thats almost a completely undefendable point! Then you have the problem of a nephite being able to travel over this mountainous terrain in a day and a half. Forget it, not gonna happen.

 

Depends on your assumption on the beginning and ending point of his journey.  You are assuming crossing the entire isthmus, but others have suggested the ending point as a political boundary rather than a physical one.  

 

Sorry, but don't have the reference or details.

[prismsplay]

If one is merely looking for dates, one can find compatible dates on both continents.

 

I have no problem with there being compatible dates in South America also. That merely proves the truth of the long quote from Zenos in the Book of Jacob concerning branches of the house of Israel being grafted into wild trees in "many" spots in the vineyard, South America obviously being one of those spots. The impassable nature of over 400 miles of swamps, jungles, and mountains between North and South America kept the two graftings separate from each other. The archaeological records of both spots are so different during that time period that it is obvious that they were separate civilizations with little if any contacts between them.

[nealr]

If the "promised land" is both north and south America then it places BoM events on both continents.

 

Why can't the entire landmass be promised, and the events in the text playout in a more limited sphere? That is like taking a multi-generational family history that says they lived in Utah and insisting that the events described therein must span across the entirety of the state, even though it would be just as true if all the events reported in the history turned out to be limited to the Orem-Provo area, or the Greater Salt Lake area, or even the St. George area. It would still be accurate to say that they lived in Utah.

 

Likewise, the promised land can be all of the western hemisphere, while the Book of Mormon events are limited to certain region within that hemisphere. It would still, then, be accurate to say they lived in the promised land, even though they did not occupy it's entirety.

[prismsplay]

Why can't the entire landmass be promised, and the events in the text playout in a more limited sphere? That is like taking a multi-generational family history that says they lived in Utah and insisting that the events described therein must span across the entirety of the state, even though it would be just as true if all the events reported in the history turned out to be limited to the Orem-Provo area, or the Greater Salt Lake area, or even the St. George area. It would still be accurate to say that they lived in Utah.

 

Likewise, the promised land can be all of the western hemisphere, while the Book of Mormon events are limited to certain region within that hemisphere. It would still, then, be accurate to say they lived in the promised land, even though they did not occupy it's entirety.

 

Traveling distances are often cited as reasons for rejecting the continental theory. In her book Peoples, Places and Prophecies, Verneil Simmons commented on the traveling mentioned in 3 Nephi 3:22-24.

 

"In A.D. 17 a proclamation by the governor called all the people together to the 'center' of their lands, in an attempt to overcome the Gadianton robbers. Within a thirty-day period they were required to gather to Zarahemla and Bountiful, south of the 'narrow neck'. The story, if taken as told, assures us that the total land areas were neither so large nor so far distant that the inhabitants could not be accomodated centrally in an area of limited dimensions. Even with excellent communication facilities, the period of 30 days puts limits on the extent of the territory. The record states that the country was densely populated, from 'sea to sea.'

 

"The erroneous [RLDS] map of 1900 [showing the Isthmus of Panama as the narrow neck] would have the people from the land 'northward' crossing that impassable Darien gap by the thousands, with all their belongings [including flocks and herds], to reach the Andean altiplano, the 'center' of their lands. This concept is impossible when set against the statements of the record."

 

Remember, the Isthmus of Panama is over 400 miles long with jungles, swamps, and mountains all along the way. That would be especially difficult for those with flocks and herds.

Edited October 17, 2013 by prismsplay

[nealr]

Traveling distances are often cited as reasons for rejecting the continental theory. In her book Peoples, Places and Prophecies, Verneil Simmons commented on the traveling mentioned in 3 Nephi 3:22-24.

 

"In A.D. 17 a proclamation by the governor called all the people together to the 'center' of their lands, in an attempt to overcome the Gadianton robbers. Within a thirty-day period they were required to gather to Zarahemla and Bountiful, south of the 'narrow neck'. The story, if taken as told, assures us that the total land areas were neither so large nor so far distant that the inhabitants could not be accomodated centrally in an area of limited dimensions. Even with excellent communication facilities, the period of 30 days puts limits on the extent of the territory. The record states that the country was densely populated, from 'sea to sea.'

 

"The erroneous [RLDS] map of 1900 [showing the Isthmus of Panama as the narrow neck] would have the people from the land 'northward' crossing that impassable Darien gap by the thousands, with all their belongings [including flocks and herds], to reach the Andean altiplano, the 'center' of their lands. This concept is impossible when set against the statements of the record."

 

Remember, the Isthmus of Panama is over 400 miles long with jungles, swamps, and mountains all along the way. That would be especially difficult for those with flocks and herds.

 

Yes, I understand all that and I agree that the events of the Book of Mormon were of a very limited scale in terms of distances.

[Rob Osborn]

Depends on your assumption on the beginning and ending point of his journey.  You are assuming crossing the entire isthmus, but others have suggested the ending point as a political boundary rather than a physical one.  

 

Sorry, but don't have the reference or details.

I have heard this theory quite a bit and I dont really buy into it. The text states the line separating the land desolation from bountiful diatance wise between the sea on the west and the sea on the east being a day and a half journey.

The "narrow pass" and "narrow pass" are the same land feature. Only one verse nails this narrow neck running inbetween both seas-

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.

[mrmcplad]

I have heard this theory quite a bit and I dont really buy into it. The text states the line separating the land desolation from bountiful diatance wise between the sea on the west and the sea on the east being a day and a half journey.

The "narrow pass" and "narrow pass" are the same land feature. Only one verse nails this narrow neck running inbetween both seas-

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.

 

You read the phrase "on the west and on the east" as a description of which seas Mormon is talking about. So the narrow pass leads by two seas, even though the singular "sea" is used?

 

Have you considered the possibility that the phrase could mean something different? One possibility is that the narrow pass traversed an east-west distance, adjacent to only one sea.

 

One of the major problems that comes from equating the narrow neck to the narrow pass (and making it so narrow you can see both seas simultaneously) is the Limhite travel party who wandered into Jaredite lands and believed they were in Zarahemla the whole time. The view of two oceans would have tipped them off that they had taken a wrong turn. How would you respond to that?

 

Anyone who takes up discussing Book of Mormon lands geography should first read "Mormon's Map" by John Sorenson. It is purely an internal map of Nephite, Lamanite, and Jaredite lands -- no attempt is made to fit it to a real-world location, and I think it's a very valuable tool in assessing models. He examines the shape of the land and topology of course. And also distances & directions, climate, ecology, economy, population, distribution of civilization, and more. Sorenson is a professional anthropologist and a brilliant mind, and has spent his entire life studying these issues.

 

Here is his analysis of the "day and a half's journey for a Nephite":

 

"Alma 22:32 speaks directly about the narrow neck, but the meaning of its statement, a "day and a half's journey for a Nephite," is unclear. Both this phrase and "a day's journey for a Nephite" (Helaman 4:7) are expressions that reach us through Mormon, a military man, and may reflect some standard measure of distance familiar among Nephite military people. Furthermore, several researchers have observed that the phrase in Alma 22:32, "from the east to the west sea," allows the interpretation that the journey was measured some point short of the actual east sea shore. After all, it would be foolish for the Nephite to waste resources defending a line that reached the sea to the east of the narrow pass, since their enemies could not reach the land northward other than via the pass (see Mormon 3:5-6; 4:4, 19)."

 

"In any case, the actual distance a person can go in one day varies greatly according to setting, individual capacity, and mode of travel. Persons have been known to travel over one hundred miles per day by foot with some regularity, and of course if one went down a river in a canoe, an even greater distance could be traveled. Such variables prevent us from establishing a definite length for the "line" at the neck, but a range of figures between 60 and 125 miles can be argued as reasonable for the "day and a half's journey.""

[Gervin]

Persons have been known to travel over one hundred miles per day by foot with some regularity

My feet have requested that I ask if Sorenson provides a citation for this statement or, perhaps, some evidence.

Edited October 18, 2013 by Gervin

[Rob Osborn]

You read the phrase "on the west and on the east" as a description of which seas Mormon is talking about. So the narrow pass leads by two seas, even though the singular "sea" is used?

 

Have you considered the possibility that the phrase could mean something different? One possibility is that the narrow pass traversed an east-west distance, adjacent to only one sea.

 

One of the major problems that comes from equating the narrow neck to the narrow pass (and making it so narrow you can see both seas simultaneously) is the Limhite travel party who wandered into Jaredite lands and believed they were in Zarahemla the whole time. The view of two oceans would have tipped them off that they had taken a wrong turn. How would you respond to that?

 

Anyone who takes up discussing Book of Mormon lands geography should first read "Mormon's Map" by John Sorenson. It is purely an internal map of Nephite, Lamanite, and Jaredite lands -- no attempt is made to fit it to a real-world location, and I think it's a very valuable tool in assessing models. He examines the shape of the land and topology of course. And also distances & directions, climate, ecology, economy, population, distribution of civilization, and more. Sorenson is a professional anthropologist and a brilliant mind, and has spent his entire life studying these issues.

 

Here is his analysis of the "day and a half's journey for a Nephite":

 

"Alma 22:32 speaks directly about the narrow neck, but the meaning of its statement, a "day and a half's journey for a Nephite," is unclear. Both this phrase and "a day's journey for a Nephite" (Helaman 4:7) are expressions that reach us through Mormon, a military man, and may reflect some standard measure of distance familiar among Nephite military people. Furthermore, several researchers have observed that the phrase in Alma 22:32, "from the east to the west sea," allows the interpretation that the journey was measured some point short of the actual east sea shore. After all, it would be foolish for the Nephite to waste resources defending a line that reached the sea to the east of the narrow pass, since their enemies could not reach the land northward other than via the pass (see Mormon 3:5-6; 4:4, 19)."

 

"In any case, the actual distance a person can go in one day varies greatly according to setting, individual capacity, and mode of travel. Persons have been known to travel over one hundred miles per day by foot with some regularity, and of course if one went down a river in a canoe, an even greater distance could be traveled. Such variables prevent us from establishing a definite length for the "line" at the neck, but a range of figures between 60 and 125 miles can be argued as reasonable for the "day and a half's journey.""

The text clearly states the pass, or "narrow neck", had a sea on either side of it. Sorenson makes a weak case by stating the possibility that it wasnt to the sea in the east that was spoken of as their point of defense but then in the same breath states the possibility of a man actually traversing the distance of a 125 miles. So which is it Sorenson? Sorenson, amongst others, wrongly think that the narrow pass was a point inside of the larger narrow neck. In reality they are the same thing- the narrow pass is the narrow neck. Sorenson also believes that Limhis group never knew they were in the narrow neck. I beg to differ. Limhis group had no real clue as to where Zarahemla was or through what lands they had to go through to get there. They got lost.

[mrmcplad]

My feet have requested that I ask if Sorenson provides a citation for this statement or, perhaps, some evidence.

 

He does provide citation in An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon. I don't have my copy handy right now, but Mike Ash references it in this article:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705387187/A-journey-across-the-narrow-neck.html?pg=all

 

Sorenson doesn't rest his case here. He only suggests the long-distance travel (by say, a Nephite military scout) is within the realm of possibility.

 

His main argument for Mesoamerica, incidentally, is based on cities and books (not the shape of the land). Mesoamerica is the only place anywhere in the ancient Americas where you find both cities and writing. The layout of the land doesn't always jive with our preconceived notions (the width of the narrow neck and the tilt of the cardinal directions are particularly vexing for people approaching his model for the first time), but he has found (along with many other scholars) that things that appear difficult at first have reasonable answers.

 

The text clearly states the pass, or "narrow neck", had a sea on either side of it. Sorenson makes a weak case by stating the possibility that it wasnt to the sea in the east that was spoken of as their point of defense but then in the same breath states the possibility of a man actually traversing the distance of a 125 miles. So which is it Sorenson? Sorenson, amongst others, wrongly think that the narrow pass was a point inside of the larger narrow neck. In reality they are the same thing- the narrow pass is the narrow neck. Sorenson also believes that Limhis group never knew they were in the narrow neck. I beg to differ. Limhis group had no real clue as to where Zarahemla was or through what lands they had to go through to get there. They got lost.

 

You believe the Limhites had no idea where to look for the land of Zarahemla, is that right? I would expect such an expedition to fail, and so would they. Two generations of isolation is a long time, but basic navigation information likely survived. King Limhi probably knew that 1) Zarahemla was northward of where they lived, 2) the path to it followed the river Sidon, and 3) the city lay on the west side of Sidon.

[Rob Osborn]

You read the phrase "on the west and on the east" as a description of which seas Mormon is talking about. So the narrow pass leads by two seas, even though the singular "sea" is used?

 

Have you considered the possibility that the phrase could mean something different? One possibility is that the narrow pass traversed an east-west distance, adjacent to only one sea.

 

One of the major problems that comes from equating the narrow neck to the narrow pass (and making it so narrow you can see both seas simultaneously) is the Limhite travel party who wandered into Jaredite lands and believed they were in Zarahemla the whole time. The view of two oceans would have tipped them off that they had taken a wrong turn. How would you respond to that?

 

Anyone who takes up discussing Book of Mormon lands geography should first read "Mormon's Map" by John Sorenson. It is purely an internal map of Nephite, Lamanite, and Jaredite lands -- no attempt is made to fit it to a real-world location, and I think it's a very valuable tool in assessing models. He examines the shape of the land and topology of course. And also distances & directions, climate, ecology, economy, population, distribution of civilization, and more. Sorenson is a professional anthropologist and a brilliant mind, and has spent his entire life studying these issues.

 

Here is his analysis of the "day and a half's journey for a Nephite":

 

"Alma 22:32 speaks directly about the narrow neck, but the meaning of its statement, a "day and a half's journey for a Nephite," is unclear. Both this phrase and "a day's journey for a Nephite" (Helaman 4:7) are expressions that reach us through Mormon, a military man, and may reflect some standard measure of distance familiar among Nephite military people. Furthermore, several researchers have observed that the phrase in Alma 22:32, "from the east to the west sea," allows the interpretation that the journey was measured some point short of the actual east sea shore. After all, it would be foolish for the Nephite to waste resources defending a line that reached the sea to the east of the narrow pass, since their enemies could not reach the land northward other than via the pass (see Mormon 3:5-6; 4:4, 19)."

 

"In any case, the actual distance a person can go in one day varies greatly according to setting, individual capacity, and mode of travel. Persons have been known to travel over one hundred miles per day by foot with some regularity, and of course if one went down a river in a canoe, an even greater distance could be traveled. Such variables prevent us from establishing a definite length for the "line" at the neck, but a range of figures between 60 and 125 miles can be argued as reasonable for the "day and a half's journey.""

The text clearly states the pass, or "narrow neck", had a sea on either side of it. Sorenson makes a weak case by stating the possibility that it wasnt to the sea in the east that was spoken of as their point of defense but then in the same breath states the possibility of a man actually traversing the distance of a 125 miles. So which is it Sorenson? Sorenson, amongst others, wrongly think that the narrow pass was a point inside of the larger narrow neck. In reality they are the same thing- the narrow pass is the narrow neck. Sorenson also believes that Limhis group never knew they were in the narrow neck. I beg to differ. Limhis group had no real clue as to where Zarahemla was or through what lands they had to go through to get there. They got lost.

He does provide citation in An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon. I don't have my copy handy right now, but Mike Ash references it in this article:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705387187/A-journey-across-the-narrow-neck.html?pg=all

 

Sorenson doesn't rest his case here. He only suggests the long-distance travel (by say, a Nephite military scout) is within the realm of possibility.

 

His main argument for Mesoamerica, incidentally, is based on cities and books (not the shape of the land). Mesoamerica is the only place anywhere in the ancient Americas where you find both cities and writing. The layout of the land doesn't always jive with our preconceived notions (the width of the narrow neck and the tilt of the cardinal directions are particularly vexing for people approaching his model for the first time), but he has found (along with many other scholars) that things that appear difficult at first have reasonable answers.

 

 

You believe the Limhites had no idea where to look for the land of Zarahemla, is that right? I would expect such an expedition to fail, and so would they. Two generations of isolation is a long time, but basic navigation information likely survived. King Limhi probably knew that 1) Zarahemla was northward of where they lived, 2) the path to it followed the river Sidon, and 3) the city lay on the west side of Sidon.

One thing we know from the text is that the land of the Jaredites was not close to Zarahemla. This tells me that Limhia group didnt have either correct information or no information at all on the distance from the land of Nephi to Zarahemla. More than likely they also didnt have a clue as to the size and population of Zarahemla. In truth, they probably didnt know much more than it was a society of their fellow brothers some extensive distance northward in some distant land. Whether they had to journey through a narrow neck or not was not known to them just as distance and population were also not known. Limhis group found the remains of a destroyed nation and thought it was Zarahemla. This tells me they didnt know much at all about Zarahemla.

From later times when all the lands were known and divided between Lamanite and Nephite we are told this-

30 And it bordered upon the land which they called Desolation, it being so far northward that it came into the land which had been peopled and been destroyed, of whose bones we have spoken, which was discovered by the people of Zarahemla, it being the place of their first landing. (Alma 22:30)

That verse tells us two things1- the land of the Jaredites was considered "so far northward" from Bountiful which itself was north of Zarahemla. And 2- the people who founded Zarahemla first landed at desolation (Where Limhis group ventured) then got back in their ship and sailed into the land southward and established Zarahemla.

[prismsplay]

The "narrow pass" and "narrow pass" are the same land feature. Only one verse nails this narrow neck running inbetween both seas-

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 "narrow neck" and the "narrow pass" are different features. The "narrow neck" is the feature which separates the "land northward" from the "land southward":

 

Ether 10:20-21:

And they [Jaredites under king Lib] built a great city by the narrow neck of land, by the place where the sea divides the land. And they did preserve the land southward for a wilderness to get game. And the whole face of the land northward was covered with inhabitants.

 

The "narrow pass"  was  narrow enough to be secured by an army:

 

Alma 52:9:

And he [chief captain Moroni] also sent orders unto him [Teancum] that he should fortify the land Bountiful and secure the narrow pass which led into the land northward, lest the Lamanites should obtain that point and should have power to harass them on every side.

 

The narrow neck was not a point that could be defended. Only the narrow pass was a point that could be defended. We have a description of the narrow pass:

 

Alma 50:34:

And it came to pass that they did not head them until they had came to the borders of the land Desolation [in the land northward]. 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.

 

Thus, the narrow pass was a narrow spit of land separated from the main shore of the land northward by waters between the mainland and the spit, so the spit had sea on both sides of it. Thus, it was a point that could be defended by an army.

[Rob Osborn]

The narrow pass is the narrow neck. Access to the beginning of it would be a "point". The land of desolation included the narrow neck.