Observe that we've seen hemispheric geography retreat to the limited, we've seen the major gene pool evaporate to a minor puddle, and now even the language will be demoted from the broadly written "language of the people" to a narrowly guarded "language of the elites".
Charity captures it well: "...this exclusion theory only works if there are a limited number of slots, and you fill those slots with something else. " That's exactly right. It's exactly what's happening.
For the Book of Mormon, the trend is not specific confirmatory evidence, but reconfiguration of claims as the slots are filled. They've come right out and said that we should not expect to find the Book of Mormon in mesoamerica -- we need to find mesoamerica in the Book of Mormon. That says it all.
"And yet another little spot is smoothed out of the echo chamber wall..." Bond
Dude, do you happen to have a reference on who said that we should not expect to find the Book of Mormon in Mesoamerica, but rather would have to find Mesoamerica in the Book of Mormon? Preferably with a link? I'd like to save that one for future use.
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
Sethbag wrote:Dude, do you happen to have a reference on who said that we should not expect to find the Book of Mormon in Mesoamerica, but rather would have to find Mesoamerica in the Book of Mormon? Preferably with a link? I'd like to save that one for future use.
I'm pretty sure it was said by John Clark in his BYU devotional in 2004.
"And yet another little spot is smoothed out of the echo chamber wall..." Bond
Well, the whole idea that one can find Mesoamerica in the Book of Mormon is ludicrous. If Mesoamerica is there, someone did an amazing job of hiding it, or rather obscuring it with Biblical quotations and 19th century Americana.
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”
Here's an indirect reference to brant's approach, but I can't find him directly stating it. Too bad ZLMB has such a rotten search engine. Maybe someone can search MAD for it.
Christensen implies that my critique of Brant Gardner’s approach misrepresents his position, but Gardner himself says that his method entails “looking for Mesoamerica in the Book of Mormon instead of the Book of Mormon in Mesoamerica.”
What does it mean to look for Mesoamerica in the Book of Mormon? It means that any text written in a particular time ought to show evidence of the time and culture in which it was created. If the Book of Mormon were created during the years it says it was and if the Mesoamerican location were the real background, then that cultural background should leave its traces in the text and should do so in ways authentic to historical texts.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.
Here's a reference to it in a FARMs article, but it is being used by Institute Director Noel Reynolds:
Turning to the New World, Reynolds affirmed that although researchers are not finding definitively Nephite cities in Mesoamerica, they are finding Mesoamerica in the Book of Mormon.
Givens examines virtually all of the arguments that have been directed against the Book of Mormon. This feature of By the Hand of Mormon will interest and inform those who appreciate the efforts of FARMS to understand the Book of Mormon as an authentic ancient text. In fact, Givens gives considerable favorable attention to the essays published by FARMS. He shows that the serious study of the Book of Mormon began with Hugh W. Nibley and continues with the scholarship being published by FARMS. Shifting somewhat from popular earlier speculation, current LDS scholarship assumes that the events depicted in the Book of Mormon took place in a limited area of Mesoamerica and that the book does not tell the story of every people in the Americas. For Givens, the most recent and sophisticated efforts to understand the real-world geography of the Book of Mormon tend to try to find Mesoamerica in the Book of Mormon (not vice versa), which is a much more fruitful way of dealing with the text than trying to discover dramatic archaeological evidence that would "prove" the truth of the Book of Mormon.
That is the reason that Book of Mormon apologists who know enough about Mesoamerica to realize this fact concentrate on finding Mesoamerica in the Book of Mormon instead of the reverse. If there were any chance of still finding the Book of Mormon in Mesoamerica, they would not be encouraging believers to abandon that particular approach.
To which Brant replied:
You have a strange way of interpreting things, beastie. Since I have been the strongest proponent of the position you describe, I suggest that I know something about the reasons for discussing it, and they aren't similar to your speculation at all. The problem with finding an artifact that is Book of Mormon-ish is that there is no diagnostic data in the text that tells us what such an artifact might be and how it would differ from anything else in the area. I agree that the previous assumption that there was a full Hebrew culture that was transported from the Old World is incorrect, but that is a far cry from your statement.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.