Shulem Cracks Book of Mormon Geography

[Moksha]

Regrettably for the apologists and the Church, there is no archeological evidence to support Book of Mormon claims on Delmarva.

The apologists can still rely on the theory that their faithful Curlom and Cumom companions meticulously gathered up all archeological evidence and buried it at sea, in honor of their friends the Nephites. This was of course before they set sail in the Nephite boats and erected statues honoring the Nephite General Authorities on Easter Island.

[Shulem]

Just because the Book of Mormon doesn't mention land being south of Lehi's first inheritance doesn't negate the possibility that there was land and that they did migrate southward.

The most correct book on earth defines the borders surrounding the land of Nephi as having three (3) seas. If there was anything worth mentioning south of Lehi's first inheritance then somebody in the book would have explained that. The book details the entire layout of the landform and provides amazing details about the far north to include, hills, large bodies of water, etc. I'm afraid that Lehi's landing is the end of the southern line. There is nothing south of that other than "sea south".

We don't have all the Book of Mormon. There is the sealed plates as well as the 116 lost pages. From those sources we could learn about a land south of Lehi's first inheritance so your critical conclusion is premature.

We can depend on the defined borders and explanations contained in the book we *DO* have rather than in a book we *DON'T*. The book we do have makes it clear that there are three (3) seas surrounding the land of Nephi: west, south, east. The recovery of the lost 116 page manuscript or a revelation from sealed gold plates locked up in Moroni's heavenly office is not going to negate the sea south. The simple fact that sea south is mentioned and defined by Book of Mormon writers means they surveyed the land and the landform as they understood it and defined this in the Book of Mormon as presently constituted. The book says nothing about traveling south in any amount of distance to discover a sea south. Nobody ever went further south than Lehi's first inheritance and the southernmost border is the ocean itself, sea south. From that point, everything is northward and flanked by the west and east seas until passing through the narrow neck of land and entering the continent proper. That is what the Book of Mormon tells us.

[Shulem]

Apologists love to talk about the possibilities in order to defend their position but critics such as myself love to talk about the evidence to defend my position. The Book of Mormon informs us of three (3) seas that surround the main landform south of the narrow neck. The land of Desolation and Cumorah are northward. We are explicitly informed that there is a land northward and a land southward. Those two (2) cardinal directions are the main driving force in helping us navigate our way through the geography of the Book of Mormon. We are also informed that there are certain notable coastal cities on the landform of the peninsula at sea east and sea west. But generally the directional theme of the book is north and south.

So, the evidence leads us to understand that Lehi's landing is the southernmost point in the whole story but apologetic possibilities lends hope that the sealed plates provide more information about southern lands south of the southern land that is never mentioned in the book. Thus, apologists rely on evidence that does not exist. Apologists rely on fantasy!

[Bought Yahoo]

Apologists love to talk about the possibilities in order to defend their position but critics such as myself love to talk about the evidence to defend my position. The Book of Mormon informs us of three (3) seas that surround the main landform south of the narrow neck. The land of Desolation and Cumorah are northward. We are explicitly informed that there is a land northward and a land southward. Those two (2) cardinal directions are the main driving force in helping us navigate our way through the geography of the Book of Mormon. We are also informed that there are certain notable coastal cities on the landform of the peninsula at sea east and sea west. But generally the directional theme of the book is north and south.

So, the evidence leads us to understand that Lehi's landing is the southernmost point in the whole story but apologetic possibilities lends hope that the sealed plates provide more information about southern lands south of the southern land that is never mentioned in the book. Thus, apologists rely on evidence that does not exist. Apologists rely on fantasy!

The Church officially took the position, until the 1920s, that Lehi landed in Chile. Officially. So Delmonico's is rather irrelevant to your position. I'm pretty sure that Orson Pratt added that to the footnotes of the Book of Mormon.

[Moksha]

The Church officially took the position, until the 1920s, that Lehi landed in Chile. Officially. So Delmonico's is rather irrelevant to your position. I'm pretty sure that Orson Pratt added that to the footnotes of the Book of Mormon.

It is a shame that Orson Pratt did not have the light and knowledge of the Delmarva alternative. Was he hoping that a Chile location would link the Nephites to the Incas?

[Bought Yahoo]

The Church officially took the position, until the 1920s, that Lehi landed in Chile. Officially. So Delmonico's is rather irrelevant to your position. I'm pretty sure that Orson Pratt added that to the footnotes of the Book of Mormon.

It is a shame that Orson Pratt did not have the light and knowledge of the Delmarva alternative. Was he hoping that a Chile location would link the Nephites to the Incas?

One must presume he had all the access necessary to Joseph Smith to reach such a conclusion. I think the Delmonico's theory is absolute foolishness and moronic.

[MG 2.0]

Shulem has single handedly put a lot of weight on a lot of Mormon shelves.

Yes, I'm afraid that I have done just that. I predict the Delmarva model will eventually become the universal model accepted by former members of the Church and critics alike. First of all, critics and apostates don't believe the story is true and recognize it as pure fiction. But in spite of that nobody should think Smith didn't have a place in mind where he visualized his story and had some kind of backdrop in which to base the geography and location. I've spent quite a bit of time discussing that and it doesn't make any sense at all to think Smith didn't think in those terms when telling his story.

And so, Delmarva works. It has everything going for it and its right where Smith needed it to be to work hi mojo and bring the gold plates to his back door. Nobody really believes Moroni hefted a golden book thousands of miles. That's just the stupidest thing I've ever heard. People that believe that are just plain stupid. They've checked their brains in and handed their souls to the Church like the dummies they are. In the mean time the Church takes no official position on geography because it's stuck between a rock and a hard place. I'm going to squeeze the Church with that rock and its going to get much harder before all this is said and done. The Church is in real trouble because the world is not going to put up with its nonsense. The world is moving forward. The Church doesn't know how to do that and so it takes no position.

Why didn’t Joseph share the ‘actual’ location of Book of Mormon geography with his closest confidants? What a secret to keep!

He let Wilford Woodruff go off on his own with the Stephens and Catherwood titled Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan, published in 1841 as the ‘source’ in explaining Book of Mormon geography.

Man, it must have been hard for Joseph to not spill the beans.

Regards,
MG

[Moksha]

I think the Delmonico's theory is absolute foolishness and moronic.

Delmarva ticks off more critical checklist items than Chile, the Great Lakes, and Mesoamerica. But you get the underlying downfall: It is like picking the locations for Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, due to its fictional nature there will never be an exact match.

History-wise, this is a Hardecanute to crack.

[Shulem]

Why didn’t Joseph share the ‘actual’ location of Book of Mormon geography with his closest confidants? What a secret to keep!

Yes, it was his little secret to keep and he was the master of that great secret. I explained the reasoning behind this in many different posts in the main thread and also accounted for the archeological expeditions and ruins you referred to in Stephens expedition. In this post I provide a nice summation about Smith being happy with his Book of Mormon AmericaS. I covered all this quite thoroughly in the main thread.

I feel extremely confident in the case I've made. I don't recall you commenting about Cowdery's dedicatory prayer for the bones at Cumorah. All those bones from the battles at Cumorah to rise again in the resurrection. Apparently, according to Smith & Cowdery, there was more than buried plates at Cumorah but also the bones of all those who fell in battle at the vale of destruction. They marched a long way from Central America to fight that final battle, did they not?

[Shulem]

I think the Delmonico's theory is absolute foolishness and moronic.

Delmarva ticks off more critical checklist items than Chile, the Great Lakes, and Mesoamerica. But you get the underlying downfall: It is like picking the locations for Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, due to its fictional nature there will never be an exact match.

History-wise, this is a Hardecanute to crack.

Thanks for that, Moksha. As you know, I have dummy on my foe's list so I can't see his posts unless someone quotes them. I will rely on you do take care of dummy for me. Thanks.