Pres. Monson and North America Bom Setting

[RevTestament]

11 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Nephi doesn't say that the man among the Gentile led the Saints of God out of captivity, does he? I'd have to go through it again, but my reading has always been that the man among the Gentiles was moved to go out, and then others later followed. Not necessarily following the man, but just fleeing captivity. 

I was probably playing a little loose with words. It does not specifically say this man led them out of captivity. He led them in the sense of establishing contact with the seed of Nephi's brethren. While it is possible by that time that the Lamanites had spread to S. America, I feel there was probably limited trade contact only. If these descendants were indeed in the present area of the United States, then this man could not have been Christopher Columbus:

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 ^awrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land.

13 And it came to pass that I beheld the Spirit of God, that it wrought upon other Gentiles; and they went forth out of captivity, upon the many waters.

11 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

The captivity thing still puzzles me. In my opinion, the only historical context that fits 1 Nephi 13 is Christians fleeing persecution in the 4th/5th centuries. That's the only time in pre-restoration history that we would have overlap with a group of people that could still claim to be Saints of God, and also persecution by a Great and Abominable (whatever that is). Anything after that period would have been during the Apostasy, and I can't pinpoint what post-Apostasy group Nephi would see in vision and identify as "Saints of God".

Really? How about the inquisition? That doesn't qualify as torture, and killing? Indeed, people fled from it. Were these people saints? I think Navidad would say yes.

5 And the angel said unto me: Behold the formation of a ^achurch which is most abominable above all other churches, which ^bslayeth the saints of God, yea, and tortureth them and bindeth them down, and yoketh them with a ^cyoke of iron, and bringeth them down into captivity.

. . . . .

7 And I also saw ^agold, and silver, and silks, and scarlets, and fine-twined ^blinen, and all manner of precious clothing; and I saw many harlots.

8 And the angel spake unto me, saying: Behold the gold, and the silver, and the silks, and the scarlets, and the fine-twined linen, and the precious clothing, and the harlots, are the ^adesires of this great and abominable church.

9 And also for the ^apraise of the world do they ^bdestroy the saints of God, and bring them down into captivity.

So Nephi is telling you here what the captivity was. It was a physical torture, killing and attempt to destroy the culture of a group of Christians. How quickly do people forget their history.

[Rajah Manchou]

19 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

Really? How about the inquisition? That doesn't qualify as torture, and killing? Indeed, people fled from it. Were these people saints? I think Navidad would say yes.

I considered that possibility. Perhaps I'm listening to closely to  the cultural relics in my brain, and made assumptions that the Great Apostasy was a period of darkness, without prophets and direct divine communication. What group would you say Nephi was identifying as the Saints of God?

[Bob Crockett]

14 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Chad Daybell probably gets better sales.  Popularity among the hoi polloi is not going to favor academic books.  At the same time, it is precisely Professor Sorenson's articles in the 1985 Ensign and Liahona which have shown what the Brethren find most convincing.  No such Meldrum version of Book of Mormon geography has appeared in the Church magazines.  I wonder why?  Could it be that only one place in the Americas shows a civilization with literacy, huge populations, and significant building (with cement)?

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/1985/04/digging-into-the-book-of-mormon-part-2?lang=eng

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/1985/06/digging-into-the-book-of-mormon-part-3?lang=eng

A very odd belief in light of DNA science not being invented until many decades after Sorenson and others had formulated the Mesoamerican theory based directly on archeological evidence.  Even in Joseph Smith's day the 1840s publication of the adventures of Stephens & Catherwood in Southern Mexico and Yucatan caught the Prophet's attention, causing him to speculate.  And with good reason.

I will admit Sorenson's theories have had traction in the Ensign, with all that means. Delusion at the highest ranks of bureaucrats.   

However, when you stack up the general authorities'  conference addresses or Ensign or Juvenile Instructor articles advocating a MesoAmerican LGT (zero) against the conference addresses and articles which support something greater than a MesoAmerican LGT (plenty), one has to wonder why the academic intelligentsia has bought into Sorenson's work. 

Edited July 7, 2020 by Bob Crockett

[Robert F. Smith]

7 hours ago, Bob Crockett said:

I will admit Sorenson's theories have had traction in the Ensign, with all that means. Delusion at the highest ranks of bureaucrats.   

However, when you stack up the general authorities'  conference addresses or Ensign or Juvenile Instructor articles advocating a MesoAmerican LGT (zero) against the conference addresses and articles which support something greater than a MesoAmerican LGT (plenty), one has to wonder why the academic intelligentsia has bought into Sorenson's work. 

One needs to distinguish between academic and non-academic activity, between archeological science on the one hand and devotional faith on the other.  They are just not the same, Bob.  Still, it is very telling that only the Sorenson approach has been permitted in the Church magazines.  It has gotten traction both with LDS intellectuals and with the Brethren simply based on common sense.  Reading the BofM text leaves no other option.

[JamesBYoung]

I would imagine by the turn of the century with most of the membership non-American, that North American settings in BoM geography will meaningless.  Look at the general blank-eyed looks of non-Americans when we all get excited about western intersections in Mormon history.  Those folks just don't care.

[Bob Crockett]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

One needs to distinguish between academic and non-academic activity, between archeological science on the one hand and devotional faith on the other.  They are just not the same, Bob.  Still, it is very telling that only the Sorenson approach has been permitted in the Church magazines.  It has gotten traction both with LDS intellectuals and with the Brethren simply based on common sense.  Reading the BofM text leaves no other option.

I think Sorenson's methodology is absurd.  

[Rajah Manchou]

1 hour ago, JamesBYoung said:

I would imagine by the turn of the century with most of the membership non-American, that North American settings in BoM geography will meaningless.  Look at the general blank-eyed looks of non-Americans when we all get excited about western intersections in Mormon history.  Those folks just don't care.

I served my mission in Africa, and I always felt sheepish when saying the line about God caring so much about the others "not of this fold" so he sent Jesus to Guatemala! And look, here's that book, found in New York! If you haven't seen the Book of Mormon Musical, they exploit this liberally.

The irony is that the Book of Mormon never says it took place in "The Americas". This interpretation was all added in later, by Americans.

Any macro geographical reference simply refers to being an island in the sea, for there are many. The geography and narrative fits extremely well when placed on a generic island or peninsula in the Pacific or Indian Oceans. You can go to the earliest accounts of the inhabitants of those isles dating back to the Book of Mormon time period and it all fits rather well. They lived in a place called Komara, they came from the Middle East, they were Jews and then converted to Christianity. They had horses, and pigs, and elephants. They had steel swords and silk. Their founder had a vision that he should sail to a new land and was guided there by divine power. They had a warrior king named Maroni (the way Joseph Smith and others spelled Moroni) who lived during the Book of Mormon time period. This Maroni founded several new cities during the Book of Mormon time period, in a geography that lines up with the internal Book of Mormon map. These people later settled the islands of Comoro and named the capital Moroni. On and on.

Yet Book of Mormon "geographers" won't go there. Have to keep it on the mainland. I don't know why that is.

Edited July 8, 2020 by Rajah Manchou

[RevTestament]

23 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

I considered that possibility. Perhaps I'm listening to closely to  the cultural relics in my brain, and made assumptions that the Great Apostasy was a period of darkness, without prophets and direct divine communication. What group would you say Nephi was identifying as the Saints of God?

I have thought about that, and I don't think there is any specific group. I believe it is referring to people who were trying to follow the word of Yeshua. Just because there apparently no authorized Church, does not mean that all those people cannot get to Paradise... would you agree?

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, Bob Crockett said:

I think Sorenson's methodology is absurd.  

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, Bob.  You are not the only one to disagree with his views.  However, in the various times when I have read your critiques of the Limited Geography Theory (Mesoamerica), which is held by most LDS scholars, I have yet to find a valid, substantive objection.  Which is remarkable, since there should be one or more possible objections to the LGT, if only by the law of averages.

[Calm]

8 hours ago, JamesBYoung said:

Look at the general blank-eyed looks of non-Americans when we all get excited about western intersections in Mormon history.

Where is this happening?

[Rajah Manchou]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Where is this happening?

From my experience, the topic of western intersections with the Book of Mormon is about as interesting to non-American Mormons as the topic of Malaysian intersections with the Book of Mormon is to American Mormons. Two minutes in and the eyes glaze over.

[JamesBYoung]

Talk to my friend from Ghana, whose reply was like, "Why do I care about the stories of the Camp of Israel in Iowa or the violence in early Springville.  You should be ashamed of your violent natures," said my friend from a country whose history is full of slaughter.

I think that most people really don't care much about life beyond their own zip code or postage stamp.

[JAHS]

12 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Yet Book of Mormon "geographers" won't go there. Have to keep it on the mainland. I don't know why that is.

I have heard others claim it happened on the Baja Peninsula or even the island of Japan. If the Americas were not involved how did the plates end up buried in the ground in a stone box covered with a large stone?

[Bob Crockett]

11 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, Bob.  You are not the only one to disagree with his views.  However, in the various times when I have read your critiques of the Limited Geography Theory (Mesoamerica), which is held by most LDS scholars, I have yet to find a valid, substantive objection.  Which is remarkable, since there should be one or more possible objections to the LGT, if only by the law of averages.

Sorenson's understanding of the scientific method is the sort a Fifth Grader might have.  Sprinkling third- and fourth-party recollections of things Joseph Smith said about MesoAmerica while rejecting direct things Joseph Smith said.  That has nothing to do with the scientific method.

Geographers use statistical measures to link ancient text to on-the-ground geography.  Sorenson wrote as if he had never heard of such a thing.

Persons publishing in the scientific method rely on peer review.  Sorenson's two books on the subject may have been reviewed by religious scholars, but not by geographers or anthropologists.

Sorenson's methods have been criticized by anthropologists at BYU who hold doctorates.  Other than one anthropologist who teaches in the Department of Religion, I am not aware of one single anthropologist with a doctorate at BYU who agrees with him.

In Sorenson's 1976 BYU Studies article, he maliciously questioned the faithfulness of other religious scholars with pet geographic theories, including Paul Cheesman.  

Sorenson's discussion of the 120-mile-wide Isthmus of Tehuantepec is particularly problematic.  He says this is the "narrow neck of land" that Alma 22:32 describes as a day and a half distance wide "for a Nephite."  This area cannot possibly be crossed in a day and a half by anybody on foot or in a canoe.  Federal surveyors mapping the area for a future railroad reported it took them over two weeks to make the crossing, as it was filled with swamps and rivers.  My personal view is that the Book of Mormon is intended to convey the idea that the Niagara Isthmus (50 miles wide and of solid footing) is the one.  

According to the account in Don Jose Garay, Survey of the Isthmus of Tehuatepec (Ackerman & Co, London 1944), the government of Mexico commissioned a survey of the Isthmus.  Garay's nine-month survey is contained in this book.   Many parts of the northern part of the isthmus are impenetrable swamp and jungle.   Although Garay discusses the prospect of navigation, he notes that the rivers are not navigable as they approach the hills and are difficult or impossible to ford at places.   The study also recounts Cortes' experience in the area as he tried to use the isthmus as a means to access lower California.

Edited July 8, 2020 by Bob Crockett

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, Bob Crockett said:

Sorenson's understanding of the scientific method is the sort a Fifth Grader might have.  Sprinkling third- and fourth-party recollections of things Joseph Smith said about MesoAmerica while rejecting direct things Joseph Smith said.  That has nothing to do with the scientific method.

Sorenson's extensive review of what the Brethren had to say on the matter over the years had nothing to do with demonstrating the best or proper BofM geography, but only to put the lie to the false claims of those selectively quoting opinions of various Brethren to support their apriori geographical notions.  It was precisely because those non-scholars violated scientific norms to achieve their off-the-wall conclusions that Sorenson had to show how they cherry-picked their evidence -- straining out gnats and swallowing camels.  Exactly the opposite of your false claim here, Bob.

2 hours ago, Bob Crockett said:

Geographers use statistical measures to link ancient text to on-the-ground geography.  Sorenson wrote as if he had never heard of such a thing.

Persons publishing in the scientific method rely on peer review.  Sorenson's two books on the subject may have been reviewed by religious scholars, but not by geographers or anthropologists.

Sorenson's methods have been criticized by anthropologists at BYU who hold doctorates.  Other than one anthropologist who teaches in the Department of Religion, I am not aware of one single anthropologist with a doctorate at BYU who agrees with him.

Most of your claims here are false.  You might want to consult with Prof. John E. Clark, who has written extensively on the issue and who has a longer and more prestigious curriculum  vitae than those in his own dept who were critical of Sorenson.  He is also the better, more experienced archeologist.  See his CV at https://brightspotcdn.byu.edu/68/eb/1f30a9c04805a02eed4fa73931a5/vita-clark.pdf

2 hours ago, Bob Crockett said:

In Sorenson's 1976 BYU Studies article, he maliciously questioned the faithfulness of other religious scholars with pet geographic theories, including Paul Cheesman. 

You have commented on this before, so it must stick in your craw that Sorenson called nonsense by its real name -- coming as it did from pretend scholars in BYU religious education.  Such non-scholars have frequently brought the LDS Church into disrepute due their ridiculous claims.

2 hours ago, Bob Crockett said:

Sorenson's discussion of the 120-mile-wide Isthmus of Tehuantepec is particularly problematic.  He says this is the "narrow neck of land" that Alma 22:32 describes as a day and a half distance wide "for a Nephite."  This area cannot possibly be crossed in a day and a half by anybody on foot or in a canoe.  Federal surveyors mapping the area for a future railroad reported it took them over two weeks to make the crossing, as it was filled with swamps and rivers.......

According to the account in Don Jose Garay, Survey of the Isthmus of Tehuatepec (Ackerman & Co, London 1944), the government of Mexico commissioned a survey of the Isthmus.  Garay's nine-month survey is contained in this book.   Many parts of the northern part of the isthmus are impenetrable swamp and jungle.   Although Garay discusses the prospect of navigation, he notes that the rivers are not navigable as they approach the hills and are difficult or impossible to ford at places.   The study also recounts Cortes' experience in the area as he tried to use the isthmus as a means to access lower California.

We have discussed this issue here before, and you pointedly ignored my logical and scientific reply then, just as you do now.  First, the BofM text doesn't say what you claim.  Second, the condition of the swamps and waterways/rivers now does in no way represent the situation in BofM times, nor even in the times of the Conquista, when the Spanish explored the area, and we have their comments -- which falsify your views.

2 hours ago, Bob Crockett said:

  My personal view is that the Book of Mormon is intended to convey the idea that the Niagara Isthmus (50 miles wide and of solid footing) is the one.  

Prof John E. Clark has this to say:  "The cultural worlds of ancient Mesoamerica and early New York are far enough apart that it ought to be simple to discover from which one the book came.  The cultures described in the Book of Mormon fit much better in Mesoamerica than in New York for any century." -- Clark, "Archaeological Trends and Book of Mormon Origins," in J. Welch, ed., The Worlds of Joseph Smith, 96.

 

[Bob Crockett]

12 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Sorenson's extensive review of what the Brethren had to say on the matter over the years had nothing to do with demonstrating the best or proper BofM geography, but only to put the lie to the false claims of those selectively quoting opinions of various Brethren to support their apriori geographical notions.  It was precisely because those non-scholars violated scientific norms to achieve their off-the-wall conclusions that Sorenson had to show how they cherry-picked their evidence -- straining out gnats and swallowing camels.  Exactly the opposite of your false claim here, Bob.

Most of your claims here are false.  You might want to consult with Prof. John E. Clark, who has written extensively on the issue and who has a longer and more prestigious curriculum  vitae than those in his own dept who were critical of Sorenson.  He is also the better, more experienced archeologist.  See his CV at https://brightspotcdn.byu.edu/68/eb/1f30a9c04805a02eed4fa73931a5/vita-clark.pdf

You have commented on this before, so it must stick in your craw that Sorenson called nonsense by its real name -- coming as it did from pretend scholars in BYU religious education.  Such non-scholars have frequently brought the LDS Church into disrepute due their ridiculous claims.

We have discussed this issue here before, and you pointedly ignored my logical and scientific reply then, just as you do now.  First, the BofM text doesn't say what you claim.  Second, the condition of the swamps and waterways/rivers now does in no way represent the situation in BofM times, nor even in the times of the Conquista, when the Spanish explored the area, and we have their comments -- which falsify your views.

Prof John E. Clark has this to say:  "The cultural worlds of ancient Mesoamerica and early New York are far enough apart that it ought to be simple to discover from which one the book came.  The cultures described in the Book of Mormon fit much better in Mesoamerica than in New York for any century." -- Clark, "Archaeological Trends and Book of Mormon Origins," in J. Welch, ed., The Worlds of Joseph Smith, 96.

 

You make a lot of claims, stating that I intentionally have brought false claims against Dr. Sorenson and that, perhaps, I'm just a liar.  

Have you identified one single person of the Brethren who have come out in support of Dr. Sorenson in a book, Ensign article or conference report?  Can you name one?

What about the scientific method?  I'd like you to affirmatively put your reputation on the record and tell me that you believe that Dr. Sorenson's two books were based on reliable and reproducible scientific methodology in sociology, anthropology and archaeology.   

Also, I'd like you to confirm your belief that his two books were peer-reviewed by members of academia holding positions in departments of sociology or anthropology.

[Robert F. Smith]

42 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:

You make a lot of claims, stating that I intentionally have brought false claims against Dr. Sorenson and that, perhaps, I'm just a liar.  

Those are your words, Bob.  You might want to quote any offensive statements you have a quarrel with, and to cite any contrary evidence.  A good, logical argument carries a lot of weight with me.

Quote

Have you identified one single person of the Brethren who have come out in support of Dr. Sorenson in a book, Ensign article or conference report?  Can you name one?

Nope.  I look only at substantive argument and common sense.

Quote

What about the scientific method?  I'd like you to affirmatively put your reputation on the record and tell me that you believe that Dr. Sorenson's two books were based on reliable and reproducible scientific methodology in sociology, anthropology and archaeology.

As you know, Sorenson's magnum opus has come in for some harsh criticism, but, on balance, I consider his arguments reliable and solidly based on excellent science.  He does cite his sources, so that anyone can go check on his claims in detail.

Quote

Also, I'd like you to confirm your belief that his two books were peer-reviewed by members of academia holding positions in departments of sociology or anthropology.

I have no idea who peer reviewed his two books on BofM geography and culture.  I was more interested in the content.

Edited July 8, 2020 by Robert F. Smith

[Rajah Manchou]

9 hours ago, JAHS said:

I have heard others claim it happened on the Baja Peninsula or even the island of Japan. If the Americas were not involved how did the plates end up buried in the ground in a stone box covered with a large stone?

Now that we know Polynesians and Native Americans were in contact, there were 1400 years for that to happen. Someone carried them there. 

[Robert F. Smith]

On 7/7/2020 at 8:09 PM, Rajah Manchou said:

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

Yet Book of Mormon "geographers" won't go there. Have to keep it on the mainland. I don't know why that is.

Bookofmormononline does include some of those other geographies, without making any judgments.  There are options which might even appeal to Bob Crockett.

[Rajah Manchou]

23 hours ago, RevTestament said:

I have thought about that, and I don't think there is any specific group. I believe it is referring to people who were trying to follow the word of Yeshua. Just because there apparently no authorized Church, does not mean that all those people cannot get to Paradise... would you agree?

90% agree. 10% of me feels a caveat is needed. That the people Nephi identified as the Saints of God were being slain by a particular institution for their beliefs and would recognize their role in the restoration once it is presented to them.

But with the new ancient DNA paper that came out this week, we'll need to reset our thinking on all this.

There's now genetic evidence of contact between the Pacific Islands and the Americas. We now need to consider the archeological evidence (eg. blow guns, bark paper, and austronesian boat forms) that support these new conclusions. Now that trans-Pacific transmission looks probable, the equation changes significantly, and it is time to adjust our calculations. 

For example: Did ancient Polynesians visit California? Maybe so. Scholars revive idea using linguistic ties, Indian headdress

Non-American nations were trading and admixing with the west coast at least 200 years before Columbus. This opens the door for cultural sharing throughout the Pacific, and as Michael Coe proposed, there's reason to believe that the religious structures of the Khmer were influenced by the religious structures of the Maya. That's Michael Coe saying that, one of the foremost scholars of both Mayan history and Khmer history.

What Mormon scholars haven't researched is the unusual similarities between Mayan culture and Khmer culture, including the historical references to a warrior chief named Maroni, one of the foundational myths of Khmer civilization. Yes, a warrior named Maroni founded the first city states of the Khmer Empire, and it all dates back to the Book of Mormon time period.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 9, 2020 by Rajah Manchou

[Rajah Manchou]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Bookofmormononline does include some of those other geographies, without making any judgments.  There are options which might even appeal to Bob Crockett.

Yes, but I'm referring to everything else. For example, where's the discussion with Mormon scholars on Maroni, the warrior chief who founded the first city states in the Khmer Empire during the Book of Mormon time period?

Given the non-random appearance in religious texts of two warrior "kings" named Maroni, both living in the same time period, both originating in the Middle East, and both founding the first city-states of two great nations that appear to have been sharing words and ideas, would you agree this is an interesting topic of discussion for Mormon scholars?

Edited July 9, 2020 by Rajah Manchou

[Nevo]

44 minutes ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Given the non-random appearance in religious texts of two warrior "kings" named Maroni, both living in the same time period, both originating in the Middle East, and both founding the first city-states of two great nations that were most likely in contact with each other across the Pacific Ocean, would you agree this is an interesting topic of discussion for Mormon scholars?

This sounds just like the story of Captain Moroni:

Quote

The annals tells of the forefather of all the Kedahan rulers, Raja Merong Mahawangsa; a king who not only has family ties to the King of the Romans but also the trust of the emperor's dignitaries.

The royal fleet of Merong Mahawangsa, on its way of sailing from Rome to China, was suddenly attacked by a legendary giant phoenix called Garuda. He crashed into the shores of what is now Kedah. There, he founded a state called Langkasuka ('Langkha' meaning 'resplendent land' in Sanskrit, while 'sukkha' meaning 'joy' or 'happiness') and became its king. He returned to Rome after his son Raja Merong Mahapudisat was enthroned.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hikayat_Merong_Mahawangsa

 

Edited July 9, 2020 by Nevo

[Rajah Manchou]

5 minutes ago, Nevo said:

This sounds just like the story of Captain Moroni:

I know right?

The Arab traders who rewrote the original myths to make them more Islamic really had a field day with it, didn't they?

Happy to discuss details with you, if you are actually interested.

[Rajah Manchou]

1 hour ago, Nevo said:

This sounds just like the story of Captain Moroni:

Its unreasonable to ask you to buy and read this book, so if you are interested in discussion I can summarize what was known about these texts in 1820 and how it ties in with what was hypothesized about the history of Joseph's Smith's backyard in1820. In short, one of the leading theories about the origins of Native Americans in the 1820s was that they were Austronesians, from Malay, who fought a battle in Onondaga County (around 60 miles from Palmyra) and were exterminated there.

The author, Vladimir Braginsky, is an expert in the Hikayats that you link to above.

Edited July 9, 2020 by Rajah Manchou

[RevTestament]

2 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

90% agree. 10% of me feels a caveat is needed. That the people Nephi identified as the Saints of God were being slain by a particular institution for their beliefs and would recognize their role in the restoration once it is presented to them.

But with the new ancient DNA paper that came out this week, we'll need to reset our thinking on all this.

There's now genetic evidence of contact between the Pacific Islands and the Americas. We now need to consider the archeological evidence (eg. blow guns, bark paper, and austronesian boat forms) that support these new conclusions. Now that trans-Pacific transmission looks probable, the equation changes significantly, and it is time to adjust our calculations. 

For example: Did ancient Polynesians visit California? Maybe so. Scholars revive idea using linguistic ties, Indian headdress

Non-American nations were trading and admixing with the west coast at least 200 years before Columbus. This opens the door for cultural sharing throughout the Pacific, and as Michael Coe proposed, there's reason to believe that the religious structures of the Khmer were influenced by the religious structures of the Maya. That's Michael Coe saying that, one of the foremost scholars of both Mayan history and Khmer history.

What Mormon scholars haven't researched is the unusual similarities between Mayan culture and Khmer culture, including the historical references to a warrior chief named Maroni, one of the foundational myths of Khmer civilization. Yes, a warrior named Maroni founded the first city states of the Khmer Empire, and it all dates back to the Book of Mormon time period.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I had no doubt about this connection. Thor Heyerdahl was way ahead of others on this, although I don't think the Polynesian Islands were settled from the Americas. It was more the other way around with some Polynesians returning with sweet potato, etc. I don't see how Easter Island could have been settled by Polynesians, and them miss the land wall of the Americas !!!??? Clearly, many sailed past Easter Island, and hit S. America. Did you see the paper I previously linked on Austronesian language comparisons to Hebrew/Semitic languages?