If you are addressing me, I must apologize. This statement completely stumps me. I am sure we are misunderstanding each other. How do you figure NY to be an island or interpret what I'm saying as such. In the meantime, I will start working on a rough map to share here as I plan to create numerous maps to depict all the missions, migrations and battles throughout the Book of Mormon for my personal studies.larsenb wrote:Western NY as an island in the sea? Interesting concept.
Book of Mormon setting in North America
-
marc
- Disciple of Jesus Christ
- Posts: 10460
- Contact:
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
-
freedomforall
- Gnolaum ∞
- Posts: 16479
- Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
This is not my creation. I saw something like this online and thought I would get a view of it on Google Earth.
Last edited by freedomforall on March 1st, 2012, 5:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
marc
- Disciple of Jesus Christ
- Posts: 10460
- Contact:
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
Ok, I decided to draw it out right now. I am not good with my paint/photo program so I apologize for my rough lines. It took me about an hour to draw once I downloaded a decent map from the internet. Anyway, here is what I mean. The locations are approximate, but once I put together all my notes and quadruple check everything, it will look a lot cleaner. But you get the idea.
Edit: Here are a couple critical scriptures that make this map work in my opinion. If a Nephite can cross Florida in a day and a half, how fast can an army of motivated Nephites and Lamanites move up and around the lands Bountiful and Desolation and up toward Cumorah? And what if they used horses?
Alma 22:32 And now, it was only the distance of a day and a half’s journey for a Nephite, on the line Bountiful and the land Desolation, from the east to the west sea; and thus the land of Nephi and the land of Zarahemla were nearly surrounded by water, there being a small neck of land between the land northward and the land southward.
Helaman 3:8 And it came to pass that they did multiply and spread, and did go forth from the land southward to the land northward, and did spread insomuch that they began to cover the face of the whole earth, from the sea south to the sea north, from the sea west to the sea east.
Edit: Here are a couple critical scriptures that make this map work in my opinion. If a Nephite can cross Florida in a day and a half, how fast can an army of motivated Nephites and Lamanites move up and around the lands Bountiful and Desolation and up toward Cumorah? And what if they used horses?
Alma 22:32 And now, it was only the distance of a day and a half’s journey for a Nephite, on the line Bountiful and the land Desolation, from the east to the west sea; and thus the land of Nephi and the land of Zarahemla were nearly surrounded by water, there being a small neck of land between the land northward and the land southward.
Helaman 3:8 And it came to pass that they did multiply and spread, and did go forth from the land southward to the land northward, and did spread insomuch that they began to cover the face of the whole earth, from the sea south to the sea north, from the sea west to the sea east.
-
Gideon
- captain of 100
- Posts: 605
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
I have wondered about Florida as the narrow neck also. So, how fast do Nephites travel?
Another piece of evidence about the Northeast, particularly the area near Palmyra, NY, is that there are lakes, ponds, streams, creeks, and rivers everywhere.
"the land of Cumorah, ... was in a land of many waters, rivers, and fountains"
(Mormon 6:4)
I just found this free book on Kindle, and I read the first chapter. It adds more evidence to a North American setting. It also explains a phrase in the D&C that has always made me wonder: "the Ohio".
http://www.sacred-texts.com/nam/iro/ibr/ibr02.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Another piece of evidence about the Northeast, particularly the area near Palmyra, NY, is that there are lakes, ponds, streams, creeks, and rivers everywhere.
"the land of Cumorah, ... was in a land of many waters, rivers, and fountains"
(Mormon 6:4)
I just found this free book on Kindle, and I read the first chapter. It adds more evidence to a North American setting. It also explains a phrase in the D&C that has always made me wonder: "the Ohio".
http://www.sacred-texts.com/nam/iro/ibr/ibr02.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
marc
- Disciple of Jesus Christ
- Posts: 10460
- Contact:
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
Great link, Gideon! If I have enough time this weekend, I'll draw up a more detailed map. The one above is too crude. A little more study last night tells me that my line, which borders the lands Bountiful and Desolation is off. I should have drawn that line to start right around Jacksonville. I believe this is the point where the border runs upward in a northwest direction. Therefore Bountiful consists of the entire panhandle and above, left of the line, while desolation is to the right and all the way up toward Cumorah. It is this "point" at Jacksonville (or around there) on the coast that the Nephite's travel from east to west across the panhandle is "a day and a half". I'm not going to bet my life on anything, but this is what I believe, all this assuming the land remained relatively the same after the "changing" at Christ's death. But I do believe that the entire Carribbean Tectonic Plate is primarily the land of Nephi with all the lands and cities round about, which Lamoni's father ruled before he and Lamoni and all the converts abandoned to inherit Jershon, leaving the land to the wicked apostates, ripe for destruction at Christ's death. I'm still compiling all the verses throughout Alma and Helaman, but this entire area is where Lehi and Helaman were warring with the apostates to reclaim the lands while waiting to be resupplied by Pahoran. Captain Moroni was intent on keeping the panhandle fortified in Nephite territory while Nephites settled Bountiful above and expanded.
Incidentally, I came across a verse that said that the Land Ishmael was the land of their first Inheritance (Colombia/Venezuela area), which I think is cool. Seems after Lehi died and Nephi, Sam and crew packed up and left, that Laman, Lemuel, and those who stayed behind, still named new cities/lands after the old world. There's a city Judea round about there, too, which Helaman travels to with his stripling warriors. There is also a city Jerusalem, a great Lamanite city in the land of Nephi, which was covered by water at Christ's death. I'm still pinpointing areas based on their travels/battles, but it's definitely in the Carribean Sea somewhere just above the Land of Ishmael/Land of first inheritance. Pretty cool stuff!
Incidentally, I came across a verse that said that the Land Ishmael was the land of their first Inheritance (Colombia/Venezuela area), which I think is cool. Seems after Lehi died and Nephi, Sam and crew packed up and left, that Laman, Lemuel, and those who stayed behind, still named new cities/lands after the old world. There's a city Judea round about there, too, which Helaman travels to with his stripling warriors. There is also a city Jerusalem, a great Lamanite city in the land of Nephi, which was covered by water at Christ's death. I'm still pinpointing areas based on their travels/battles, but it's definitely in the Carribean Sea somewhere just above the Land of Ishmael/Land of first inheritance. Pretty cool stuff!
-
marc
- Disciple of Jesus Christ
- Posts: 10460
- Contact:
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
Some cool videos relevant to North America (evidences of Nephite/Lamanite civilizations before and after Christ's visit in 3 Nephi 11), including Captain Moroni's brilliant mound build strategies against Lamanite invasions. And since they didn't have large stones with which to build temples as in MesoAmerica, they could build similar pattern mounds of earth for their homes, temples, etc.
-
HeirofNumenor
- the Heir Of Numenor
- Posts: 4229
- Location: UT
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
So where on your map of North America would the land be devoid of Timber and they had to build houses for cement? (Remember that cement needs lots of daytime heat to dry - eliminating Canada) Most likely would be N Mexico & SW USA.... but that doesn't fit with the maps being shown here.
Helaman 3:7
7 And there being but little timber upon the face of the land, nevertheless the people who went forth became exceedingly expert in the working of cement; therefore they did build houses of cement, in the which they did dwell.
Helaman 3:11
11 And thus they did enable the people in the land northward that they might build many cities, both of wood and of cement.
Helaman 3:9
9 And the people who were in the land northward did dwell in tents, and in houses of cement, and they did suffer whatsoever tree should spring up upon the face of the land that it should grow up, that in time they might have timber to build their houses, yea, their cities, and their temples, and their synagogues, and their sanctuaries, and all manner of their buildings.
-
lds_liberty
- Hi, I'm new.
- Posts: 8
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
We just released an LDS Liberty epsiode of our interview with Rod Meldrum - the founder of bookofmormonevidence.org - who promotes this idea - http://www.ldsliberty.org/north-america ... f-promise/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.
I am more impressed with the message he has developed due to his research into Book of Mormon geography rather than the actual location of where the Nephite and Lamanites may have lived.
I am more impressed with the message he has developed due to his research into Book of Mormon geography rather than the actual location of where the Nephite and Lamanites may have lived.
-
livy111us
- captain of 100
- Posts: 288
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
The Cahokia post-date The Book of Mormon by centuries and cannot be evidence for The Book of Mormon. The Hopewell generally built ceremonial mounds over the period of centuries, not in a short time for defense. The Hopewell also were a *very* small population and would not have survived one major battle in The Book of Mormon, let alone their countless battles.
The first video of Rod Meldrum going down into the ditch and then going up, and explains the difficulty a Lamanite would have climbing the mound. Rod is actually doing that backwards. He is starting from the inside of the mound, I assume because he believes it is the outside, and climbs to the outside. The moat is actually on the *inside* of the mound, not the outside. This is not even a fortification, but if it was, they would have a much easier time scaling the mound rather than the ditch and the mound.
Concerning the Great Circle mound, archaeologists explain that this mound is not a fortification from attackers, not a city, but a ceremonial center.
“Archaeologists refer to Newark and similar sites as “ceremonial centers,”…They were not cities, for little evidence of domestic activities is found there. Nor are they fortifications, as some early European Americans believed. Hopewell shamans undoubtedly performed ceremonies at these sites, including mortuary rituals at particular locations.
The circular wall varies in height from 5 to 14 feet with a ditch or moat at the base of the wall inside the enclosure. The ditch varies in depth from 8 to 13 feet. The fact that the ditch is inside the wall rather than outside indicates it is not a defensive moat.” Archaeology in America: Northeast and Southeast, Francis P. McManamon page 100
Here are a few other statements from archaeologists who specialize in the area of the Hopewell area, that cast doubt on their plausibility to be Nephites:
“there is no archaeological evidence of widespread “massive city remains” in North America by any formal definition of the term city. With the possible exception of Cahokia, there are no archaeological settlements in North America that are comparable in size and population density to, for example, the earliest city-states in Mesopotamia, the first cities located along the Indus River in Pakistan, or any of the large urban settlements located in the Valley of Mexico. Even estimates for Cahokia rarely calculate its population at more than ten thousand people, a number sometimes used as a statistical cutoff point for the designation of a settlement as a city. Other than Cahokia, all of the other large mound sites in North America appear to have been a different kind of settlement entirely: not cities but rather ceremonial centers with relatively small residential populations surrounded by numerous hamlets dispersed in vast areas around them. The people living in these hamlets produced the surplus (in the form of food, wealth, and labor) that supported the ritual elites living in the mound centers. In a particularly egregious example of misuse of terminology, the documentary describes the earth embankment that encloses the Newark Earthworks in Ohio as “city walls.” This is nonsense. The Newark Earthworks include a spectacular array of more than four and a half square miles of geometric enclosures and mounds in a variety of shapes and sizes, but there is no archaeological evidence for an urban population here (Lepper 2004) or at any of the other monumental earthworks of the Hopewell culture. To be clear: stating that places like the Newark Earthworks, Poverty Point in Louisiana (Gibson 2000), Etowah in Georgia, Moundville in Alabama (Welch 1991), Town Creek Mound in North Carolina, or Crystal River Mounds in Florida were not cities is not to disparage them or minimize the achievements of those who produced them. It merely points out the fact, as shown clearly by archaeological investigation, that this architecture was not urban in character and was wholly unlike cities as ordinarily defined. Indeed, one of the fascinating challenges posed by such structures is how a population dispersed in small hamlets without hereditary kings or pharaohs could have organized the labor to erect such massive earthworks.” Civilizations Lost and Found: Fabricating History, Bradly Leper http://www.csicop.org/si/show/civilizat ... ernate_re/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Food for thought.
The first video of Rod Meldrum going down into the ditch and then going up, and explains the difficulty a Lamanite would have climbing the mound. Rod is actually doing that backwards. He is starting from the inside of the mound, I assume because he believes it is the outside, and climbs to the outside. The moat is actually on the *inside* of the mound, not the outside. This is not even a fortification, but if it was, they would have a much easier time scaling the mound rather than the ditch and the mound.
Concerning the Great Circle mound, archaeologists explain that this mound is not a fortification from attackers, not a city, but a ceremonial center.
“Archaeologists refer to Newark and similar sites as “ceremonial centers,”…They were not cities, for little evidence of domestic activities is found there. Nor are they fortifications, as some early European Americans believed. Hopewell shamans undoubtedly performed ceremonies at these sites, including mortuary rituals at particular locations.
The circular wall varies in height from 5 to 14 feet with a ditch or moat at the base of the wall inside the enclosure. The ditch varies in depth from 8 to 13 feet. The fact that the ditch is inside the wall rather than outside indicates it is not a defensive moat.” Archaeology in America: Northeast and Southeast, Francis P. McManamon page 100
Here are a few other statements from archaeologists who specialize in the area of the Hopewell area, that cast doubt on their plausibility to be Nephites:
“there is no archaeological evidence of widespread “massive city remains” in North America by any formal definition of the term city. With the possible exception of Cahokia, there are no archaeological settlements in North America that are comparable in size and population density to, for example, the earliest city-states in Mesopotamia, the first cities located along the Indus River in Pakistan, or any of the large urban settlements located in the Valley of Mexico. Even estimates for Cahokia rarely calculate its population at more than ten thousand people, a number sometimes used as a statistical cutoff point for the designation of a settlement as a city. Other than Cahokia, all of the other large mound sites in North America appear to have been a different kind of settlement entirely: not cities but rather ceremonial centers with relatively small residential populations surrounded by numerous hamlets dispersed in vast areas around them. The people living in these hamlets produced the surplus (in the form of food, wealth, and labor) that supported the ritual elites living in the mound centers. In a particularly egregious example of misuse of terminology, the documentary describes the earth embankment that encloses the Newark Earthworks in Ohio as “city walls.” This is nonsense. The Newark Earthworks include a spectacular array of more than four and a half square miles of geometric enclosures and mounds in a variety of shapes and sizes, but there is no archaeological evidence for an urban population here (Lepper 2004) or at any of the other monumental earthworks of the Hopewell culture. To be clear: stating that places like the Newark Earthworks, Poverty Point in Louisiana (Gibson 2000), Etowah in Georgia, Moundville in Alabama (Welch 1991), Town Creek Mound in North Carolina, or Crystal River Mounds in Florida were not cities is not to disparage them or minimize the achievements of those who produced them. It merely points out the fact, as shown clearly by archaeological investigation, that this architecture was not urban in character and was wholly unlike cities as ordinarily defined. Indeed, one of the fascinating challenges posed by such structures is how a population dispersed in small hamlets without hereditary kings or pharaohs could have organized the labor to erect such massive earthworks.” Civilizations Lost and Found: Fabricating History, Bradly Leper http://www.csicop.org/si/show/civilizat ... ernate_re/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Food for thought.
-
soberminded
- captain of 50
- Posts: 54
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
That is one cool map, Coach. I mentally tried to place the cities i know on it but i have to go back to the source and review. Fascinating...to say the least.
-
freedomforall
- Gnolaum ∞
- Posts: 16479
- Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
Food for thought.
http://www.bookofmormonlands.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.thebookofmormongeography.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopi ... 97#p136597" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.bookofmormonlands.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.thebookofmormongeography.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopi ... 97#p136597" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
livy111us
- captain of 100
- Posts: 288
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
My concerns still stand, despite the links which do not answer them. I see multiple problems with a North American setting for The Book of Mormon in which include geographical, cultural, and archaeological problems. Having put a lot of time into studying BOM geography and it's theories, I see a Mesoamerican setting to have the least amount of problems, with a South American setting in second and Great Lakes in third, FWIW.
May I ask where in the Pac NW you are at? That is my old stomping grounds.
May I ask where in the Pac NW you are at? That is my old stomping grounds.
-
marc
- Disciple of Jesus Christ
- Posts: 10460
- Contact:
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
The land Desolation just as it says in the Book of Mormon. Of course a lot of time passed between the time they began building houses of cement and Colonial America. Plenty of time for soil erosion, trees and forrest to grow and the land to change substantially. And all the videos I posted are just for fun and perspective. Not necessarily to say that those same mounds are Captain Moroni's, only that Moroni was the inspiration for the Lamanites to use with their city building after they destroyed the Nephites and populated the US. What you see in the videos could simply be the evolution of city building in later centuries.HeirofNumenor wrote:So where on your map of North America would the land be devoid of Timber and they had to build houses for cement? (Remember that cement needs lots of daytime heat to dry - eliminating Canada) Most likely would be N Mexico & SW USA.... but that doesn't fit with the maps being shown here.Helaman 3:7
7 And there being but little timber upon the face of the land, nevertheless the people who went forth became exceedingly expert in the working of cement; therefore they did build houses of cement, in the which they did dwell.
Helaman 3:11
11 And thus they did enable the people in the land northward that they might build many cities, both of wood and of cement.
Helaman 3:9
9 And the people who were in the land northward did dwell in tents, and in houses of cement, and they did suffer whatsoever tree should spring up upon the face of the land that it should grow up, that in time they might have timber to build their houses, yea, their cities, and their temples, and their synagogues, and their sanctuaries, and all manner of their buildings.
I think too many people are stuck in one paradigm or another, or one time frame or another, as if time froze and the land never changed. But it change. A lot. Even between the time the people of Mulek finally settle Zarahemla and the Nephites discovered them, their language had changed dramatically that Mosiah had to teach them their native tongue again despite both civilizations having come from the same exact city of Jerusalem in Israel. Every time I look at today's map and how a Nephite could travel across Florida in a day and a half only, it doesn't surprise me at all that Limhi was able to find Coriantumr way up north in Jaredite country after traveling many days and bringing him back down. Anyway, I honestly don't want people to get hung up on this map. It is simply what I use for context when studying the travels of the sons of Mosiah in their mission, the migration and wars of the Nephites during the reign of Judges and then their wars four generations after Christ visited them.
I am completely open to see anyone else draw their own map and place the lands and cities according to their own understanding of the Book of Mormon and their own research. As for me, I believe the land of Nephi round about is basically the Carribean Tectonic plate, which connected Florida, being the narrow neck of land that separated the land Northward (US) with the land Southward (MesoAmerica/S. America). There is NO doubt in my mind that the hill Cumorah is the same hill, the one and only hill, which was Ramah to the Jaredites and which Moroni hid the records for Joseph Smith to find.
-
marc
- Disciple of Jesus Christ
- Posts: 10460
- Contact:
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
Nice find with the second link! I do not, however think Zarahemla was that far into Mexico, but I could be wrong. I also don't believe the the Rio Grand is the River Sidon. They don't fit right. The River Sidon flowed northward into the sea. I believe Sidon ran northward somewhere into the Gulf of Mexico, west of the land of inheritance and was changed, diverted or even split from the Guatemalan highlands. I'm still sorting that one out. I think it was referred to as waters of Sidon after Christ's visit that changed the land. I can't remember and have to check. And his map seems to have a narrow channel of water between Florida and the land of Ishmael, which could be or not. My opinion as of now, is it was solid land, making the Gulf of Mexico completely isolated. I could be wrong. Again, I specifically remember the Land of Ishmael being the land of their first inheritance so this is where he and I differ. Anyway, as I mentioned above, I don't claim my map to be gospel truth, but I'm standing by what I have...so far.freedomfighter wrote:Food for thought.
http://www.bookofmormonlands.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.thebookofmormongeography.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopi ... 97#p136597" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
livy111us
- captain of 100
- Posts: 288
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
Coach, while not fitting your theory exactly, you may be interested in an article I wrote on evidences of Mesoamericans in North America. I believe this fits in with Book of Mormon statements of Nephite migrations "northward." If The Book of Mormon took place in Mesoamerica, the lands northward might very well be the lands of the Hopewell which some argue to be Nephites. I don't have a problem with Nephites being in North America, but believe that they very well may have been part of these migrations of people who originated in Mesoamerica.
http://www.bmaf.org/node/458" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.bmaf.org/node/458" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
marc
- Disciple of Jesus Christ
- Posts: 10460
- Contact:
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
livy111us, as I said, my model is pre/post Christ's visit, 34 AD when the entire land and water was changed. I tend to believe that all the wicked people and their cities were buried by water, land, burned, etc, sparing all those who lived a terrestrial law. This is my opinion. When the land changed, as we have today, still so much changed. Even between 34 AD and 421 AD, that's a LOT of time to grow timbers, which they did, and change their land with tilling, which they did, and all their building and growing. And from that time forward until Joseph Smith's time, many centuries, that's a lot of time for erosion to occur, forests to grow, and all the changes and development and evolution of the cultures of the Lamanites/American Indians. This is just my opinion.
Last edited by marc on February 29th, 2012, 10:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
marc
- Disciple of Jesus Christ
- Posts: 10460
- Contact:
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
I've been saying this all along.livy111us wrote:...but believe that they very well may have been part of these migrations of people who originated in Mesoamerica.
-
livy111us
- captain of 100
- Posts: 288
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
If you are interested, here are some articles on possible locations for the river Sidon:
http://bomgeography.poulsenll.org/grijalvasidon.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.bmaf.org/node/180" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
and a collection of geography theories with general geographical features named:
http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon ... ls/Limited" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://bomgeography.poulsenll.org/grijalvasidon.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.bmaf.org/node/180" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
and a collection of geography theories with general geographical features named:
http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon ... ls/Limited" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Last edited by livy111us on February 28th, 2012, 8:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
livy111us
- captain of 100
- Posts: 288
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
I think this message was meant for someone else since it seems to be on topic with a conversation you were having with HeirofNumenor.coachmarc wrote:livy111us, as I said, my model is pre/post Christ's visit, 34 AD when the entire land and water was changed. I tend to believe that all the wicked people and their cities were buried by water, land, burned, etc, sparing all those who lived a terrestrial law. This is my opinion. When the land changed, as we have today, still so much changed. Even between 34 AD and 421 AD, that's a LOT of time to grow timbers, which they did, and change their land with tilling, which they did, and all their building and growing. And from that time forward until Joseph Smith's time, a century, that's a lot of time for erosion to occur, forests to grow, and all the changes and development and evolution of the cultures of the Lamanites/American Indians. This is just my opinion.
But with that said, many of the geographical features were part of Moroni's editorial and would reflect a post-Christ geography and be more consistent with the geography we see today.
-
marc
- Disciple of Jesus Christ
- Posts: 10460
- Contact:
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
Thanks for those links. I'll check them out tomorrow. One final thought for tonight. In my mind, MesoAmerica is the Southern borders between the land of their first inheritance all the way to Zarahemla, which was spared being buried by water, though it was destroyed as Christ testified, but was rebuilt. I believe the City of Zarahemla was somewhere around or between Guatemala and Mexico City. That's just a rough guess and that's all it is. North of MesoAmerica, in the Carribbean Tectonic Plate is where Captain Moroni was traveling back and forth trying to maintain his "liberty" cities when he writes Pahoran. And Florida is the part of Bountiful, which he wanted fortified to keep Lamanites out of the land North, which Morianton (spelling? Going off of memory) wanted to do, heading all the way up to Ripliancum before he beat his maidservant and she fled to inform Captain Moroni, who then told, I think it was Lehi, to fortify and hold Florida, "the narrow neck of land".
-
marc
- Disciple of Jesus Christ
- Posts: 10460
- Contact:
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
I own a book, which I've had since about 1991, which I'm looking at again. In "Deciphering the Geography of the Book of Mormon," F. Richard Hauck, writes the following 12 statements as "facts" because they are clearly stated in the Book of Mormon. We find this in his third chapter, "Assumptions-Their Use And Abuse".
Fact 1. The Book of Mormon is an abbreviated history compiled by religious leaders of ancient peoples of Near East Asian origin that settled in the Americas.
Fact 2. Three separate colonies were established on the American continent following sea migrations. Jared and Lehi were the leaders two colonies, and Mulek, a son of Old Testament King Zedekiah, accompanied the third migration.
Fact 3. The colonization led by Jared and his brother occurred between 3,500 and 2,500 BC contrasted with the separate arrivals of Lehi's colony and the group that included Mulek, both latter migrations occurring during the first half of the sixth century BC.
Fact 4. Shortly after their landing, a segment of Lehi's group under the leadership of Nephi settled inland in the land of Nephi and became known as the Nephites.
Fact 5. A segment oft the Nephites abandoned the land of Nephi probably during the third century BC and settled at Zarahemla among the people of Zarahemla, who included descendants of the migratory party accompanied by Mulek.
Fact 6. A Nephite colony temporarily reoccupied the settlements of Nephi and Shilom within the Lamanite-controlled land of Nephi between 200 and 120 BC.
Fact 7. The locality of the total recorded experience is flanked by north, south, east and west seas.
Fact 8. Both the lands of Zarahemla and Nephi extend from the borders of the east seashore to the borders of the west seashore.
Fact 9. The land southward (incorporating the lands of Nephi and Zarahemla) and the land northward (the homeland colonized earlier by Jared and his migration party)were separated by a narrow neck of land, also referred to as a narrow passage of land.
Fact 10. The destruction of the civilization found by the descendants of Jared's party occurred between 600 and 100 BC in the land northward at the hill the Jaredites named Ramah.
Fact 11. The Nephite-Lamanite conflicts culminated with the destruction of the Nephite political and economic system in AD 385 in the land northward at the hill the Nephites named Cumorah.
Fact 12. The Hill Ramah was identical with the Hill Cumorah.
He doesn't support any of these with scripture at this juncture, but I'll "assume" he is correct to a certain degree until I can verify or dispute it. Furthermore, my map supports all 12 of his facts, although #8 is hazy the way he has it written. He has really done well with listing all the relevant scriptures, travels, migrations, battles, etc, but nowhere in his book (that I can see) does he take into account the fact that some cities were buried by water. He also uses the current map of MesoAmerica as the same unchanged land for his Book of Mormon model with every land and city confined to that small region of Guatemala with the exception of Hill Cumorah and surrounding lands, which he places in what is today Veracruz. The only problem with this model and most that follow this model, which confine all the lands and cities to this region only is that the Land Southward is east of the land Northward, which is west. That just doesn't sit well with me. But I'm no scholar. I'm sure these ancient peoples, being the expert astronomers that they were, knew which way is north and northward. Alma talks about the "planets which move in their regular form" in Alma 30:44. He must have known which was is north.
Just some more ramblings. Have a nice day.
Fact 1. The Book of Mormon is an abbreviated history compiled by religious leaders of ancient peoples of Near East Asian origin that settled in the Americas.
Fact 2. Three separate colonies were established on the American continent following sea migrations. Jared and Lehi were the leaders two colonies, and Mulek, a son of Old Testament King Zedekiah, accompanied the third migration.
Fact 3. The colonization led by Jared and his brother occurred between 3,500 and 2,500 BC contrasted with the separate arrivals of Lehi's colony and the group that included Mulek, both latter migrations occurring during the first half of the sixth century BC.
Fact 4. Shortly after their landing, a segment of Lehi's group under the leadership of Nephi settled inland in the land of Nephi and became known as the Nephites.
Fact 5. A segment oft the Nephites abandoned the land of Nephi probably during the third century BC and settled at Zarahemla among the people of Zarahemla, who included descendants of the migratory party accompanied by Mulek.
Fact 6. A Nephite colony temporarily reoccupied the settlements of Nephi and Shilom within the Lamanite-controlled land of Nephi between 200 and 120 BC.
Fact 7. The locality of the total recorded experience is flanked by north, south, east and west seas.
Fact 8. Both the lands of Zarahemla and Nephi extend from the borders of the east seashore to the borders of the west seashore.
Fact 9. The land southward (incorporating the lands of Nephi and Zarahemla) and the land northward (the homeland colonized earlier by Jared and his migration party)were separated by a narrow neck of land, also referred to as a narrow passage of land.
Fact 10. The destruction of the civilization found by the descendants of Jared's party occurred between 600 and 100 BC in the land northward at the hill the Jaredites named Ramah.
Fact 11. The Nephite-Lamanite conflicts culminated with the destruction of the Nephite political and economic system in AD 385 in the land northward at the hill the Nephites named Cumorah.
Fact 12. The Hill Ramah was identical with the Hill Cumorah.
He doesn't support any of these with scripture at this juncture, but I'll "assume" he is correct to a certain degree until I can verify or dispute it. Furthermore, my map supports all 12 of his facts, although #8 is hazy the way he has it written. He has really done well with listing all the relevant scriptures, travels, migrations, battles, etc, but nowhere in his book (that I can see) does he take into account the fact that some cities were buried by water. He also uses the current map of MesoAmerica as the same unchanged land for his Book of Mormon model with every land and city confined to that small region of Guatemala with the exception of Hill Cumorah and surrounding lands, which he places in what is today Veracruz. The only problem with this model and most that follow this model, which confine all the lands and cities to this region only is that the Land Southward is east of the land Northward, which is west. That just doesn't sit well with me. But I'm no scholar. I'm sure these ancient peoples, being the expert astronomers that they were, knew which way is north and northward. Alma talks about the "planets which move in their regular form" in Alma 30:44. He must have known which was is north.
Just some more ramblings. Have a nice day.
-
freedomforall
- Gnolaum ∞
- Posts: 16479
- Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
Couldn't northward, in BOM sense, also include variants? For example, instead of saying northeast, they would say northward. A few degrees one side or the other of true north could make a huge difference as to where populations cropped up. One could be in Florida and pointing toward Ohio and say it is northward, right? They may not have been that accurate as to where true north is.
-
livy111us
- captain of 100
- Posts: 288
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
Coach,
That list gives very vague geographical features and I am sure I could find a few dozen areas in my home state that could fit that description. There is much more that needs to fit than just that. I would recommend coming up with an internal map first, using The Book of Mormon as your guide, and then find an external geography which fits the internal geography. John Sorenson has written a short, concise book which should help you do that. In Mormon's Map, he examines the internal geography of The BOM and doesn't give an external one (even though he espouses a Mesoamerican setting). I think it does the best job at organizing the evidence of what BOM lands were supposed to look like. You can read it online here:
http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publica ... bookid=101" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I haven't checked this site out fully, but from what I've seen it looks pretty good:
https://sites.google.com/site/bomgeogra ... commentary" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
In answer to the directional issue that you brought up, they were not as dogmatic as we are today with our satellite photographs. I'd recommend reading these very short articles on that issue
http://bookofmormonresearch.org/book_of ... -of-mormon" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publica ... chapid=818" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Despite those explanations, Larry Poulsens geography reconciles the directional issues that Sorensons geography has. He briefly explains it here:
http://bomgeography.poulsenll.org/bomdirections.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Or you could just watch a lecture he gave, which includes the directional information, here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knw0pl8Ifsc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
That list gives very vague geographical features and I am sure I could find a few dozen areas in my home state that could fit that description. There is much more that needs to fit than just that. I would recommend coming up with an internal map first, using The Book of Mormon as your guide, and then find an external geography which fits the internal geography. John Sorenson has written a short, concise book which should help you do that. In Mormon's Map, he examines the internal geography of The BOM and doesn't give an external one (even though he espouses a Mesoamerican setting). I think it does the best job at organizing the evidence of what BOM lands were supposed to look like. You can read it online here:
http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publica ... bookid=101" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I haven't checked this site out fully, but from what I've seen it looks pretty good:
https://sites.google.com/site/bomgeogra ... commentary" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
In answer to the directional issue that you brought up, they were not as dogmatic as we are today with our satellite photographs. I'd recommend reading these very short articles on that issue
http://bookofmormonresearch.org/book_of ... -of-mormon" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publica ... chapid=818" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Despite those explanations, Larry Poulsens geography reconciles the directional issues that Sorensons geography has. He briefly explains it here:
http://bomgeography.poulsenll.org/bomdirections.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Or you could just watch a lecture he gave, which includes the directional information, here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knw0pl8Ifsc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
livy111us
- captain of 100
- Posts: 288
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
I couldn't have said it better myself. Early Mesoamericanist's believed in directional quarters which would make North not necessarily true North, but "Northward." Here is an example:freedomfighter wrote:Couldn't northward, in BOM sense, also include variants? For example, instead of saying northeast, they would say northward. A few degrees one side or the other of true north could make a huge difference as to where populations cropped up. One could be in Florida and pointing toward Ohio and say it is northward, right? They may not have been that accurate as to where true north is.
http://bomgeography.poulsenll.org/image ... _shown.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I may invite Larry over to add to the conversation. He is a smart guy and can explain his theory and be here to answer any questions.
-
larryp
- Hi, I'm new.
- Posts: 1
Re: Book of Mormon setting in North America
Livy
I registered for the site but dont spend a lot of time on BofM geography these days. Most of everything new is mostly speculation. As I have said everyone needs to build there own internal map using all 500 geographically references in the text. Unfortunatly many, including Sorenson, leave out those that do not fit or can not be integrated into their view of the geography. One of the most important descriptions of geography is found in Alma 22 where Mormon, in an editorial aside, describes the geographical relationship between the Nephite and Lamanite cultures. He describes a narrow strip of wilderness that is the main geographical feature that seperates the two cultures. Any viable mapping of the BofM must inlude such a feature and provide evidence that it is a natural barrier between both modern and ancient cultures in the Americas. It must run from an east sea to a west sea and be at a higher elavation than Zarahemla because the source of the river Sidon is found in this strip of wilderness and rivers only run downhill. Sorenson, unfortunately, does not spend much time on this feature and does not even show it clearly on his internal map.
LarryP
I registered for the site but dont spend a lot of time on BofM geography these days. Most of everything new is mostly speculation. As I have said everyone needs to build there own internal map using all 500 geographically references in the text. Unfortunatly many, including Sorenson, leave out those that do not fit or can not be integrated into their view of the geography. One of the most important descriptions of geography is found in Alma 22 where Mormon, in an editorial aside, describes the geographical relationship between the Nephite and Lamanite cultures. He describes a narrow strip of wilderness that is the main geographical feature that seperates the two cultures. Any viable mapping of the BofM must inlude such a feature and provide evidence that it is a natural barrier between both modern and ancient cultures in the Americas. It must run from an east sea to a west sea and be at a higher elavation than Zarahemla because the source of the river Sidon is found in this strip of wilderness and rivers only run downhill. Sorenson, unfortunately, does not spend much time on this feature and does not even show it clearly on his internal map.
LarryP
