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

[_JoetheClerk]

It is clear from Revelations given to Joseph Smith that the Lamanites were the American Indians in Missour, Ohio and near where he lived. Why else would God reveal the Saints were to do missionary work to The Lamanites?

Why were so many of our members and children called on Lamanite Missions if not to teach Lamanites? In the Dakotas. In Montana and Wyoming. In Oklahoma. In Arizona, Utah and New Mexico? In the South Sea Islands? In Central and South America?

If the Brethren can't figure out who Lamanites really are what are they doing calling people on missions to them... by Revelation?

[_krose]

I have heard rumors that the term "hot drinks" was slang for the miracle elixirs that snake oil salesmen would try and sell. I have yet to see anything to verify this claim. Does anyone know if this claim is true?

Haven't heard that. I understood that it was a common belief at the time that drinking high-temperature beverages was harmful. I'll have to look that up.

[_CaliforniaKid]

Well Dan appears to be gone, but here is one more little bit of revelation that seems to debunk a Mesoamerican LGT:

D&C 128:20: "And again, what do we hear? Glad tidings from Cumorah! Moroni, an angel from heaven, declaring the fulfilment of the prophets—the book to be revealed. A voice of the Lord in the wilderness of Fayette, Seneca county, declaring the three witnesses to bear record of the book! The voice of Michael on the banks of the Susquehanna, detecting the devil when he appeared as an angel of light! The voice of Peter, James, and John in the wilderness between Harmony, Susquehanna county, and Colesville, Broome county, on the Susquehanna river, declaring themselves as possessing the keys of the kingdom, and of the dispensation of the fulness of times!"

This passage identifies the hill from which the book was revealed as Cumorah. The LGT, of course, requires that the identification of that hill as Cumorah was a mistake. Evidently it was the Lord's mistake, not Joseph's. (That, or D&C 128 is just speculation unconfirmed by revelation.)

[_Ray A]

Well Dan appears to be gone, but here is one more little bit of revelation that seems to debunk a Mesoamerican LGT:

D&C 128:20: "And again, what do we hear? Glad tidings from Cumorah! Moroni, an angel from heaven, declaring the fulfilment of the prophets—the book to be revealed. A voice of the Lord in the wilderness of Fayette, Seneca county, declaring the three witnesses to bear record of the book! The voice of Michael on the banks of the Susquehanna, detecting the devil when he appeared as an angel of light! The voice of Peter, James, and John in the wilderness between Harmony, Susquehanna county, and Colesville, Broome county, on the Susquehanna river, declaring themselves as possessing the keys of the kingdom, and of the dispensation of the fulness of times!"

This passage identifies the hill from which the book was revealed as Cumorah. The LGT, of course, requires that the identification of that hill as Cumorah was a mistake. Evidently it was the Lord's mistake, not Joseph's. (That, or D&C 128 is just speculation unconfirmed by revelation.)

Ah yes, but you see, Chris, there are two Cumorahs. The NY one was just the namesake of the real Cumorah. I've thought about this one two, but there's no escape.

Dan should be back tomorrow, so I've just given the standard apologetic reply in advance.

[_CaliforniaKid]

Ah yes, but you see, Chris, there are two Cumorahs. The NY one was just the namesake of the real Cumorah.

Yes, I've heard this reply before: the early Mormons screwed up by calling it Cumorah, and then God shrewdly played along. Cute of God to propagate falsehoods like that.

[_Ray A]

Yes, I've heard this reply before: the early Mormons screwed up by calling it Cumorah, and then God shrewdly played along. Cute of God to propagate falsehoods like that.

There's an interesting article from the Deseret News, July 29, 1978 (Church News section), reproduced by the Tanners:

GEOGRAPHY PROBLEMS

THE GEOGRAPHY OF the Book of Mormon has intrigued some readers of that volume ever since its publication. But why worry about it?

Efforts to pinpoint certain places from what is written in the book are fruitless because the record does not give evidence of such locations in terms of our modern geography.

Attempts to designate certain areas as the Land Bountiful or the site of Zarahemla or the place where the Nephite city of Jerusalem sank into the sea ‘and waters have I caused to come up in the stead thereof’ can bring no definitive results. So why speculate?

To guess where Zarahemla stood can in no wise add to anyone’s faith. But to raise doubts in people’s minds about the location of the Hill Cumorah, and thus challenge the words of the prophets concerning the place where Moroni buried the records, is most certainly harmful. And who has the right to raise doubts in anyone’s mind?

Our position is to build faith, not to weaken it, and theories concerning the geography of the Book of Mormon can most certainly undermine faith if allowed to run rampant.

Why not leave hidden the things that the Lord has hidden? If He wants the geography of the Book of Mormon revealed, He will do so through His prophet, and not through some writer who wishes to enlighten the world despite his utter lack of inspiration on the point.

SOME AUTHORS have felt ‘called upon’ to inform the world about Book of Mormon geography and have published writings giving their views. These books, however, are strictly private works and represent only their personal speculations. (Emphasis added)

Well the horse has bolted, ridden by John Sorenson, but I dare not offer any odds on that one - anything is possible.

Joseph Fielding Smith actually referred to D&C 128 though:

EARLY BRETHREN LOCATE CUMORAH IN WESTERN NEW YORK. It must be conceded that this description fits perfectly the land of Cumorah in New York, as it has been known since the visitation of Moroni to the Prophet Joseph Smith, for the hill is in the proximity of the Great Lakes and also in the land of many rivers and fountains. Moreover, the Prophet Joseph Smith himself is on record, definitely declaring the present hill called Cumorah to be the exact hill spoken of in the Book of Mormon.

And he called any other theories "modernistic theories of necessity". But to be fair, he also believed the world was created in six days, and that evolution is a myth of the devil. In these matters he wasn't the brightest spark on the block. Nevertheless, the Lord chooseth the weak and foolish to break down the mighty scholars and confound their wisdom. And Rodney Meldrum is still hard at work doing battle for the Prophets.

You can't pay for this kind of entertainment. Place your bets if you dare.

Sorenson 3-1?
Meldrum 50-1?

Judging by the Testimonials on Meldrum's site, it could be the other way around. But note Rod's comment:

The following are authentic emails. Names have been removed to protect the privacy of those who shared them. It is hoped that some of their words will touch the lives of others in positive ways. -Rod

What could this possibly mean? That the New York Cumorahites now have to purchase and plead their heresy incognito? It appears so. The scholars have defeated the Prophets with evidence, reason, and strong logic. The Book of Mormon now "adds up" and makes sense. You can now safely believe - because we now know where Cumorah was. Without this knowledge, they could be as mistaken as a former president of the Church, and who wants to go down that thorny track of actually believing a Prophet?

[_Chap]

I have been away from this board for a while, and I see that this thread has moved on a long way. It seems be serving its purpose, however.

The material I posted was intended to open discusson of the extent to which Joseph Smith can reasonably be regarded by LDS as giving generally reliable (though not of course infallible) accounts of what his alleged heavenly informants told him.

I suggested that two texts by Smith claim that angelic visitors repeatedly gave him information that, by his account, indicated that those Book of Mormon events which are set in the Western hemisphere took place largely in the country in which Smith lived, which was the United States, and involved the indigenous peoples of the United States. Smith actually seems to have held such a view himself, even if he was at times prepared to envisage some of those events as having taken place over a wider area. The claims of believers in the Limited Geography Theory that the Book of Mormon events took place in a rather small area of Mesoamerica do not however seem consistent with those expressed by Smith, and reported by him as having been expressed by his angelic visitors.

In starting such a discussion, it would be unrealistic to expect any dramatic changes of mind amongst the actual participants. But one can hope to give the bystanders reading the posts a chance to see what each side of the debate can produce by way of argument and evidence. Luckily we have had the participation of one well-informed and articulate LDS poster, who has presumably shown us the best that can be done for his side of the discussion in the context of an internet discussion board. The bystanders will be best placed to judge his efforts, and to consider whether they themselves could muster the the degree of mental agility required to maintain the positions he favors.

Unexpected points have come from those who have brought up the Word of Wisdom. It is indeed striking that you cannot get into the Temple without observing at least one dietary restriction (abstention from coffee and tea, of whatever temperature) that appears to be based only on a hearsay account of the interpretation offered by Smith of "what the Lord meant" by prohibiting "hot drinks". So one important feature of everyday LDS life seems to be based on taking very seriously testimony of a kind readily discounted elsewhere - as when, for instance, proponents of Limited Geography readily discount Smith's interpretation of the geographical information that (he claimed) the angels repeatedly communicated to him.


APPENDIX (really a bit trivial):

DCP has implied that saying something happened in Mesomerica is the same as saying it happened in North America, because "Mesoamerica is in North America'.

So far as I follow his intentions in making this point, it was meant to count against the suggestion that those who place the totality of Book of Mormon events in a small area of Mesoamerica (the Limited Geography Theory) are expressing a view materially different from that of Joseph Smith, who seems to have thought that Book of Mormon events took part over a much larger area, much of it in the parts of North America that he knew as his own country, far from Mesoamerica. In itself DCP's point is hardly even a quibble, but ...

In his support he cites Wikipedia. Now even using the Wikipedia reference given by DCP it can be argued that 'North America' for many people does not include Mesoamerica:

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

The term North America may mean different things to different people in the world according to the context. Usage other than that of the entire continent includes:

* In English, North America is often used to refer to the United States and Canada exclusively.[22] Alternatively, usage may include Mexico[23] (as with North American Free Trade Agreement) and other entities.[24]

I confess that I have always been one of those who have seen the American continent as falling into three bits, rather just two: North America, Central America, and South America (yes, I know that Central America does not mean exactly the same as Mesoamerica, but that is not the point). Fortunately, I seem to be in very good company:

President Gordon B. Hinckley, Fifteenth President of the Church
Ensign, May 1977, 64:

http://www.prophetjosephsmith.org/josep ... e_hinckley

Seated in this hall today are those from North, Central, and South America; from the British Isles and Africa; from the nations of Europe; from the islands and continents of the Pacific; and from the ancient lands of Asia. You who have come from far and near, you are the flowering of the vision of Joseph Smith, the prophet of God. He was indeed a mighty seer, who saw this day and greater days yet to come as the work of the Lord moves over the earth.

I know Gordon B. Hinckley was no more infallible than I am, but it seems at the least ungracious for any LDS to chide me for following his example.

[_TAK]

This passage identifies the hill from which the book was revealed as Cumorah. The LGT, of course, requires that the identification of that hill as Cumorah was a mistake. Evidently it was the Lord's mistake, not Joseph's. (That, or D&C 128 is just speculation unconfirmed by revelation.)

I thought LGT allows for two (or more when needed..) Cumorahs ??

[_CaliforniaKid]

I thought LGT allows for two (or more when needed..) Cumorahs ??

More like one hill called Cumorah in ancient times and one hill (mistakenly) called Cumorah in modern times.

[_KimberlyAnn]

This passage identifies the hill from which the book was revealed as Cumorah. The LGT, of course, requires that the identification of that hill as Cumorah was a mistake. Evidently it was the Lord's mistake, not Joseph's. (That, or D&C 128 is just speculation unconfirmed by revelation.)

I thought LGT allows for two (or more when needed..) Cumorahs ??

No, TAK, it's the UGT, Unlimited Geography Theory, that allows for as many Cumorahs as needed.

Tal came up with that one.

KA