Shulem Cracks Book of Mormon Geography

[MG 2.0]

You have chosen your path. It is in opposition to the CofJCofLDS. You’ve made your bed and you have to sleep in it.

Regards,
MG

Why the threats? Your case is devoid of solid evidence of actual Nephites. The plates conveniently disappeared and Joseph Smith didn't use them in any event. His rock was useless when the 116 pages were lost/destroyed. The book itself is full of contradictions and copying from the Bible and Clarke's commentaries, etc., etc. So, the fiction conclusion is beyond a reasonable doubt and Shulem is on to a way to explain how the geography was invented. You ought to avoid the "believe or else" nonsense, especially when your case is so incredibly weak. However, if threats of having to live with the obvious conclusion are necessary for you, then by all means continue to threaten.

I am no threat to Shulem. He can stand on his own. And I didn’t make any threats. Everything I stated was fact.

As for the conclusions that you’ve come to I’m not going to argue with you point by point. Many folks have gone down these rabbit trails time after time, including me. There really is not much that is new under the sun to discuss on any one of the points you bring up.

Listing the predictable ‘soundbites’ in a few lines of text doesn’t do service to the reasons people believe in the doctrines and practices of the CofJCofLDS. And the testimonies they have of the scriptures and the spirit felt as they read them that witnesses to their souls that of God and His Son live and that the Plan of Salvation answers the questions mankind has been asking for millennia.

And MANY still are.

As I said, some will and some won’t receive that testimony. That’s just the way it is.

But we can still get along. I mean, look at the Pope and President Nelson. Working together to alleviate suffering and hardship throughout the world. If they were mortal enemies would they engage like they have?

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

…the LDS Church aggressively sends out missionaries to steal convert members of the Catholic Church. Why does the LDS Church do that?

I can only speak from personal experience. I served a mission back in Washington DC back in 1973-75. I met and taught a lot of Catholics. Our discussions were always friendly with absolutely no compulsion or ridicule, etc. If they were interested…most weren’t…we would return. I NEVER had a mindset that I was out to “steal” someone from their faith. I followed the dictum of Joseph Smith.

We claim the privilege of worshipping Almighty God according to the dictates of our conscience, and allow all men the same privilege; let them worship how, where, or what they may. (Joseph Smith, "Church History," Times and Seasons, 1 Mar. 1842, 3:710) Editorial, 1 June 1842

I grew up in Southern Cal. My friends and I in our ward NEVER made light of the beliefs of others, at least in any serious way. We all had friends of other faiths. We were not out to steal them away from their faith into the LDS Church. Now, if they were interested and wanted to hear the Good Word, then awesome.

Your apostasy has jaundiced your views in some respects methinks, Shulem.

Is it YOU that might be out to “steal” people away from a life of faith, obedience, and testimony?

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

It is pretty clear that Mormon-related “apologetic source material from a faithful perspective” is not written from a logical or rational perspective, even though they like to pretend it is. Most major religions seem to have a pretty realistic take on theological positions, in that when faith is required to believe they don’t argue facts. Mormon apologists haven’t figured that out, and it really is sinking them.

Mormons have become a divided people embracing different theories about the historicity of the Book of Mormon. Some say “lo here” and others “lo there.” The foundation of Mormonism has become a great divide and the contradictions of opposing forces within apologetics has reached explosive degrees of disagreement. Arguing about north being north or south being south and a myriad of problems associated with trying to match the text up with a land-candidate has become mission impossible. And we see also that the Presidents of the Church are clueless on what to do or what to say, let alone the position they should take in telling the world WHERE Zarahemla is.

All this is very, very, telling.

The net result is that members are left to choose what their testimonies and faith in God/Jesus Christ are based on. Those things that they know in their heart to ‘ring true’ or those things that are peripheral ‘issues’ that are either unresolved and/or unresolvable and only tangentially connect with actual faith and the practice of that faith.

Within the field of scientific endeavor there have been those things that may have at one time been unresolved. Now, some of those things are. Others are not.

In the science of theology..which includes this thing we call revelation…ought we not to expect the same?

Is it so hard to believe that EVERYTHING comes to us line upon line and precept upon precept, here a little and there a little?

For example, in Book of Mormon studies we’ve come a LONG way. Some issues have been resolved. Have all issues been resolved? No.

Active and believing members of the church move forward with the confidence that with patience and faith all will be revealed.

Some are willing to take that road. Others aren’t. There is a great separation/sifting process in motion. And it was foretold.

Regards,
MG

[Shulem]

Is it YOU that might be out to “steal” people away from a life of faith, obedience, and testimony?

Sure, it would make me happy, like icing on a cake, to convince a Latter-day Saint that the Book of Mormon is pure fiction and they need no longer rely on faith and testimony that the book is a genuine historical record. I would be thrilled to learn of Mormons disobeying their mandates and to disavow allegiance to Church leaders. But as I say, they are not the target. I am more interested in preventing testimonies rather than destroying testimonies. The Delmarva model will serve as an example in which eight billion people can observe and put the pieces together for themselves on how Joseph came up with his geography.

I am on a mission, MG. That mission is to help prevent your Church from growing anymore than it already has. Me thinks my hallowed hand in concert with Joseph Smith’s inspiration in me is very powerful. Now, bow before me!

Backyard Professor Live!

[Shulem]

The net result is that members are left to choose what their testimonies and faith in God/Jesus Christ are based on. Those things that they know in their heart to ‘ring true’ or those things that are peripheral ‘issues’ that are either unresolved and/or unresolvable and only tangentially connect with actual faith and the practice of that faith.

Right, members get to choose Heartland or down south, Mesoamerican. Both can’t be true but the beauty of the whole thing is the members get to choose! And with all the Book of Mormon models now available it has become a smorgasbord. Oddly enough, no member is entitled or permitted to get up at the pulpit and bare their personal testimony of the model they believe in and especially if that belief is based on confirmation from the Holy Ghost. To do so is strictly forbidden in today’s Mormonism. Leaders of the Church know full well that the controversies surrounding the geography are a Pandora’s box and there is no answer to the riddle in which all Latter-day Saints can embrace. It’s all suspense.

Within the field of scientific endeavor there have been those things that may have at one time been unresolved. Now, some of those things are. Others are not.

Obviously, there is not enough scientific endeavor to show enough resolved issues to state affirmatively where Zarahemla is located. There is a severe lack, a draught, and starvation for evidence! The Latter-day Saints are starving for revelation to affirm the claim that the Book of Mormon actually happened! The saints have to rely on their faith in practically nothing. Just the words from a book, that’s all they get coupled with feelings that they think it’s true.

In the science of theology..which includes this thing we call revelation…ought we not to expect the same? Is it so hard to believe that EVERYTHING comes to us line upon line and precept upon precept, here a little and there a little?

Line upon line and precept upon precept is a basic Mormon staple and you get absolutely none of that from the leaders of the Church when it comes to the geography. Their mouths are shut. Their lips are sealed. The heaven are closed. Sounds like a Protestant church needing revelation, doesn’t it?

For example, in Book of Mormon studies we’ve come a LONG way. Some issues have been resolved. Have all issues been resolved? No.

No, you have not come a LONG way. There are a great many unresolved issues and that is why Mormonism can’t come to a conclusion on where the geography is. It’s a nightmare.

Active and believing members of the church move forward with the confidence that with patience and faith all will be revealed.

No, it’s not going to be revealed not now and not ever. I’m afraid, MG, you will live out your life and pass away before the Church reveals anything to you about the geography of the Book of Mormon. You’re not going to get anything from the Church regarding geography revelation. Please, don’t kid yourself, there is no line upon line in this case. You get nothing. You can’t even get up to the pulpit and bare testimony of your own pet theory. That is not permitted.

Some are willing to take that road. Others aren’t. There is a great separation/sifting process in motion. And it was foretold.

Foretold? Oh please. Everything in life is a great separation/sifting process. It’s that way everywhere and with everyone. That’s just life in general. To turn it into a prophecy to support the validity of the Book of Mormon just goes to show how little there is to prove its authenticity.

[Shulem]

I mean, look at the Pope and President Nelson. Working together to alleviate suffering and hardship throughout the world. If they were mortal enemies would they engage like they have?

It’s business. The Church wants to get along with everyone these days and they needed a temple in Rome to carry on with the spectacle.

Hey, do you think the Church would have gotten a temple in Rome had Kimball sent McConkie to convince authorities there that a temple was in the best interest of everyone? Do you think McConkie would have flattered the pope? Oh please, don’t get me started. This thread will not get derailed.

[Shulem]

MG, Shulem has done better job fitting Delmarva to the geography that fits the Book of Mormon narrative than any of links that you just provided. Joe was a novelist and a storyteller. The Book of Mormon is a novel. Your links are fiction explaining the novel and so is Delmarva but it fits the narrative much, much better than your links.

Thank you, Tator. Yes, the Delmarva model works beautifully and I can further demonstrate that using distance and milage in showing the connection of the cities and regions therein as it relates to the cardinal directions. I have cracked the code of the Book of Mormon! So far, I have explained the following points of interest:

1) First Inheritance, 2) Lehi-Nephi, 3) Zarahemla

But I have not explained distance/mileage as it pertains to the peninsula which is coded in the Book of Mormon text. There is a next stop in the Book of Mormon Twilight Zone and it’s worth visiting if you’re interested. I honestly don’t know how interested readers are in going on this little journey. Believe me when I say, Delmarva works! And Shulem has figured it out!

[MG 2.0]

For example, in Book of Mormon studies we’ve come a LONG way. Some issues have been resolved. Have all issues been resolved? No.

No, you have not come a LONG way. There are a great many unresolved issues and that is why Mormonism can’t come to a conclusion on where the geography is. It’s a nightmare.

I’m thinking along the line of this presentation given by Matt Roper:

https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/con ... he-prophet

There has been significant progress in decreasing the number of Book of Mormon ‘supposed’ anachronisms. That’s definitely a point in favor of historicity.

But of course this comes from those danged apologists.

Regards,
MG

[Shulem]

https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/con ... he-prophet

There has been significant progress in decreasing the number of Book of Mormon ‘supposed’ anachronisms. That’s definitely a point in favor of historicity.

But of course this comes from those danged apologists.

That’s an action-packed apologetic webpage and it has lots of faith promoting advertisements and little reminders that the gospel is supposed to be true. I find anachronisms in the Book of Mormon interesting. But here’s the thing; explaining away or eliminating any number of anachronisms in the Book of Mormon does absolutely nothing for the Book of Mormon and does NOT add points in favor of historicity. Even if there was not a single anachronism in the Book of Mormon that would do nothing to prove its historicity. No points towards proof!

If you want points in favor of historicity then show me the evidence from the dirt -- tangible artifacts in the dirt that science and non-biased world scholars can use to certify the historicity of the Book of Mormon. Otherwise, all you have is a novel.

Color me not impressed.

[MG 2.0]

But here’s the thing; explaining away or eliminating any number of anachronisms in the Book of Mormon does absolutely nothing for the Book of Mormon and does NOT add points in favor of historicity. Even if there was not a single anachronism in the Book of Mormon that would do nothing to prove its historicity.

That’s really interesting. In the past it seems as though anachronisms in the Book of Mormon WERE a big deal. Apparently not so much anymore now that more and more of what WERE anachronisms no longer are.

Funny how times change.

As time has gone on MORE research rather than less has overall been a boon to the authenticity of the Book of Mormon’s ancient origins. Although if you simply look at soundbites put out there by the critics on boards such as this one might think otherwise.

Regards,
MG