Location of Book of Mormon events: evidence from Joseph Smith Papers

[_Rollo Tomasi]

Mesoamerica is in North America.

Central America is more accurate -- from central Mexico to Honduras and Nicaragua.

[_Daniel Peterson]

You can’t trust adults to tell you the truth.

But, says poor antishock8, you can trust him.

Which he proceeds to demonstrate by a misleading out-of-context quote:

"... when we publish critical essays, we're engaged in slander, smearing, character assassination, and the destruction of lives."- Mr. Peterson

.

[Guest]

Mesoamerica is in North America.

Central America is more accurate -- from central Mexico to Honduras and Nicaragua.

Mesoamerica is in North America.

Central America is in North America.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_America

[_antishock8]

I'm sorry, Fat “F”, but when did I say anyone can trust me?

Oh, and that quote is VERY contextual. It's the best Freudian slip I've seen on this board, yet.

[_Daniel Peterson]

I'm sorry, Fat f***, but when did I say anyone can trust me?

Oh, and that quote is VERY contextual. It's the best Freudian slip I've seen on this board, yet.

As I've pointed out elsewhere, poor antishock8 represents the bottom tier of MDB posters.

[_CaliforniaKid]

From a recent conversation with Brant Gardner at MADB:

I think since accepting the Book of Mormon as a historical document requires that we accept the premise that Joseph Smith was a true prophet, our historical interpretation of the Book of Mormon must reckon with other conclusions that proceed from the same premise: namely, the Zelph story and the location of Manti (in Huntsville, Missouri).

Does accepting Joseph Smith as a prophet include him in the same category as biblical prophets, or is he in a category and definition all of his own? The problem with most assertions that we must accept Joseph's prophetic mantle as Book of Mormon evidence is that it tends to make presumptions about what a prophet is that are unique and unsupportable from history.

I don't have a problem with Joseph Smith as a prophet. I do have a problem with assuming that the mantle of prophecy included omniscience. Joseph never claimed that and was usually pretty frustrated when people refused to understand the human aspect of the calling.

In other words, Joseph was only a prophet when speaking as such (which is to say, when his words can be construed in support of a Meoamerican limited geography).

I expect Chap will feel mighty silly for posting this thread when he realizes how obvious the answer is.

Best,

-Chris

[Guest]

As I've pointed out elsewhere, poor antishock8 represents the bottom tier of MDB posters.

And I've pointed out elsewhere Mr. Peterson represents the bottom tier of academics, and pointedly the "academics" from his esteemed university.

[_Daniel Peterson]

I'm sure I speak for all in thanking poor antishock8 for his valuable contributions to this thread.

In other words, Joseph was only a prophet when speaking as such (which is to say, when his words can be construed in support of a Meoamerican limited geography).

I expect Chap will feel mighty silly for posting this thread when he realizes how obvious the answer is.

Anybody who attempts to foist off on Latter-day Saints concepts of prophetic inerrancy and omniscience that Latter-day Saints have never accepted should feel silly -- especially if and when it's being done in order to score illegitimate partisan advantage.

[_The Dude]

So Joseph Smith was wrong. No biggie. He was right about everything else, certainly, because his fundamentalist Protestant background only colored his understanding of trivial matters like Native American origins. If he had been wrong about the plan of salvation or the priesthood, we would surely know about it by now.

[_Ray A]

Does accepting Joseph Smith as a prophet include him in the same category as biblical prophets, or is he in a category and definition all of his own? The problem with most assertions that we must accept Joseph's prophetic mantle as Book of Mormon evidence is that it tends to make presumptions about what a prophet is that are unique and unsupportable from history.

I don't have a problem with Joseph Smith as a prophet. I do have a problem with assuming that the mantle of prophecy included omniscience. Joseph never claimed that and was usually pretty frustrated when people refused to understand the human aspect of the calling. (emphasis added)

Nephi could see 2,500 years into the future, and even spot Columbus on the prophecy chart. Even within a 600 year time frame, in "the land of Jerusalem":

There are several prophecies that are made that can only be fulfilled outside of the Book of Mormon. Key among these are the prophecies concerning the birth, life, and death of the Savior. Nephi records that Jesus would be born to a virgin, conceived by the Spirit; that Jesus would be baptized; that there would be twelve disciples; that he would heal the sick and bedeviled; that he would be judged by the world; and that he would be crucified.

But Joseph (1805-1844) has trouble working out where the Nephites lived.