Thursday, February 9, 2017

Answering a Reader’s Eastern U.S. Model – Part IV: The Map Without Error – Part IV

Continuing with David McKane’s many comments left on this blog, and specifically below the continuation of the errors on his “errorless maps.”
    Looking at more errors on McKane’s map of his Land of Promise in the Heartland, Eastern U.S. and Great Lakes area:
    Mormon writes in his insert: “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).
White Arrows show the extent of McKane’s (yellow circle) Land of Nephi, though it is hard to know from McKane’s various maps what the northern extent of his land of Nephi is—here it is shown in New England, but on other maps the area above West Virginia is called the East Wilderness, which is supposed to be in the Nephite lands

    As can be seen from his map, while his Land of Nephi borders on the Atlantic Ocean, it is not his West Sea or Sea West, which is far to the north. And the scriptural record suggests no other “sea” to the east, let alone such a major one as the Atlantic Ocean. However, none of his Land of Nephi borders on his West Sea or Sea West, but along the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers, the latter being his border between the Land of Zarahemla and the Land of Nephi, instead of the narrow strip of wilderness Mormon describes: “which was divided from the land of Zarahemla by a narrow strip of wilderness, which ran from the sea east even to the sea west” (Alma 22:27)and a river is not considered a wilderness. Both of his placements are still more errors on his map according to Mormon’s descriptions.
    In addition, he shows on the map below that where Mormon says: “and round about on the borders of the seashore, and the borders of the wilderness which was on the north by the land of Zarahemla” (Alma 22:27), he shows a line from the West Sea to the middle of Iowa.
White Arrows: the length of the narrow strip of wilderness running “round about” (curving) from the Sea East even to the Sea West, which McKane shows running across the land from his West Sea to a point in the middle of Iowa; White Circle: McKane’s “all the regions round about which was bordering even to the sea on the east and on the west”

    Another problem, is the area within the white circle above, showing “all the regions round about,” shows McKane obviously does not understand that Mormon is describing the Land of Nephi, where all the king’s people were “in the regions round about,” meaning within the Land of Nephi—this was the Lamanite king’s land, where all his Lamanite people were located. They were not scattered willy-nilly around all of the Land Southward, north of the Nephites, and surrounding them except for the Land Northward, which McKane’s map shows. In addition, wilderness does not surround Zarahemla, but is south of there and round about (curving up) on the west and east seashores. In vs.28, Mormon reiterates that the Lamanties were camped on the west and on the east of Zarahemla, not north of Zarahemla.
    Plus, McKane seems to feel he knows more than Mormon, who wrote about Manti saying: “was on the north by the land of Zarahemla, through the borders of Manti, by the head of the river Sidon, running from the east towards the west -- and thus were the Lamanites and the Nephites divided” (Alma 22:27) for McKane writes: “I do not think the city of Manti was close to the head of the waters of Sidon for a couple of reasons one is it states the border of Manti not the actual city).
    In addition, at no time is Mormon describing the Lamanites near the land of Bountiful, yet on the map below, McKane place the Lamanites on the west seashore of the Sea West which is west of the Land of Bountiful:
McKane’s yellow line is his placement of Lamanites to the west of the Sea West

    Mormon writes: “Now, the more idle part of the Lamanites lived in the wilderness, and dwelt in tents; and they were spread through the wilderness on the west, in the land of Nephi; yea, and also on the west of the land of Zarahemla, in the borders by the seashore…” (Alma 22:28, emphasis added). The problems are:
1. His yellow line is on the “east” of the land, though the “west” of the sea, which, using Moron’s wordage, “on the west of the Land of Nephi” and “on the west of the Land of Zarahemla,” he has them on the “east.” On the west in his map would place them living on the sea, not the seashore.
2. He has these Lamanites living to the west of the Land of Bountiful where Lamanites never were until 350 A.D. when they chased Mormon and his armies into the Land Northward (Mormon 2:28).
    In another instance, McKane’s map is meant to show Mormon’s comment: “And now, it was only the distance of a day and a half’s journey for a Nephite, on the line Bountiful and the land Desolation, from the east to the west sea” (Alma 22:32)—yet, McKane has this are north of the Sea East and south of the Sea West, and east of the Land of Bountiful, with this area to the west of the Land of Desolation, or southwest if you step back and take a bigger view. To pass through here you would be moving to the east and slightly north, none of which is the description of the narrow neck of land that Mormon describes.
White arrow points to McKane’s narrow neck of land that Mormon describes in Alma 22:32)

    Nor does this narrow neck keep the Land of Nephie and the Land of Zarahemla from nearly being surrounded by water as Mormon describes, when he said, “and thus the land of Nephi and the land of Zarahemla were nearly surrounded by water, there being a small neck of land between the Land Northward and the Land Southward” (Alma 22:32).
    Another problem with McKane’s map is that Mormon tell us “Thus the land on the northward was called Desolation, and the land on the southward was called Bountiful”
(Alma 22:31), but in McKane’s map, they are east and west if each other.
McKane quotes Mormon with the map below:
    “Therefore the Lamanites could have no more possessions only in the land of Nephi, and the wilderness round about. Now this was wisdom in the Nephites—as the Lamanites were an enemy to them, they would not suffer their afflictions on every hand, and also that they might have a country whither they might flee, according to their desires” (Alma 22:34). However, as the Nephites escape into the Land Northward….they are simply not protected by the topography in McKane's map:
Now in McKane’s map, what is there to keep the Lamanites from flanking both the east and the west and coming in from behind to attack the retreating Nephites? Certainly nothing in McKane’s map scenario.
There just isn’t anything about McKane’s several maps that incite any confidence in his model since so very little matches Mormon’s numerous descriptions, yet he seems oblivious to the fact that his map simply does not match the scriptural record. 
(See the next post, ”Answering a Reader’s Eastern U.S. Model –  Part V: Muntains Whose Height is Great - Part I,” for more information on David Mckane’s model around the Great Lakes-Heartland of his Land of Promise and our responses to his comments on our blog, and taking a look the lack of mountains in the eastern U.S. to match Samuel the Lamanite's prophecy)

24 comments:

  1. The East Sea is Lake Ontario not the Atlantic Ocean. The West Sea is lake Michigan the Nephites in the Great Lakes area Stretched from the Lake Michigan to Lake Ontario not the Atlantic Ocean

    ReplyDelete
  2. You have done a great job of misrepresenting the map.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Are fully protected being in the Location between Lake Huron and Lake Ontario. Del notice the Land Desolation is located were the Hill Cumorah is were the last battles took place. My map does not place the Hill Cumorah 4000 miles away. Are you saying the Nephites and Lamanites traveled 4000 miles to battle at New York.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Emphatically, no. The small hill in New York is an utterly useless bit of real estate from the perspective of the clash of many 10's of thousands of Nephites and Lamanites and the millions of Jaredites who fought at their respective "final battles".

      Delete
    2. Mormon went to the lamanites not the other way around. Of Mormon wanted a strategic advantage he would have set up fortresses and let the lamanites come to him. The hill Cumorah is the one place we no for sure.

      Delete
  4. So far what I've read of the analysis is spot on. Anybody with any degree of smarts can see that your maps are not correct. It will be fun to see if you can answer even one criticism intelligently at the end of Del's analysis. I have my doubts.

    ReplyDelete
  5. David; Learning comes from listening and studying--it does not come from constantly talking and arguing. i asked one thing of you in exchange for answering all your comments and question that you originated--but you don't seem to be able to do anything someone else wants, only what you want.

    ReplyDelete

  6. David: You wrote: "You have done a great job of misrepresenting the map."
    There is absolutely no misrepresentation of any of your maps--they are exactly as you have them on your website--they are the maps you bragged had no errors and that no one had ever seen any discrepancies, which is a comment you obviously made up. All we have done is overlay your map with arrows or circles (usually in white) to draw attention to that portion of the map we are commenting upon at that particular moment—which we have specifically cited so readers would understand what we have done. On some occasions we have brought forward your words and labels from one of your maps onto another one that you conveniently leave off at times to show how overall your maps are so inaccurate. For whatever reason, you have chosen to use different maps for different reasons, but when we combine them, they are the same map with nothing but your labels on them. And, frankly, you know that—your comment is completely irresponsible and totally without merit.

    ReplyDelete
  7. David: You wrote: “The East Sea is Lake Ontario not the Atlantic Ocean. The West Sea is lake Michigan the Nephites in the Great Lakes area Stretched from the Lake Michigan to Lake Ontario not the Atlantic Ocean”
    I never said you said anything about the Atlantic Ocean, in fact, you ignore the Atlantic Ocean as though it is not there but in the #1 map above, you show on YOUR map the Atlantic Ocean, with no distinction between it and an eastern border of your Lamanite lands (your blue line runs along the Atlantic coast). Now we have circled your Land of Nephi which overlays in the Kentucky/Tennessee area with your eastern blue line along the coast of the Atlantic Ocean—common sense and all rules of map making represent a location of your Land of Nephi to be inclusive of all the area within that blue line which terminates, but does not enclose in the north, in Pennsylvania on the west and Connecticut in the east. IT IS YOUR MAP—you drew it and put those lines and labels on it. If that is not what you mean, then your work is extremely sloppy!

    ReplyDelete
  8. You would do well to withhold your remarks until you have seen all that we are posting here in answer to your comments, questions, and criticisms. Everything you try to squirm out of the box you paint for yourself, you just make the box bigger and more ridiculous.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think it better to discuss the issues as they come up.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The blue lines represent shorelines or rivers that were borders or large water features for the Lamanites and Nephites.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I have Pennsylvania and New York area as the East wilderness essentially controlled by the Lamanites in 72 BC the Nephites take control of these areas and populate the area see Alma 50 and Alma 52

    7 And it came to pass that Moroni caused that his armies should go forth into the east wilderness; yea, and they went forth and drove all the Lamanites who were in the east wilderness into their own lands, which were south of the land of Zarahemla.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Your right in that the Lamanites surrounded the Nephites. The Lamanites occupied wilderness on the east of Zarahemla and on the west and north of Zarahemla

    Alma 22:27 states that there is wilderness north of Zarahemla.

    “and the borders of the wilderness which was on the north by the land of Zarahemla,”

    Alma 2 shows that this wilderness is occupied by Lamanites.
    The Nephites on the North border of Zarahemla east of the River Sidon battle with the Amlacites. The Almacites are joined by “a numerous host of the Lamanites” (Alma 2:24). The Amalictes and lamanites are described “as being as numerous almost, as it were, as the sands of the sea” Alma 2:27.

    Alma 2:36 verifies that this Lamanite wilderness is north of Zarahemla, when the Lamanites retreat North and West from Zarahemla.

    Alma 2:36 “And they fled before the Nephites towards the wilderness which was west and north”

    The name of the Lamanite wilderness North and west of Zarahemla is Hermounts
    Alma 2:37 “until they were scattered on the west, and on the north, until they had reached the wilderness, which was called Hermounts”

    The Nephites push out the Lamanites out of the East Wilderness which is north and East of the Nephites.

    Helaman 50:7,9
    7 And it came to pass that Moroni caused that his armies should go forth into the east wilderness; yea, and they went forth and drove all the Lamanites who were in the east wilderness into their own lands, which were south of the land of Zarahemla.

    9 And it came to pass that when Moroni had driven all the Lamanites out of the east wilderness, which was north of the lands of their own possessions, he caused that the inhabitants who were in the land of Zarahemla and in the land round about should go forth into the east wilderness, even to the borders by the seashore, and possess the land.

    The Nephites were surrounded by Lamanites as states in Alma 22:29

    Alma 22
    29 And also there were many Lamanites on the east by the seashore, whither the Nephites had driven them. And thus the Nephites were nearly surrounded by the Lamanites;

    The Nephite backup plan was to go to the Land Northward if the Land Southward got over run which is what happened in Mormon 2:3

    therefore they would not fight, and they began to retreat towards the north
    countries.



    ReplyDelete
  14. Del you should change your map to reflect those verses

    ReplyDelete
  15. David: You wrote above: “Del you should change your map to reflect those verses.”
    Response: You haven’t seen my map, yet. It will appear toward the end of our answers to your comments which, if you would be courteous and, as we asked, wait until all has been posted for you to start making your comments, you would see.

    David, you wrote: “Your right in that the Lamanites surrounded the Nephites. The Lamanites occupied wilderness on the east of Zarahemla and on the west and north of Zarahemla.”
    Evidently, in addition to ignoring what I write, you don’t read the scriptural record closely, either: Mormon says: “And thus the Nephites were nearly surrounded by the Lamanites” (Alma 22:27). Nearly surrounded is not surrounded. This not only tells you (or should) they were not surrounded, but that there is no wilderness on the north, as you keep insisting, but Mormon doesn’t say on the north of Zarahemla, as pointed out yesterday in comments, which obviously you did not read, Mormon says on the north, by Zarahemla, i.e., the narrow strip of wilderness, which was south of Zarahemla extended to the West Sea and then curved (round about) and ran up the seashore toward the north, by Zarahemla.

    David, you write: “The name of the Lamanite wilderness North and west of Zarahemla is Hermounts.” Response: Again, you seem to lack understanding. Hermounts was full of wild, carnivorous beasts who devoured the Lamanites who fled into that area when fleeing from the Nephites (Alma 2:37). Obviously, they did not live there in tents! This wilderness, separate from the others mentioned and named, not directional called, was not occupied by the Lamanites—Mormon even says those who entered it were devoured by the wild beasts.

    David, you write: “The Nephites push out the Lamanites from the East Wilderness which is north and East of the Nephites,” yet, you write a scripture following that does not say that: “Alma 22:29 And also there were many Lamanites on the east by the seashore, whither the Nephites had driven them. And thus the Nephites were nearly surrounded by the Lamanites.”
    Response: You can’t just claim something says something it does not and ever be taken seriously. As mentioned above, the east wilderness was not north of the Nephites, but north of the Lamanites lands, which Moroni drove them back into (Alma 50:3). David, you can’t just make dumb, inaccurate statements and claim that is what Mormon said. At least be accurate with the scriptural record. You have this arrogant attitude that you know more what Mormon means than Mormon, which hardly draws followers to your point of view. As an example, you wrote, quoting Mormon: “And it came to pass that when Moroni had driven all the Lamanites out of the east wilderness, which was north of the lands of their own possessions (Alma 50:9)” you mislabeled this Helaman 50:9), my emphasis shows that what I said above, the east wilderness was north of the Lamanite lands. Not north of Nephite Lands!
    The east wilderness is also along the seashore of the Sea East. As Mormon wrote: “And it came to pass that when Moroni had driven all the Lamanites out of the east wilderness, which was north of the lands of their own possessions, he caused that the inhabitants who were in the land of Zarahemla and in the land round about should go forth into the east wilderness, even to the borders by the seashore, and possess the land” (Alma 50:9).
    Thus, David, Mormon tells us that the east wilderness was along the Sea East, but you have it beyond the sea east. One can only wonder if you actually read the scriptures or just decide you know more and write and think your own views.
    (continued below)

    ReplyDelete
  16. (continued fron above)
    We keep pointing out your errors and you ignore any view other than your own—even ignoring the scriptural record in favor of your own erroneous view. Obviously, you are so steeped in your own views you ignore what is said to you. I wrote in the previous comments section: in answer to your erroneous idea about a wilderness being to the north of Zarahemla occupied by the Lamanites:

    “David: You wrote above: "The Narrow Neck/Narrow strip of wilderness separated Land Desolation from Zarahemla. Zarahemla was part of the land Southward the Narrow Neck/narrow strip of wilderness separating Desolation from the land southward"
    The narrow neck DID NOT separate the Land of Desolation from the Land of Zarahemla.It is clear it separated the Land of Desolation from the Land of Bountiful. The scriptural record is specific! You keep making dumb mistakes!
    David: You wrote “Zarahemla being part of the land southward, not northward. Zarahemla was south of the Narrow neck.”
    That is what I said. But Zarahemla is NOT SEPARATED from the Land of Desolaton by the narrow neck of land, which is what you said. The Land of Zarahemla was separated from the Land of Bountiful by an unnamed land that was between them (3 Nephi 3:23), and the Land of Bountiful was separated from the Land of Desolation by the narrow neck of land. That is what I said, that is what Mormon tells us, and that is all there is to it. Stop making dumb mistakes by saying things that are not correct.
    David, you keep insisting that there were Lamanites to the north of the Nephites, which is contrary to everything Mormon describes. As an example: “and thus the Nephites in their wisdom, with their guards and their armies, had hemmed in the Lamanites on the south, that thereby they should have no more possession on the north, that they might not overrun the land northward” (Alma 22:33). There were no Lamanites to the north of the Nephites!
    You are constantly wrong and will not even make an attempt to understand what Mormon says because it is contrary to what you think—so you try to change what Mormon wrote.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Because you do not read what we write in response to your never-ending erroneous comments, you keep saying the same things over and over again, causing a similarly over-repeated response. So we will stop replying to your comments that have already been answered.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Del
    I go by what the scriptures say. Your trying to get a certain geographical area to fit the scriptures but it clearly doesn't.
    1)The notion that the west sea borders the land of Zarahemla and the Land of Nephi is not supported by scripture.
    We know that the East sea borders the Land of Nephi but if the Land of Nephi truly bordered the Pacific Ocean it would say so but it doesn’t say that.
    Helaman 50:8
    8 And the land of a Nephi did run
    in a straight course from the east
    sea to the west. (Describing the Land of Nephi west and east border it only mentions the East Sea)

    2) If Zarahemla bordered the west sea Hagoth could have launched from Zarahemla but in order to launch from the west sea Hagoth had to travel North. Don’t you see a problem with that he traveled North not west. See Alma 63.
    When the Lamanites retreat from Zarahemla they retreat North and West towards wilderness. The scriptures state the only thing west of Zarahemla is wilderness and Lamanites not a Sea. See Alma 2
    Alma 22:28
    Now, the more idle part of the Lamanites lived in the wilderness,
    and dwelt in tents; and they were spread through the wilderness on
    the west, in the land of Nephi; YEA, AND ALSO ON THE WEST OF THE LAND OF ZARAHEMLA,

    3) The scriptures point to the idea that the West Sea most southern point did not extend past much of Bountiful. When the Laminates get ready to attack bountiful it gives the indication that they are south of the West Sea. Alma 53:8
    8 And now it came to pass that the armies of the Lamanites, on the
    WEST SEA, SOUTH, while in the absence of Moroni on account of some intrigue
    amongst the Nephites, which caused dissensions amongst them, had gained some ground over the Nephites, yea, insomuch that they had obtained possession of a number
    of their cities in that part of the land.

    4) You state that Zarahemla is in the Land northward north of the Narrow Neck that is not what the scriptures say. The scriptures say Zarahemla is in the land southward south of the Narrow Neck.
    Ether 9:31
    31 And there came forth poisonous serpents also upon the face of
    the land, and did poison many people. And it came to pass that their
    flocks began to flee before the poisonous serpents, towards the land
    SOUTHWARD, which was called by the NEPHITES ZARAHEMLA.
    Alma 22:32
    there being a SMALL NECK OF LAND BETWEEN the LAND NORTHWARD and the LAND SOUTHWARD.

    4) You state that Zarahemla has mountains and pointed to a couple of verses that stated the Gadianton warriors lived in a wilderness that had mountains. Nothing to do with Zarahemla. The other verse states that the city of moronihah got covered by a mountain before Christ visit. Once again it has nothing to do with Zarahemla. Hills and plains are mentioned more in the Book of Mormon then mountains are mentioned. The only people who lived in the mountains were robbers.

    5) The notion that the mountains mention in the Book of Mormon need to be a certain elevation to qualify as great is your opinion and your opinion only. We live in a day when we understand the mountain ranges and the elevation of their peaks. The Nephites were only aware of and could only compare the greatest of mountains that they knew of. The idea that the Andes mountains are the only mountains that qualify is ridiculous.

    6) You have no explanation for the migrating beast mentioned in the Book of Mormon (no migrating mammals in south America) and the Lamanites on the west part of the land of Nephi and Zarahemla who lived in TENTS (Tepees). There are no south American civilizations that lived-in tents.

    ReplyDelete
  20. You have not been able to answer these questions with scripture but opinions

    ReplyDelete
  21. David they've all been answered multiple times. You are just too dense to understand.

    ReplyDelete
  22. DAVID: YOUR REDUNDANT AND REPETITIVE COMMENTS ARE NO LONGER WELCOME HERE SINCE THEY ADD NOTHING TO OUR OVERALL PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING THE SCRIPTURAL RECORD. YOUR 22 POSTS ON OUR BLOG IN ONE DAY WITH NOTHING BUT REPEATED ARGUMENTS THAT HAVE REPEATEDLY BEEN ANSWERED IS A DISTRACTION TO OUR READERS AND A WASTE OF TIME FOR US.

    IF YOU KEEP POSTING, WE WILL SIMPLY ERASE THEM. WHEN THE CURRENT SERIE ANSWERING YOUR COMMENTS IS CONCLUDED IN A FEW DAYS, WE WILL AGAIN LOOK AT YOUR COMMENTS—IF THEY ARE NEW MATERIAL, WE WILL RESPOND TO THEM, IF NOT, YOU WILL BE PERMANENTLY REMOVED FROM THIS BLOG AS AN ANNOYANCE

    ReplyDelete