Thursday, April 19, 2012

Did the Land of Promise Span Two Continents? Part IV

Continuing with Peter Covino, Jr’s map as shown on the Alpha Publishing and Book of Mormon Geography websites, we pick up again with their comments and our responses. Indeed, we are dealing here with some fanciful and outlandish ideas about the Book of Mormon Land of Promise. In the last post, we showed how their very own map includes the sinking of 8 cities not mentioned in scripture, and a land sinking that does not cover the sunken cities mentioned in scripture. This post continues with that idea of the cities that were sunk.

Comment: “The Land of Nephi…where did it go?…and there was terrible thunder, insomuch that it did shake the whole earth as if it was about to divide asunder. And the city of Moroni did sink into the depths of the sea, and the inhabitants thereof were drowned.…there was a more great and terrible destruction in the land northward; for behold, the whole face of the land was changed…And thus the face of the whole earth became deformed…And many great and notable cities were sunk…And behold, the great city Moroni have I caused to be sunk in the depths of the sea, and the inhabitants thereof to be drowned.…and the city of Jerusalem and the inhabitants thereof; and waters have I caused to come up in the stead thereof…3 Nephi Chapter 8 & 9.” [In a box below this statement] “There also came up a land out of the depth of the sea…Moses 7:14.”

Response: The first part of the above statement was covered in the last post. But as a footnote, we should add that in the scriptures quoted, and in all of 3 Nephi, there is no mention—not a single indication—of any land being sunk. Only cities are identified. Now obviously, the land immediately around the city would seem to have been sunk with the city, buy if a land, say like the Land of Nephi, the Land of Zarahemla, the Land of Bountiful, etc., would have been sunk, one would think it would have been included in the descriptions in 3 Nephi. But the Land of Nephi is not mentioned as being sunk, nor is there any indication, suggestion, intimation, or any clue at all that this happened--instead, Covino goes to archaeology that shows sunken structures in the Caribbean Sea as his source. Archaeology is good to support scriptural events, but should not replace them. Again, as others like to do, Covina is adding something into the scriptures that is not there!

The second point is with Moses 7:14. Why this was included in the manner it was is hard to imagine. The obvious use of this was to show that land that came up had to do with the land that was sunk described above. The point here is, Moses 7:14 has nothing to do with the Nephites, the earth’s changes during the Savior’s crucifixion, or anything else regarding these events. The question “The Land of Nephi…where did it go?” and this Moses scripture make it seem like they are supportive of one another.

Actually, Moses 7:14 has to do with the time of Enoch and states: “There also came up a land out of the depths of the sea, and so great was the fear of the enemies of the people of God, that they fled and stood afar off and went upon the land which came up out of the depth of the sea.” Verse 12 deals with “Enoch continued to call upon all the people save it were the people of Canaan to repent.” Verse 13 starts out with “And so great was the faith of Enoch, that he led the people of God, and their enemies came to battle against them…” Obviously, without question, the idea that a land came up out of the depths of the sea during the pre-Flood era of Enoch, the 4th great grandson of Adam, who lived three generations before Noah, can have no reference to the Nephites or what happened to the Land of Nephi. Obviously, there can be no reason to include this scripture other than what appears to be an attempt to manipulate the unwary reader.

Map showing site locations (black lettering added from the composite map, and red lettering and boundary line added to show the location of South America and the Caribbean Sea

Comment: “There are those who have tried to say that this Book of Mormon map is incorrect. They miss quote the contents of this book and assuming that their analysis is more correct. I suggest you look at the facts list which is a FREE download at this site and see for yourself.”

Response: The Free download of "facts" will be dealt with in future posts. For now, there can be no question Covino and Elieson’s “the Book of Mormon map” is incorrect. It is flagrantly incorrect. Take the following points:

1. The West Sea is to the east of the Land of Zarahemla, especially that part of the land where the city of Zarahemla resides (present day Mexico). The scriptures are clear that the Land of Zarahemla runs from the west sea to the east sea, placing the city of Zarahemla somewhere in between. A flagrant disregard for the scriptural record.

2. The Sea West is to the South of the Land of Bountiful, and the Land of Bountiful does not border on the Sea East (13). Both of these points are in opposition to the scriptural record. In addition, the Sea West is to the North of the Land of Nephi. Again, this is in opposition to the scriptural record.

3. Mormon tells us Hagoth built ships along the west sea and launched them into the Wet Sea (Alma 63:6 7). This would be impossible according to Covino’s map since no ship launched into his West Sea could go further north than the Land of Bountiful (which was south of where Hagoth built his ships (Alma 63:5)

4. The Narrow Neck (15) is not attached to the Land Southward. Nor could Limhi’s 43-man expedition gone that way on this map, which would be in the complete opposite direction from the City of Nephi than the City of Zarahemla. An odd course for those trying to find Zarahemla. The Narrow Neck is also 160 miles across and 500 miles long—hardly matching the “small” and “narrow” descriptions Mormon used.

5. The City of Moroni location (23) does not match the scriptural location: “the city Moroni; and it was by the east sea; and it was on the south by the line of the possessions of the Lamanites.” for it is about 2000 miles inside Lamanite land (present day Puerto Rico), not by the border of Nephite land.

6. Despite the fact that the area of first landing was the only place the Lamanites occupied until they moved northward into the Land of Nephi, this map shows they occupied a land 1400 miles across from west to east, which has no supportive suggestion in scripture.

7. The scriptures clearly point out that there was a narrow neck of land (15) separating the Land Southward from the Land Northward, and that this narrow neck could easily be defended against the Lamanites approaching from the south. It is also the boundary of the later truce between the Nephites and Lamanites in Mormon’s time, yet this map has no specific separation from these two lands, with a boundary between the Land of Bountiful and the Land of Desolation covering approximately 2000 miles, from the Rocky Mountains to the tip of Florida.

8. The scriptures clearly point out that the separation of the narrow neck of land between the Land Bountiful in the Land Southward and the Land of Desolation in the Land Northward ran in an east-west direction, yet this map has such a line running the length of Florida, about 600 miles in a north-south direction.

There are numerous other inaccuracies in this map, but space here is limited. See the next post, “Did the Land of Promise Span Two Continents? Part V” for more on this and other statements about the Covino-Elieson map)

No comments:

Post a Comment