Answering a Reader's Eastern U.S. Model – Part V: Mountains, Whose Height is Great - Part I

When it comes to seas, McKane has as slew of them, six in all, not counting the Sea that Divides the Land, which we will get into below; however, to begin with we'll look at his South Sea, which by the way, Mormon names the Sea South (Helaman 3:8), a distinction McKane claims gives hims six seas instead of four, and which McKane places in the Gulf of Mexico as shown in his map below:

Top: McKane's map of his South Sea as the Gulf of Mexico; Bottom: Another of his maps which he shows (white arrow) the Land of First Inheritance along the Gulf Coast making ujp a large part of h is Land of Nephi

At the same time, McKane claims that the Land of First Inheritance is along the entire seashore and coast of the Guolf states, from Florida to Louisiana, with an indication on at least one other map of his that Lehi landed along the west coast of northern Florida. Now, taking all of that in hand, we wonder where Mormon's description of this fits into McKane's plan, since Mormon tells us that the Land of First Inheritance was along the West Sea toward the South in the Land of Nephi, not the South Sea. In fact, McKane's entire Land of Nephi on the map below is nowhere near the West Sea, which his landing site for Lehi is 800 Miles from his West Sea! Somehow, McKane doesn't see that as a discrepancy, and evidently neither do any who have ever seen his map before according to his boast--which stated, as we covered in the last post, that no one has ever been able to find anything wrong with his map—no discrepancies with the scriptural record—which we showed eighteen variances with which his map either doesn’t agree with the scriptural record, with Hebrew/Jewish custom, or just plain common sense in the last two posts. 
    Another example of his map is shown below:

Another case in point: Mckane's map shows the Land of Nephi stretching to a sea in the east (Atlantic Ocean), but not his Sea East (Lake Erie) or East Sea (Lake Ontario) of his map; nor does it stretch to his Sea East or East Sea as Mormon describes (Alma 22:27)

However, Mormon writes that this land of the Lamanite king, the Land of Nephi (Alma 22:1) was bordered by two seas: “And it came to pass that the king sent a proclamation throughout all the land, amongst all his people who were in all his land, who were in all the regions round about, which was bordering even to the sea, on the east and on the west” (Alma 22:27, emphasis added). 
    In addition, Mormon tells us the Land of Nephi and the Land of Zarahemla were nearly surrounded by water except for a small neck of land between the Land Northward and the Land Southward (Alma 22:32). Also, he has no Sea West along the Land of Nephi, just a river, and a rather narrow one at that.

    Another glaring error of McKane's map over land location is the fact that Samuel the Lamanite gave us great insight into what it would contain. It does not take much knowledge or understanding to recognize his contribution to the description of the Land of Promise when he states that the Lord put words into his heart (Helaman 13:3) and he was told to speak them. From the Temple wall, Samuel told the Nephites in Zarahemla:
    “And behold, there shall be great tempests, and there shall be many mountains laid low, like unto a valley, and there shall be many places which are now called valleys which shall become mountains, whose height is great” (Helaman 14:23). 
    Now let’s not minimize Samuel’s comment, since he added that these signs, and others even greater, are given for a purpose, which “the angel said unto me that many shall see greater things than these, to the intent that they might believe that these signs and these wonders should come to pass upon all the face of this land, to the intent that there should be no cause for unbelief among the children of men” (Helaman 14:28, emphasis added). That is, the sight of these valleys turning into mountains and shooting upward to levels “whose height is great” and many other wonders, were for the purpose of showing the Nephites and Lamanites not only the power of God, but that he had atoned for the sins of man, etc.
    David, you wrote recently in answer to this from one of our readers about the height is great: "To a Nephite the term whose height i great is relative to where you live. To a person who lives in Arizona the highest peak is in Arizon. If you live in Utah the highest peak you know of is in Utah. There are plenty of mountain ranges in North America. But you never did answer the question there is no verse in the Book of Mormon that states Zarahemla has mountains and you are misleading your readers. Under your logic the land of promise is in Nepal peaks of the mountains are great. Your logic is silly and your making stuff up there is no verse that states Zarahemla has a single mountain."
    Really, David? Really? 

First of all, Nephi in his vision of the Land of Promise "saw mountains tumbling into pieces" (1 Nephi 12:4), suggesting there were mountains in the Land of Promise, which generally refers to the Land of Zarahenla since that was the Nephite capital and most writing and activity of the entire Book of Mormon takes place there; also, speaking of the Land of Zarahemla where the Gaddianton Robbers were sequestered, "they would retreat back into the mountains" (Helaman 11:25), and this is where, fed up with it the Nephits "sent an army of strong men into the wilderness and upon the mountains..." (Helaman 11:28), and when the Nephites failed eliminate the Robbers, "they were again obliged to return out of the wilderness and out of the mountains" (Helaman 11:31), and returned to their  homes out of the mountains and into their own land, "because of the exceeding greatness of the numbers of those robbers who infested the mountains and the wilderness" (Helaman 11:31). Also, "save it were for the Gadianton Robbers, who dwelt upon mountains, who did infest the land" (3 Nephi 1:27)' and "the war between the robbers and the people of Nephi did continue...the people of Nephi did gain some advantage of the robbers, insomuch that they did drive them back out of their lands into the mountains and into their secret places" (3 Nephi 2:17). Again in 3 Nephi 3:20, and finally, when the Gadianton Robbers came "forth form the hills, and out of the mountains, and the wilderness...and began to take possession of the lands which had been deserted by the Nephites" (3 Nephi 4:1). And let's not forget that a "great Mountain" was "carried up upon the city of Moronihah" (3 Nephi 8:10). 

If my count is correct, that makes nine (9) times mountains are mentioned as being in the Land of Zarahemla!  To say there is no mention of Mountains in the Land of Zarahemla is totally without merit and you would know that if you spent the time researching instead of trying to counter someone's view different than your own. 
    McKane also wrote in thing to obviate the idea of mountains in the Land of Zarahemla: "Zarahemla is not even mentioned in that chapter [which is Helaman 11]. It's a great verse about the gadianton robbers though. "And they did commit murder and plunder; and then they would retreat back into the mountains,andinto the wilderness and secret places, hiding themselves that they could not be discovered, receiving daily an addition to their numbers, inasmuch as there were dissenters that went forth unto them." Keep trying." 
    One can only wonder what is in McKane's mind—the quote isabout mountains, the entire chapter is about the Land of Zarahemla, and the Gadianton Robbers began in the Land of Zarahemla and later extended in the Land of Nephi. It is as though McKane thinks that those verses he doesn't like or that disagree with his scenario are about some other land. If anyone needs to keep trying it is McKane and he could start by finding a model land that mirrors the entire scriptural record. The problem is with McKane, as with almost all theorists, if some fact disagrees with their point of view, they ignore it, ridicule it, and claim it is not what Mormon says it is. McKane has demonstrated a continual similar approach to all he does not agree with.

As for Samuel, it is a shame David that you feel so superior as to cast dispersion on such a great individual who was deliverying a prophecy so meaningful that all future generations of Nephites could not miss the signs and would be judged accordingly. A prophecy you render so insignificantthat it is almost meaningless, yet it was the means that the Lord chose to chastise his people in Zarahemla—Samuel stood and described what would happen in the Land of Zarahemla, and the Land of Bountiful, and in the Land Northward, and in 3 Nephi, we find that his prophecy happened in those three lands. You call this silly? By the way, "silly" means having or showing a lack of common sense or judgment, absurd and foolish," and describing a "foolish person." How absurd to call iterry foolish. His intelligence and knowledge so far outstrips what you have shown in your comments here that it is beyond discussion.
    To claim there were no mountains and the scriptural record doesn't say there were mountains in the Land of Zarahemla is beyond "silly," it is fallacious and without redeeming value. We pride ourselves here on being scholarly and knowledgeable--your lack of both that you express in your comments is a poor support for your view. You might also want to use spellcheck, David, to save me the time and effort of constantly correcting your spelling errors and missing words.
(See the next post, ”Answering a Reader – Part II,” for more information on David Mckane’s model around the Great Lakes of his Land of Promise and our responses to his comments on our blog)