AN EVENING WITH RODNEY MELDRUM (Warning: *LONG*)

[_mentalgymnast]

Church anthropologists are far, far too invested in the Mesoamerican theory to switch gears now.

Yep.

Regards,
MG

[_Sethbag]

David offers up his paradigm-shifting willingness as, IMHO, a smokescreen to hide what is essentially a closed-mindedness about the church, because, as John points out, David has already admitted previously that the one paradigm in all of this that really matters, David is unwilling to reconsider, and that is that the church is true.

[_harmony]

David offers up his paradigm-shifting willingness as, IMHO, a smokescreen to hide what is essentially a closed-mindedness about the church, because, as John points out, David has already admitted previously that the one paradigm in all of this that really matters, David is unwilling to reconsider, and that is that the church is true.

And yet David is one of a very small select group that is willing to admit that the church is not the gospel of Jesus Christ. That they are, in fact, two different albeit perhaps connected things. For that, I think he deserves huge high 5's.

[_mentalgymnast]

What I am trying to communicate here is that, no matter how sound you find the methodology supporting LGT, the Mesoamerican setting, etc., there are solid and understandable reasons why these arguments fail to satisfy. .. From one point of view, and really the easiest one for the average Joe to grasp, it is as though apologists are saying that the absence of evidence suggests the existence of Lamanites in Mesoamerica..

Throughout the years as I've kept tabs on the Book of Mormon historicity debate and the question of "Where was Zarahemla?", I've had issues with the meso-american views expressed by the educated elite (Sorensen and others). Finally, we have Meldrum bucking the entrenched paradigm within the scholarly establishment.

It's great. I'm excited to see where this will all lead.

Regards,
MG

[_Gadianton]

Do you mean that because the MI has failed to convince the modern academic world that a golden book delivered up by an angel of God to a 19th century New England Farm boy is a legitimate ancient source that somehow the MI has failed to present any sophisticated arguments that counter some of the issues raised by critics?

That's a ridiculous standard for success.

Why is it a ridiculous standard for success? DCP himself has said that the emperical evidence for the Book of Mormon is in its favor and has explicitly attributed his belief in the book's antiquity to his own fact sifting as a devout empericist. If he's right, then the homework is complete and it's really a matter of the Kuhnian shift in perspective to kick in for the academic world to take a careful look.

If this is "ridiculous" as you put it, then there is another option. Why be such a fundamentalist and insist that an angel literally delivered a Gold Bible to Smith? I mean, is there a clear demarcation that puts Meldrum's geography in the "fundamentalist" camp but makes the retention of literal Gold Plates delivered by a real angel of no issue to one as a progressive, serious scholar?

[_beastie]

EE –

Perhaps it is you who is being too fundamentalist in your interpretation of the Book of Mormon. Apologists are nibbling at an apple with the Mesoamerican theory, but are afraid to simply bite.

The Mesoamerican theory has its own challenges, and apologists wedded to Mesoamerica deal with those challenges by invoking translation artifacts and/or faulty interpretations of the Book of Mormon. They have, to a certain degree, also invoked the idea of epic myth-making in the Book of Mormon. They’re nibbling.

Embracing the New England model would have to go beyond nibbling, but you still don’t have to eat the whole apple. All it would require would be invoking just a little bit more of epic myth-making in order to deal with the problematic lack of social complexity in the region. But the fact is that, despite the fact that there were polities of prerequisite social complexity in Mesoamerica, apologists still are cornered, because the polities that had the prerequisite social complexity were actually the most powerful polities in the time and region – the very polities that, of course, had detectable influence on the cultural evolution of the entire region. Now, when, in the past, I made such statements to apologists, they would protest that the Book of Mormon polities were actual minor ones, nowhere near the most powerful of the time period. Why? Because they know that admitting that Book of Mormon polities would have been the most powerful in the region causes problems for their simultaneous assertion that it’s reasonable to expect such a civilization to disappear without a trace. But when they make that argument they’ve managed to cut off their nose to spite their face because they’ve lost the one clear advantage that Mesoamerica offered in the first place. Why insist on a region that did have complex chiefdoms and city-states, and then insist that Book of Mormon polities weren’t any of those?? But even worse, that’s not what they’re actually insisting when it comes down to dirty details. With few exceptions, when apologists suggest locations as possible matches for Book of Mormon cities – like Kaminaljuyu for the City of Nephi – they’re still choosing the most powerful polities in the region as candidates. So they’re talking out of both sides of their mouths, anyway. They’re choosing the most powerful polities because they, like you, can’t quite bring themselves to do more than nibble at that apple, rather than man-up and take a full, fleshy bite.

Sooner or later they’re going to have to embrace even more epic myth-making to explain why it sounds like the Book of Mormon polities would be the most powerful in the region when they really weren’t, so why not embrace it in the region that correlates with the teachings of past prophets?

I think it’s a win-win for apologists. They get to avoid the discomfort that disregarding the teachings of past prophets causes, hence keeping chapel/folk Mormons in the game, and yet making a nuanced enough argument to satisfy believers who are a bit more educated in ancient American history. Sure, it’s not an argument that would salvage every “shaken believer’s” faith in the Book of Mormon, but current apologia doesn’t do that, either.

by the way, I’m a recent “convert” to this idea. I long argued that apologists had no choice but to stick to Mesoamerica. But Trevor recently convinced me to rethink the issue, and I’m leaning strongly towards agreeing with him at this point.

I think that Meldrum is going to have an impact on Book of Mormon apologetics, whether or not the “elite” like it. And it may not be the impact or argument he currently envisions, either – but it will still be an impact.

Of course, there are no such things are real prophets, and I ain’t one, either. I could be wrong. But I’m fascinated by the evolution.

[_Trevor]

Frankly, I am liking this North American, Great Lakes setting for the Book of Mormon better and better all the time. I am not as keen on Meldrum's anti-FAIR/NMI stance. But really, this Great Lakes notion works pretty well for me.

I can expect not to find the very same things in the Great Lakes region that I will not find in Mesoamerica.

1) I won't expect to find an artifact with the inscription, "I, Nephi, owned this."

2) I won't expect to find a horse or an elephant from 300 AD.

3) I won't expect to find Hebrew DNA (sorry, Rod).

4) I won't expect to find any explicit evidences of Christian culture (after all, which symbols did they use to celebrate the cross? A cross?)

5) I won't expect to find a cave full of plates. I can currently not find that at the drumlin called Cumorah.

6) I won't expect to find "Reformed Egyptian."

If I am not to expect to find any of these things, I can at least rest comfortable with the knowledge that Joseph Smith claimed that there were Nephite and Lamanite remains and special places all around him. When receiving the plates from the angel, he got them from the drumlin near Palmyra. If one prophet could be said to have made any contribution to Book of Mormon geography, it would have to have been Joseph Smith. Maybe Brigham when he identified the location of a temple in Utah as a site that had been dedicated in Book of Mormon times. That was in North America too.

And yes, Book of Mormon tours would be cheaper and safer, and they would do more to boost the North American economy. Maybe it wouldn't be as fun to be a tour guide, but you could combine modern Church history with Book of Mormon history. A double whammy. Really, the whole thing is no-brainer. And, please, let's not get into which tour would be historically accurate. At least in North America you are guaranteed those 19th-century sites in addition to Cumorah. In Central America you have no idea whether what you are looking at had anything to do with the Book of Mormon.

[_Trevor]

Oh, and when Joseph Smith did connect Mesoamerica with the Book of Mormon, he was not speaking as a prophet at the time.

[_beastie]

Oh, and when Joseph Smith did connect Mesoamerica with the Book of Mormon, he was not speaking as a prophet at the time.

While this is funny, it does demonstrate that apologists are already having to use arguments to defend the Mesoamerican theory that they'd have to use with the Great Lakes theory, as well. So why not use the same arguments to defend the position that roughly correlates with past prophets?

I'm disappointed that EE hasn't responded to this idea. I do think that it's an idea that deserves more serious thought than apologists seem willing to give it.

[_Trevor]

While this is funny, it does demonstrate that apologists are already having to use arguments to defend the Mesoamerican theory that they'd have to use with the Great Lakes theory, as well. So why not use the same arguments to defend the position that roughly correlates with past prophets?

I'm disappointed that EE hasn't responded to this idea. I do think that it's an idea that deserves more serious thought than apologists seem willing to give it.

While I am employing a measure of humor, I wouldn't say I am joking. I think it is fair and important to ask how many sacred sites Joseph and subsequent prophets identified in Mexico, Central America, and South America compared with those that were identified by prophetic inspiration or vision in North America. I don't know the answer to the question. All I know is that the instances of such identification I do know of occurred in North America and dealt with North American sites and artifacts. Did Joseph Smith indicate that he was speaking by inspiration when he connected the book with Mesoamerica, or was he merely opining?