New Book Of Mormon Geography Model

[hagoth7]

...Interestingly enough, the Nephites only find the bones of the Jaredites but fail to mention any traces of their cities or spacious buildings....

On a similar note, it has been estimated that around 5 million people lived in the European region of Germania during the 1st century BC.

The ancient region of Germania was about 1/4 the size of modern Mexico.

In the case of Germania, there is also no evidence of big cities, making the large population for that region/people an interesting parallel.

But if such an outcome was viable in northern Europe, who is to say it wasn't viable elsewhere, such as in the Americas?

[Robert F. Smith]

..........................................................  

 

I am not aware of any evidence of non-Book of Mormon people living in America between

1000 BC to 400 AD who were aware of the existence of Book of Mormon people in America

during that time.

............................................................   

The real question, Jim, is what sort of evidence you would expect to find if Book of Mormon peoples lived in the Americas during that time period (or more correctly, from 3100 BC to about 420 AD)??  In addition, you might want to ask what sort of evidence would indicate the absence of BofM peoples anywhere in the Americas.  Asked either way, is the question even answerable by any sort of research program?  If so, what kind of program could be applied to answer the question pro or con?

[Brant Gardner]

It's easy to speculate that the hopewell Indians are the Nephites because their technology, timeline, advanced trade system, geographic location and DNA from Isreal matches the Book of Mormon historical record.

It's easy to speculate that the adena are the Jaredites because the end of the adena culture is a close match and adena technology and geographic location is a good match for the historical record of the Book of Mormon.

Well, not really. The times are reasonably good, except that some scholars are debating whether there was any distinction at all between the Adena and the Hopewell. The Book of Mormon requires a pretty firm geographic separation between Jaredites and Nephites, with Nephites not moving into Jaredite territory very late. The Hopewell and Adena peoples were in the same places, with no real distinction in location. That is the reason that there might not be a cultural division. It may be the simple change over time in the same people.

 

The DNA argument is popular among some LDS, but it is the result of mistaken readings (and sometimes intentionally ignored parts of th the reading) of the scientific literature. 

 

The geographic argument is really only acceptable if you accept it without actually examining it. For example, in the geography BOMGeography espouses, he/she suggests multiple seas. However, there is no usable west sea for the land of Nephi. The most important textual description of the west sea comes during a description of geography based in the land of Nephi.

 

So, no, it isn't very easy at all.

[Brant Gardner]

And Mesoamerica is not the Land of Promise described in the Book of Mormon. To this day people are leaving it to get to America.

 

I find this a fascinating defense of a geography that refers to the Book of Mormon. It suggests that the promises given to people 2,500 years ago were not fulfilled until some 2,400 years later. God gave the Book of Mormon people a promised land that only fulfills its promise 1,500 years after there are no Nephites.

 

That doesn't make a lot of sense. During Book of Mormon times, why would North America have been considered interesting at all? It wasn't a great nation. There weren't even the five nations at that time. 

 

Although I do understand the value of the Book of Mormon for our day, I have to believe that it had value for the people who lived it as well. During Book of Mormon times, North America was hardly favored above any other land. Shouldn't the people who were given the promise have had some benefit from it?

[telnetd]

The real question, Jim, is what sort of evidence you would expect to find if Book of Mormon peoples lived in the Americas during that time period (or more correctly, from 3100 BC to about 420 AD)??  In addition, you might want to ask what sort of evidence would indicate the absence of BofM peoples anywhere in the Americas.  Asked either way, is the question even answerable by any sort of research program?  If so, what kind of program could be applied to answer the question pro or con?

 

Hi Jim, Robert,

 

I do not think the question is answerable by any sort of research program unless archaeology

can tell the difference between BOM people and non-BOM.  And one cannot provide evidence

that the Nephites ever came to a land called America.  Either the BOM is a historical account

or its just a story made up of many parts copied from the Bible) in my opinion.  I have seen

some references of past LDS leaders teaching the hill Cumorah is the one and only in New

York State, but I do not believe this is true teaching.

 

Trying to prove or disprove BOM archaeology is futile in my opinion but it is interetng to see

the material posted on the forum to the links.  To all the posters out there. let's talk with

each other, not over each other... keep the peace :-)

 

Gail

[Bomgeography]

As a SE Asia model convert, I can sympathize. 

 

But I'm not so familiar with all the North American models so I need someone to spell out to me how this one is different. What is "new" about it?

This is different than every single model in that I'm proposing that there are six seas not four. I believe the West Sea and the Sea west mentioned in the Book of Mormon are two different seas. I believe that the East Sea and Sea East are two different seas. Also another point that is different from all the Book of Mormon geography models is that narrow neck and narrow passage assumed to be one geographic feature are actually two different geographic features. This make up works well, in that the hopewell landscape involves six main bodies of water. This model uses six bodies of water also. A Sea East, East Sea, West Sea, Sea West, North Sea, and South Sea.

See the geography layout in link below

https://mormonbandwagon.com/dave/tribe-manasseh-5/

[Bobbieaware]

There are six sections not one.https://mormonbandwagon.com/dave/tribe-manasseh-5/https://mormonbandwagon.com/dave/tribe-manasseh-4/https://mormonbandwagon.com/dave/tribe-manasseh-3/https://mormonbandwagon.com/dave/tribe-manasseh-2/https://mormonbandwagon.com/dave/tribe-manasseh-1/https://mormonbandwagon.com/dave/tribe-manasseh-6/

While it's my practice to keep an open mind on LDS issues that aren't settled, I must say for me the most compelling and convincing single piece of evidence in the whole Book of Mormon geography debate is that we (those of us who believe) know at least one thing for sure, and that is that the prophet Moroni -- along with the heavy gold alloy plates, the large metal breastplate, and urim and thummim he carried will him -- spent a significant amount of time in what is now known as the United States -- unless he and the artifacts he carried were transported by supernatural means to what is now present-day New York State. Think of it: we know for certain a great Nephite prophet actually walked uopn and buried the sacred Nephite record and artifacts in the same soil the prophet Joseph Smith walked upon some 14 centuries later! So we know for certain at least one Nephite, and the sacred Nephite records and artifacts entrusted to his care, were right here in what is now the heartland of the United States. But conversely, there is no such undeniable evidence that a Nephite ever walked upon the soil of present-day Mexico, Central America or South America. But even though I find this point of fact compelling -- especially when one applies the test of Occam's Razor -- I will try to keep an open mind until the day Lord finally unfolds this great mystery to our view.

Edited October 31, 2015 by Bobbieaware

[Bomgeography]

Well, not really. The times are reasonably good, except that some scholars are debating whether there was any distinction at all between the Adena and the Hopewell. The Book of Mormon requires a pretty firm geographic separation between Jaredites and Nephites, with Nephites not moving into Jaredite territory very late. The Hopewell and Adena peoples were in the same places, with no real distinction in location. That is the reason that there might not be a cultural division. It may be the simple change over time in the same people.

 

The DNA argument is popular among some LDS, but it is the result of mistaken readings (and sometimes intentionally ignored parts of th the reading) of the scientific literature. 

 

The geographic argument is really only acceptable if you accept it without actually examining it. For example, in the geography BOMGeography espouses, he/she suggests multiple seas. However, there is no usable west sea for the land of Nephi. The most important textual description of the west sea comes during a description of geography based in the land of Nephi.

 

So, no, it isn't very easy at all.

The Hopewell and Adena are two distinct cultures. The oldest Hopewell site is dated to 500BC and is along the Gulf of Mexico. The Adena date past 1000BC and are located in the Great Lakes. The end of the Adena Culture happened around 200BC. The end of the Hopewell ended between 400-500AD.

It is believed that Adena did merge with the Hopewell but that is only because Hopewell style artifacts are found on Adena sites with some Adena sites completely abandoned. This matches up well with the Book of Mormon because the Jaredites would have completely abandoned their sites. There is no reason why the Nephites would not have used their sites as their own as they were left abandoned. We also know that the Jaredite civilization ended sometime around 200 BC a good fit.

I think the archaeologist are getting the Mulekites and the Nephites confused. The Mulekites left the Middle East around the same time as Lehi but the Mulekites were in the same area as the Jaredites. The Mulekites most likely were the first to use abandoned Adena/Jaredite sites.

The Mulekites became Nephites having King Mosiah as their King and learning their language.

[Rajah Manchou]

Also another point that is different from all the Book of Mormon geography models is that narrow neck and narrow passage assumed to be one geographic feature are actually two different geographic features. 

Even though I'm unconvinced about a North American setting for the Book of Mormon, I do think your map makes the most sense of those that I have looked at. 

I went 35 years of my life not understanding or relating to the Book of Mormon at all because I had no spatial reference point. It wasn't until I developed an interest in BOM geography, and I tried to place it in a location that I was most familiar with, that the text started to come to life. Even I have settled on the most unlikely fringe geography (everyone seems to get a good chuckly out of the SE Asian model) it has done more than anything else to help me understand the characters and narratives. 

It seems you've put a lot of thought and dedication into this geography, and I think that is half the point. Nice work

 

[Bomgeography]

Even though I'm unconvinced about a North American setting for the Book of Mormon, I do think your map makes the most sense of those that I have looked at. 

I went 35 years of my life not understanding or relating to the Book of Mormon at all because I had no spatial reference point. It wasn't until I developed an interest in BOM geography, and I tried to place it in a location that I was most familiar with, that the text started to come to life. Even I have settled on the most unlikely fringe geography (everyone seems to get a good chuckly out of the SE Asian model) it has done more than anything else to help me understand the characters and narratives. 

It seems you've put a lot of thought and dedication into this geography, and I think that is half the point. Nice work

Thanks Rajah as stated before I have spent a lot of time and effort on this. Working on this also made me study and understand the Book of Mormon a lot better than before I started this.

[hagoth7]

I find this a fascinating defense of a geography that refers to the Book of Mormon. It suggests that the promises given to people 2,500 years ago were not fulfilled until some 2,400 years later. God gave the Book of Mormon people a promised land that only fulfills its promise 1,500 years after there are no Nephites.

 

That doesn't make a lot of sense...Shouldn't the people who were given the promise have had some benefit from it?

It makes good sense if you simply drop the claim that there are no Nephites.

Edited November 1, 2015 by hagoth7

[Robert F. Smith]

...............................................

.......................................Think of it: we know for certain a great Nephite prophet actually walked uopn and buried the sacred Nephite record and artifacts in the same soil the prophet Joseph Smith walked upon some 14 centuries later! So we know for certain at least one Nephite, and the sacred Nephite records and artifacts entrusted to his care, were right here in what is now the heartland of the United States. But conversely, there is no such undeniable evidence that a Nephite ever walked upon the soil of present-day Mexico, Central America or South America. But even though I find this point of fact compelling -- especially when one applies the test of Occam's Razor -- I will try to keep an open mind until the day Lord finally unfolds this great mystery to our view.

Yes, and we have several actual accounts of shipwrecked explorers who walked across North America centuries ago -- taking less time than Moroni did -- and who wrote about it.

[Calm]

It makes good sense if you simply drop the claim that there are no Nephites.

No, he means that after the Nephites are destroyed in 400 AD, it takes about another 1500 years to become the land of promise if that land of promise is the USA with its freedoms, etc.

[hagoth7]

No, he means that after the Nephites are destroyed in 400 AD, it takes about another 1500 years to become the land of promise if that land of promise is the USA with its freedoms, etc.

Thanks. I actually understood what he meant.

[Calm]

Okay...then what was your point...that there are Nephites now or that something in the civilization back then still holds for the US while not being available anywhere else in the Americas?

[Anijen]

Bomgeography, This sounds good, great in fact. You have sold me on the location of the Book of Mormon, until that is, I actually study and apply some anthropology and archaeology to the theory. Throw in some LDS history and some other semi-history (Josephs map of Moroni's travels) and it all falls apart. But I give you an A for effort and passion.

[hagoth7]

Okay...then what was your point...that there are Nephites now or that something in the civilization back then still holds for the US while not being available anywhere else in the Americas?

My point is that the promise applied back then. And that the promise also applies today. Wherever one happens to believe the Nephite land(s) of promise are.

 

In my view, it's incorrect to suggest that the promise was completely fulfilled over a thousand years ago - and is no longer in force.

 

And my additional point, while on that thought, is that there are Nephites (and Lamanites, etc.) now - to whom that promise applies.

 

You said "[Grant] means that after the Nephites are destroyed in 400 AD, it takes another 1500 years to become the land of promise if that land of promise is the USA..." If we can set aside the argument about whether it's the USA or not. What I simply  mean is that just as Palestine was and still is the land of promise for many of Abraham's descendants, I believe Nephite/Lehite lands were and still are their lands of promise. Or, as Lehi put it, "...we have obtained a land of promise, a land which is choice above all other lands; a land which the Lord God hath covenanted with me should be a land for the inheritance of my seed.Yea, the Lord hath covenanted this land unto me, and to my children forever..."

 

I'll decline to comment further on where I believe such lands are, since the official church stance is that we have no revealed Nephite geography, and since such a discussion would go beyond the scope of the OP.

Edited November 1, 2015 by hagoth7

[Bobbieaware]

My point is that the promise applied back then. And that the promise also applies today. Wherever one happens to believe the Nephite land(s) of promise are.

In my view, it's incorrect to suggest that the promise was completely fulfilled over a thousand years ago - and is no longer in force.

And my additional point, while on that thought, is that there are Nephites (and Lamanites, etc.) now - to whom that promise applies.

You said "[Grant] means that after the Nephites are destroyed in 400 AD, it takes another 1500 years to become the land of promise if that land of promise is the USA..." If we can set aside the argument about whether it's the USA or not. What I simply mean is that just as Palestine was and still is the land of promise for many of Abraham's descendants, I believe Nephite/Lehite lands were and still are their lands of promise. Or, as Lehi put it, "...we have obtained a land of promise, a land which is choice above all other lands; a land which the Lord God hath covenanted with me should be a land for the inheritance of my seed.Yea, the Lord hath covenanted this land unto me, and to my children forever..."

I'll decline to comment further on where I believe such lands are, since the official church stance is that we have no revealed Nephite geography, and since such a discussion would go beyond the scope of the OP.

I agree. And why should there be any confusion on this point? The Book of Mormon makes it quite clear the American promised land that was first inhabited by the Jaredites and then by the Nephites (wherever that land is finally revealed to be) was a land of promise BEFORE the Jaredites and the Nephites ever arrived. The Lord consecrated the American promised land TO STAND as a covenant land of promise continually, whether or not any of his righteous covenant people are occupying the promised land at any given point in time. The following verse from the Book of Mormon makes this point very clear:

10 And it came to pass that I looked and beheld many waters; and they divided the Gentiles from the seed of my brethren.

11 And it came to pass that the angel said unto me: Behold the wrath of God is upon the seed of thy brethren.

12 And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, WHO WERE IN THE PROMISED LAND. (1 Nephi 13)

So in verse 12 the promised land is still called the promised land even though the Church of Christ was not upon the land at that time.

Edited November 1, 2015 by Bobbieaware

[Rajah Manchou]

The Book of Mormon makes it quite clear the American promised land that was first inhabited by the Jaredites and then by the Nephites (wherever that land is finally revealed to be) was a land of promise BEFORE the Jaredites and the Nephites ever arrived. The Lord consecrated the American promised land TO STAND as a covenant land of promise continually, whether or not any of his righteous covenant people are occupying the promised land at any given point in time. 

Just want to point out that the Book of Mormon text never states that the Promised Land was American. Things that we today call continents, or modern nations and governments with shifting borders, are never mentioned in the Book of Mormon. 

The only macro (zoomed out) geographical reference offered is in 2 Nephi 10:20 which states that they were "upon an isle of the sea" and that there were other islands that were already inhabited by Israelites. The text also claims that "the land of Nephi and the land of Zarahemla were nearly surrounded by water". (Alma 22:32)

As much as I'd like the Book of Mormon to fit snugly into the American Heartland, it doesn't line up. 

Edited November 1, 2015 by Rajah Manchou

[Calm]

Or, as Lehi put it, "...we have obtained a land of promise, a land which is choice above all other lands; a land which the Lord God hath covenanted with me should be a land for the inheritance of my seed.Yea, the Lord hath covenanted this land unto me, and to my children forever..."

 

 

What were the blessings and the conditions of continuing to possess the land of promise given with the blessing (possibly in other verses as it is talked about in several places, iirc)?

 

 

If you are not making the argument the US is the land of promise and it is pretty limited to the US and maybe some of Canada, then the question I asked above is not directed to you...but I would like those who do believe that the US to answer...

 

that something in the civilization back then still holds for the US while not being available anywhere else in the Americas

 

What was it that made the future US territory the land of promise in the past that still applies today and is not something unique to the last three centuries but unique to the area so that its existence precludes other parts of the Americas as being a part of the land of promise?

Edited November 1, 2015 by Calm

[Bobbieaware]

Just want to point out that the Book of Mormon text never states that the Promised Land was American. Things that we today call continents, or modern nations and governments with shifting borders, are never mentioned in the Book of Mormon. 

The only macro (zoomed out) geographical reference offered is in 2 Nephi 10:20 which states that they were "upon an isle of the sea" and that there were other islands that were already inhabited by Israelites. The text also claims that "the land of Nephi and the land of Zarahemla were nearly surrounded by water". (Alma 22:32)

As much as I'd like the Book of Mormon to fit snugly into the American Heartland, it doesn't line up.

As I was just awaking and still groggy, I gave you a rep point by accident.

[Bobbieaware]

What were the blessings and the conditions of continuing to possess the land of promise given with the blessing (possibly in other verses as it is talked about in several places, iirc)?

If you are not making the argument the US is the land of promise and it is pretty limited to the US and maybe some of Canada, then the question I asked above is not directed to you...but I would like those who do believe that the US to answer...

What was it that made the future US territory the land of promise in the past that still applies today and is not something unique to the last three centuries but unique to the area so that its existence precludes other parts of the Americas as being a part of the land of promise?

Although I love and honor him as an Apostle of Jesus Christ, I know for some on this board the Apostle Mark E Petersen's teachings aren't worth two cents. But for what it's worth (there will likely be some here who will appreciate what he has to say), what follows are some of Elder Petersen's statements pertaining to the identity of the Book of Mormon's latter-day land of promise:

Destiny of the United States of America

"As I speak to you here tonight, I would like for you to have in mind that there was only one reason why the United States came into being—only one reason. It is a different reason from anything that we know in any other nation. There is a United States only because God planned to restore the gospel in the last days and he had to have a free country in which to do it, with freedom of worship, freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and freedom of assembly.

He declared that he would make this the greatest nation in the world, and this he has done. Ours is, indeed, the greatest nation on earth, and it was made so by the Almighty himself. It was made so to fulfill the divine destiny given to us by the Lord. That is why the Book of Mormon prophets declared that THIS LAMD IS CHOICE ABOVE ALL OTHER LANDS IN THE EARTH.

It is the destiny of America which makes her the greatest nation on earth. No other nation was ever conceived and set up as was ours. NO OTHER NATION HAS BEEN GIVEN A DESTINY SUCH AS OURS.

What is that destiny? You will be surprised when I say this, but it is nevertheless true. The destiny of the United States of America is to play an important part in helping to prepare for the second coming of Christ. It is that important. That is the reason the United States was set up.

The preparation for the second coming of Christ depended largely on the restoration of the gospel. There could not be a restoration of the gospel without freedom. God provided THIS COUNTRY AS THE BASE OF OPERATIONS IN THESE, THE LAST DAYS, a place where there would be freedom, where he could restore his gospel. Therefore, the United States was given and is yet to be given a great mission in respect to the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.

God has made the United States the base of operations for his work in these modern times, just as he used Palestine as his center of operations in ancient times. We should always keep this clearly in mind. As Palestine was the center of the Lord’s operations in ancient times, just so IN THE SAME MANNER, THE UNITED STATES IS THE CENTER OF HIS OPERATIONS IN THESE LAST DAYS.

For centuries he preserved this land from colonization by unwanted groups. Then he set up this nation by his own power and for his own purpose. That purpose was to provide the free conditions under which he could restore his gospel in the last days. Here he gave us an inspired Constitution so that his church could move forward with full guarantee of freedom of speech, freedom of worship, freedom of assembly, and freedom of press—all of which were essential to his work." (BYU Speeches of the Year 1976)

Similarly, only months before he died, in another speech at BYU. Apostle L. Tom Perry declared that the United States is the Book of Mormon's promised land of the latter-days.

Edited November 1, 2015 by Bobbieaware

[jkwilliams]

Although I love and honor him as an Apostle of Jesus Christ, I know for some on this board the Apostle Mark E Petersen's teachings aren't worth two cents.

 

Is it necessary to poison the well in this way? It's entirely possible to quote an apostle without impugning the character of other board participants.

[stemelbow]

Very cool.  I didn't read all your evidence, but from what I saw I'm confident in saying that your model isn't any less likely to be correct than the other existing models.

I agree. The biggest issue I'd have with this theory is the distances covered. The places are assumed huge and quite a distance from each other, which is something the Mesoamerican model seemed to have going for it.

[stemelbow]

While it's my practice to keep an open mind on LDS issues that aren't settled, I must say for me the most compelling and convincing single piece of evidence in the whole Book of Mormon geography debate is that we (those of us who believe) know at least one thing for sure, and that is that the prophet Moroni -- along with the heavy gold alloy plates, the large metal breastplate, and urim and thummim he carried will him -- spent a significant amount of time in what is now known as the United States

YOu and I have way different ideas of what "know" means, I think. Moroni came in vision. the plates were taken heavenward, apparently. The witnesses saw the plates and were told about them when conversing in vision. For all we know Moroni had the plates in Peru back when he was alive, and Joseph's interaction with them, meaningless as it seemed to translation, were interacting with plates given him from heaven, converted to lesser forms before they were taken back. Or some other thing like that.

In other words, in my mind, we don't know much of anything, surely not what you are claiming we do know in the above.

But we all disagree about something, I guess.