Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10812
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by larsenb »

kittycat51 wrote: March 18th, 2017, 11:38 am
larsenb wrote: March 17th, 2017, 11:17 pm
sandman45 wrote: March 17th, 2017, 2:52 pm
Robin Hood wrote: March 16th, 2017, 5:30 pm Pro: Heartland model is correct.
Con: Mesoamerican model is incorrect.
Amen and Amen.. Joseph didn't believe it was.. he knew.. he spent so much time with Moroni and knew their culture, their beliefs, their wars, their landscapes, and the clothes they wore what the houses looked like etc.. . . . .
Sorry Sandman. The statements in issues of the 1842 Times and Seasons discussing what Lloyd Stephens, et al., found in Mesoamerica and the surmises that these were the likely locations for the Land of Zarahemla, etc., were written by Joseph Smith.

John Lund did an exhaustive study showing this. I've seen no real rebuttal of his work. Do you have one?? I'd like to see it.
No I don't believe that Joseph wrote that Times and Season's article. It goes against many other things he stated to the brethren during Zion's march and what he wrote in letters to Emma. He would be contradicting himself. Have you read this article "The Smoking Gun of Book of Mormon Geography"? http://bookofmormonevidence.org/the-smo ... geography/" I think the link to the actual article is broken, but you can download the article in PDF from the above link. Worth reading especially because I don't think you have. I think Lund's research concerning trying to prove who wrote the article in "The Times and Season's" is flawed.
In scholarly research, it is customary to rebut someones research by a detailed rebuttal. It is not enough to say: "I think Lund's research concerning trying to prove who wrote the article(s) in The Times and Seasons' is flawed. You have to show why it is flawed, or show the work of someone who has done so.

We have gone over this subject, again, and again. Earlier, someone did bring up arguments against Lund, but they really didn't address what he did, and were off the mark in the assertions they made. Now you can go dig up this alleged rebuttal, and I will dig up my arguments as to why the fellow doesn't make even a dent in Lund's work.

Or . . . you can find someone who has actually shown that Lund's work is flawed . . . or, you can look at Lund's research and come up with your own ideas as to why it is flawed. But just saying you think this, or you think that, is no argument whatsoever.

ripliancum
captain of 100
Posts: 178

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by ripliancum »

This is what I and everybody else is saying.

If Joseph Smith did write that article in times and season it contradicts what we know with 100% certainty that Joseph Smith written about where the location of the Nephites were located.

LETTER PENNED BY JOSEPH SMITH TO EMMA DURRING ZION’S CAMP MARCH WHICH TRAVELED FROM EASTERN OHIO THROUGH ILLINOIS TO MISOURI. JUNE 4, 1834.

“The whole of our journey, in the midst of so large a company of social honest and sincere men, wandering over the plains of the Nephites, recounting occasionally the history of the Book of Mormon, roving over the mounds of that once beloved people of the Lord, picking up their skulls & their bones, as a proof of its divine authenticity, and gazing upon a country the fertility, the splendour and the goodness so indescribable, all serves to pass away time unnoticed.” (The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, by Dean C. Jessee (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1984), p 324 in care of Community of Christ church)

JOSEPH SMITH’S LETTER TO MR. JOHN WENTWORTH MARCH 1842
The principal nation of the second race fell in battle towards the close of the fourth century. The remnant are the Indians that now inhabit this country. This book also tells us that our Saviour [Savior] made his appearance upon this continent after his resurrection, that he planted the gospel here in all its fulness [fullness], and richness, and power, and blessing; that they had apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers and evangelists; the same order, the same priesthood, the same ordinances, gifts, powers, and blessing, as was enjoyed on the eastern continent, that the people were cut off in consequence of their transgressions… “(History of the Church 1: 301)

brianj
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4066
Location: Vineyard, Utah

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by brianj »

ripliancum wrote: March 18th, 2017, 11:47 pm This is what I and everybody else is saying.

If Joseph Smith did write that article in times and season it contradicts what we know with 100% certainty that Joseph Smith written about where the location of the Nephites were located.

LETTER PENNED BY JOSEPH SMITH TO EMMA DURRING ZION’S CAMP MARCH WHICH TRAVELED FROM EASTERN OHIO THROUGH ILLINOIS TO MISOURI. JUNE 4, 1834.

“The whole of our journey, in the midst of so large a company of social honest and sincere men, wandering over the plains of the Nephites, recounting occasionally the history of the Book of Mormon, roving over the mounds of that once beloved people of the Lord, picking up their skulls & their bones, as a proof of its divine authenticity, and gazing upon a country the fertility, the splendour and the goodness so indescribable, all serves to pass away time unnoticed.” (The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, by Dean C. Jessee (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1984), p 324 in care of Community of Christ church)

JOSEPH SMITH’S LETTER TO MR. JOHN WENTWORTH MARCH 1842
The principal nation of the second race fell in battle towards the close of the fourth century. The remnant are the Indians that now inhabit this country. This book also tells us that our Saviour [Savior] made his appearance upon this continent after his resurrection, that he planted the gospel here in all its fulness [fullness], and richness, and power, and blessing; that they had apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers and evangelists; the same order, the same priesthood, the same ordinances, gifts, powers, and blessing, as was enjoyed on the eastern continent, that the people were cut off in consequence of their transgressions… “(History of the Church 1: 301)
This leaves me wondering about the extent of the Nephite and Lamanite remnant. Would the Mi'kmaq of the northeast, the Seminole of the southeast, the Salish of the northwest, and the Chumash of the southwest be remnants of the Nephites and Lamanites? What about the Cree of Canada and the Inuit of Canada and Alaska or the indigenous groups of Mexico?

The more you know the better you understand how little you know.

ripliancum
captain of 100
Posts: 178

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by ripliancum »

The Mik maq used Egyptian Hieroglyphs. The Mik Maq also stated that they sailed to America and were visited by a beautiful man who performed miracles.

http://bookofmormonevidence.blogspot.co ... glyph.html

Its really sad that FAIR and the Neal A Maxwell Institute refuse to explore Native American tribes and their Book of Mormon links

The Iroquois Cherokee stated that they killed off a fair skinned Indian tribe.

Iroquois legend of a foreign people who sailed to the continent then were destroyed.

“After a long time a number of foreign people sailed from a port unknown; but unfortunately before reached their destination the winds drove them contrary ; at length their ship wrecked somewhere on the southern part of the Great Island, and many of the crews perished ; a few active persons were saved ….They immediately selected a place for residence and built a small fortification in order to provide against the attacks of furious beasts….After many years the foreign people became numerous, and extended their settlements ; but afterwards they were destroyed”
(Cusick 1838, pg. 16)


“I did not fail to ask him who these warriors of fire were. “They were,” said he, “bearded men, white but swarthy… They had come on floating villages from the side where the sun rises. They conquered the ancients of the country, of whom they killed as many as there are spears of grass in the Prairies, and in the beginning they were good friends of our brothers, but ultimately they made them submit as well as the ancients of the country, as our Suns (leaders) had foreseen and had foretold to them.””
(Swanton 1909 pg. 184)

A tradition, he said, prevailed among the different nations of Indians through-out that whole extensive range of country, and had been handed down time immemorial, that in an age long gone by, there came white men from a foreign country, and by consent of the Indians established trading-houses and settlements where these tumuli (mounds) are found. A friendly intercourse was continued for several years; many of the white men brought their wives, and had children born to them; and additions to their numbers were made yearly from their own country. These circumstances at length gave rise to jealousies among the Indians, and fears began to be entertained in regard to the increasing numbers, wealth, and ulterior views of the new comers; apprehending that becoming strong, they might one day seize upon the country as their own. A secret council, composed of the chiefs of all the different nations from the St. Lawrence to the Mississippi, was therefore convoked; the result of which, after long deliberation, was a resolution that on a certain night designated for that purpose, all their white neighbors, men, women and children, should be exterminated.“
(Stone 1838 pg. 484)

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10812
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by larsenb »

ripliancum wrote: March 20th, 2017, 12:48 pm The Mik maq used Egyptian Hieroglyphs. The Mik Maq also stated that they sailed to America and were visited by a beautiful man who performed miracles.

http://bookofmormonevidence.blogspot.co ... glyph.html

Its really sad that FAIR and the Neal A Maxwell Institute refuse to explore Native American tribes and their Book of Mormon links

The Iroquois Cherokee stated that they killed off a fair skinned Indian tribe.

Iroquois legend of a foreign people who sailed to the continent then were destroyed.

“After a long time a number of foreign people sailed from a port unknown; but unfortunately before reached their destination the winds drove them contrary ; at length their ship wrecked somewhere on the southern part of the Great Island, and many of the crews perished ; a few active persons were saved ….They immediately selected a place for residence and built a small fortification in order to provide against the attacks of furious beasts….After many years the foreign people became numerous, and extended their settlements ; but afterwards they were destroyed”
(Cusick 1838, pg. 16)


“I did not fail to ask him who these warriors of fire were. “They were,” said he, “bearded men, white but swarthy… They had come on floating villages from the side where the sun rises. They conquered the ancients of the country, of whom they killed as many as there are spears of grass in the Prairies, and in the beginning they were good friends of our brothers, but ultimately they made them submit as well as the ancients of the country, as our Suns (leaders) had foreseen and had foretold to them.””
(Swanton 1909 pg. 184)

A tradition, he said, prevailed among the different nations of Indians through-out that whole extensive range of country, and had been handed down time immemorial, that in an age long gone by, there came white men from a foreign country, and by consent of the Indians established trading-houses and settlements where these tumuli (mounds) are found. A friendly intercourse was continued for several years; many of the white men brought their wives, and had children born to them; and additions to their numbers were made yearly from their own country. These circumstances at length gave rise to jealousies among the Indians, and fears began to be entertained in regard to the increasing numbers, wealth, and ulterior views of the new comers; apprehending that becoming strong, they might one day seize upon the country as their own. A secret council, composed of the chiefs of all the different nations from the St. Lawrence to the Mississippi, was therefore convoked; the result of which, after long deliberation, was a resolution that on a certain night designated for that purpose, all their white neighbors, men, women and children, should be exterminated.“
(Stone 1838 pg. 484)
We've discussed the Micmacs before. There is no pickup from you. Barry Fell found that one of their chants they no longer understood transliterated to Ptolomaic Greek and surmised they were descended from early Ptolomaic Greek Christians.

And can you provide a citation for them being visited by a beautiful man who performed miracles? Are you aware of the book: He Walked the Americas by L. Taylor Hansen. She and her predecessor collected almost hundreds of accounts from many tribes in both South and North America with similar stories.

And who on earth were the Iroquois Cherokee??

You need to supply titles to what I assume are books, not just the last name of an author and a date.

These are interesting stories. But you can find similar stories by descendants of the Maya in Guatemala; and elsewhere; particularly that their descendants came from across the sea in ships and how they were descended from 7 'brothers', etc.

ripliancum
captain of 100
Posts: 178

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by ripliancum »

(Gaspesian/Micmac legend of a beautiful person who in a time of turmoil visited them. He taught them and performed miracles. The sleep mentioned in the quote would make sense during the three days of darkness mentioned in 3 Nephi. The cross mentioned in the quote is the Greek style cross - not to be confused with the evangelical cross. The Greek cross is a sacred symbol found in prehistoric Indian civilizations.)
“They claim that, at a time when their country was afflicted with a very dangerous and deadly malady which had reduced them to an extreme destitution in every respect and had already sent many of them to their graves, certain old men of those whom they considered the best, the wisest, and the most influential, fell asleep, all overwhelmed with weariness and despair at seeing a desolation so general and the impending ruin of the entire Gaspesian nation … It was, say they, in this sleep filled with bitterness that a man, beautiful as could be, appeared to them with a Cross in his hand. He told them to take heart, to go back to their homes, to make Crosses like that which were shown them, and to present these to the heads of families with the assurance that if they would receive the Crosses with respect they would find these without question the remedy for all their ills. And so it turned out in fact, for the sickness ended, and all the afflicted who used the Cross with respect were restored miraculously to health. In this they were more happy.”
(New Relations of Gaspesia pg. 172)

I meant the Iroquois and Cherokee two separate tribes.

New Relations of Gaspesia by Father Chretian Le Clercq

Ancient History of the six Nations by David Cusick

Life of Joseph Brant-Thayendanegea: by William Stone 2nd volume

Mississippi Valley and Adjacent Coast of the Gulf of Mexico By John R. Swanton quotes the Natchez tribe of Mississippi (Land Of Nephi)
Last edited by ripliancum on March 20th, 2017, 2:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10812
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by larsenb »

ripliancum wrote: March 20th, 2017, 1:29 pm (Gaspesian/Micmac legend of a beautiful person who in a time of turmoil visited them. He taught them and performed miracles. The sleep mentioned in the quote would make sense during the three days of darkness mentioned in 3 Nephi. The cross mentioned in the quote is the Greek style cross - not to be confused with the evangelical cross. The Greek cross is a sacred symbol found in prehistoric Indian civilizations.)
“They claim that, at a time when their country was afflicted with a very dangerous and deadly malady which had reduced them to an extreme destitution in every respect and had already sent many of them to their graves, certain old men of those whom they considered the best, the wisest, and the most influential, fell asleep, all overwhelmed with weariness and despair at seeing a desolation so general and the impending ruin of the entire Gaspesian nation … It was, say they, in this sleep filled with bitterness that a man, beautiful as could be, appeared to them with a Cross in his hand. He told them to take heart, to go back to their homes, to make Crosses like that which were shown them, and to present these to the heads of families with the assurance that if they would receive the Crosses with respect they would find these without question the remedy for all their ills. And so it turned out in fact, for the sickness ended, and all the afflicted who used the Cross with respect were restored miraculously to health. In this they were more happy.”
(New Relations of Gaspesia pg. 172)

I meant the Iroquois and Cherokee two separate tribes.

New Relations of Gaspesia by Father Chretian Le Clercq

Ancient History of the six Nations by David Cusick

Life of Joseph Brant-Thayendanegea: by William Stone

Mississippi Valley and Adjacent Coast of the Gulf of Mexico By John R. Swanton Swanton quotes the Natchez tribe of Mississippi (Land Of Nephi)
As mentioned, He Walked the Americas, has similar stories, and they were collected from tribes all over South and North America. Get it and give it a read.

Thanks for providing the book titles and authors.

ripliancum
captain of 100
Posts: 178

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by ripliancum »

I would be very interested to know which South American tribes say that they were visited by Christ and what sources she used for this.

User avatar
AI2.0
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3917

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by AI2.0 »

ripliancum wrote: March 20th, 2017, 2:01 pm I would be very interested to know which South American tribes say that they were visited by Christ and what sources she used for this.

Many. They are common stories among the peoples of Mexico, Central and South America as they are among the Native Americans. Read the book "He Walked the America's" which larsenb mentioned. I'm a bit surprised you didn't know about that book.

Why do you claim they are not also the descendants of the Nephites/Lamanites?

Is it only because you believe they don't carry the Haplogroup X2A? If so, then you are basing this on a false premise. Haplogroup X2A came to the Americas around 15,000 BC--several millenia before the Jaredites, let alone Lehi's group. They are a different group.

http://www.fairmormon.org/blog/2010/04/ ... roup-again


And our church leaders/prophets believe and teach that the people of Mexico, Central and South America are the descendants of the Nephite/Lamanites, in addition to the Native Americans, I don't understand why you would want to exclude them.

ripliancum
captain of 100
Posts: 178

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by ripliancum »

If you believe that mankind started with Adam and Eve as I do 6000 years ago there is no way that Haplo group x arrived in the Americas 15000 years ago. There is no genetic evidence for the scientific theory on this by the way.
The book of Mormon best explains this by saying a trans ocean voyage.

You also have to believe that mankind evolved from pond scum and cockroaches another fallacy of evolution.

I'm not familiar with South American civilizations that say that Christ visited them. Except some say the Questlcoatl but even fair has issues with this.

Could you give references for these examples. I'm very curious as to why Mesoamerican apologist do not use these examples and as to why they are not referenced or Can you show me where FAIR talks about these examples.
Last edited by ripliancum on March 21st, 2017, 12:38 pm, edited 8 times in total.

User avatar
Robin Hood
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13110
Location: England

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by Robin Hood »

ripliancum wrote: March 21st, 2017, 12:05 pm If you believe that mankind started with Adam and Eve as I do 6000 years ago there is no way that Haplo group x arrived in the Americas at 15000 years ago. There is no genetic evidence of this. You also have to believe that mankind evolved from pond scum and cockroaches another fallacy of evolution.
Well said.
I believe mankind started with the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the Garden, not their creation.
In my view they were likely in the Garden for some considerable time.

ripliancum
captain of 100
Posts: 178

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by ripliancum »

Haplo group x is probably the DNA of Lehi. Scientist have postulated that Haplo group x dispersed from Israel. Israel has the highest concentration and the most diversity of Haplo group x anywhere in the world. Native Americans have the second highest concentration of this Middle East dna marker. The genetics on this is a no brainer.

"An attractive hypothesis to explain this geographic concentration of lineages which diverged remotely within an ancient haplogroup (and which are not identified in other populations of the region) is that these Galilee Druze individuals represent the refugium of an ancestral group with high diversity and high frequency of haplogroup X"

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/articl ... ne.0002105

As to why x is not a jewish marker Lehi tribe Manasseh fell away from traditional worship after getting taken over by the Assyrians in 700BC. Lehi family obviously came back to its traditional beliefs.

The tribe of Manasseh became part of the lost ten tribes of Israel

samizdat
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3511

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by samizdat »

ripliancum wrote: March 20th, 2017, 12:48 pm The Mik maq used Egyptian Hieroglyphs. The Mik Maq also stated that they sailed to America and were visited by a beautiful man who performed miracles.

http://bookofmormonevidence.blogspot.co ... glyph.html

Its really sad that FAIR and the Neal A Maxwell Institute refuse to explore Native American tribes and their Book of Mormon links

The Iroquois Cherokee stated that they killed off a fair skinned Indian tribe.

Iroquois legend of a foreign people who sailed to the continent then were destroyed.

“After a long time a number of foreign people sailed from a port unknown; but unfortunately before reached their destination the winds drove them contrary ; at length their ship wrecked somewhere on the southern part of the Great Island, and many of the crews perished ; a few active persons were saved ….They immediately selected a place for residence and built a small fortification in order to provide against the attacks of furious beasts….After many years the foreign people became numerous, and extended their settlements ; but afterwards they were destroyed”
(Cusick 1838, pg. 16)


“I did not fail to ask him who these warriors of fire were. “They were,” said he, “bearded men, white but swarthy… They had come on floating villages from the side where the sun rises. They conquered the ancients of the country, of whom they killed as many as there are spears of grass in the Prairies, and in the beginning they were good friends of our brothers, but ultimately they made them submit as well as the ancients of the country, as our Suns (leaders) had foreseen and had foretold to them.””
(Swanton 1909 pg. 184)

A tradition, he said, prevailed among the different nations of Indians through-out that whole extensive range of country, and had been handed down time immemorial, that in an age long gone by, there came white men from a foreign country, and by consent of the Indians established trading-houses and settlements where these tumuli (mounds) are found. A friendly intercourse was continued for several years; many of the white men brought their wives, and had children born to them; and additions to their numbers were made yearly from their own country. These circumstances at length gave rise to jealousies among the Indians, and fears began to be entertained in regard to the increasing numbers, wealth, and ulterior views of the new comers; apprehending that becoming strong, they might one day seize upon the country as their own. A secret council, composed of the chiefs of all the different nations from the St. Lawrence to the Mississippi, was therefore convoked; the result of which, after long deliberation, was a resolution that on a certain night designated for that purpose, all their white neighbors, men, women and children, should be exterminated.“
(Stone 1838 pg. 484)
The Mic Mac script does not date anywhere near Book of Mormon times, and you would have to move your model north into Canada if it were true.

The Mayan script however, does. As do the Zapotec, and there are Olmec inscriptions dating to 1200 BC.

The Heartland Theory doesn´t have anything to stand on in these cases.

User avatar
AI2.0
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3917

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by AI2.0 »

ripliancum wrote: March 21st, 2017, 12:05 pm If you believe that mankind started with Adam and Eve as I do 6000 years ago there is no way that Haplo group x arrived in the Americas 15000 years ago. There is no genetic evidence for the scientific theory on this by the way. If you believe Adam and Eve were the only humanoids, then you've got a problem because of all the evidence that there were others on earth before 6,000 BC. And you can't pick and choose which parts of the data you believe and what you discard, it goes hand in hand. The science dates this DNA to abt. 15,000 BC. Instead of keeping the DNA, but throwing out the dates, you'd best admit that the DNA evidence cannot be used to support this theory. I'm pretty sure you are using Rod Meldrum's theories and he's already been called out on his misleading claims.
The book of Mormon best explains this by saying a trans ocean voyage.

You also have to believe that mankind evolved from pond scum and cockroaches another fallacy of evolution.No you don't have to believe that, but that's a popular way to dismiss others' views.

I'm not familiar with South American civilizations that say that Christ visited them. Except some say the Questlcoatl but even fair has issues with this.The book, 'He Walked the Americas' by L. Taylor Hansen; has a lot of these legends in it.

Could you give references for these examples. I'm very curious as to why Mesoamerican apologist do not use these examples and as to why they are not referenced or Can you show me where FAIR talks about these examples.
I don't know if Fair does talk about them, but if you research the book, then I bet you will have a lot of your questions answered. Google it, if you can't find a copy of the book, I'm sure there will be info on it. Mesoamerican LDS scholars like to use the geography and archaeology (which are their fields of study), which might explain why they may not be as interested in researching legends.

ripliancum
captain of 100
Posts: 178

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by ripliancum »

If the quotes were reliable FAIR would use them. The fact that FAIR doesn't says a lot.

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10812
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by larsenb »

ripliancum wrote: March 22nd, 2017, 12:47 pm If the quotes were reliable FAIR would use them. The fact that FAIR doesn't says a lot.
Quotes from He Walked the Americas are just as reliable, if not more so, than the alleged description of a Jesus-like figure who visited the Micmacs. Whether FAIR or the Neal A. Maxwell Institute reference these works has nothing to do with their reliability. These groups don't deal in such indirect apologetics as Indian legends, as AI2.0 suggested and the last time I checked.

ripliancum
captain of 100
Posts: 178

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by ripliancum »

I would love to see where she quotes from. Im not familiar with indigenous people of central and south America that claim that Christ visited them or have legends that support that idea.

User avatar
AI2.0
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3917

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by AI2.0 »

ripliancum wrote: March 22nd, 2017, 12:47 pm If the quotes were reliable FAIR would use them. The fact that FAIR doesn't says a lot.
Since FAIR doesn't quote Native American legends, are they not reliable? Be careful of the conclusions you draw...

Her quotes and research is as reliable for the central and south american indians as they are for the Native American indians, because she has plenty of those legends in her book as well.

Just thumbing through the book, I see chapters on Indians in Georgia, Arizona, Michigan, Oklahoma and California and she also has chapters on Guatemala, Polynesia, Mexico, Yucatan, Brazil--just to name a few.

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10812
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by larsenb »

ripliancum wrote: March 22nd, 2017, 1:18 pm I would love to see where she quotes from. Im not familiar with indigenous people of central and south America that claim that Christ visited them or have legends that support that idea.
Now you've been informed, so you can't claim ignorance. But you're also jumping to conclusions the Indians narrating the stories don't claim. They don't say Christ visited them, but describe the figure who did visited them in terms that could be regarded as being akin to Christ-like characteristics and abilities, and at least one account places the visitations in the same time frame as Christ.

User avatar
sandman45
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1562

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by sandman45 »

larsenb wrote: March 17th, 2017, 11:17 pm
sandman45 wrote: March 17th, 2017, 2:52 pm
Robin Hood wrote: March 16th, 2017, 5:30 pm Pro: Heartland model is correct.
Con: Mesoamerican model is incorrect.
Amen and Amen.. Joseph didn't believe it was.. he knew.. he spent so much time with Moroni and knew their culture, their beliefs, their wars, their landscapes, and the clothes they wore what the houses looked like etc.. . . . .
Sorry Sandman. The statements in issues of the 1842 Times and Seasons discussing what Lloyd Stephens, et al., found in Mesoamerica and the surmises that these were the likely locations for the Land of Zarahemla, etc., were written by Joseph Smith.

John Lund did an exhaustive study showing this. I've seen no real rebuttal of his work. Do you have one?? I'd like to see it.
Sorry Joseph didn't write that

User avatar
sandman45
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1562

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by sandman45 »

AI2.0 wrote: March 18th, 2017, 8:29 am
sandman45 wrote: March 17th, 2017, 2:52 pm
Robin Hood wrote: March 16th, 2017, 5:30 pm Pro: Heartland model is correct.
Con: Mesoamerican model is incorrect.
Amen and Amen.. Joseph didn't believe it was.. he knew.. he spent so much time with Moroni and knew their culture, their beliefs, their wars, their landscapes, and the clothes they wore what the houses looked like etc..

There is evidence of civilization.. just ask Smithsonian.. they are covering up most of it.
We are taught in schools that the american indians are savages and uncivilized.. false doctrine there.. there was and were multiple civilizations.. Adena were before Hopewell and there is a lot of evidences that they were the Jaredites..
Thanks, I will look up the Adena. But I don't like the continued insistence that "Joseph knew". This is absolutely false, because if it was true then the church would only teach and encourage the heartland theory, the church would not claim that the book of Mormon lands has not been revealed. How do you explain this?

It is simple; If "Joseph knew", then the church would know, we wouldn't be arguing this and BYU would be spending it's money on hopewell research, so it's clear this is false.

Joseph knew.. and the church today doesn't teach all the same things today that Joseph did then..(just read a lot of the church history from Joseph to John Taylor and compare it to now)
Because the Saints joined babylon and embraced it with open arms.. welcomed them into the valley and love it and love their religion and their science and their financial systems etc etc..

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10812
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by larsenb »

sandman45 wrote: April 4th, 2017, 3:38 pm
larsenb wrote: March 17th, 2017, 11:17 pm
sandman45 wrote: March 17th, 2017, 2:52 pm
Robin Hood wrote: March 16th, 2017, 5:30 pm Pro: Heartland model is correct.
Con: Mesoamerican model is incorrect.
Amen and Amen.. Joseph didn't believe it was.. he knew.. he spent so much time with Moroni and knew their culture, their beliefs, their wars, their landscapes, and the clothes they wore what the houses looked like etc.. . . . .
Sorry Sandman. The statements in issues of the 1842 Times and Seasons discussing what Lloyd Stephens, et al., found in Mesoamerica and the surmises that these were the likely locations for the Land of Zarahemla, etc., were written by Joseph Smith.

John Lund did an exhaustive study showing this. I've seen no real rebuttal of his work. Do you have one?? I'd like to see it.
Sorry Joseph didn't write that
Sorry, but Lund basically proves that he did.

EdGoble
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1077

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by EdGoble »

larsenb wrote: April 4th, 2017, 4:35 pm
sandman45 wrote: April 4th, 2017, 3:38 pm Sorry Joseph didn't write that
Sorry, but Lund basically proves that he did.
I don't comment much on Book of Mormon Geography stuff anymore. I wrote a couple of books on it that never went anywhere, and the books are just ignored basically, and I pretty-much lost interest.

I just decided to put in my two cents here. It seems that we have incessant denials that continue from the North American/Heartland/New Yorkian camp. I have to side here with larsenb. There is ample evidence now that Joseph wrote it.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7053 ... raphy.html

The wordprint analysis also says he did, as well as other evidences. Matt Roper presented this at FAIR way back in 2010, and so this has been 7 years that Heartlanders continue to dispute these findings. You can continue to dispute these things, and are welcome to your opinion. It doesn't change the fact that this evidence is what it is.

I believe that the Book of Mormon land southward is in Mesoamerica.

However, Joseph identified Quirigua as his site for Zarahemla in these articles, but no Mesoamericanist would side with that (I don't either). They would only side with the general idea that Joseph was placing the Book of Mormon land southward in Mesoamerica. And so, Mesoamericanists would never say that Joseph was making these observations based on revelatory information.

Furthermore, there is a statement in the Levi Hancock journal with a direct quote from Joseph Smith stating that the area of Illinois was the Land of Desolation, which if there is anything to it, also drives the narrow neck of land into Mexico, perhaps to Tehuantepec, being the northernmost neck that is plausible. No Mesoamericanist would believe that this statement is revelatory, and would set it aside, especially because it implies, if taken seriously, that Desolation extended up into the North American area, not just into Northern Mexico, because they are hell-bent on having only a extremely limited Geography, leaving out anything in the United States as Book of Mormon lands. North American theorists are worse as far as their lack of rationality goes, and are hell-bent on putting Zarahemla and the rest of the Nephite nation and Narrow neck within the confines of the current borders of the United States, for no rational reason. And North American theorists do nothing but cast the Hancock statement aside also as not reliable or not revelatory, yet that is hypocritical because they are supposedly basing what they believe on Joseph Smith, and treat this as unreliable. I have the direct quotes from Rod Meldrum where I confronted him on this point, where he was trying to explain it away. Oh brother. So we might as well set it ALL aside, because every last statement is likely to be unreliable.

Therefore, only entirely new revelation separate from what Joseph Smith believed, or what anyone else ever believed can really do anything for us to settle this controversy, and that won't happen till the Lord is ready, perhaps after the sifting of people in the Google apostasy. No further evidence will be given, in my opinion, until people are ready to accept unconditionally the truth we already have in faith, and until all the faithless have either repented of that and decided to have faith, or until they all leave or are cut off. What is happening right now is the cleansing of the corruption from the vineyard, the pruning, so to speak. And until that is done, and the church is cleansed of this faithlessness and corruption in the membership, no new information will be given.

Therefore, if anyone wants to come to any kind of conclusion at this moment, it doesn't do to base it on what Joseph Smith believed, in case there was any potential shards of glimmer of light in his belief. Both Mesoamericanists and North American theorists should give up on trying to rely on Joseph Smith or any other statement anybody else has ever made. As John Sorenson has established long ago, all we have to rely on is the text of the Book of Mormon. But even that is dependent on our own personal INTERPRETATION of scripture, where the scripture is not clear, but its ALL WE HAVE. Therefore, if you desire to have any basis in having any chance of hope at coming to a conclusion on Book of Mormon Geography, lay aside anything anybody ever said on it, and rely on the text.

Now, I believe in an exceedingly great distance in the text between the Narrow Neck of Land and the land of Cumorah, and that desolation extended up into Illinois and further. Yet Mesoamericanists would always confront me on that. They always demand that the text requires a limited distance there, even though I say that the text means what it says when it says exceedingly. It says that the land extended up into an area of large bodies of water. They are willing to say that it means what it says below the neck, but are hell-bent on saying that it doesn't mean what it says above the neck. This is not rational. I am still a believer in the New York Cumorah. It is interesting that my position actually harmonizes not just with the Times and Seasons articles of Joseph Smith, but also Joseph Smith's statement on Desolation in the Hancock Journal. Therefore, if we go by Joseph Smith's statements, which perhaps we ought not, both the North American theory, and the Mesoamerican Cumorah theory are found wanting for differing reasons, and only a model with Cumorah in New York and Mesoamerica as the Land Southward is the one that is actually in harmony. Does this do anything for it? Probably not. But it is nevertheless the is the grand irony of relying on Joseph Smith, that NEITHER theory in the controversy is the "one," but rather a combination of elements from both that end up being "it."

But my writings on this controversy are continually ignored by both camps, when both camps are equally wrong about different aspects of the puzzle, not only on Joseph Smith, but also on elements of interpretation of the text.

It will only be when both camps cast aside their respective lack of belief about different things, and cast aside the pieces that don't fit, and bring together things that actually do fit together from both sides, and see how they harmonize that the truth, or what is likely to be true rather, will actually shine through. Both sides have truth, but both sides have pieces that are false too. And so, that is the dilemma. And this is where the issue stands. It is not until both sides rediscover these facts that they will make progress. Some have declared the issue over, and have declared that their side has won, such as on this site: http://bookofmormonwars.blogspot.com, saying "Book of Mormon wars (are over)". Neither side has won, and neither will so long as either side clings to anything that is false.

But, as they say, life is too short, and I don't have a lot of interest anymore in this subject. I know that for some people, it is one of the first principles, practically, of the gospel they believe in, or so it seems sometimes. But for me, its just a curiosity, and can't take on the importance to me that it used to when I was younger and dwelling too much on things that don't truly matter.

User avatar
AI2.0
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3917

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by AI2.0 »

sandman45 wrote: April 4th, 2017, 3:43 pm
AI2.0 wrote: March 18th, 2017, 8:29 am
sandman45 wrote: March 17th, 2017, 2:52 pm
Robin Hood wrote: March 16th, 2017, 5:30 pm Pro: Heartland model is correct.
Con: Mesoamerican model is incorrect.
Amen and Amen.. Joseph didn't believe it was.. he knew.. he spent so much time with Moroni and knew their culture, their beliefs, their wars, their landscapes, and the clothes they wore what the houses looked like etc..

There is evidence of civilization.. just ask Smithsonian.. they are covering up most of it.
We are taught in schools that the american indians are savages and uncivilized.. false doctrine there.. there was and were multiple civilizations.. Adena were before Hopewell and there is a lot of evidences that they were the Jaredites..
Thanks, I will look up the Adena. But I don't like the continued insistence that "Joseph knew". This is absolutely false, because if it was true then the church would only teach and encourage the heartland theory, the church would not claim that the book of Mormon lands has not been revealed. How do you explain this?

It is simple; If "Joseph knew", then the church would know, we wouldn't be arguing this and BYU would be spending it's money on hopewell research, so it's clear this is false.

Joseph knew.. and the church today doesn't teach all the same things today that Joseph did then..(just read a lot of the church history from Joseph to John Taylor and compare it to now)
Because the Saints joined babylon and embraced it with open arms.. welcomed them into the valley and love it and love their religion and their science and their financial systems etc etc..

Well then, if you believe the church leaders conspired to cover up what Joseph supposedly 'Knew' and the saints joined babylon and love everything you believe they should despise, does that mean you are no longer LDS?

And if you are no longer LDS, why should it matter to you where the Lehite land is?

If you do still believe in Joseph Smith as a prophet, are you willing to admit that you believe he set up a flawed system that became corrupted after only a short time? And if that's the case, then the whole 'restoration' of the Lord's true and living church was a big failure as well.


Are you really sure you want to believe something like that? It has far reaching consequences for remaining faithful to modern day prophets and prophecy...

As for me, I don't believe Joseph 'knew', I trust that as the church leaders say today, the actual location of the land of the Lehites was never revealed, so I don't have to worry about cover ups and conspiracies.

User avatar
AI2.0
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3917

Re: Pros and Cons of Heartland vs. MesoAmerica Theories

Post by AI2.0 »

EdGoble wrote: April 5th, 2017, 9:38 am
larsenb wrote: April 4th, 2017, 4:35 pm
sandman45 wrote: April 4th, 2017, 3:38 pm Sorry Joseph didn't write that
Sorry, but Lund basically proves that he did.
I don't comment much on Book of Mormon Geography stuff anymore. I wrote a couple of books on it that never went anywhere, and the books are just ignored basically, and I pretty-much lost interest.

I just decided to put in my two cents here. It seems that we have incessant denials that continue from the North American/Heartland/New Yorkian camp. I have to side here with larsenb. There is ample evidence now that Joseph wrote it.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7053 ... raphy.html

The wordprint analysis also says he did, as well as other evidences. Matt Roper presented this at FAIR way back in 2010, and so this has been 7 years that Heartlanders continue to dispute these findings. You can continue to dispute these things, and are welcome to your opinion. It doesn't change the fact that this evidence is what it is.

I believe that the Book of Mormon land southward is in Mesoamerica.

However, Joseph identified Quirigua as his site for Zarahemla in these articles, but no Mesoamericanist would side with that (I don't either). They would only side with the general idea that Joseph was placing the Book of Mormon land southward in Mesoamerica. And so, Mesoamericanists would never say that Joseph was making these observations based on revelatory information.

Furthermore, there is a statement in the Levi Hancock journal with a direct quote from Joseph Smith stating that the area of Illinois was the Land of Desolation, which if there is anything to it, also drives the narrow neck of land into Mexico, perhaps to Tehuantepec, being the northernmost neck that is plausible. No Mesoamericanist would believe that this statement is revelatory, and would set it aside, especially because it implies, if taken seriously, that Desolation extended up into the North American area, not just into Northern Mexico, because they are hell-bent on having only a extremely limited Geography, leaving out anything in the United States as Book of Mormon lands. North American theorists are worse as far as their lack of rationality goes, and are hell-bent on putting Zarahemla and the rest of the Nephite nation and Narrow neck within the confines of the current borders of the United States, for no rational reason. And North American theorists do nothing but cast the Hancock statement aside also as not reliable or not revelatory, yet that is hypocritical because they are supposedly basing what they believe on Joseph Smith, and treat this as unreliable. I have the direct quotes from Rod Meldrum where I confronted him on this point, where he was trying to explain it away. Oh brother. So we might as well set it ALL aside, because every last statement is likely to be unreliable.

Therefore, only entirely new revelation separate from what Joseph Smith believed, or what anyone else ever believed can really do anything for us to settle this controversy, and that won't happen till the Lord is ready, perhaps after the sifting of people in the Google apostasy. No further evidence will be given, in my opinion, until people are ready to accept unconditionally the truth we already have in faith, and until all the faithless have either repented of that and decided to have faith, or until they all leave or are cut off. What is happening right now is the cleansing of the corruption from the vineyard, the pruning, so to speak. And until that is done, and the church is cleansed of this faithlessness and corruption in the membership, no new information will be given.

Therefore, if anyone wants to come to any kind of conclusion at this moment, it doesn't do to base it on what Joseph Smith believed, in case there was any potential shards of glimmer of light in his belief. Both Mesoamericanists and North American theorists should give up on trying to rely on Joseph Smith or any other statement anybody else has ever made. As John Sorenson has established long ago, all we have to rely on is the text of the Book of Mormon. But even that is dependent on our own personal INTERPRETATION of scripture, where the scripture is not clear, but its ALL WE HAVE. Therefore, if you desire to have any basis in having any chance of hope at coming to a conclusion on Book of Mormon Geography, lay aside anything anybody ever said on it, and rely on the text.

Now, I believe in an exceedingly great distance in the text between the Narrow Neck of Land and the land of Cumorah, and that desolation extended up into Illinois and further. Yet Mesoamericanists would always confront me on that. They always demand that the text requires a limited distance there, even though I say that the text means what it says when it says exceedingly. It says that the land extended up into an area of large bodies of water. They are willing to say that it means what it says below the neck, but are hell-bent on saying that it doesn't mean what it says above the neck. This is not rational. I am still a believer in the New York Cumorah. It is interesting that my position actually harmonizes not just with the Times and Seasons articles of Joseph Smith, but also Joseph Smith's statement on Desolation in the Hancock Journal. Therefore, if we go by Joseph Smith's statements, which perhaps we ought not, both the North American theory, and the Mesoamerican Cumorah theory are found wanting for differing reasons, and only a model with Cumorah in New York and Mesoamerica as the Land Southward is the one that is actually in harmony. Does this do anything for it? Probably not. But it is nevertheless the is the grand irony of relying on Joseph Smith, that NEITHER theory in the controversy is the "one," but rather a combination of elements from both that end up being "it."

But my writings on this controversy are continually ignored by both camps, when both camps are equally wrong about different aspects of the puzzle, not only on Joseph Smith, but also on elements of interpretation of the text.

It will only be when both camps cast aside their respective lack of belief about different things, and cast aside the pieces that don't fit, and bring together things that actually do fit together from both sides, and see how they harmonize that the truth, or what is likely to be true rather, will actually shine through. Both sides have truth, but both sides have pieces that are false too. And so, that is the dilemma. And this is where the issue stands. It is not until both sides rediscover these facts that they will make progress. Some have declared the issue over, and have declared that their side has won, such as on this site: http://bookofmormonwars.blogspot.com, saying "Book of Mormon wars (are over)". Neither side has won, and neither will so long as either side clings to anything that is false.

But, as they say, life is too short, and I don't have a lot of interest anymore in this subject. I know that for some people, it is one of the first principles, practically, of the gospel they believe in, or so it seems sometimes. But for me, its just a curiosity, and can't take on the importance to me that it used to when I was younger and dwelling too much on things that don't truly matter.
Thank you for sharing your extensive knowledge on this subject and you are right, having faith is what matters, not relying on someone's claims of proof for their side. It's becoming more evident how important it is to stay close to the main body of the church and not get side tracked by these things which can divide us as a people.

Post Reply