Unconventional Book of Mormon Geography Theories

Here is the link I was referring. Steve Danderson mentions it just a little ways down in relation to one person advocating a Mississippi model.

http://www.fairblog.org/2009/03/31/a-look-at-meldrums-revised-dvd/#comments

The wikipedia link I was referring to was the “big list”. In mentioning the Mesoamerica models it calls them “mormon approved”. Judging from the comments here and other places I think alot of different models are “Mormon approved.”

lol. Oops, I guess the joke was on me then. Maybe I have heard so many wild theories I had no problem with entertaining the idea of Florida, since I don’t think it is any more outrageous than Malay or Africa models.

Fascinating, all of it. A Florida theory would be interesting, and I like this Malay theory. I think I like it because, more than anything, I really hate it when people call American/Central American Indians “Lamanites”. It just seems ignorant to me, and I don’t think that I would want to be called a Lamanite if I were American Indian and a new convert to the church or just learning about the church. I mean, the Lamanites ended up as the bad guys in the end.

I’ll be the one to say that I don’t think we’re likely to find out for sure anytime soon (at least not through traditional scholarship, and I don’t see the Church making a statement). As far as the plates being deposited in Cumorah: 1) after death, Moroni was resurrected; 2) Moroni was charged with guarding the golden plates. As a resurrected being and “angel”, is it not possible that he could have somehow, over some 1400 years (I think I have my dates right?), found a way to get them from just about anywhere in the world to upstate NY? Without a full and complete understanding of how resurrection and being an angel works I can’t explain the actual physical process (teleportation? magic? – kidding), I think that if you believe in those concepts then it’s fully plausible that Moroni could somehow have moved the plates in the period between the end of the Book of Mormon and the early 1800s. I’m probably not the only person to think of this (I hope).

And I’m not a Book of Mormon history scholar in any way.

I’m with you Hawkgrrl, you just beat me to the punch while I was writing my thoughts

J.Ro, If you’re into magic woo woo BS, go right ahead and theorize like that. I’m a skeptic of all things supernatural. My God is not a supernatural God, but is a human being. My Bible is a Bible of archaeology with real artifacts and real sites. And my Book of Mormon is a record of a fallen people who really died and really wrote on tablets of gold, and really stuck that record in a hill regardless of where they were buried. Maylay is too much, because it asks too much. Too much nonsense attached to it. If we are going to get to the core, we are going to do it with rationality. Not because prophets said so. Not because someone waived a magic wand over plates. Not because there was a stargate in the hill cumorah to Mexico or to Malaysia. Lets pull our heads out of the clouds and get down to business. Let’s all be rational.

Ed, if you can rationally, and scientifically if you like, explain everything in the New Testament to me, then you’ve got my ear. (The NT because it’s at least more widely accepted than the BoM.) Personally, I know for sure that we don’t know everything there is to know about anything. If that makes sense. Basic physics taught me that. Because of that, I think it’s entirely reasonable to say that there are things that happen(ed) that we just can’t explain away with what we know now. You probably disagree, if I’m reading into your comments correctly.

Ed, while I am not a “proponent” of the Malay theory, I need to say a few things – just to try to position the overall discussion in a way that is true to the Book of Mormon itself:

1) MH mentioned this, but Moroni getting to New York isn’t an issue no matter where the history actually occurred. The man had 35 years to get to wherever he had to go. In 35 years, he could have crawled with two broken legs around the world. Distance simply ain’t an issue, especially if the land was broken up and changed dramatically at time of the crucifixion of Jesus.

2) If we are willing to judge the record based ONLY on what it actually says, all kinds of possibilities emerge. For example, the quote Olsen uses to counter the Meso-America claim:

“[Moroni] said there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang.”

If we start from scratch, with no prior assumptions, it is perfectly reasonable to read that quote as meaning the book gives an account of the people who populated the Americas previous to Joseph Smith (generically called Native Americans) and the original people from whom those people were descended. That reading sounds stretched to our ears simply because we have assumed otherwise for so long – but the actual text speaks constantly of Nephites and Lamanites who left the originally settled land and traveled generally eastward. It isn’t a stretch at all to believe that “Lehites” might have been populating the Americas for centuries during the time of the Book of Mormon and for centuries afterward. It fits the overall statements in the Book of Mormon quite nicely, actually – although it isn’t proven by the account in any way.

3) You speak of “rationality” – but then you turn around and discount without any attempt at explanation the fact that Malay (or other possibilities) actually are FAR more rational when it comes to many of the apparent anachronisms if Meso-America is the location. That simply isn’t fair, and it isn’t rational. If many of the “textual problems” are solved with another location, that location deserves serious consideration.

4) The early members of the Church, including Joseph himself, seemed to have all kinds of incorrect assumptions about the Book of Mormon – largely because they didn’t “study” it much as a historical text or “proof text”. They used it as a witness of the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith – as a religious record, not to understand the history within it. If, in fact, the civilization descended from Lehi lived primarily elsewhere, but many of them migrated eventually to the Americas – and if, to the people recording the main record, “the Americas” were unknown as anything other than “the isles of the sea” (which is no stretch at all, since even much later Europeans originally thought exactly like that), the insurmountable obstacles pretty much disappear, imo.

Again, I am not claiming the Malay theory is correct. I just think it can’t be dismissed by any of the reasons I’ve heard thus far – especially when Moroni had 35 years to get where he ended up burying the plates. Physical distance fades into insignificance when so much time is available – and when going somewhere away from his native civilization (where he no longer would have been hunted) would have allowed him to live in peace and relative comfort for much of that time if he had chosen to do so.

Heretic, not only are you leading, but you are slippery slope. Sorry you got lost in your fallacies.

Ray and fellow Maylaers, I really am done with you people. have a great day.

This is totally off topic from the current debate in the comments but does anybody know of a serious argument for a Florida model?

Ray, I can’t do anything sometimes without getting emotional because I have an anxiety disorder and I have to back out sometimes. I will think about answering things a bit more tomorrow if this thing is still going.

“sci-fi is only “fantasy” until it’s reality”

Well-stated, Hawkgrrl! Excellent way to put it. I think there are a lot of things that are possible, even likely, that we as a society scoff at.

Ed, could you provide some of the evidence you claim (some reputable links that present it, maybe)? Like I said, this isn’t my passion and I’m not here to start an argument, but I would be interested in your proof. MH presented some potential evidence for the Malay theory, I’d like to see what you’re comparing it to. And I promise I won’t come back and give a word of argument about it. Just a matter of curiosity.

Hawkgrrrl,

People tend to focus too much on what hasn’t been found versus what has been found, and discount what has been found as if it is of no consequence. Its a miracle that what has been found has been found. Not long ago, people were saying how they would never find cement. Now there is cement that is recognized to be all over. You will never have a perfect dataset. And you will never find a perfect dataset in the Bible lands either. There are plenty of missing evidences there, such as evidence of an exodus, lack of evidence in the red sea of a passage. The fall of Jericho doesn’t date right. Not long ago, people were doubting that David was real until they found evidence of him. They swore there was no city of David in Jerusalem and now they found it. Don’t get so hung up on things that haven’t been dug up, and look at what is before your eyes.

Well Ray, then more power to you in your beliefs. I’m glad you feel strongly about them.

You guys have had way too much fun without me!

I just wanted to throw my two cents worth in here.

MH post #32- “What if they were at least as convincing as Nahom…”

Just for the record, Nahom is not very impressive to me as good evidence for the authenticity of the BoM. It may be good evidence to show that someone helped JS write the book, but not evidence of its historicity.

One last point, if we’re employing Occam’s razor here, the best evidence I’ve seen puts it in the Great Lakes area with JS writing this as 19th century inspired fiction using the geography he was familiar with. That answers all the problems with geography, anthropology, linguistics, metals, and alike and seems far more reasonable. But then again, who really uses logic and evidence to decide religious beliefs????

Please continue with the discussion…

MH–

I admit I’m not a huge fan of this subject. But it can be fun.

I didn’t realize there were more than a hundred theories. That alone was worth the read. It confirms my idea that we as fallen beings get distracted by trivial matters to the exclusion of the weightier ones.

There is one point that I wonder about in your post. The gold plates tipping the scales at 200 lbs seems to be more than even a husky farmer from the 1800 could handle with one hand, or even two, while running. If I recall correctly, isn’t there statements by those who lifted the plates saying they weighted in at 40 to 60 lbs?

It ain’t there, Cowboy. The explanations range from, “That would be too easy,” to, “That proves it’s all a hoax” – and include everything in between.

Fwiw, I just don’t accept the grand deception required for God to have inspired delusions for Joseph OR created a fake resting place for the plates. I think the plates and other artifacts were real, and I think Moroni carried them (40-80 lbs.) to their eventual resting place at some point – but I have no idea when. It could have been in 421 AD; he could have moved them or repositioned them in the late 1700′s. I don’t know, and I really don’t care when it comes down to it.

This is a technical question heretic: How do you embed links in the text? I have to go old school in my blog posts because I cannot figure out how to make a word link to previous research. That makes it rather difficult to refer to previous research without bogging down my blog posts. If your willing to indulge me, maybe you can message me with somme instructions. Thanks.

MH,
I wrote most of this post on another thread so please read it with the idea of my reaction to Nahom as evidence rather than a rebuttal to your paper on the subject. (I did read it.) Had Nahom been discovered in the 20th century instead of the 18th century as Daniel Peterson seems to imply, the evidence would carry a little more weight. The fact of the matter is, Nahom was documented on maps at least 80 years prior to the BoM publication and as anyone knows that works with maps, map makers tend to copy other maps. I don’t know if JS had access to one of the more expensive maps of Arabia or not, but good maps had it on there as well as Carsten Niebuhr’s writing about Arabia describing the area were Bountiful could have been. So your argument now has to be that JS didn’t have access to a good map of the area. I believe he had help from someone to write the book which opens all kinds of possibilities as to who else may have had a good map. Dartmouth University had the D’Anville map as well as the Niebuhr map and writings translated into English as early as 1804. (If you read below, you can see who were students at that school.)

Even the best evidence for the historicity of the BoM, according to Terryl Given’s (Nahom), is not near as convincing in light of the facts documented interestingly enough by FARMS. Several articles written by FARMS verify how many people knew about Nahom in the 1700’s. According to FARMS, the better maps of the Arabian Peninsula had the location of NHM pinpointed.

“Of course, not all maps of Arabia between the years 1751 and 1814 recorded the location of Nahom. In fact, it is generally found only on the finest and most expensive maps created by the best cartographers and published by the finest printers. In my searches I found countless maps of Arabia with no reference to Nahom or anything like it. Thus, it is somewhat amazing that the first modern map of the Arabian Peninsula, created by D’Anville in 1751, did record the location of this often ignored or unrecognized district. Furthermore, that same map inspired the Danes to send an expedition to the region to fill in the missing information, and the only survivor was the cartographer, Carsten Niebuhr. Not only did he engrave a place called Nahom on his map but he also gave us more details of the area in his journal. These two maps and the ones that followed all give testimony to Lehi’s epic journey almost two thousand years earlier.” (http://farms.byu.edu/publications/jbms/?vol=17&num=1&id=464)

Let me take you back to the assertion of the Joker’s word print study. They worked to show that Rigdon/Spaulding most likely wrote the BoM. I know we went round and round about how valid this study was and I don’t want to ride that marry-go-round again. Dartmouth University had many of these good maps in its library at the time that Spaulding, Rigdon, and Ethan Smith attended there. Both Spaulding and Smith wrote about people coming from the old world to the new. It’s fair to conclude that they would have done some research into writing their books and therefore the inclusion of “Nahom” and for that matter “Bountiful” is not remarkable if one concludes that one or both of these men contributed to the BoM either willingly or unknowingly.

If that’s the best evidence for the BoM, then there is no evidence at all that can’t be explained scientifically. Even if we assume that JS wrote the book without help, the fact that this area was know and written about in several books about Arabia (see FARMS) means there is a real possibility that he could have gotten his hands on the information.

In the Malay Theory, I also propose that people from the Malay area migrated eastward across the Pacific Ocean (the uninhabited quarter). American Hypotheses incorrectly propose that the Polynesians migrated westward. The small groups from the Malay area landed in many places in the Americas. So please note that the Malay Hypothesis does NOT rule out America being a Land of Promise. The amount of attention paid to transporting the plates to NY is amazing to me. There have been “100 Hypotheses” proposed and EVERY ONE of them (except “one”) (and there is almost nothing else to support that Hypothesis) has no way of explaining how the plates got there. I have a way to propose how they got there but Sorenson has no better idea. So I don’t understand the negativity against the Malay Hypothesis with regard to the plates arriving in NY.

Don’t you think it is rather odd that there are numerous articles super thrilled about the NHM they found on a rock… but a theory that has MANY similarities to the Book of Mormon is immediately dismissed or ignored? I wonder why so many say such dismissive things about a theory it is obvious they have not read. Many of the things discussed above are explained with scientific references, or references to the scriptures, or references to others who are trying to find where Book of Mormon events have taken place. Dr Olsen isn’t just making a fantasy story. He is trying to prove the Book of Mormon is true. Since he is a scientist (and graduated from BYU– Salutatorian & has a Masters & Doctorate from Cornell University in Chemistry… he understands scientific resarch) he believes that any theory that has even one problem should be revisited. He has found 220 reasons that Mala works and Meso doesn’t. That is overwhelming evidence. As someone said, Just because Joseph had a preconceived notion that the BofM happened in the Americas… doesn’t make it so. He was a man and had his own opinions. Even Sorenson doesn’t believe in the Hemispheric Model. Sorenson admits he hasn’t found evidence. The Beauty of the Mala Hypothesis is that it works in so many ways and ties so many scientific evidences together. Please download his original manuscript (1995) and read it and then comment more! Ray & MH & others had some great comments, but some comments show that people have read the word “Malay” and thought it abhorant and would not read more because, of course, it happened in America, Joseph said so. Remember… Joseph had his own opinions, they weren’t always from God’s mouth. Moroni did not bury his plates in the Hill Cumorah, Mormon did (Mormon 6:6). Moroni left with his. Amazingly, Dr Olsen found that a group of people left Malaysia about 400 AD (time of the last battles) and traveled with plants, animals, beliefs, musical instruments… and landed in Madagascar. They named a town Moroni, island Comoros(Cumorah?) and another town Morondava… It is easy for one to imagine that Moroni left from there in a boat with a bunch of gold plates and sailed to NY… (and perhaps a group of them landed there and that is the Eastern American group some talk of?????? who knows??? That is easier for me to believe than Moroni carried heavy gold plates and food & “a sleeping bag?” etc… and traveled all across the USA with no beasts of burden, wheels, or carts…) It seems like I say the same stuff over & over. Please read MH’s other blog & links he has provided. Thanks to those of you that tried to discuss the theory. I realize that you aren’t claiming it as your own……yet.

MH,

In fairness to the discussion, neither you nor I know how educated JS was with a school teacher for a father and a family that deeply valued knowledge. By the way, I think Emma’s statement about JS not knowing about the wall around Jerusalem says more about Emma’s gullibility than it does about Joseph’s actual knowledge. Come-on, this was a family that studied the bible almost fanatically. To be honest, I’m surprised you stooped to this kind of defense, your better than that my friend.

Whether you buy into the idea of Rigdon helping with the BoM or not, is not relevant to the discussion. The fact is, Nahom was known and written about. The fact that JS put it in the BoM shows that either he or someone helping him, had access to a good map. You can say he didn’t know, but that’s just your opinion, not evidence for the historicity of the BoM. Perhaps you should do a google search on D’Anville and Niebuhr. I think you’ll find that their work was used lots of places. Not just at Dartmouth…

On a more positive note, I think you should write about the Rigdon/Spaulding connection. It’s only a theory after all; you and I both like to think we’re smarter than the average apologist. I would just hope you would apply the same scrutiny to the historicity of the BoM as you use to dismiss Rigdon as a possible source for it.

Sorry Ray, I didn’t see your post until after I posted. For another time then…

MH:

Wow! You really got a popular discussion going here by expanding your blog posts from your own site. I’ve immensely enjoyed reading the above discussion, and hope people will link to the original discussions on your site as well, since I don’t want to retype the discussion we had there. Excellent work on your part and excellent discussion from all of the posters here.

If Joseph was 14 + and thought the BofM happened in America… Then it is even more amazing that so many things seem to match in Malasia/Burma/Thailand! To me that gives me shivvers thinking about Joseph actually translating the gold plates to match a historical setting (that wasnt researched by him, wasn’t something he could have learned about from his parents or teachers… because he if it was something he learned he would have been trying to think of some things that matched America if he was faking it.) If Mala turns out to be right. It Proves Joseph was a prophet, there is a God, Moroni gave Joseph the plates….etc etc etc. …Why would a New Englander name a place Moron?

Joseph also would not have been able to know of Moroni in the Madagascar area. From what I have read, it was not on maps at that time (1800s). He certainly would not have known that people went there from a land with similar place names & geographical features (to the BofM)… 400AD… you get my drift… Even if there was a way for him to figure that out… He thought it was America that was the main Land of Promise…

Remember, Joseph did not get to translate all of the gold plates… some were taken from him. Where/What did it talk about in the rest? Perhaps ?????

Voni,
I agree there is much to the book that makes it incredible to think a young farm boy could have made it all up and thought up more names and places and details than even Shakespeare could have done.

However, it seems to me that there was detail about building ships to come to the promised lands, and the zealots who built ships to go explore other islands never to be heard of again … but no mention of Moroni or others building a ship to go bury the plates in a new bountiful land.

Hapi,
I guess that is possible, but if they were astute enough to make this change:

Title page: (both versions)
1830: “…by Joseph Smith, jr., author and proprietor”
Today: “translated by Joseph Smith, jr.”

I would think they would also come to see the claim of ancient Americans are contained in the book, if unfounded, would also need an update and to change that. That is a much bigger doctrinal point than if Joseph’s title in the credits is correct or not.

Maybe not, but I would think so. My point is that it is regularly taught to missionaries and from missionaries to the masses and someone would have picked up that it should no longer be taught that way if it was incorrect.

As a missionary, I was told not to teach or make reference to blacks are descendants of Cain, even though prior apostles taught that, because we don’t have any evidence of such.

As we more and more knowledge and revelation is given to understand the words of God, we increase our knowledge on these matters, we don’t just teach things because that is what we’ve been told by our fathers. We build and learn and seek the truth and a perfect knowledge of things.

“SteveS, I’m not aware of any scholarship claiming the plates were transported (except of Hawkgrrrl and J.Ro.)”

Scholars indeed! Someday we will show you all… Who will be shaking their head in disbelief then?!

MH, in your point: Joseph Smith History 1:34 “[Moroni] said there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang.” Did this ever really get addressed in this discussion? I just went back through this whole discussion and can’t seem to find much of an answer to the question. This is probably my biggest hang-up on this theory; I can’t see why Moroni would lie about who the book was about. Did I miss something in all this back and forth?

Heretic,

You say: “Ed, have you ever heard or studied of this theory before? I guess the thing I find troubling is that you seem to dismiss without having a single reference to why it is unsound. Perhaps it is unsound, but please provide specifics.”

I just said plenty of times that the references placing the Book of Mormon in the Americas, and that the Book of Mormon places the ancient inhabitants mentioned in the book in America, by Moroni’s own mouth. I sit here scratching my head how this does not absolutely make what you are saying irrational. And here I go again, and you guys won’t like it that I called it that. I feel strongly that you guys are saying irrational things about it not being in America. I’m sorry if you don’t like the fact that I have an absolute and unbending dogmatism on that point. But it is an absolute dogmatism on that point nevertheless, and I won’t budge on that point. You are being irrational to assume there is any possibility that it is outside of America. Various possibilities and plausible things exist in America as settings. But outside of America, it is simply IMPOSSIBLE. That isn’t meant to be condescending. That is a fact. You can’t get around these absolutely plain statements.

MH, you are being silly. I tire of this nonsensical battle. Any truly reasonable person would not belabor this particular point. You know that there is nothing in the Book of Mormon that says “America” any more than the names Joseph Smith and Martin Harris are mentioned in Isaiah 29 about the prophecy of Charles Anthon and the sealed book.

Columbus:

12 And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and awrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land. (1 nephi 13:12)

Pilgrims/United States:

15 And I beheld the Spirit of the Lord, that it was upon the Gentiles, and they did prosper and obtain the bland for their inheritance; and I beheld that they were white, and exceedingly fair and beautiful, like unto my people before they were slain.
16 And it came to pass that I, Nephi, beheld that the Gentiles who had gone forth out of captivity did humble themselves before the Lord; and the power of the Lord was awith them.
17 And I beheld that their mother Gentiles were gathered together upon the waters, and upon the land also, to battle against them.
18 And I beheld that the power of God was with them, and also that the wrath of God was upon all those that were gathered together against them to battle.
19 And I, Nephi, beheld that the Gentiles that had gone out of captivity were delivered by the power of God out of the hands of all other nations. (1 Nephi 13:15-19)

Columbus:

12 And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and awrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land. (1 nephi 13:12)

Pilgrims/United States:

15 And I beheld the Spirit of the Lord, that it was upon the Gentiles, and they did prosper and aobtain the bland for their inheritance; and I beheld that they were white, and exceedingly fair and cbeautiful, like unto my people before they were dslain.
16 And it came to pass that I, Nephi, beheld that the Gentiles who had gone forth out of captivity did humble themselves before the Lord; and the power of the Lord was awith them.
17 And I beheld that their mother Gentiles were gathered together upon the waters, and upon the land also, to battle against them.
18 And I beheld that the power of God was with them, and also that the wrath of God was upon all those that were gathered together aagainst them to battle.
19 And I, Nephi, beheld that the Gentiles that had gone out of captivity were adelivered by the power of God out of the hands of all other nations.

THIS FRACKING CONTINENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

JS-H 1: 34:
34 He said there was a abook deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of THE FORMER INHABITANTS OF THIS CONTINENT, and the source from whence they sprang. He also said that the bfulness of the everlasting Gospel was contained in it, as delivered by the Savior to the ancient inhabitants;

MY WORD THIS IS FRICKING ABSURD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

“I tire of this nonsensical battle” too. Thanks for the nice parting shots, but I wish you well.

MH, the level of irrationality and absurdity manifested in this pushed me to get real irritated at you, and I can’t imagine why you can’t see how. If I were conspiracy theory prone, I would say that you are feigning your open mindedness towards the idea of the Malay thing. That’s almost how I feel about you. I am to the point almost where I think you aren’t truly open to what you are arguing and that you are just doing it to try to show the absurdity of the historicity of the Book of Mormon to you, that you are putting on a show. I truly believe that the originator of the Malay proposition does not believe in Book of Mormon historicity.

I’ve read at least half a dozen books dealing with BOM geography, and it seems that prophetic statements always get downplayed in favor of archeology, etc. For me, this riddle requires further light and knowledge or it will forever remain unanswered. So, what do the prophets say?
1) #96 documents a good number of verses referring to a western hemisphere location, and specifically, a U.S. location

2) This position is backed up by Mark E. Peterson’s “The Great Prologue” and numerous church manuals

3) Joseph Smith seemed to favor a U.S. model as #99 noted:His record of Zion’s Camp in History of the Church contains many references to “crossing the plains of the Nephites”, finding Zelph’s skeleton, a Nephite altar in Adam-Ondi-Ahman, etc. Having spoken with many BOM prophets personally, I give his opinion the most weight. HIs “missionaries to the Lamanites” were all American Indians. (Note that he did send others to Asia (Hosea Stout to Hong Kong) and South Africa, but these were not “Lamanite Missions”)

4) Brigham Young and all of his successors favored a Western Hemisphere model. As #99 noted B.Y. claimed Moroni dedicated the Manti temple grounds. He also claimed the Gadianton Robbers roamed the Wasatch mountains.

5) In Jesus the Christ, Talmage claims the Temple in Bountiful was in present day Venezuela…

6) Everyone from “Lamanite Generation” at BYU to Pres. Kimball talking about Lamanites “Blossoming as a Rose” seems to favor an american model.

7)Lastly, the “promised land” has always been understood to be America. You’d have a hard time convincing me that inhabitants of Malaysia or Africa have prospered in the last 3 centuries.

And regarding Post #56, David Whitmer says the stone box washed out of the hill Comorah and was lying at it’s base sometime in the 1870′s. I’ll find a source and post again if anyone cares.

Cowboy, As John Clark points out “Es Usted Norteamericano” (Are you North-American)? O sea (in other words), there was no border between the United States in Mexico in book of Mormon times, and these are artificial dividing lines in our day. It is a common mistake of Limited Great Lakes theorists to interpret the scriptures for the pilgrims, Columbus, etc., Gringo-Centrically, or in other words, United States Centric. After all, Columbus landed in the Carribean, and the Spanish went south. As for what anybody said, the Prophets are all speculating from the beginning of time, and it isn’t worth quoting from any general authority on geography, with the exception of when they say that no geography is revealed.

Thats why its so critical that we use the Book of Mormon text and other scriptural texts and dispense with all else.

Hawkgrrrl:

I am going to try and be diplomatic about this. The Zelph account is one of the most ridiculous stories extant regarding Joseph Smith’s claims to prophecy. I think every Mormon finds themselves staring at their feet the first time they hear this story, because it just sounds absurd. On another post at one time I compared the Zelph account to the movie “Big Fish”, which if you’ve seen then the comparison needs no explanation. I personally think this account calls into question Joseph Smith’s claims in a serious way.

The above notwithstanding, I don’t think we can separate The Book of Mormon geography claims from the claims about it from it’s translator. The book itself is said to be the product of a revelation, ie divine translation. How can we then with confidence accept that the book is in any way an accurate revelation if we will so quickly dismiss all other revelations on the book by it’s supposed author/translator? This is one of the biggest cases of throwing the baby out with the bath water that I can think of. This is where the Zelph account comes in. Regardless of how we would like to dismiss Joseph Smith’s musing’s on specific geography related issues regarding The Book of Mormon as just speculation, we cannot dismiss the clear revelatory nature of the Zelph account. You cannot question the Zelph account without adding a few wrinkles to all of Joseph Smith’s revelations. If you undermind Zelph, you ultimately challenge The Book of Mormon. That was my point earlier, (#99) I don’t think it is wise strategy for a members of a Church that ultimately and foundationally hinges on revelation, particular regarding a sacred book that’s sole existence is credited to revelation, to abandon that revelation in favor of scientific compatability.

Cowboy,

I would say the the Zelph account cast much more doubt on the D&C than the BoM.

If anything, Joseph own ignorance of the very work he produced strengthens the case that was a translator, not an author.

The Zelph issue is sticky, but the doubts it raises are not about the Book of Mormon.

I have long wondered what might be written in the two thirds of the Book of Mormon that were not translated and are still sealed. We are told that we will receive them when we are spiritually (and/or physically) prepared to receive them. I am very fasinated with the comment by Moroni, “and the source from whence they sprang”. To me it is the key to the answer! The sealed 2/3 of the Book of Mormon could contain the story of how Moroni left the Maylay Peninsula and traveled through all kinds of adventures and finally ended up in New York! Maybe something happened and he had to run for his life and he took the plates with him to keep them safe from the Lamanites, left the land with some other people he found who had a ship and eventually ended up in New York State in America!!! It could say anything!!! If something like that happened, the Book of Mormon is still about the inhabitants of this continent AND THE SOURCE FROM WHENCE THEY SPRANG!!!!!!!!!!!

I am so excited to read the discussion on this!!! I think the Maylay Theory is incredible because it has actual evidence found on this earth to support it instead of just some made up guesses where no evidence has been found. It is awesome! I want to learn more!!!!

Firetag brings up some interesting points regarding Malay’s military history. As I said before, I’m not expert in this area, just a student. I noticed that Morgan Deane, who commented very early, has a Masters Degree in Military History, and I was curious if he might try to weigh in on Firetag’s comments. (Morgan, you need to add a .com onto your website so that when people click on your name, they don’t get a “page not found” error.) Morgan’s website is http://mormonwar.blogspot.com, and apparently he is versed in Asian warfare. From his website it says,

I have presented papers on Napoleonic warfare and published papers about Asian and Book of Mormon Warfare. My research interests include the above topics, the American Civil War, the application of military theory, ancient warfare, and medieval warfare.

Kay brings up an excellent point. Perhaps in the other 2/3 of the plates there is a record of how the plates arrived in NY. I know Ralph Olsen has speculated on this point. (Kay, I’ve got plenty of links to learn more, so indulge!)

Re: “The phrase ‘Land of the free’ is derived from the fact that the Thai are proud of the fact that Thailand is the only country in Southeast Asia never colonized by a European power.”

Does Thai have any kind of event(s) in it’s history that would support the idea of Christian Gentiles coming over and kicking their descendant’s trash? Because that’s what the BoM says should happen.

Re: “He said there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang.”

Jerusalem is obviously the “source.” If it’s Thai then we’ve got one source followed by another.

I agree with Ed–that Meso-America correlates better than any other geography–and that most reasons for arguing against it boil down to unknowns rather than facts that don’t fit.

FireTag: Great comment(115).

Thanks for the nod heretic. Its nice to know somebody actually reads my blog. I feel like I am in a very small abandoned corner of the blogosphere sometimes. Anyways, this post on naval warfare in the Book of Mormon is from a couple weeks ago:
http://mormonwar.blogspot.com/2009/04/naval-warfare-in-book-of-mormon.html

And it touches on many salient points made by firetag.

My research papers on Asian warfare has dealt with Chinese Naval theory in the middle ages and the Sino-Japanese Korean War(1592-1598). Other topics studied during for school have been mostly East or Inner Asian topics. These subjects unfortunately dont make me quite as qualified to comment on Malaysian warfare. I can speak in generalities and educated deductions though. Fire tag is right that there is no mention of costal defense in the Book of Mormon. Although Sorenson mentions a principle that the Nephites would enjoy the higher climates more and abandon their costal areas fairly quickly. Based on the map above it seems the river Sidon could still support the strategic concepts I described on my post. Nephite power would be easier to control downstream than it would upstream. And Bountiful being an important entry way to the Ocean and a gate for an upriver strike (read: easier, faster, more deadly) at Zarahemla would help explain the fascination with that city and the narrow neck of land. And the city themselves could be the costal fortifications. Chinese ships were often nothing more than floating siege towers, and their cities operated as vital choke points. Moroni also mentions many “forts” and “places of resort” that they made, these could be the poor man’s costal defense against possible flanks. And many the Lamanite Kings were just strategically bankrupt, and it seems from the map that the city of Nephi (the Lamanite Capital) was on a river flowing the OPPOSITE direction of Nephite lands. So an invansion may have been more hassle by sailing south, then around, then trying to have an ancient D-Day, than simply moving rapidly to the North.

The militarized trading missions I discussed would also carry more weight. The Chinese had treasure fleets that ranged across the Pacific during the Early Ming Dynasty, the Nephites after Hagoth could have had a more primitive version. Remember that Lehi left to preach and teach in the distant lands “north” for over seven years (Helaman 7:1), which was longer than Alma’s mission around the vicinity of Zarahemla (Alma 5-about 13). Based on the map the garrison city of Moroni was also placed at a (probable) vital river crossing. Again that matches my tentative thesis.

I disagree with firetag’s conclusion that naval warfare never happened or was unimportant. I think it was unimportant, because many ancient societies never thought in terms of naval AND land warfare. They simply thought about warfare, and naval matters, were always thought of supplemental. Medieval Chinese historians always thought of Navies as adjuncts to the land forces, or just land battles that happen to float. Mormons love affair with Captain Moroni absorbed much of the direct discussion of warfare. I don’t know enough about ancient chariot warfare to comment either way. I do agree that Chariots were not used in combat. The argument for naval matters are inferred from many parts of the text. Chariot warfare is not. So I agree there. I would love to have some books reccomended on Malaysian warfare. Because the point on chariots is the most damaging point for the Malaysian theory so far. So far the only way to “explain” it would be that the type of wealth and lands neccessary to support chariot armies did not exsist in the Nephite government. The Nephites abhored ostentatioius displays of wealth, their kings were very humble (“I myself did labor with mine own hands”), and they presumably did not have the high number of rich landowners to support a Chariot force.

Anyway, thanks for mentioning me in the discussion. These are just ideas I am throwing out. But overall I don’t think that military considerations are that damaging to the Malay theory. Chariots yes, naval warfare and defenses no. In fact,I think naval warfare strenthens the theory. Thoughts? Opinions?

#121 Therefore, I am kind of acting as a “defender” – in that I am trying to make sure incorrect assumptions about it aren’t perpetuated as the heart of it.

Thanks Ray.

I think that ANY Prophet is a MAN first. Everything out of his mouth is not from God. Sometimes he gives his opinions. If he has an opinion on something… and comments on it, it might just mean that he didn’t think to pray to God to find out if it is right. (on any topic from what to eat, who to visit, or where ????)

#126 Very interesting and I want to know more… I wonder what Ralph would say. I’ll be heading to your blogspot. Do you talk of such things there?

Morgan, thanks for weighing in. It’s nice to have someone with a background in Military History to give a more expert view.

Morgan:

Great posts. Great blog. Now I want to go away and read everything you wrote. And the most important point I want to make here is that the military mindset of the major compiler of the records delivered to us needs to be factored into our reading of the BofM. That perspective tends to be neglected because ministers (especially in my own “progressive” Restoration denomination) do not like to think “theologically” about any aspect of violence. Their longing is to end it.

But that can lead to a misinterpretation of the theology of the Book, or an unwarranted downgrading of its ability to transform and judge our modern belief systems.

I second MH. I really appreciate having someone with far more expertise than I have weigh in.

My last question here: Asian concepts of warfare are obviously applicable to the Malay Peninsula if the area has nothing to do with the BofM. (I believe the theory of conventional non-Mormon historians is that Malay was settled from the North.) But if the land is being peopled from the Mid-East (Jerusalem or the Tower of Babel), then wouldn’t we expect them to import the concepts of war that prevailed in those regions (e.g., the Egyptian) or to have to invent their own from scratch based on the geography as they discovered it?

Firetag,

Before Morgan gets to your question, I want to make one thing abundantly clear. Olsen believes that there were people pre-existing on Malay. So when you say, the theory of conventional non-Mormon historians is that Malay was settled from the North, so does Olsen. So, just as Sorenson proposes that there were pre-existing people and the Nephites were a small minority in Mesoamerica, the Malay theory has the same supposition.

So, Asian, as well as Egyptian/Israeli military strategies could be at work here. I don’t know that Morgan can deduce which strategies are more prevalent in the BoM, but I suspect, as you do, that Asian strategies would probably prevail due to the pre-existing Asian peoples there.

James, I honestly don’t understand your point. Nobody here is claiming to “settle” the issue for the whole church.

Are you saying nobody should do research and try to figure it out? If so, I just don’t understand why. Can you explain a bit more why you think so?

Thanks Firetag! I feel like my corner is not going to be as abandoned anymore. I knew at least a few people would be interested if they stubled across it. I think their would be some Near East influences as far as warfare goes. I have not explored those as much because everything coming out of FARMS and FAIR concerning my discipline takes a Near East approach. (but they do Near East+ Meso, not Near East+Asian so I think I have a new original research project) Also, I do not have that much expertise in that area. I have tried expanding my field but it is slow going because of all the other projects I have going on.

I have tried to use Asain comparisons to add some needed breadth to our comparisons. From a methodology standpoint, if you just compare two areas (near east/ Mesoamerica) you may miss out on a better “bulls eye”. So you must compare more than one region to see if A (our geography model) is closer to B (the Near East or whatever) than it is to C (Asia or whatever). Rather than A is like B, which can be used by the “Joseph Smith made it up” crowd as well. You end up having a confusing set of ideas trying to study a hybrid book (Near East + Meso or Asain) at the same time you defend it from other comparisons that lead to fantasy conclusions.

So I try to examine the warfare from a variety of different angles to see what the internal message or internal consistency is first. I have not widened my scope in trying place my studies to any particular geography. I have sometimes used Sorenson as a default mainly because he is “in the lead” right now. Although as Mormon scholars should know, many scholars thinking one thing or having an orthodoxy does not make it true and should not prevent a study of other ideas. Its rather hypocritical to tell the 95% percent of historians that the Book of Mormon historicity is true, even as 95% of Book of Mormon Scholars try to tell the Malay people to go away and they are off their rocker. (I’m not sure if anybody is doing that, but there does seem to be some resistance to the idea on this blog) I do enjoy placing my ideas on a map, and it seems many of the principles I discussed are packaged for a wide variety of maps. (to paraphrase Richard G. Scotts definition of principle)

Anyways, I am kind of rambling right now. If you need my particular skill set on anything else let me know. And thanks for your interest in my blog.

I agree with Cowboy in 141. (Now I feel bad for not finding that Sorenson quote I promised.) But James, please review my comment in 102.

Firetag–You nailed it! I think far too many people view prophets as infallible, fortune tellers. I think they are men, inspired by God, and subject to the same frailties as you and me. Yet, most members don’t want to follow someone like you and me, and seemed threatened by the fact that a prophet, such as Joseph Smith, could make contradictory statements (such as BoM geography.)

It’s much more pleasant to think that a prophet like Joseph never makes a mistake, so that one never has to exercise faith to determine if what Joseph (or Monson) said. Even Joseph told us we must study things out in our minds–but many of us would rather not take the effort to study–it’s easier for the prophet to tell us how to think.

Hi James.

I thought your comments about FAIR and FARMS were an effort to engage their scholarship into the making of Church position on doctrinal and practical issues. I responded according to my understanding of how real scholarship works in social scientific and humanistic disciplines.

But your comment revealed that your real concern was for pastoral counseling for touchy issues for which the Church has no official responses. That’s a different realm entirely, and one that doesn’t easily understand the mores and modicums of scholarly discourse. I recognize that the average LDS member isn’t going to be interested in scholarly inquiry, its rules and methods, nor in its inability to make final, definitive conclusions about matters of history, philosophy, religious doctrine, etc. Most people think that scholars spend their lives discovering “facts” or “truth” about the world around them, and when they appeal to scholarly authority to answer a question, they expect the scholar to be able to draw upon a wealth of “knowledge” and “facts” to give a satisfactory answer. Normal people don’t realize that most scholars are mostly interested in moving _toward_ a more accurate assessment or description of historical events, artifacts, or ideas using ever-more precise instruments, but not really seeking to write the final word on any subject. And many normal members of most congregations don’t realize that even general consensus among scholars on any particular subject can rapidly change given further evidences.

In the LDS context, couple the general perception of scholarly work and a perception that the leaders of a particular faith are privy to the Spirit for making definitive statements of truth and it seems natural to join the two together. Faithful scholarship can inform priesthood leadership in accessing the Spirit to discover the truth about blacks and the priesthood, polygamy, blood atonement, etc. Using this model, the leaders and Mormon scholars should be done solving all the hairy doctrinal and practical issues faced by the Church in no time, right?

Of course, it doesn’t work that way. And a bishop should know that, and be ready to tell members with questions that sometimes the Lord hasn’t revealed the whats, wheres, whens, whys, and hows about every aspect of his Gospel or his Church organization. A bishop can and should point members to scholarly work that seeks greater understanding about the troubling issues at hand, but shouldn’t seek to imply trust that the scholars should have “proof” or finality to their conclusions. A bishop can and should point members to statements made by church leaders in conference talks, books, etc., but also be willing and able to help the member distinguish information from those sources as personal opinions that might be accurate, but for which the Church has no final, definitive stance. Adam and Eve, too, had to patiently wait for further light and knowledge from the Lord.

In the end, people with questions that cannot be answered have a choice to make: are they going to maintain their faith in basic Gospel principles and in the saving power of Gospel ordinances _despite_ concerns and insufficient knowledge about troubling doctrine or historical events, or are they going to reject that faith and look elsewhere for answers. A bishop who strives with all his heart (and a RS president or trusted lady friend; don’t want to leave out the women!) to inspire faith and exhort to build that faith might feel anguish for the individual who decides that he or she can no longer continue down the same path, but the bishop (or other confidante) should feel no remorse in not being able to provide definitive answers to questions for which there exist none.

Regarding Nahom, it may or may not be a hit. Depending on where you believe Lehi’s family landed consider its weight. Were they alone? There was time for ten divorces before they left.

You failed to acknowledge my refute to your assumption that Moroni “left the battlefield” and that he had “no reason to remain.”

Will you acknowledge he was still around for at least 15 years?

So you’re Ray then? Well, answer my refute for the land being changed having zero affect on where Moroni went. Next, answer my refute that Moroni stayed around the last twenty years because he was actively reading, writing, and translating the record of Ether.

While you’re at it, explain where Moroni obtained more plates to write on.

——————–

Why is the resurrection of Moroni important? I thought you were in the loop on that. Can someone explain that to MH/Ray.

“Ed #96 I don’t understand how you interpret that to be anything about Columbus. Besides, Columbus did not land in the United States. (see someone else’s comment above)”

I don’t see how you didn’t see that Ed said that Columbus did not land in the United States. That is the traditional interpretation of that scripture, that it was Columbus.

#106: There are quite a few quite complimentary comments about the Land of Promise that the Nephites occupied. It was to be free, was to be prosperous, it was to have no oppressive leadership,
In my opinion, I would rate Guatemala lowest of any country on the planet. The people there have been conquored, oppressed, they are very poor, mistreated, starving…
So the argument that the Nephite Land of Promise was one of the best countries on the planet is not true if you claim MESO.
It works with MALA

Columbus never did land in Meso America or North America at all. He only landed in the West Indies & Northeast South America

#117 In talking about Zelph, you forget that Joseph also talks about Palenque, and says it is a Nephite city. Archaeologists report that Palenque was not built until 600AD? which is long after Book of Mormon times. So sometimes Joseph was speaking as an inspired person and sometimes as a mere mortal –like the rest of us.

#126 In one of Nibleys books he writes about Oriental warfare being similar in many ways to warfare in the Book of Mormon. He mentions some similarities between warfare and chess where the a main objective is to capture the king. They recruit people in the surrounding areas just like people in Asia did. This can help explain why there were so many in the final battles. The King was not beheaded … He was put in prison and put to work. Nibley was so impressed by the similarities that he thought that the Jaredites spent a lot of time in the Orient. He makes other points too…

#132 Firetag : We arent saying there were no people on the Malay peninsula prior to the time the BofM people got there. There were people–Asians –there and the Nephites learned from them. Here is an example of indigenous people on the Malay Peninsula. There were black people there (in the southern end of the Malay Peninsula)called Semangs. When Laman and Lemuel left the Nephites and went into the wilderness they apparently intermarried with the Semangs and that is why they became black. That also explains why the Lamanites became more numerous that the Nephites. It might also be noted that the Jaredites did not become black and they were just as wicked as the Lamanites but there was no black population in Burma to cause it to become so.

#143 The point about chariots is not that they were used for war. It is important to note that the wheel was not used in MESO. It wasn’t in their art, or for any cart to transport anything, etc. One reason for doubting they had wheels in MESO is they had no animals to pull a wheeled vehicle. If they have looked and looked and looked for decades for wheels… and haven’t found ANY in MESO…then it seems reasonable to conclude they did not have the wheel.

I haven’t had a chance to get back for a couple of days and only had time to read “some” more of the posts. Does anyone have a question they would like to ask me (even if it wasn’t covered in the book) about the Malay Theory?

Leonides, I acknowledge you. You are straining at gnats. Find something substantive, like geology, linguistics, or something else to pick at. Find something like Firetag found. That was a great comment.

It is common knowledge that Columbus discovered America, it is celebrated in our schools every year. Do you really wish to scrutinize this and mock historians, LDS and others, just to justify alternate models?

Normally it is important to read something BEFORE one criticizes it. I have had people come in to complain about a wide variety of books in my library. Usually, when I ask them what they think is wrong with it, it turns out that they haven’t read it. So I politely ask them to read it and find the part that they object about. At the same time I find a copy of the book and read it to to see if I can figure out what they object to. How can one discuss it if you have no knowledge of it? They have always decided that the book wasn’t bad. Someone told them it was bad so they believed them. They were embarressed they didn’t read it in the first place BEFORE complaining about it.

One woman came in and insisted that I take ALL of the Berenstein Bears books out of the library (My kids and I love those books)! Isn’t it a good thing that we have the right to read what we want to in this country!?

I had a man come into my library soon after I got the job there, and ask me if I had a Bible. I said, I’m not sure, probably, let’s go look. We went over to the shelf where one would be found, and we didn’t have one. He said, “It’s a good thing you DON’T HAVE ONE in here!”

Ray, I appreciate you so much. Thanks for having so much patience.

Ralph:

I certainly agree that the “blackness” of the Lamanites came about through the rapid intermarriage with the preexisting population in any scenario. The question is how different a population has to appear to a culture so attuned to purity (as faithful Jews) to qualify as “cursed”. My suspicion is that people who wouldn’t interact with Babylonians or Egyptions without feeling unclean would have described any more primitive people born much south of the Arctic Circle pretty much in the same terms. (Notice that in Heleman’s period, converting Lamanites become fair — and there was no time for genetics to reverse course in a couple of years.)

The point regarding horses, wheels, and chariots is more subtle. Givens, Chapter 5 Ref 103 cites how many horses (and other animals) can exist in cultures we know have them without evidence remaining centuries later. He also notes that there ARE a small number of findings of pre-Columbian horse remains. So, as in many scientific measurements, the statement “did not exist” should really be qualified as “did not exist above easily detectable limits.”

This describes what matches the internal use of the BofM chariots — a population of a dying horse species, too near the edge of extinction to be maintained or bred by any but kings and high nobles, and not available in quantities to be used for much besides “Air Force One”.

I have gone the rounds with BOMC. While I am open to a Great Lakes Theory (such as Meldrum’s), I find BOMC has a tremendously thin skin, and his scholarship is poor. Let me demonstrate by asking BOMC some questions regarding his theory.

BOMC claims that Lake Tonowanda is the South Sea. Lake Tonowanda has been extinct for 10,000 years, and clearly doesn’t fit within the BoM time period (even the Jaredites date back only to 2500 BC). BOMC, how do you explain this discrepancy? (I’ll answer that in the next paragraph for him.)

BOMC claims that elephants existed in NY, and uses a prehistoric elephant to make his case. The problem is, the elephant is only thousands of years off of the Jaredite period. To justify this, he trashes the theory of evolution and carbon dating. Well, he can do that, but he’s not going to win any friends in the scientific community. BOMC, why is carbon dating and evolution all wrong?

Once again, I think the Great Lakes theories are interesting to study, but BOMC’s lack of scholarship is so apparent, I wouldn’t put any stock into any of his opinions. I’m sorry if my last comment sounded poorly toward him, but my patience with him is always rewarded with “you didn’t read the theory”, and I’ve had it with him. Feel free to check out his theory. It is one of the worst examples of “scholarship” I have ever seen.

Firetag,

“My suspicion is that people who wouldn’t interact with Babylonians or Egyptians without feeling unclean

I will disagree with this assumption. If we are to look at Lehi and his family, we need to read closely the book of Jeremiah, Isaiah, and those other contemporaries. From reading the Bible, we learn that the prophets are the ones constantly calling the Jews to repentance–it seems they constantly engaged in idol worship, and many other “unclean” acts that Jeremiah and others condemned. While Nephi would have followed Jeremiah, even his followers soon fell away as early as Jacob. Certainly Laman and Lemuel didn’t care about being “unclean” in the Jewish sense.

As for these pre-columbian horse remains, I can’t state authoritatively, but I believe they also date to the improper time period (just as BOMC’s elephant.) If you have a link to the contrary, please let me know. (Givens book is on my “to read” list, so if he has covered that issue, I am not yet aware of it.)

Aboz,

Do you really think people who barge into a discussion and say things like “talk some sense into you” and “Are you really that dense?” — much less people who do that while misunderstanding what the people they’re talking to have been saying all along — deserve better responses than BOMC got from Ray?

How does calling something irrational equate to an insult? How does making a statement of one’s opinion of your opinion equate to an insult? Where did he call you a name? You’ve lost me there Ray. As far as I can tell, there was some provocation going on, and then you say the guy insulted you? Seems like he got pretty frustrated with you and MH long before you got frustrated, and he seemed to indicate that he was being provoked, or thats what he thought.

Re #63, #67 etc. re: the stone box

I can’t Google a testimony, but I can Google a quote from Sidney Rigdon regarding the fate of the stone box. It’s fourth- or fifth-hand, but it’s on the Internet, so it must be true.

The Chicago Times Interviews David Whitmer August 1875 S.L. Herald, 12 Aug 1875 in Ebbie Richardson, “David Whitmer,” pp.158
“Three times he has been at the Hill Cumorah and seen the casket that contained the tablets and seerstone. Eventually the casket has been washed down to the foot of the hill, but it was to be seen when he last visited the historic place.”

Since MH threw a softball across the plate I thought I would point people to a blog post I wrote that could be a chapter from Olsen’s manuscript. He already has a good chapter about “old world” links, and I thought it was awesome that he mentioned King Noah. Because without reading his manuscript I wrote about the description of King Noah being very similar to a Chinese description of a “bad emperor”.
http://mormonwar.blogspot.com/2009/03/bad-emperor.html

On a final note, I wrote about all these comparisons to Chinese history and the Book of Mormon because it was two subjects I knew, not because I thought there was any connection beyond universal principles of good generalship/strategy. But after reading his thesis and based on my research I am thinking his model is at least equal to the Mesoamerican one.

MH #193 There is at least one example I can think of off the top of my head where a fish thought to be extinct geologic ages ago still turns up in fishing nets occasionally in deep waters.

Think any archeologist from 4000 AD could tell that pandas exist today in North America — since they are only preserved by governments in zoos? I’m suggesting horses’ status in Mayan America was closer to that in mumbers than in plow pulling numbers. Horses are only explicitly shown in use by kings in the Book of Mormon.

Aboz, you’ve been pretty reasonable with disagreement, as have most. See comment #48–Ed has an anxiety disorder, so I’m sure that’s why he got emotional. As you’ll notice with BOMC, he won’t address a single weakness in his theory, but sure loves to point fingers at others’ theories. It’s fine to disagree, and Aboz, you’ve done well. But as Ray said earlier, some guys come in with guns blazing, and they are the ones I have a real problem with, not so much you.

I can understand why people think Malay is irrational–I certainly did when I first heard of it. However, when you read it, you have to admit that it fixes many problems with Meso by creating new problems of its own–namely correlation with accepted interpretations of scripture. I understand this, and I understand it is a weakness. In my original post, I said, “I’m not sure I buy it.” But I think it is important to think outside the box, which this particular theory does extremely well. It challenges modern mormons in ways similar to the challenges in 1830 when Joseph Smith challenged Christianity with his “gold bible.” For modern mormons to dismiss it without merit as the christians did in Joseph’s day is quite ironic.

Yes, Doug, it is possible that the BoM is fiction, as you like to point out. Your point does have validity, and some people will conclude as you do. I’m at the library right now checking out my Sidney Rigdon book, so we can address the Solomon Spaulding manuscript so I hope to have that post ready in the next week or two. Perhaps the BoM is fiction, but there are probably better theories than the Spaulding Manuscript theory, which keeps getting recycled. So, stay tuned…

Raish and John Sorenson reviewed hundreds of articles and made an exhaustive search in the literature for evidence connecting the Orient with the Americas. They have found many evidences including tangible objects indicating connection with South East Asia and Western America. They wanted to to find information indicating voyages across the Pacific Ocean. Most of them turned out to be from Southeast Asia. Inadvertantly they provided a large amount of evidence supporting the Mala Hypothesis. And really Each one of the items provides a good argument for the Mala Hypothesis. (PreColumbian Contact with the Americas Across the Oceans)

PS And please note they traveled eastward–not westward across the Pacific.

MH, I got emotional because I think anyone would get emotional from exasperation where you were demanding that I provide you with references when you already knew what they were. We have seen Ray also get emotional lately. That’s why I was questioning why in the world you would ask for such things when you already knew what scriptures said what. I know you are a very studied person. I know you know the arguments for the various scriptures, and that you are no fool. That’s why I interpreted it as a provocation. On the other hand, as long as I can pull myself away from this kind of stuff, before I get real irritated I’m usually fine. But Ray and you sucked me back in, or rather, I admit that I gave in and got sucked in. And the fact that you are also a very studied person is why I question why in the world you even consider this an option. It isn’t an option. It is a twisting of the scriptures far beyond what is reasonable according to common sense. Cowboy cracks me up, but his point is valid. Why is it that you got so offended when you know that I was provoked? Indeed, I chose to be provoked, but the fact remains I was provoked, and that is how I interpreted it. My disorder aside. I think other people can see why I interpreted it as a provocation.

Ed, They were NOT trying to provoke you. They were giving you an opportunity to show why your theory was better. I’m sure they assumed that you had read the Mala theory. The proof you gave them worked for both theories. When they tried to explain that to you, you went wild. . . It was obvious to all that have read Olsen’s theory that you had NOT read it. Ray and MH VERY PATIENTLY kept repeating their explanations and even suggested you read the Mala theory. Suggestion: It helps to win an argument IF YOU HAVE READ ABOUT BOTH SIDES so you can show ways they are different.

Ralph Olsen has been seriously researching on Book of Mormon geography for at least 18 years in the university library AND in the scriptures. He studies and studies the scriptures and prays alot about the whole thing. (He has studied Clark and Washburns maps, Sorenson’s writings…etc etc etc…) Sometimes he wakes up in the night with an idea and jots it down. In the morning he goes to the university library to research it . . . (ie. that’s how he found Hill Mah)

His second book is a more concise version of the first with all the additional things he had found since the first book (you can download above) so it would be easier to read for the average reader. He recently told me he has found 40 more items since. He would love to have others show where there is a weakness or strength. So far no one has found any specific fact that did not work. Others have shared their expertise to make him realize other ways to research.

Dr Ralph Olsen is NOT trying to undermine anything about the church. He is a member in good standing. He is trying to PROVE the Book of Mormon is TRUE!

Ed.
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to explain this AGAIN.

According to BOTH theories (MALA and MESO) the groups left from the Jerusalem area. If MesoAmerica was the destination, Lehi (wealthy man) could have purchased a ship near Jerusalem and taken a far shorter and more feasible voyage to America via the Mediterranean Sea and Atlantic Ocean. Instead, the Lehites walked south and east. Lehi could either use his money or lose it. If the book is supposed to be about the the area they came from along the way to America… it didn’t talk about Jerusalem hardly at all… but it does talk about a Land of Promise (Malay). One of the many Lands of Promise that they were to be spread to (early saints named multiple places Land of Promise also) Joseph only translated a third of the plates. Perhaps they get to America in the next part. When Moroni told Joseph that the plates talk of the history of the inhabitants of this continent and the source from whence they sprang, I don’t think he knew that Joseph wasn’t going to get to translate the whole thing.

The Lehites trudged laboriously through the deserts of Arabia for eight years (1 Ne 17:4). The trek was dangerous (e.g from marauders), stressful, exhausting and highly aggravating to some, particularly Laman and Lemuel. Wouldn’t an Atlantic voyage have been stressful enough and far less divisive? Then every step of the tortuous way through Arabia took them farther from America and closer to the Malay Peninsula. The account specifically states that they journeyed TOWARDS the Land of Promise (1 Ne 5:22).

The Jaredites walked to Nimrod at the source of the Tigris River (Eth 2:1). They built heavy log barges for floating the river. On the river they ‘did cross many waters.’ (Eth 2:6), including a large lake (look at Bible map of the Middle East). They came to the great sea which divided the land (Persian Gulf?) (Eth 2:13). So they too traveled south and east away from America and toward the Malay Peninsula.

South of Asia there is an ocean which extends from Arabia to the Malay Peninsula. Joseph Smith is quoted as saying, “Lehi went down to the Red Sea to the great southern ocean and crossed over to this land. (the Land of Promise. He doesn’t mention a country name) Coupled ocean currents (gyres) extend along the southern coast of Asia as far east as the Malay Peninsula (Encyclopedia Britannica (1998), Vol. 20, p. 180). The gyres are wind driven and change direction in accord with seasonal winds. The Jaredite barges were sometimes submerged (Eth 6:7) so they could have had no sails. As their only means of propulsion, other than rowing, they could have drifted to the Malay Peninsula –but not from there eastward across the Pacific: there are NO suitable currents in the Pacific.

In order for eight Jaredite barges to avoid becoming separated and lost, they would have had to go ashore each night. Frequent landings would also have been required to obtain requisite food, feed, and potable water. A continuous coast line extends from southern Arabia to the Malay Peninsula but not to America. Can you imagine how they could take enough water in gourds for themselves and animals clear across the Pacific? I can’t either.

An account by Coon provides information about the abilities of experienced sailors under the best of conditions during Book of Mormon times (Coon, C.S. (1984) The Story of Man. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., p. 258). Ships in the Aegean Sea in about 700 B.C. sailed close to shore. They navigated by landfalls (hence had very limited navigational skills). They hugged the coast and beached their boats each night. To sail across the Aegean Sea (150 miles or less) was considered to be a ‘great feat!’ It was attempted only in the finest summer weather. Steering was done with an oar. For comparison, the Jaredite voyage may have occurred as early as 3,000 B.C.. And the Lehite voyage about 600 B.C.. As landlubbers, they probably had even less navigational skill. With livestock and families aboard they would have been required to go ashore frequently for supplies.

The gyres of the Indian Ocean and Bay of Bengal are wind-driven and average about one mile per hour (Encyclopedia Britannica, p. 180). The distance from the Persian Gulf to the Malay Peninsula is about 4,000 miles. Taking into account the time lost in going ashore and back each night, the Jaredites would have been very fortunate (no delays, e.g.) to go as far as the Malay Peninsula in their reported 344 day voyage (Eth 6:11).

The Lehites built a boat on the southern coast of Arabia. They had no prior experience. They loaded it with animals and with families. They sailed to the land of promise in “many days” (not weeks or months) (1 Ne 18:23). They reported having had no problems at all (other than one storm). They had no navigational expertise at all and yet did not get lost. The accounts indicate a short voyage from southern Arabia, along the southern coast of Asia, to a promised land within a reasonable distance (for example: the Malay Peninsula).

For comparison, consider the voyage of Magellan (In way more advanced times) across much of the Pacific. He had three ships which had been built by craftsmen. The crews were experienced sailors. They had no animals or family members on board to tend. They had excellent navigational skills. They ran out of food and potable water. They had fatal sicknesses. Some, including Magellan, were killed in fighting islanders. The voyage as far as the Philippines took four months (many weeks) (Encyclopedia Britannica (1995) Vol 18, p. 733). Only one of the ships was seaworthy enough to continue the voyage on past the Philippines. The two accounts (of Lehi and of Magellan) provide convincing evidence, in my opinion, that Lehi did not cross the Pacific Ocean. He apparently stopped at a land much closer to southern Arabia (i.e. the Malay Peninsula).

In Science, experimentation is used to check rival hypotheses. Skeptics of the
Malay Hypotheses are encouraged to try to float from the Persian Gulf to America on log barges under conditions comparable to those experienced by the Jaredites. Both intuition and evidence have a crucial role to play in the quest for truth.

The Jaredites were to go to a ‘quarter’ where man had never been (Eth 2:5). At the time (about 3,000 B.C.), both North and South America had been inhabited for many thousands of years (at least 20,000). So America is ruled out as the initial Land of Promise. The Malay Peninsula is located on the periphery of the Pacific ‘quarter’ and Mala proposes that Book of Mormon people ‘hived off’ the peninsula to go to some of the idyllic isles of Polynesia. Many of the islands were uninhabited during Book of Mormon times. So Mala provides an appropriate setting for the crucial account.

In traditional American hypotheses, the Amerindians are descendants of the Book of Mormon Lamanites (Intro to BofM). This is a devastating problem for advocates because the evidence of science, including DNA evidence, clearly indicates that most Amerindians are descendants of people who crossed the Bering Strait from northeast Asia (Southerton, S.G. (2004) Losing a Lost Tribe. Signature Books, SLC, UT, p. 92). Mala is quite compatible with the evidence because it proposes that only a few Book of Mormon people migrated from island to island and then finally to America.

The Promised Land was to be kept from the knowledge of other nations (2 Ne 1:8). The great diversity of languages in America provides assurance that other ‘nations’ had been present for thousands of years. By including Polynesia in the concept of ‘Promised Land’, Mala can accomodate the scripture. Many islands had been unknown to others until after European explorers arrived after 1500 A.D.

After enough time to do a little exploring, the Lehites realized that they had landed on a peninsula (Alma 22:32). Their Land of Promise was nearly surrounded by water and was connected by a narrow neck of land to a mainland. The Malay Peninsula provides an excellent setting. Guatemala fails. America has no suitable peninsula to match the accounts.

The peninsula described in Alma 22:32 was clearly oriented north-south with principal lands appropriately named Land Northward and Land Southward. The Malay Peninsula matches the account very well. In Mesoamerica, the Isthmus of Tehuantepec extends east-west. It couldn’t be oriented worse.

In order for Book of Mormon lands to fit on the Isthmus of Tehuantepec at all, Sorenson has to assume that the term ‘north’ does not really mean ‘north’. He skews directions about 60 degrees counter-clockwise. This allows him to propose that the Land of Promise extended diagonally across Tehuantepec. Yet the Lehites had a compass (1 Ne 18:12; 18:21; Alma 37:38; 37:43-45), and they knew they were going precisely south-southeast when they were travelling along the Red Seacoast (1 Ne 16:13). The Malay Hypothesis accommodates Book of Mormon directions very well.

The gold plates were inscribed with ‘reformed Egyptian’ (glyphs?) in order to conserve space (Morm 9:32). Under divine guidance, they were translated into English for us. The Book of Mormon is claimed to be the most correct of all books (Intro. To BofM). An appealing feature of Mala is that it allows us to read the Book of Mormon literally. As indicated in Section 15, advocates of Meso propose changing the meanings of the terms (e.g. ‘north’) as a means for having their account match their preconceived notions.

Across the mid-section of the Land Southward there was a narrow mountain range which extended from West Sea to the East Sea (Alma 22:27). The Malay Peninsula has the Cameron Highlands which match the account very well. Guatemala has no suitable strip. It’s one sea is located much more south than west and it has no east sea at all.

The Book of Mormon describes their journey to the Land of Promise and tells of groups of people hiving off to go on to other lands of promise. The MALA theory works very well with science also because then people left there and populated the ilsands of the Pacific and finally groups landed also in America. That is why little things have been found in America in scattered locations that do not fit with MESO or the proper time. That is why DNA evidence doesn’t match in MESO. That is why animals, plants etc do not match in MESO…..etc…

It works so perfectly, if you honestly think about it, you get goose bumps and wonder why the preconceived notion has held everyone back for so long. The only thing I can think of is that it isn’t quite the right time yet.
Thanks for reading.

As you folks don’t seem to want to let this go, I present Joseph Fielding Smith’s own rebuttal to the Malay theory. I’ve seen the arguments about not believing some of JS revelations and I understand why many have taken that view, but if we accept that some of what he said was made up, how do you determine what was real? More to the point, how does being a prophet help if the pope has as good a track record in getting God’s messages as he does? But then again, I don’t accept many of JS “revelations” either… Ok, so I guess we’re brothers after all…

JOSEPH FIELDING SMITH-
Perhaps this matter could rest at this point, but the question of the territory now embraced within the United States having been in possession of Nephites and Lamanites before the death of Mormon, carries some weight in the determining of this matter. In the light of revelation it is absurd for anyone to maintain that the Nephites and Lamanites did not possess this northern land. While Zion’s camp was marching on the way to Jackson County [Missouri], near the bank of the Illinois River [in Illinois] they came to a mound containing the skeleton of a man. The history of this incident is as follows:

“The brethren procured a shovel and a hoe, and removing the earth to the depth of about one foot, discovered the skeleton of a man, almost entire, and between his ribs the stone point of a Lamanitish arrow, which evidently produced his death. Elder Burr Riggs retained the arrow. The contemplation of the scenery around us produced peculiar sensations in our bosoms; and subsequently the visions of the past being opened to my understanding by the Spirit of the Almighty, I discovered that the person whose skeleton was before us was a white Lamanite, a large, thickset man, and a man of God. His name was Zelph. He was a warrior and chieftain under the great prophet Onandagus, who was known from the Hill Cumorah, or eastern sea to the Rocky Mountains. The curse was taken from Zelph, or at least, in part—one of his thigh bones was broken by a stone flung from a sling, while in battle, years before his death. He was killed in battle by the arrow found among his ribs, during the last great struggle of the Lamanites and Nephites.”

Elder Heber C. Kimball who was present recorded the following in his journal:

“While on our way we felt anxious to know who the person was who had been killed by that arrow. It was made known to Joseph that he had been an officer who fell in battle, in the last destruction among the Lamanites, and his name was Zelph. This caused us to rejoice much, to think that God was so mindful of us as to show these things to his servant. Brother Joseph had inquired of the Lord, and it was made known in a vision.”

In the face of this evidence coming from the Prophet Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, and David Whitmer, we cannot say that the Nephites and Lamanites did not possess the territory of the United States and that the Hill Cumorah is in Central America. Neither can we say that the great struggle which resulted in the destruction of the Nephites took place in Central America. If Zelph, a righteous man, was fighting under a great prophet-general in the last battles between the Nephites and Lamanites; if that great prophet-general was known from the Rocky Mountains to “the Hill Cumorah or eastern sea,” then some of those battles, and evidently the final battles did take place within the borders of what is now the United States.

There were no righteous prophets, save the Three Nephites, after the death of Moroni, and we learn that Zelph was slain during one of these battles during the great last struggle between the Nephites and Lamanites and was buried near the Illinois River.

In the Book of Mormon story the Lamanites were constantly crowding the Nephites back towards the north and east. If the battles in which Zelph took part were fought in the country traversed by the Zion’s Camp, then we have every reason to believe from what is written in the Book of Mormon, that the Nephites were forced farther and farther to the north and east until they found themselves in the land of Ripliancum, which both Ether and Mormon declare to us was the land of Ramah or Cumorah, a land of “many waters,” which “by interpretation, is large, or to exceed all.”

This being true, what would be more natural then that Moroni, like his father Mormon, would deposit the plates in the land where the battles came to an end and the Nephites were destroyed? This Moroni says he did, and from all the evidence in the Book of Mormon, augmented by the testimony of the Prophet Joseph Smith, these final battles took place in the territory known as the United States and in the neighborhood of the Great Lakes and hills of Western New York. And here Moroni found the resting place for the sacred instruments which had been committed to his care. (Doctrines of Salvation, Joseph Fielding Smith. Compiled by Bruce R. McConkie. 3 vols. Salt Lake City, Utah: Bookcraft, 1954-56, p.238-240.)

Heretic.

The evidence PLEASE…. You don’t even have scriptures to back up the proposition. NO DNA anythying. Stop telling me that I need to read something that I understand already. What makes you think that I don’t understand what you hare saying? Lets see, we are to number 218 now? You are spewing stuff out of thin air without the least bit of evidence to back up your idea. But you don’t even believe in it anyway, and just say its a possibility. You spew a bunch of stuff to make it look somehow possible. But that stuff isn’t evidence of your proposition. Its evidence that you just try to show that its possible that it happened. Stop trying to force the evidence to fit. The evidence doesn’t work. The scriptural evidence, coupled with imperfect archaeological data only fits the Americas.

This has gotten beyond stupid. Goodbye.

Here’s the problem with the argument that perhaps Joseph Smith was wrong. Read Doug G.’s quote from Joseph Fielding Smith, who was quoting History of the Church, I think (# 216). Then read the Quote from Heber C. Kimball. It’s not like the Brethren inadvertantly unearthed an ancient corpse while trying to dig a latrine, and then began speculating about the possibilities of whether “Zelph” had ties to The Book of Mormon peoples. Joseph inquired of Lord, and recieved a rather specific revelation. This revelation included the following data points;

the mans name – Zelph
his role in society as it relates to a specific Book of Mormon event – A warrior and a chieftan
his nationality – a white lamanite
the time period in which he lived – The last great struggle between the Nephites and the Lamanites
His spiritual orientation – a man of God
The names of his contemporaries, including their reputation – The Prophet Onandagus, known from Cummorah to the Rocky Mtns.
His relative body size – A large, thick set man
An apparent curse- How a thigh bone was broken from an injury many years prior
Cause of Death – this was obvious, I will concede

If you dismiss this revelation as wishful thinking, or whatever, you ultimately challenge Joseph Smith as a Prophet. I know I have said this before, but it does not make any sense to discredit some of Joseph Smith’s revelatons in order to try and bring legitimacy to his most prominent visions, ie The Book of Mormon. You may debate this, but when it comes to Prophets and revelation, I’m afraid that it’s a package deal. If not, then frankly a Prophet isn’t good for anything.

“then some of those battles.. did take place within the borders of what is now the United States”

See, even Joseph Fielding Smith agree with me! Florida’s where they first landed and then walked off from there. It’s actually viable to walk from Florida across to the Rocky Mtns. If Columbus came across the Atlantic, why not Lehi?

So its settled then? Carlitos’ Florida theory is the only one which makes sense.

Its Florida, only Florida, remember Florida Theory

Now “Show me the DNA.” can’t because they all died and those Lamamites who lived on had changed their race or colour of skin so therefore miraculously changed their DNA, or evolved their DNA…All settled now children?

“Why do we keep on this merry-go-round?”

Because this is the thread that never ends. It goes on and on my friend. Some people started commenting on it, not knowing what it was – and they’ll continue commenting forever just because this is the thread that never ends . . .

MH and Ray,

I did read the comments; I just thought it would be helpful for folks to be able to read what they so easily were dismissing. I don’t recall anyone more than just referencing the information and I think there is value in actually seeing it. You may disagree of course; my comment was mostly just quoting directly from Doctrines of Salvation. I thought it brought something to the discussion…

Please ignore my inputs as you’ve obviously already considered my points and dismissed it. Jeezz’s take a pill man…

This thread never ends because you tell somebody that you disagree and they have no foundation, and they repeat to you the same thing again as if you don’t know what they said, as if somehow that means that you are a retard and didn’t read what they said.

Follow-up on my comment WAY back on #96. Thanks Adam E. for the David Whitmer quote (#192). The Gadiantons in the Wasatch was a theme repeded several times in the early 1860′s Journal of Discourses Vol. 8 p. 338 (Originally printed in the Deseret News, March 20, 1861.) Heber C Kimball on the same topic is Vol. 8 pg 256-258.

While the topic of geography has been discussed ad naseum, I think one more principle may be germane: The Law of Witnesses. When two or three prophets testify to the same point, to me the Word is established.
When scholars begin the search by tossing out all spiritual insights (see quote in #229 for example) I become very skeptical of any conclusions reached. The answer to this question will eventually be revealed, but the answer will come by study AND BY FAITH. If we disregard the prophets and their revelations, what does it profit us to know where the Book of Mormon took place?

Ray, read the context carefully of my statement again, and you will see that I was saying that it is YOU people that are treating ME like [offensive word deleted] telling me that I don’t know the basics of YOUR theory that you are arguing for. I didn’t call you people [offensive word deleted]. I said you are treating ME like [offensive word deleted].

Hey Ray, MH, email me at helaman3000@yahoo.com, and perhaps we can talk on the phone and I will prove to you by my own voice over the phone that I know the basics of the Maylay theory as far as I need to know them to be able to tell you here or over the phone with my own voice that it has no foundation, and that I don’t need to read all the way through 200 pages of nothing to know that it has no foundation. Hey, do you want to get together for lunch if you are in Utah, and I can tell that to your face? And we can discuss face to face how much I don’t know about this theory?

Hey you guys, read Ed’s thing carefully, and it is absolutely clear what he was saying. He said he felt like you people were treating him like [offensive word deleted] not giving him credit enough to know what he was talking about. Ray, it wasn’t fair for you to say that Ed was calling you that pejorative. Any reasonable person can see Ed’s intent there. You didn’t read his post carefully enough. I, frankly, feel that you guys are not giving him credit enough to know that your theory is without foundation. I for one can see that the Maylay theory is without foundation. Are you going to tell me that I don’t know enough about it to in order to judge it?

Let me make this as blunt as I can put it, and then I will drop it:

I HATE THAT WORD NO MATTER HOW IT’S USED. Period. I don’t need anyone to deconstruct my comment, since I never said Ed called me that. I fully understand EXACTLY what he meant. I simply HATE THAT WORD NO MATTER HOW IT IS USED, so I asked Ed not to use it – “no matter the context”. I even said I would not call MYSELF or others that word – since I understood PERFECTLY what he meant. I said I would not allow that word to be used – plainly and clearly.

He ignored my request. He used it again (repeatedly), as did Aboz, despite my very sincere request not to use it – and he defended its use simply because he was not calling anyone else that word. It is a loathsome pejorative – flat-out disgusting and ugly and vile. It should die the same death as racial slurs and other reprehensible identifiers. I said I would delete it, and I have – although I left it alone in the original comment. (I left it alone in MH’s comment, since he is the author of this post and simply was repeating my request that it not be used.)

I will ask one more time:

PLEASE DON’T USE IT, no matter the context. It is HIGHLY offensive on its face. Period. I will delete its use in any further comments. Period.

Now, having said that, let’s all take a breath. I know how to read; you know how to read; let’s try communicating as adults. Please.

The Malay theory Does have a foundation of 200+ reasons why it physically works and Meso doesn’t. Even one thing should cause one to wonder about Meso. How can you say it is without foundation? I believe it has more things right with it than any other theory. It is worth more inquiry.

I rest my case. A piece of work.

Ok Ray, I told you people that what you are defending is nonsense. Anger ensued because you are stubborn and so am I. AND??????????????????

They are listed. See (3) in the original post. The main purpose of this post was to let people know of other, non-mainstream theories, and to emphasize one that is the least mainstream (although the African one could give the Malay theory a run for the money.)

What is wrong with 300 posts? It is a great thing for MH to have written the post with so much (the most?) interest on MormonMatters. Congratulations.

Voni,

If the comments go into another round of name calling, or re-covering Zelph, or re-covering early church leaders statements merry-go-round, I’ll personally ask Ray to shut down the comments. We really don’t need to cover those topics again, as I don’t think we’ll cover any new ground. JTJ brings up a good point to consider, which has only been emphasized by Doug, but his point is more in the realm of “authorship” rather than “geography.” As such, I don’t mind briefly answering Doug and JTJ, and I’ve already promised a new post in that direction to more fully address one of the most significant theories regarding authorship that (like the geography theories) has significant weaknesses too.

Ray,
Your comment only bolsters the argument for two options. Right now, you are starting with a conclusion and working backwards trying to find evidence to support the conclusion. The evidence doesn’t suggest Israelite migrations in North or South America. Is there any non-LDS scholar or historian who is even investigating literal BOM claims? I would be interested in reading it.

JTJ,

There are plenty of people who believe in a Big Bang, or Evolution, but evidence is less than convincing for a consensus you are trying to suggest. Even if one believes in Big Bang or Evolution, certainly there are flaws (or at least elements lacking solid evidence) to question the theories. Certainly, you’ll find argument for and against these propositions. This topic is no different.

While scholars do not always agree with one another, it is still an uphill battle that the only scholars arguing for Israelite origin of the American Indians, on any scale, are those whose religion hangs on that very fact. Some third party support for Book of Mormon claims could go a long way in lending credibility to our beliefs. In other words, I would be interested seeing if there is any good non-LDS scholarly support for our claims as well.

JTJ and Cowboy,

Certainly you bring up some valid points–a non-Mormon scholar would go a long way towards adding credibility. While not directly related to this post, I will tell you I heard a presentation from a Mormon by the name of George Potter. He runs a website at http://www.nephiproject.com which is primarily interested in Old World BoM archaeology. Potter has done some impressive work in Yemen, trying to locate Nephi’s harbor. I know his work is disputed by the Aston’s, but both groups have found some good candidates for the Land Bountiful in Yemen. (Potter proposes Khor Kori, while Aston proposes Wadi Sayyaq.)

At any rate, Potter does have some non-Mormon scholars on his team. I remember Potter telling a story of a non-Mormon, while smoking a cigar, explaining the River Laman to the others in the group. I will try to see if I can contact George so I can better document this conversation. But suffice it to say that Potter thinks he has some good candidates for Old World BoM geography matches.

(Incidentally, Potter and Aston both have some impressive BoM geography in Arabia and Yemen. Potter supports a Chilean/Peruvian New World model–I’m not sure about Aston’s New World preferences,. But their Old World geography has much agreement. Even their proposed locations for Nephi’s harbor are located relatively close in proximity.)

I’ll confine myself to a couple of points on Voni’s oceanography here, in the following context. We all are embedding our assumptions about testing geography in a larger assumption about HOW we expect God to act.

JTJ seems (correct me if I’m wrong) to advocate a God-as-last-resort version of Occam’s razor in which the Divine is considered only when “rational” explanation fails. Voni is more “God is mildly involved”; God can and does get them across the Indian Ocean, but getting them across the Pacific without island hopping over centuries is too hard, even though God gives them a compass and presumably doesn’t have to guess what they need to pack in supplies to get them across. At the other extreme are those who assume Nephi could have built an aircraft carrier if he’d only had the faith of the Brother of Jared.

The same problem occurs when we try to evaluate geographic theories in light of the “clear” text of the Book of Mormon. Clarity depends critically about assumptions about how the translation process would work and how the English words would therefore relate to BofMormon glyphs.

Sometimes, we think we’re debating geography when we are really debating differing assumptions about how God worked (or should work). So we should try to assume the same thing about how God works in comparing the Meso and Malay models, and I’ll use the oceanography as an example.

Let me assume the same capabilities for navigation and supply Voni uses for Malay and apply to Meso: exit from Yemen by ship, hugging the land and stopping frequently for resupply (without the Book mentioning it) travel by various groups across long spaces without it being mentioned.

While Voni describes the overall Indian Ocean and Pacific currents correctly, there are a couple of important omissions. First, the reason sea travel in the Indian Ocean between Arabia and Asia is so easy is the monsoon, which reverses the prevailing current and permits seasonal TWO-way trade between the centers. Sea trade is much more hazardous if you can only go one-way and have to travel all the way around the Indian Ocean to get back to your starting point.

There is another feature of the circulation that’s relevant, because the shore hugging of Voni’s argument requires that currents within the first 100 miles or so from the coast are what matters if the Nephits are going to get anywhere each day. Rotational effects of the earth produce strong boundary currents along the western shores of the ocean basins that are much faster than the general gyres. The Gulf Stream is the western boundary current for the North Atlantic, and there is a corresponding western boundary current that runs southward along the coast of Africa. It doesn’t reverse seasonally, which makes it useless for two-way travel, but — wait — God was taking Lehi on a one-way trip.

On the other side of the tip of Africa, the currents run northward along the coast to the equator where (as Voni’s model allows) the Nephites can do a complete resupply before racing across the Atlantic on the easterlies (in this scenario that compass remains actually useful for something important when you can no longer follow the coast) to wherever God tells you to land. Then the only gap you’ve got to cross before your presence shows up in the archeological record on the Pacific Coast of MesoAmerica is basically the width of Meso — at this point a piece of cake compared to the trips to get the plates to New York in either meso or Malay.

Again, my point here is not to argue for an Atlantic landing, it is to argue for recognizing how our assumptions about HOW God is involved in the process we’re evaluating can bias our model evaluations.

Firetag, Think of it as a list of things that are most probable. Take the flood as an analogy of probability. The geologic strata provides no evidence for a global deluge, however there is historical evidence for local flood myths. Assuming a metaphysical explanation of a historical event vs. a naturalistic is the least probable of occurrences. I’m splitting hairs between “last resort” and “probability”, but you generally get the point.

Mormon Heretic, I hope this is not the extent of outside sources

Firetag,

Excellent analysis! It seems to me that Dr Olsen is open to either an Atlantic or Pacific crossing. Sorensen definitely advocates a Pacific crossing, and I’ll see if I can post something from Sorenson indicating a Pacific crossing. Sorenson also mentions the monsoons, as you did, and he also believes that Nephi stopped many times on the ocean journey for supplies, stating that it would have been too difficult to carry fresh water the entire way to Meso. (I’ll try to get Sorenson’s map–it goes right by Malay on the way to Guatemala.)

JTJ, that was a sampling, not a full-course. It was merely to show that some non-Mormons do take the BoM more seriously than some commenters implied. I liked the quote that Joseph “was a religious genius” too.

Cowboy, certainly the Old World geography for the BoM is of much better quality.

JTJ,

This is where I need to quote Rabbi Moses Maimonides (he lived 1135 – 1204). The following quote comes from a book titled, “DNA and Tradition: The Genetic Link to the Ancient Hebrews“, by Rabbi Yaakov Kleiman.

“Although writing more than 700 years ago, [Rabbi Moses] Nachmanides’ message is even more clear and relevant today. His writings directed the person of faith to realize that there is much more hidden than revealed, both in the traditional Biblical writings and also in the natural world. Our challenge is to continually study and investigate both realms, with the realization that apparent conflicts are merely artifacts of temporary incomplete understanding in one or both realms. This avoidance of intellectual pride, allows the person of traditional religious faith to work comfortably within the framework of rigorous scientific hypothesis and empiricism. This is also in keeping with the rationalist approach in Maimonides’ Guide for the Perplexed.”

Done.

You’re welcome, MH.

boy, I forgot to check back here and missed out on quite the discussion…

I’ve been reading a book about the ‘true’ location of Atlantis. (See http://www.atlan.org)

The idea is that the Indonesian islands during the Ice Age were a continent because of lower sea level. There’s a pretty compelling argument that this was the location of all the traditional (Egyptian, Greek, Celtic, Hindu) understandings of the lands of the civilization destroyed by the flood, paradise lost.

So, that gives the Malaysian location a little more ‘big picture’ relevance if adam-ondi-ahman was really there.

But there are a lot of assumptions and holes and things. Still, worth checking out.

Mormon Heretic

yes, there is cement and even concrete in Mesoamerica…check out a book called Ancient Sun Kingdoms of the Americas by Von Hagen. He quotes the Spanish soldiers as being amazed at the great cement cities, the roads. etc. I remember reading several books some 40 years ago on BoM archeology, and there are literally 100′s of findings that indicate that the Americas would seem to fit the geography of the BoM. By the way, is there a great road system and cement buildings in Malaysia?

Neawesee

well of course no skeletons were found. I lived in Tombstone, Az while stationed at Ft. Huachuca in the Army, and have seen bones disappear in just a few weeks. I now live in SW Utah and have watched entire cow skeletons fall apart in just three or four years, what with the mice, squirrels, and coyotes working on them. I’ve also butchered deer one year, leaving bones,etc. and found absolutely nothing there the next year. And all these examples are in areas of very little rain. Imagine how long it would take for bodies to disappear in an area of more rain and wildlife than the US Southwest!

And steel? In a wet environment? Have you looked at our steel bridges almost anywhere in the US? Even here in southern Utah, they are starting to go already after being around not even 50 years! I can tell you’ve probably never done any blacksmithing, have you? It’s a constant struggle to keep steel from reverting back to it’s natural form…iron dust. And while Nephi says he made steel swords for his people, I don’t remember anything that says they were in common use for everyone a thousand years later. So what’s the big deal about not finding steel anywhere in central or south America.

And why would the plates have to be buried near where the final battles took place? 35 years is a long time to get anywhere, as has been mentioned above.

Thanks Steve. I know Olsen has submitted his review to FARMS and been given the run-around. I am curious about it. I agree about that Meldrum “had blurred pseudo-revelation with pseudo-scholarship in an attempt to undermine REAL revelation and scholarship.” I was intrigued when I first learned of his theory, but not so much when I went to his latest meeting.

Do you know anyone at FARMS who might be willing to look at Malay? I’ve studied it more than most, but I don’t consider myself a scholar of this sort of information.

The most unconventional geography plan has been published since 1986 and you have never covered it. It is the only book which relies soley upon prophetic statements and only the Book of Mormon. It is the definitive version, the only one without numerous discrepancies and not in diametric opposition to prophetic statements.

Greetings from a Malagasy (Madagascar) LDS! I’m sure many of you who defend the Mesoamerican theory live in America… but for us not American, and even before being aware of the Malay hypothesis, we thought that the Lehites settling in America didn’t quite make sense (I’m a scientist). Many inconsistencies… How I stumbled on this Malay theory was after a trip to Greece and pondering about the remark of Paul on circumcision. Then thinking that in Madagascar, all males are being circumcised…. even those of Malay origin (other races that blended over the centuries are Malays, Arabs, Abyssinians and African Bantus). Now Question… Are Malagasy (those from Madagascar) of semitic origin for practicing the circumcision like the Jews? Does it come from the Malays? Do Malays have semitic origin? And of course the island Comoros, which capital is Moroni is just too striking a coicidence… 
For many of us in the Old World, the Malay theory really hits Home!