More on Sorenson’s Land of Promise – Part VI

We are continuing with John L. Sorenson’s book An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon, which is so extensively hyped by Mesoamericanists and Land of Promise Theorists, especially because of Sorenson’s reputation as the one-time Dean of Anthropology at BYU, and current status as Professor Emeritus, and referred to as the “Guru of Book of Mormon Archaeology,” that it needs a reality check every so often. 
    Continuing with Sorenson’s comments about the distance across the narrow neck of land.

Just about everything is in the wrong place in Sorenson’s Mesoamerica map from Mormon’s detailed descriptions, yet Sorenson tells us that “hereafter I plan to assume that the geography question is settled”
    Sorenson continuing: “I have said often enough that these results are not conclusive. Yet hereafter I plan to assume that the geography question is settled, in broad terms. It is sensible to assume so in order to get on with other matters. I am personally assured that the Nephite map is now known with quite high probability. Furthermore, no other map correlation will do; all others known to me contain fatal flaws. On the contrary, the picture offered here is thoroughly plausible” (p47).
    Response: When something is not conclusive how can we assume the geography question is settled? In fact, not only is it settled in Sorenson’s mind, he uses this “inconclusive geography” to base the rest of his book upon and all his theories and future writing.
    In the Foreword to his book, it is written: “This book has been many years in preparation and will undoubtedly endure for many years to come. It will become required reading for all people interested in the antiquity of the Book of Mormon. Those who comment on the historicity of Book of Mormon accounts henceforth are irresponsible or uninformed if they ignore or neglect Dr. Sorenson’s present work.”
    One can only wonder how irresponsible or uninformed one is if they see and question Sorenson’s many mistakes and his lack of scriptural agreement? Evidently, one should ignore truth and simply take Sorenson’s word for things, even when he uses “inconclusive geography” to prove his points.
   Sorenson continuing: “Furthermore, no other map correlation will do; on the contrary, the picture offered here is thoroughly plausible. That will become more apparent as we proceed with our discussion. So let us examine more detailed evidence about the match between the scriptgure and external sources” (p 47).
    Response: It is interesting that Sorenson’s own map (Map 4, p24) is far closer to Mormon’s description than his actual map of Mesoamerica. So let us take a look at his final map, his Mesoamerica, the map that is superior to and better than any other map because “no other map correlation will do.” (Correlation, by the way means “a mutual relationship of connection between two or more things,” that is, Sorenson’s points on his map should correlate with one another).
    So let us begin with his comment on p 5: “"the first place to seek for knowledge of the Book of Mormon, is the book itself."  While one can hardly disagree with such a statement, he goes on to say that: "We must...construct a map, systematically and comprehensively.  Every statement in the volume (Book of Mormon) must be milked of relevant information, and all of it ought to fit together without contradiction. 

Sorenson’s Map. Compare his locations with those stated in the scriptural record. There is not a single match between the scriptural record and Sorenson’s map locations—absolutely no correlation between the two at all despite his own conditions that they must do so
    1. Mormon: Land Northward – To the north of Bountiful and the narrow neck of land (Alma 22:31)
    Sorenson Map: Land Northward – To the west of Bountiful and the narrow neck of land;
    2. Mormon: Land Southward – To the south of Bountiful and the narrow neck of land (Alma 22:31)
    Sorenson Map: Land Southward – To the east of Bountiful and the narrow neck of land
    3. Mormon: Land of Zarahemla – To the north of the narrow strip of land which was to the north of the Land of Nephi (Alma 22:27)
    Sorenson Map: Land of Zarahemla – To the east of the narrow strip of land which is to the west of the Land of Nephi
    4. Mormon: Land of Bountiful – To the south of the narrow strip of land, in the north of the Land Southward (Alma 22:29; Helaman 1:17)
    Sorenson Map: Land of Bountiful – To the east of the narrow neck of land, in the west of the Land Southward (which is in the east);
    5. Mormon: Land of Desolation – To the north of the narrow neck of land, in the south of the Land Northward (Alma 22:29)

Sorenson’s Bountiful is east of his Desolation instead of to the south of the land of Descolation
    Sorenson Map: Land of Desolation – To the west of the narrow neck of land, in the east of the Land Northward;
    6. Mormon: City of Zarahemla – North of the Land of Nephi and south of the Land of Bountiful (Helaman 4:5-7)
    Sorenson Map: City of Zarahemla – To the west of the Land of Nephi, and to the east of the Land of Bountiful;
    7. Mormon: Jaredites inhabited the north country – Jaredite bones were so far northward (Alma 22:29), they were destroyed on the face of the north country (Ether 1:1)
    Sorenson Map: Jaredite Lands – Far to the west in the Land Northward, which is actually to the West;
    8. Mormon: Land of First Inheritance (Lehi Landing site) – On the west in the land of Nephi, in the place of their fathers' first inheritance, and thus bordering along by the seashore (Alma 22:28)
    Sorenson: Land of First Inheritance: Located along the south seashore of the Land of Nephi;
    9. Mormon: East and West Sea: The land was between the Sea East and the Sea West (Alma 22:27), the land was surrounded by water except for a small neck of land (Alma 22:32), there were many Lamanites in the west along the seashore (Alma 22:28) and in the east along the seashore (Alma 22:29), thus the Sea East was in the east and the Sea West was in the west.
    Sorenson: East and West Sea: His East Sea is in the north; his West Sea is in the south;

The South Wilderness is the northern part of the narrow strip of wilderness which was the wilderness area bordering on the south of the Land of Promise. This is all one wilderness area that stretches to sea to sea and turns “round about” northward along each seashore (Alma 22:27-28)
    10. Mormon: South Wilderness: This is the narrow strip of wilderness in the south of the Land of Zarahemla, running from the Sea East to the Sea West (Alma 22:27); the other South Wilderness was in the south of the Land Northward where the Jaredites moved into after landing (Alma 22:31). At the time of the Jaredites, the Land of Bountiful was referred to as a wilderness (Alma 22:31) since there were no people living there.
    Sorenson: South Wilderness: Sorenson places the south wilderness to the north of the Land of Zarahemla along the coast of the East Sea which is actually in the north (Map 12, p 241).
    These are just ten points related to Sorenson’s first map of Mesoamerica to show that there is absolutely no correlation at all between Sorenson’s placement and the scriptural record and Mormon’s descriptions.
    It also might be of interest to note that on Map 8, p 170, using Soreonson’s own mileage chart, the Land of Shemlon (occupied by the Lamanites) is 15 miles away to the south of the City of Nephi (Lehi-Nephi), with low lying hills in between, yet Noah climbed upon the tower he built (Mosiah 11:12; 19:5) and saw the Lamanites approaching (Mosiah 19:6). That is some distance to see through low-lying hills, even “within the borders of the land.”
    The point is, anyone can draw a map. However, to be of any value, it has to be within the confines of the scriptural record and match that description. Sorenson’s maps are far from doing so.
    Yet despite these glaring discrepancies Sorenson goes on to say of his map: “Despite their contributions, all previous maps have been incomplete and inconsistent in dealing with the relevant information in the Book of Mormon.  None are fully reliable.  (pg. 6)  Building an internally consistent map is but the first step...Our first task is to analyze from the text the key characteristics of the lands described."
    It is a shame that Sorenson never seemed to learn to take his own advice.
    In a moment of humility, perhaps, Sorenson states on a different occasion, “We all should be willing to ‘be instructed more perfectly in theory’ (D&C 88:78). I am willing to change my theories and hypotheses, when the need is demonstrated.” It would seem that without question, the need has been demonstrated.
(See the next post, “More on Sorenson’s Land of Promise – Part VII,” for more information on how far Sorenson is willing to go to stretch reality and believability to prove his Mesoamerican Theory, and how often he write something is not in the scriptural record when it plainly is)