Cumorah ... Has Time Changed Your Mind?

[cdowis]

Rather expansive reading of the Wentworth letter. Inconsistent with contemporaneous statements in JSP.

 

 

It goes back to the issue of whether JS really knew the exact location of BOM events.  He had alot on his plate, running the church, dealing with persecution, major doctrinal issues, building and running a Zion society, etc etc.  It is obvious to me, since BOM geography was not a doctrinal issue, he was satisfied with broad generalizations ("this country", "America") and had not really settled down to investigate this question in detail.  It was never settled in his lifetime, and left it to others.  Almost nothing was known about mesoamerica in JS's time, and so there was not enough information for him to come to a firm conclusion.

 

Quite frankly, the "brethren" allowed themselves to take the easy way to simply to follow the assumption that the NY Hill Cumorah was the same as the one in the BOM.  We now have the tools to deal with this issue with scientific rigor.

 

It is my view that, similar to the translation of the BOA papyri, the Lord has left us to figure it out ourselves rather than answering every trivial question with a revelation that can be resolved with thoughtful investigation.

 

Clearly you disagree with me.

Edited February 19, 2014 by cdowis

[Bob Crockett]

True. Back to my appeals to authority.

[Tiki]

 

Many have mischaracterized the LGT.  This theory does not preclude a hemispheric model.  See the references to the land northward.

 

 

That's not correct. Dr. Sorenson has said otherwise.

 

See minute 2:40 in this YouTube video:  

"He [Nibley] was completely mistaken. At one point in his life, where he thought Jaredites went all over North America, and so on, there’s nothing to that at all. It does not fit the book."

[Tiki]

It goes back to the issue of whether JS really knew the exact location of BOM events.  He had alot on his plate, running the church, dealing with persecution, major doctrinal issues, building and running a Zion society, etc etc.  It is obvious to me, since BOM geography was not a doctrinal issue, he was satisfied with broad generalizations ("this country", "America") and had not really settled down to investigate this question in detail.  It was never settled in his lifetime, and left it to others.  Almost nothing was known about mesoamerica in JS's time, and so there was not enough information for him to come to a firm conclusion.

 

Quite frankly, the "brethren" allowed themselves to take the easy way to simply to follow the assumption that the NY Hill Cumorah was the same as the one in the BOM.  We now have the tools to deal with this issue with scientific rigor.

 

 

You're not correct. The Joseph Smith papers web site contains writings that point out the brethern identified the Hill of Cumorah to be in New York State. It's mentioned in another thread on this board. You're behind the learning curve.

 

John Lloyd Stephens also used "this country" in his book "Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas and Yucatan" from which Dr. Sorenson claims Joseph Smith learned the location of the geography of the Book of Mormon.

See page 98 of Stephen's book, Volume I of the same.

 

Stephens wrote:

 

"In our own country the opening of forests and the discovery of tumuli or mounds and fortifications extending in ranges from the lakes through the valleys of the Ohio and Mississippi mummies in a cave in Kentucky the inscription on the rock at Dighton supposed to be in Phoenician characters and the ruins of walls and a great city in Arkansas and Wisconsin Territory had suggested wild and wandering ideas in regard to the first peopling of this country and the strong belief that powerful and populous nations had occupied it and had passed away whose histories are entirely unknown. The same evidences continue in Texas and in Mexico they assume a still more definite form."

 

http://books.google.com/books?id=RFpCAAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22John+Lloyd+Stephens%22&source=bl&ots=6403hayVPi&sig=1n7Fqr2PAuuweNHawvPGzBpk9lM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=uMgVUI2WHYP69QTljoHoCQ&ved=0CFQQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=arkansas&f=false

 

If John Lloyd Stephens could have written "this country" referring to then the United States, why could not the Prophet Joseph Smith?

Edited February 23, 2014 by Tiki

[cdowis]

You're not correct. The Joseph Smith papers web site contains writings that point out the brethern identified the Hill of Cumorah to be in New York State.

 

The "brethren"  were mistaken in their assumption that the hill they called "Cumorah" in NY was the same as the hill mentioned in the BOM. 

 

snip

If John Lloyd Stephens could have written "this country" referring to then the United States, why could not the Prophet Joseph Smith?

 

Of course.  The BOM does indeed refer to the United States.  It was called the "land northward" and there is a record of a few events among the Nephites (and Lamanites) in that area.

Edited February 23, 2014 by cdowis

[Bob Crockett]

The "brethren" were mistaken in their assumption that the hill they called "Cumorah" in NY was the same as the hill mentioned in the BOM.

]

Yes. That is where the LGT leads. Although I don't think it goes so far as put the Brethren in sarcastic quotes. I just think that LGT theorists say that the Brethren are not always right. But in response one must look at indicia of reliability.

Is a statement by the Brethren directly on point?

Is the teaching uttered by many more than one man, and in official settings all?

Is it contained in the official History?

Is it endorsed or stated by Joseph Smith?

Is it stated in general conference?

Is it published on the church's website?

Does the matter tend to follow the Brethren collectively or, by contrast, do its critics criticize the Brethren or rely upon unpublished or unofficial anecdotal exceptions?

 

Does the matter tend to rely upon man's wisdom or the teachings of the Spirit?

So, where does the LGT fall or fail here?

Edited February 23, 2014 by Bob Crockett

[Tiki]

 

You're not correct. The Joseph Smith papers web site contains writings that point out the brethern identified the Hill of Cumorah to be in New York State.

 

The "brethren"  were mistaken in their assumption that the hill they called "Cumorah" in NY was the same as the hill mentioned in the BOM. 

 

snip

If John Lloyd Stephens could have written "this country" referring to then the United States, why could not the Prophet Joseph Smith?

 

Of course.  The BOM does indeed refer to the United States.  It was called the "land northward" and there is a record of a few events among the Nephites (and Lamanites) in that area.

 

 

The Brethren were not mistaken. Like I mentioned, the information is on the JosephSmithPapers.org site at this link http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSummary/history-1834-1836?dm=image-and-text&zm=zoom-inner&tm=expanded&p=95&s=undefined&sm=none

 

P. 95 Below is a screen shot as an attached file, circled in red "the hill Cumorah."

 

The false notion perpetuated by those who promote the LGT are the ones claiming the Brethren were mistaken.

Those promoting the LGT are mistaken.

 

Edited February 23, 2014 by Tiki

[Tiki]

 

 

If John Lloyd Stephens could have written "this country" referring to then the United States, why could not the Prophet Joseph Smith?

 

Of course.  The BOM does indeed refer to the United States.  It was called the "land northward" and there is a record of a few events among the Nephites (and Lamanites) in that area.

 

 

Joseph Smith stated in the Wentworth Letter, from which we have our 13 Articles of Faith, which one can read in the July 2002 Ensign:  https://www.lds.org/ensign/2002/07/the-wentworth-letter?lang=eng

 

"I was also informed concerning the aboriginal inhabitants of this country, and shown who they were, where they came from, a brief sketch of their origin, their progress, their civilization, their laws, their governments. And all this happened on this continent...The remnant are the Indians that now inhabit this country." [emphasis in bold]

 

The LGT gets hung up on this quote, because the LGT places the Book of Mormon events in a 500 x 200 mile area in Mesoamerica - despite what our friend CDOWIS claims.

Dr. John Sorenson has claimed that North America does not fit the Book of Mormon and Dr. Sorenson has been credited with promoting the LGT through his many publications.

 

John Lloyd Stephens, was a popular author of books of travel and also used the same phrase "this country"  in reference to the then United States. (See my post #129 above)

John Lloyd Stephens wrote a travel book about Mesoamerica and a copy was given to the Prophet Joseph Smith. Those who promote the LGT claim the Prophet, Seer and Revelator Joseph Smith, Jr., learned the geography of the Book of Mormon from this travel book - which was a very popular book in its day. (Similar in popularity to today's National Geographic magazine.)

 

This book was even given rave reviews by Mr. Edgar Allan Poe, who at the time was a newspaper editor.  See: http://www.eapoe.org/works/criticsm/gm41083.htm

 

Those promoting the LGT claim Joseph Smith's use of "this country" in the Wentworth Letter, does not refer to the then United States, because it all occurred in a 500 x 200 mile area in Mesoamerica. This despite the fact that Stephens used the same phrase in his book to refer to the then United States, from which book allegedly the Prophet Joseph Smith learned the geography of the Book of Mormon.

 

[LGT = Limited Geography Theory]

Edited February 24, 2014 by Tiki

[cdowis]

I have already responded to your interpretation of the Wentworth letter, and I am not interested in repeating myself.

 

"The LGT gets hung up on this quote, because the LGT places the Book of Mormon events in a 500 x 200 mile area in Mesoamerica"

 

CFR that the LGT precludes the United States as the land northward.   I assume that you can find an absolute, authoritative source for what the LGT does or does not say -- or is the "the LGT places..." is just your interpretation of that theory.  I am not "hung up" on that statement at all.

Edited February 24, 2014 by cdowis

[Bob Crockett]

CFR that the LGT precludes the United States as the land northward.   I assume that you can find an absolute, authoritative source for what the LGT does or does not say -- or is the "the LGT places..." is just your interpretation of that theory.  I am not "hung up" on that statement at all.

 

"Absolute, authoritative" is an oxymoron for the LGT, but Dr. Sorenson plainly defines the land northward as a heavily populated area in the Mexican states of Veracruz, Oaxaca and Guerrero and "limited adjacent areas."  Codex, at 22.

 

As Dr. Hamblin points out in one of his publications, one of the crucial differences between the LGT and the Hemispheric model is that the former limits the "land northward" to parts of Mexico, and the latter includes North America in the model. 

 

Perhaps you might be persuaded of the intrinsic weakness of the LGT model if you read Sorenson's An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon.  I was generally sympathetic to the LGT until I read that book, and read it several times and used it in a local study group of folks who agreed with the theory.  I had  a hard time seeing how a legitimate anthroplogist would put his name to such writing and such a theory.  Again, the LGT is sheer speculation which depends upon vague references, any one of which if interpreted incorrectly would completely viscerate Dr. Sorenson's model.

 

I don't claim any particular credentials to make these statements.  I am not a Meldrumite, or any "ite."  But I have developed a working theory that the LGT's genesis is a lack of belief in the claims of the Book of Mormon.  Because so much appears to be lacking in comparison between the Americas and the Book of Mormon account, doubters have yielded to this dissonance by defining the Book of Mormon lands to be so small that what bothers the doubters just does somewhere else.  It is akin to saying that the flood account is consistent with science if one merely limits the "world" to the lands now submeged in the Mediterranean sea.

 

I, however, believe that the Book of Mormon account is generally consistent with what is known about the Americas, language and culture diffusion, the mound culture and South American Indian culture, iron and copper.  Perhaps horses don't quite fit the model I hold, but there are unexplained occurrences of horses which Dr. Sorenson references in Codex.  

 

I further assert that the LGT theorists here present very weak arguments, such as the "appeal to authority" fallacy.  But, when it comes to Book of Mormon geography, the only consideration is what authorities say about it. The appeal to authority fallacy applies only to appeals to authorities who do not have expertise, such as having a professional football player endorse a Honda. The "fallacy" does not apply to an appeal to a person who is an authority in the subject matter, and in the case of revelatory material, the Brethren are ipso facto authorities if not the eartly sources of such information.

Edited February 24, 2014 by Bob Crockett

[Tiki]

I have already responded to your interpretation of the Wentworth letter, and I am not interested in repeating myself.

 

"The LGT gets hung up on this quote, because the LGT places the Book of Mormon events in a 500 x 200 mile area in Mesoamerica"

 

CFR that the LGT precludes the United States as the land northward.   I assume that you can find an absolute, authoritative source for what the LGT does or does not say -- or is the "the LGT places..." is just your interpretation of that theory.  I am not "hung up" on that statement at all.

Why do I have to repeat myself?

See my post #128. Dr. Sorenson has so stated that North America does not fit the Book of Mormon.

And the Joseph Smith papers indicate the Hill Cumorah is in New York.

Or maybe your LGT changes according to the winds, the waves, the drifting of the sands and the teaching and the whims of men or it depends on how many mocking fingers of derision are pointed its way from the great and spacious building?

[rodheadlee]

Why do you have to put the LGT folks in a box?

[Bob Crockett]

Good pun.

[Tiki]

Why do you have to put the LGT folks in a box?

 

I have already responded to your interpretation of the Wentworth letter, and I am not interested in repeating myself.

 

"The LGT gets hung up on this quote, because the LGT places the Book of Mormon events in a 500 x 200 mile area in Mesoamerica"

 

CFR that the LGT precludes the United States as the land northward.   I assume that you can find an absolute, authoritative source for what the LGT does or does not say -- or is the "the LGT places..." is just your interpretation of that theory.  I am not "hung up" on that statement at all.

 

Here it is, 500 x 200 miles. I'm surprised the LGT proponents are not aware of it:

 

"In Mormon’s mind, the scene of the Nephite, Lamanite, and Jaredite activities was of limited size. Main lands, minor lands, mountain ranges, plains, valleys, rivers, and oceans are all referred to in a manner that indicates that Mormon not only knew about those geographical elements from the records of his ancestors, but he knew much of the scene personally and intimately. The dimensions are small, although hardly tiny. The promised land in which the Nephites’ history played out was on the order of five hundred miles long and over two hundred miles wide, according to Mormon’s mental map."  http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1119&index=1

"What may startle some about this situation is that most of what Joseph Smith said or implied about geography indicates that he did not understand or was ambiguous about the fact, as it turns out, that Mesoamerica was the particular setting for Nephite history. Until he encountered the Stephens's book, ...."   http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1099&index=19

 

Note also how the author claims he knows the Prophet Mormon's Mental Map.

But when he knows the mind of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Jr., he claims Joseph Smith did not understand.  - What consistent logic from a scholar!

 

This why folks such as cdowis claim the "brethren" didn't know. They have to claim this to bolster the LGT. They have to remove Joseph Smith.

Thus they criticize Joseph Smith's statements about geography, etc., including their "interpretation" of the Wentworth Letter.

 

This is the keystone of the LGT - LDS Scholars know, the Prophets did not.

 

Did this answer your questions & CFR?

Edited February 25, 2014 by Tiki

[cdowis]

 Neither article addresses the issue of the land northward, nor indicates that it is in mesoamerica.  They merely repeat where the narrative of the main BOM text takes place -- Alma's journey, the land of Zarahemla, etc.

 

Bluntly, I think you would agree with me that this is a waste of time for both of us, and we have nothing further to discuss. 

[Bob Crockett]

Untrue. My two cites to Sorenson and Hamblin explicitly refer to the land northward. The LGT does not include anything north off southern and central Mexican states.

Have you Sorenson's works?

[cdowis]

Untrue. My two cites to Sorenson and Hamblin explicitly refer to the land northward. The LGT does not include anything north off southern and central Mexican states.

Have you Sorenson's works?

 

Seems you are suffering from a logical fallacy here ==>

These two cities in Mexico are in the land northward

Therefore the land northward does not extend to North America.

 

May I suggest you give some attention to basic logic.

 

I have not read his book yet, but , specifically, please give us the reference which explicitly EXCLUDES North America from the land northward.  His treatment of the Zeniff statement by JS indicating that he was a Nephite, living in North America, or, according to my interpretation of the LGT, the land northward.

Edited February 25, 2014 by cdowis

[rodheadlee]

 

 

Did this answer your questions & CFR?

No, it doesn't change the fact that I'm free to believe what ever form of LGT that my little P brain can come up with.

[Bob Crockett]

Seems you are suffering from a logical fallacy here ==>

These two cities in Mexico are in the land northward

Therefore the land northward does not extend to North America.

May I suggest you give some attention to basic logic.

I have not read his book yet, but , specifically, please give us the reference which explicitly EXCLUDES North America from the land northward. His treatment of the Zeniff statement by JS indicating that he was a Nephite, living in North America, or, according to my interpretation of the LGT, the land northward.

You asked for specific exclusion. My Sorenson and Hamblin cites above do it. I really can do no better.

I certainly applaud you for rejecting a key component of the LGT. I too would reject any theory that would exclude North America north of Mexico from "the land northward". Like I have said before, any such theory is contrary to the Book of Mormon. You seem to sense that.

Edited February 25, 2014 by Bob Crockett

[jkwilliams]

You asked for specific exclusion. My Sorenson and Hamblin cites above do it. I really can do no better.

I certainly applaud you for rejecting a key component of the LGT. I too would reject any theory that would exclude North America north of Mexico from "the land northward". Like I have said before, any such theory is contrary to the Book of Mormon. You seem to sense that.

 

The whole point of the LGT is to situate the action of the Book of Mormon in a limited geographical area. The LGT is a specific rejection of the hemispheric model and thus a denial that any of the action took place in North America. I've been around apologetics for a long time, but this is the first time I've ever heard anyone say that the LGT doesn't preclude a hemispheric/North American setting.

 

We don't agree all that often, Bob, but you're spot on here. BTW, why on earth are you up so early, my friend?

Edited February 25, 2014 by jkwilliams

[cdowis]

You asked for specific exclusion. My Sorenson and Hamblin cites above do it. I really can do no better.

 

Got it.  You stand firmly behind your reasoning by logical fallacy and can "do no better".

[cdowis]

jkwilliams,

 

You need to keep up.  It has been mentioned by myself several times in this forum.   For example, I believe that I was the first to deal with the Zelph issue in the context of LGT. 

 

And, yes, I am not a published author, but the world of apologetics goes beyond the formal scholars. 

 

FWIW,  I have been in apologetics for a very long time myself. And you need to go beyond what you hear others say.  "Nobody told me that" is a sorry excuse for someone of your experience.  You need to add to the body of knowledge rather than being spoonfed.

Edited February 25, 2014 by cdowis

[rodheadlee]

The whole point of the LGT is to situate the action of the Book of Mormon in a limited geographical area. The LGT is a specific rejection of the hemispheric model and thus a denial that any of the action took place in North America. I've been around apologetics for a long time, but this is the first time I've ever heard anyone say that the LGT doesn't preclude a hemispheric/North American setting.

 

We don't agree all that often, Bob, but you're spot on here. BTW, why on earth are you up so early, my friend?

I'm sorry but Mexico is in North America.

[jkwilliams]

jkwilliams,

 

You need to keep up.  It has been mentioned by myself several times in this forum.   For example, I believe that I was the first to deal with the Zelph issue in the context of LGT. 

 

And, yes, I am not a published author, but the world of apologetics goes beyond the formal scholars. 

 

FWIW,  I have been in apologetics for a very long time myself. And you need to go beyond what you hear others say.  "Nobody told me that" is a sorry excuse for someone of your experience.  You need to add to the body of knowledge rather than being spoonfed.

 

Everyone I know who believes in the LGT--except you, apparently--waves off Zelph as some kind of offhand joke by Joseph Smith that is irrelevant to Book of Mormon geography. As I said, the LGT has always been an attempt to reduce the size of the Book of Mormon geographical footprint to one that accords with the descriptions in the text. It's "limited" because it specifically excludes a footprint larger than that relatively small area in the Yucatan and Guatemala. If the LGT allowed for a footprint the size of Central and North America, it would no longer be "limited" in any meaningful sense.

 

It seems all you have to respond with is an insult, so I have no reason to take your position seriously.

[jkwilliams]

I'm sorry but Mexico is in North America.

 

I am talking about where the LGT puts Book of Mormon geography, and that is in the Yucatan and Guatemala. Is Mexico considered to be in North America? Sure, but cdowis is talking about all of North America, at least to the central plains of the US. I'm not sure how straining at a definition supports the idea that the LGT allows for Nephites and Lamanites in Illinois.