Book of Mormon Geography

[Shulem]

The mentions of "going up" that you don't highlight show that using Delmarva as a template would have resulted in very different storylines in the Book of Mormon. For example:

As you know, going UP and going DOWN is a regular feature in the Book of Mormon, especially between the respective territories of the lands of Zarahemla & Lehi-Nephi. I cover this in some detail in the other threads. Apologists get hung up on the UP & DOWN as if it relates to elevation but that seems not to be the case between these lands. It’s the direction that counts: north & south -- up & down, but where is up and where is down? In my Delmarva model, you can’t get to the land of Nephi from Zarahemla without first going UP and then hooking around and then going DOWN. It’s the “UP” that is prominently featured from Zarahemla because it’s the beginning (“started to go up”) of the journey and thus is quite descriptive. So, going UP is what describes the journey because that is how it starts on the first leg until making the turn south to go down. Incidentally, Joseph Smith should not have used the word start in his Book of Mormon translation.

"And now, they knew not the course they should travel in the wilderness to go up to the land of Lehi-Nephi; therefore they wandered many days in the wilderness, even forty days did they wander."

They left Zarahemla to go UP (northward) and kept going up wandering about aimlessly round about on the main body of the peninsula. They failed to make the proper turn at the narrow inlet in which to go south. So they wandered about until they they finally found their way. It all makes for a great story and provides adventure. Wouldn’t you say?

How could it be possible that they would get lost for forty days if all they had to do was go up alongside the river, hook around it, and then go down the other side?

BECAUSE “they knew not the course they should travel in the wilderness to go up to the land of Lehi-Nephi”. They didn’t know the course, period. They didn’t know how to get there. They didn’t know where to make the narrow turn and go south. They kept going and wandered aimlessly on the main body of the peninsula, probably in circles as far as Joseph Smith was concerned. The story featured them being lost because they did not have a map and knew not the course they should travel. That was Joseph Smith having fun making his novel.

Simple. As. That.

Then there's the next verse in Omni:

"28 Wherefore, they went up into the wilderness. And their leader being a strong and mighty man, and a stiffnecked man, wherefore he caused a contention among them; and they were all slain, save fifty, in the wilderness, and they returned again to the land of Zarahemla."

That reads as if by going up into the wilderness they had left the land of Zarahemla and were in the Land of Nephi.

The expedition in Omni failed to make it to the land of Nephi. They simply returned to Zarahemla empty handed.

But Mosiah gives a prime example that illustrates how after they first go UP from Zarahemla to the land of Nephi (although they lose their way and wander 40 days) they finally make the proper turn through a narrow pass to go south which is the final leg given in directional terms.

And Ammon took three of his brethren, and their names were Amaleki, Helem, and Hem, and they went down into the land of Nephi.

Note how they went DOWN (south) into the land of Nephi! They went down into the tail of Delmarva after having made the turn north of Shilom. The Delmarva model accommodates the descriptions given in the text quite nicely, I think. Wouldn’t you say?

[Shulem]

Did you know that the Susquehanna is the longest river on the American east coast? Both Hagoth and Captain Kidd were wise in choosing this river for their expeditions.

I think it’s fair to say that if young Joseph could envision Captain Kidd sailing up the Susquehanna River, then he can also imagine Hagoth doing the same. Hagoth set out from the ocean bay just as Kidd did into fresh river water and “into the land northward.” Thus, he went “into the land northward” just as those who walked on the dry ground of the narrow neck went “into the land which was northward.” Whether by river or by land, they went “into the land.” Thus they made their journey with distance whether by water or land.

The very course was northward! Onward we go! Whether by land or river, they did travel an exceedingly great distance, insomuch that they came to large bodies of water and many rivers. Even to Cumorah and the Great Lakes!

Doesn’t this all tie together rather nicely?



See also: Into the land northward

[Shulem]

"And in the thirty and eighth year, this man built other ships. And the first ship did also return, and many more people did enter into it; and they also took much provisions, and set out again to the land northward. And it came to pass that they were never heard of more. And we suppose that they were drowned in the depths of the sea. And it came to pass that one other ship also did sail forth; and whither she did go we know not."

If Hagoth's ships had sailed up the Susquehanna, I doubt Smith would have chosen the wording "drowned in the depths of the sea." And if a ship sailed up a river, it'd be pretty easy to know "whither she did go".

FIRST, let me say Smith chose his words carefully and in my opinion, he stole the word “she” out of Late War and modern context. Vessels being referred to a “she’ or a “her” is very questionable in my view. I recommend you familiarize yourself with my thread:

“Wither she did go” ??

SECOND, allow me to interject to your objections about “depths of the sea” with regard to those who sailed up and down the river and entered therein. Bear in mind the Chesapeake Bay flanks the west coast of Delmarva and there is a bay to the far north near the narrow neck. This is where river meets the sea. I can conclude that had Captain Kidd been known to have sunk while making an expedition it would follow that his bones would be at sea even if he had perished up river. In this case, the author makes little distinction between river and sea as they become one when they finally meet.

Right? Look, see:

And now as many of the Lamanites and the Amlicites who had been slain upon the bank of the river Sidon were cast into the waters of Sidon; and behold their bones are in the depths of the sea, and they are many.

Folks, we are talking about a real flowing river! A river that flows and goes beyond and adjoins with the sea. What sea? The ocean! Yes, the river joins the sea where fresh water and salt meet and mix.

Their bones have GONE FORTH and are lost at sea! Where the river meets the ocean.

And it came to pass that they did cast their dead into the waters of Sidon, and they have gone forth and are buried in the depths of the sea.

[Shulem]

I doubt Smith would have chosen the wording

Wasn’t Smith translating with his head in a hat and reading the very words off a seer stone? What is there to choose if he’s simply reading the words that appear on a stone?

Are you tipping your hat to me?

[Shulem]

Apart from a (too narrow) narrow neck of land, I'm not seeing much else in the Book of Mormon that looks like Delmarva.

Indeed!

Laman Knight,

Would you care to show me on the map where Joseph was looking at a narrow neck and demonstrate using the text how it all comes together?

Indeed, I would love to analyze a narrow neck which you think better describes what is in the Book of Mormon.

[Shulem]

Apart from a (too narrow) narrow neck of land, I'm not seeing much else in the Book of Mormon that looks like Delmarva.

May I suggest that you open your eyes and take a closer look at the maps, please? Those that Joseph Smith may have looked at in his day. What justification do you have to say that the narrow neck is too narrow? I’ve provided references in the text that give the width & length of the neck based on what it takes for a man to traverse it and defend it -- from sea to sea within a reasonable time based on various circumstances. I believe my presentation is quite clear and irrefutable. I also believe nonmembers of the church will thoroughly embrace it as a correct interpretation. But believers and members who require archeological evidence will reject it based on that reason and that reason alone. We can take it step by step again if that is what it takes to get you to see the picture of the map Joseph Smith was looking at. But you have not made your case! You have dropped every ball. If you don’t want to see or believe what I am explaining then you don’t have to. Whatever floats your boat. I feel pretty confident that all of your objections have been easily handled and explained and my position vigorously defended and logically proven correct by using the text.

Now, let’s seriously begin to find some common ground we can work with. Okay? The text informs us that there is a Sea South or a South Sea. Delmarva has just that! Everything off the tip of Delmarva going south is ocean and is the very Sea South mentioned in the Book of Mormon. So, when you say you don’t see much of anything else that identifies Delmarva with the text it leads me to believe that you aren’t being straight with me.


Delmarva

[✓] Sea South

Do we have an accord, Zosimus?

[Shulem]

And if a ship sailed up a river, it'd be pretty easy to know "whither she did go".

How hardly! They knew next to NOTHING other than the fact that they sailed northward into the land. But where they finally ended up or what river tributary, lake or sea they may have taken into the northern country was anyone’s guess, including Joseph’s.

[Shulem]

Speculative fiction does not always strive for exacting accuracy. Not sure I would book passage on the third voyage if the passengers of the second voyage were never heard from again, even if I was seeking the gold of El Dorado.

And I’ve stressed in my other threads that Smith took license in telling stories how he wanted in order to make his stories exciting and fun for him. The Book of Mormon is nothing but fiction. It’s a story Joseph Smith made up out of thin air. Look at all the ridiculous geography models made up by apologists and you will see just how divided members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints really are as they push their own models on others as if to say, Lo here, we have the truth. Mormonism is a house divided amongst itself and is guided by prophets who don’t have a clue what to make of the geography.

[Moksha]

Look at all the ridiculous geography models made up by apologists and you will see just how divided members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints really are as they push their own models on others as if to say, Lo here, we have the truth.

Equally ridiculous are the many looks-similar-in-print-or-pronunciation words from other languages which apologists try to tie to Joseph's story. Makes you wish cult-like effort could be put into scouring the bristle cone forest looking for evidence to tie to Tolkien's Ents.

[Shulem]

If Hagoth's ships had sailed up the Susquehanna, I doubt Smith would have chosen the wording "drowned in the depths of the sea." And if a ship sailed up a river, it'd be pretty easy to know "whither she did go".

You know what I doubt? I doubt Joseph Smith would have chosen the word “into” to describe how Hagoth (Alma 63:5) set sail “into” the northern land unless he was referring to going up river. He didn’t say unto or over or out in order to reach the northern land. He said, “into” which implies penetration and the actual entering of the land. Unfortunately, apologists have painted the wrong impression that Hagoth set sail out into the Pacific and sailed great distances around the continent or to the islands of the sea. But that is not what the text implies. We have plenty of examples to show that going “into” the land is to penetrate the very land whether by river or on the land itself. I believe that I’ve made that point quite clear in the other threads as well as this thread. And yes, it is one of my high cards -- an Ace of Diamonds. Here are some comparative verses that express Smith’s choice in using the word “into”:

And it came to pass that she fled, and came over to the camp of Moroni, and told Moroni all things concerning the matter, and also concerning their intentions to flee into the land northward

Therefore Moroni sent an army, with their camp, to head the people of Morianton, to stop their flight into the land northward.

And it came to pass that they did not head them until they had come to the borders of the land Desolation; and there they did head them, by the narrow pass which led by the sea into the land northward, yea, by the sea, on the west and on the east.

And now, when the Lamanites saw this they were affrighted; and they abandoned their design in marching into the land northward, and retreated with all their army into the city of Mulek, and sought protection in their fortifications.

And now, when the Lamanites saw this they were affrighted; and they abandoned their design in marching into the land northward, and retreated with all their army into the city of Mulek, and sought protection in their fortifications.

And it came to pass that many of the Lamanites did go into the land northward; and also Nephi and Lehi went into the land northward, to preach unto the people. And thus ended the sixty and third year.