Ancient gold plates unearthed

[sam]

5 hours ago, notHagoth7 said:

Hi again Sam,

Your response suggests that the basis for my first question was unclear.

So another attempt at clarity: Here's a more specific explanation of the initial challenge I currently see with your suggestion for Hagoth and Alma 63. Sailing speeds of 40mph+ are reached on the Great Lakes now. Let's say Hagoth's largest ship could only reach a small fraction of that speed, let's say 5 MPH, and that they traveled 10-12 hours per day (50-60 miles/day). At such a pace, they would have reached the north end of the lake in a few days, considerably *less* than a week.  For a sailing distance of less than a week that started in the early spring, as you suggest, why would they need to stop to "prepare for the winter months" when their arrival would have still been in the very early spring...and when they were only a few days away from their starting point?

When Alma 63 attests that a year lapsed for their actual round-trip journey, how does that align with your map, which suggests a round-trip journey of less than two weeks?

That discrepancy simply doesn't add up for me. By this, I don't mean to discourage you from trying to make sense of the text. On the contrary. I'm simply saying that Alma 63 doesn't seem to be a good match for the distances you're initially suggesting. 

Unless someone sees something obvious that I'm overlooking.

Furthermore, the context of Alma 63 and other passages suggests a longer journey. A devastating war had just ended where the Lamanites had almost pushed the Nephite into the sea to extinction. Their beloved leader Captain Moroni had just died (verse 3). And Helaman had died just two years prior (final verse of the previous chapter).  The vacuum of their recent deaths, and the deaths of tens of thousands of Nephites from the recently-ended war, likely hung like a shadow over the Nephites, especially with the prophecy to Helaman through Alma, several years earlier, of the Nephite's eventual extinction. In such a setting, I would imagine many prayed humbly for insight and direction. Hence the Nephite diaspora of Alma 63. In my assessment, they were essentially jettisoning in escape pods to flee a doomed civilization...in hopes of a better promise.

 

In such a context, a journey of 4 or 5 days simply wouldn't add up for me, even if we did *not* have the one-year duration clearly defined in Alma 63. The fact that we *do* have a one-year duration only adds to my intended point.

Consider, for example, the principle declared by Nephi's brother Jacob in 2 Nephi 10:

...Just as He led Lehi and his family out of the Old World to some place New.  

And so on. And so on. 

Thoughts?

Alma 63 never states how long it took hagoth to arrive at his destination. It states that during the next year he made more ships to sail to his destination. If Hagoth had to make ships to sail across the ocean I don't think he could have made multiple ships and then sail to their destination in time allotted in ALma 63.

 6 And behold, there were many of the Nephites who did enter therein and did sail forth with much provisions, and also many women and children; and they took their course northward. And thus ended the thirty and seventh year.

 7 And in the thirty and eighth year, this man built other ships. And the first ship did also return, and many more people did enter into it; and they also took much provisions, and set out again to the land northward.

[Rajah Manchou]

1 hour ago, sam said:

Alma 63 never states how long it took hagoth to arrive at his destination. It states that during the next year he made more ships to sail to his destination. If Hagoth had to make ships to sail across the ocean I don't think he could have made multiple ships and then sail to their destination in time allotted in ALma 63.

The Meso model doesn't claim to know where the ships went. Its not a requirement of the text to say they went across the ocean or even to the Polynesian islands. I've heard a few different guesses from Meso modelers, including that Hagoth's ships went to California. That's a possibility, but there is no evidence for shipping of this kind in Mesoamerica or the Heartland in 50 BC.

FWIW, the Malay model holds up pretty well for these verses. There is evidence of settlements on the peninsula trading with settlements in the land north during the correct time period (source). These settlements in the north ran out of wood (source) as they used fuel to fire brick kilns to make buildings, and so traded in timber and woods from the south (source). Trade went north along the west coast, launching from an area where the sea divides the land, using larger ocean-going vessels. There are Jewish settlements in the land north - called Zoram until today - (source) and to the west (Cochin Jews) that date back to the right time period.

Also, in light of the OP its worth mentioning that this civilization in the north was using inscribed gold plates bound by wires during the same century Moroni wandered off.



 

Edited September 16, 2016 by Rajah Manchou

[sam]

3 minutes ago, Rajah Manchou said:

The Meso model doesn't claim to know where the ships went. Its not a requirement of the text to say they went across the ocean or even to the Polynesian islands.

I've heard a few different guesses from Meso modelers, including that Hagoth's ships went to California. That's a possibility, but there is no evidence for shipping of this kind in Mesoamerica or the Heartland in 50 BC.

FWIW, the Malay model holds up pretty well for these verses. There is evidence of related settlements on the peninsula and in the land northwards in the correct time periods. These settlements in the north rapidly faced deforestation as they built their brick temples and buildings and so traded in timber and woods from the south. Trade went north along the coasts using larger ocean-going vessels. There are Jewish settlements in the land north (called Zoram until today) and to the west (Cochin Jews) that date back to the right time period.

Also, in light of the OP its also interesting that this civilization in the north was using inscribed gold plates bound by wires during the same century Moroni wandered off.



 

How do reconcile Hill Cumorah being in New York and D&C54:8 stating the border of the Lamanites is in Missouri.

[sam]

56 minutes ago, sam said:

Alma 63 never states how long it took hagoth to arrive at his destination. It states that during the next year he made more ships to sail to his destination. If Hagoth had to make ships to sail across the ocean I don't think he could have made multiple ships and then sail to their destination in time allotted in ALma 63.

 6 And behold, there were many of the Nephites who did enter therein and did sail forth with much provisions, and also many women and children; and they took their course northward. And thus ended the thirty and seventh year.

 7 And in the thirty and eighth year, this man built other ships. And the first ship did also return, and many more people did enter into it; and they also took much provisions, and set out again to the land northward.

Give the time allotted for multiple ships being built supplies being gathered and going to their destination and back it would seem that the great lakes model is a better fit because of the short distance needed for travel through the great lakes.

[Rajah Manchou]

18 minutes ago, sam said:

How do reconcile Hill Cumorah being in New York and D&C54:8 stating the border of the Lamanites is in Missouri.

Neither of these assertions are found in the Book of Mormon, so I've made no attempt to reconcile them.

[sam]

17 minutes ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Neither of these assertions are found in the Book of Mormon, so I've made no attempt to reconcile them.

The book of Mormon states that the last battles between the Nephites and Lamanites was at the Hill Cumorah. The church has only one Hill Cumorah visitor center and D&C 54:8 is revelation. I would think this would be of the upmost consideration when making a map.

[Hagoth]

9 hours ago, why me said:

On the other hand there is very little empirical evidence for any religious book. Religions work by faith and not evidence.

I couldn't agree more. By that token we might put all religious texts on equal ground; equally true in the sense that all are "true" to the body of believers who accept them. I wonder if Tolkien had claimed his books were literal if we would have countless people bearing testimony of them and shelves of apologetics defending them.

[Hagoth]

On 9/15/2016 at 1:16 PM, Gray said:

I don't believe the BOM corresponds to a real world geography, but I find your approach refreshing. 

Same here. No longer a literal believer in the BoM but from what I've seen, this theory is as well-founded as others, although it does seem to me that the BoM is written with the Americas in mind. In fact, I think it is written to fit exactly into the Moundbuilder Myths that were the common belief in the 19th century, until Cyrus Thomas published his 700-page report that demonstrates a direct, unbroken line from Modern Indians back to the earliest archaeology that was known at the time.

[Calm]

12 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

The Great Lakes don't feel right to me. The doubts I have are in the verses that claim that there may have been a shipwreck and the people were never heard from again. And another party went north and "whither she did go we know not". 

The lakes aren't so massive that a party would just disappear without the other settlers in the north knowing about it. Even if the ships reached the far end of Lake Michigan, it wouldn't be that difficult for those onboard to walk back along the shore of the lake if they were shipwrecked or had any problems.

Is there any historical precedence for building exceedingly large ships in such small lakes? Seems like smaller boats making frequent runs along the coast would be an easier way to get around Lake Michigan in 52 BC.

And this post brings to mind this depressing, but beautiful song:

http://gordonlightfoot.com/WreckOfTheEdmundFitzgerald.shtml

[Rajah Manchou]

9 hours ago, sam said:

The book of Mormon states that the last battles between the Nephites and Lamanites was at the Hill Cumorah. The church has only one Hill Cumorah visitor center and D&C 54:8 is revelation. I would think this would be of the upmost consideration when making a map.

Hill Cumorah visitor center = Not in the Book of Mormon
D&C 54:8 = Not in the Book of Mormon

[Rajah Manchou]

8 hours ago, Hagoth said:

Same here. No longer a literal believer in the BoM but from what I've seen, this theory is as well-founded as others, although it does seem to me that the BoM is written with the Americas in mind. In fact, I think it is written to fit exactly into the Moundbuilder Myths that were the common belief in the 19th century, until Cyrus Thomas published his 700-page report that demonstrates a direct, unbroken line from Modern Indians back to the earliest archaeology that was known at the time.

I'm torn on the origins of the Book of Mormon. Much of the content could only have been known to a post-KJV author while many other things could not have been known to a 19th century author. 

While moundbuilder myths were common belief in the 19th century, another popular belief was that the moundbuilders were Malay, and that the Malay and Tartars (Asian Turks) battled in upstate New York. This hypothesis was promoted by Samuel Mitchill, one of the scholars visited by Martin Harris before the Book of Mormon was fully translated. Mitchill often compared Malay material culture to the artifacts being discovered in the mounds. (source)

So what was known about Malay and Tartar cultures in the 1820s and did it work its way into the moundbuilder mythologies, and the Book of Mormon? 

The Book of Mormon fits as well with what was known about Malay culture in the 19th century as it does moundbuilder culture of the 19th century. I don't think there was a difference between the two in the mind of Samuel Mitchill and others.

Edited September 17, 2016 by Rajah Manchou

[Rajah Manchou]

9 hours ago, Hagoth said:

I think it is written to fit exactly into the Moundbuilder Myths that were the common belief in the 19th century

If you haven't already, take a look at the link in my previous post. Note the similarities between the story of Zelph and Mitchill's lecture on Malay moundbuilders.

• Fair complexioned tartars in the northwest
• Darker complexioned malays from just below the Isthmus of Darien in the southwest
• Scandinavian group that doesn't appear in the Book of Mormon in Onondaga, where they all battle it out

Zelph was a white Lamanite that fought with the people of Onandagus.

During Joseph's time, Mormon lore seemed to keep pace with the latest in archeological revelations and discoveries.

[sam]

20 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Hill Cumorah visitor center = Not in the Book of Mormon
D&C 54:8 = Not in the Book of Mormon

The hill Cumorah is in the Book of Mormon and its where Mormon hid the plates. 

Joseph smith got the plates from the hill Cumorah 

[Rajah Manchou]

5 hours ago, sam said:

The hill Cumorah is in the Book of Mormon and its where Mormon hid the plates. Joseph smith got the plates from the hill Cumorah 

Thanks for the info. But only one out of three statements is correct:

• The Hill Cumorah is in the Book of Mormon (true)
• Mormon hid the plates in the Hill Cumorah (false)
• Joseph smith got the plates from the Hill Cumorah (false, but it is true the hill was later called Cumorah)

Mormon did not hide the plates in the Hill Cumorah. He gave the plates to his son Moroni. The text is pretty clear that the surviving Nephites did not hang around the Hill Cumorah, so why would Moroni? Its more probable that Moroni got as far away from the Hill Cumorah as possible before stopping to finish the record and bury the plates "in the earth" as he said.

Joseph Smith got the plates from a hill that had no name. If this hill had a name between 1823 and 1828, it wasn't Cumorah. 

 

 

[Calm]

53 minutes ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Joseph Smith got the plates from a hill that had no name. If this hill had a name between 1823 and 1828, it wasn't Cumorah. 
 

NM, apparently got it totally mixed up with another place.

Edited September 18, 2016 by Calm

[why me]

On 16.9.2016 at 11:03 PM, Hagoth said:

I couldn't agree more. By that token we might put all religious texts on equal ground; equally true in the sense that all are "true" to the body of believers who accept them. I wonder if Tolkien had claimed his books were literal if we would have countless people bearing testimony of them and shelves of apologetics defending them.

I think that we could see differences in the narratives and in its history. The bible for example and the book of mormon do have some interesting history to draw from. How to explain the apostle dedication to missionary work after the resurrection and appearance of Christ? It must have been a very convincing  experience. And with the book of mormon, it is the 11 witnesses and the availablity of Joseph to write a book (in secret) within the time frame that he had.

Edited September 20, 2016 by why me

[bcuzbcuz]

On 20 September 2016 at 0:49 PM, why me said:

I think that we could see differences in the narratives and in its history. The bible for example and the book of mormon do have some interesting history to draw from. How to explain the apostle dedication to missionary work after the resurrection and appearance of Christ? It must have been a very convincing  experience. And with the book of mormon, it is the 11 witnesses and the availablity of Joseph to write a book (in secret) within the time frame that he had.

Do you see the contradiction in your choice of things to compare? You reference to the text from the new testament (stories most of us are familiar with) and then you hop to the witnesses and the concept that the BofM was a marvelous work because it was so quickly dictated.

You compare the inside of one book (NT) and the outside of the other (you give no story from the text).

The text from the BofM, inspirational stories, something that has some connection to your apostle story, would make more sense. As this point you might as well be comparing apples to potatoes. 

[cdowis]

On 9/16/2016 at 10:59 AM, sam said:

How do reconcile Hill Cumorah being in New York and D&C54:8 stating the border of the Lamanites is in Missouri.

Really quite simple.  

It took me 1.3 seconds to realize that "Lamanites" refers to the AmerIndians who were living at that location in 1831.  Missouri was on the western boundary of the United States.

It has nothing to do with BOM geography but  referring to the "Indian Territory" below which was west of Missouri.

Edited September 23, 2016 by cdowis

[why me]

On 22.9.2016 at 2:41 PM, bcuzbcuz said:

Do you see the contradiction in your choice of things to compare? You reference to the text from the new testament (stories most of us are familiar with) and then you hop to the witnesses and the concept that the BofM was a marvelous work because it was so quickly dictated.

You compare the inside of one book (NT) and the outside of the other (you give no story from the text).

The text from the BofM, inspirational stories, something that has some connection to your apostle story, would make more sense. As this point you might as well be comparing apples to potatoes. 

I think that the comparison is relevant. Both narratives that I mentioned had committed people who never denied what they saw or experienced after they experienced what they experienced. The apostles began their ministry after the reappearance of christ. And the witnessed never denied their experience with the book of mormon.

[sam]

On September 22, 2016 at 6:52 PM, cdowis said:

Really quite simple.  

It took me 1.3 seconds to realize that "Lamanites" refers to the AmerIndians who were living at that location in 1831.  Missouri was on the western boundary of the United States.

It has nothing to do with BOM geography but  referring to the "Indian Territory" below which was west of Missouri.

Ya I agree the plains Indians makes a great fit. Especially when it describes the lamanites on the west living in tents.