Thursday, February 2, 2017

Evolution of Land of Promise Geography – Part VI

Continuing with the understanding of the paper on which Frederick G. Williams wrote that Lehi landed along the Chilean west coast at 30º South Latitude. It should be noted that theorists who champion other sites, such as Mesoamerica and the Heartland and Great Lakes, take issue with the Williams’ note, though they have no explanation what prompted it and why it was circulated about the early Church. 
    Some, of course, want to claim it was a revelation, others simply want it to go away so they can promote their own views, especially those who champion Mesoasmerica or the eastern U.S. or Heartland. 
In 1890, in response to the sheer number of varying theories being produced, George Q. Cannon, then first counselor in the First Presidency, made the following statement:
    “There is a tendency, strongly manifested at the present time among some of the brethren, to study the geography of the Book of Mormon. We have heard of numerous lectures, illustrated by suggestive maps, being derived on this subject during the present winter, generally under the auspices of the Improvement Societies and Sunday Schools.” He stated further that: “No two original investigators agree. . . When, as in the case, one student places a certain city at the Isthmus of Panama, a second in Venezuela, and a third in Guiana or northern Brazil, . . . they cannot be thus far apart in this one important point without relative positions being also widely separate. Consequently, we see no necessity for maps of this character, because, at least, much would be left to the imagination of those who prepare them” (The Juvenile Instructor, 1890).
    Because of the various comments of the Brethren on the subject of Book of Mormon geography it should be very obvious that no one considered the geography of the Book of Mormon events settled at this point in history—neither Joseph Smith nor Olivwer Cowdery, nor Orson Pratt nor anyone else. In fact Cannon comments on that very subject when he said: “The First Presidency have often been asked to prepare some suggestive map illustrative of Nephite geography, but have never consented to do so. Nor are we acquainted with any of the Twelve Apostles, who would undertake such a task. The reason is, that without further information they are not prepared even to suggest. The word of the Lord or the translation of other ancient records is required to clear up many points now so obscure” (John Sorenson, The Geography of Book of Mormon Events: A Source Book, p17).
This statement alone should dispel any long held traditional beliefs that any of the proposed landing sites of Lehi was a settled issue. Partly  because 1) Lehi’s proposed landing site in South America was not considered a revelation to Joseph, and 2) the theory that the Isthmus of Darien was the narrow neck described in the Book of Mormon was simply the conjecture of those who embraced the believability in the Central American setting which they held only in response to a gentile book which dealt exclusively with the discoveries of ancient ruins in that land.
    Now, since there was no official designation given by the Church as to the whereabouts of the ancient Book of Mormon lands, we might reasonably ask ourselves why those theories that placed them in either South America or in Central America continued to persist for so long?
    On the other hand, it is often asked why more attention was not placed on the Hill Cumorah in New York, a known landmark, at least by name, why was more attention not placed and the site given more attention? Or why more attention was not placed on an area within the United States, a country destined to be the leader of the world and the place of the New Jerusalem? Perhaps, it might be answered, because nothing in the Book of Mormon matches the historic knowledge of this North American area, at least not in an overall way using all the descriptions mormon left us.
 Brigham Young University Archaeological expeditions to Middle America 1949. At the ruins of Aguacatal, Campeche, Mexico, their probable city Bountiful of the Book of Mormon. Earthen city wall on the left; exterior swamp on the right
 Of course, we cannot pinpoint any reason why groups of members decided on one site or another of the many being touted in the early years; however, some sites had an advantage, not because they were right or close to being right, but because they had the ear of the membership through official channels, such as FARMS and their Mesoamerican model with the backing of BYU archaeology, where that issue was solely taught, studied, and pursued with sponsored digs, etc.
    Later, others came to the forefront, such as the Heartland, the Great Lakes, etc., both because of the hill Cumorah, and also because of an enormous amount of advertising and exposure in Church house fireside meetings by supporters of these areas.
    The sad fact is, that few of these theories concentrate on the scriptural record, and on Mormon’s descriptions of the Land of Promise in which he lived, traveled, and fought many battles for some 75 years. Certainly no theorists opinions, nor anyone’s beliefs or models, can outweigh Mormon’s abridged writing of the larger record that gives us numerous clues to the appearance and even location of the Land of Promise.
    Another problem is that modern man simply cannot seem to put himself in the world of 600 B.C. as to the method of Nephi’s ship, which he describes as being “driven forth before the wind” (1 Nephi 18:8,9) tells us how he traveled, since to modern man, a sailing ship, especially one with a diesel engine of today, can go just about anywhere, and modern sailors, even hobbyists, know a great deal about sailing with today's modern technologies.
    Nor can they accept Jacob’s statement of the Land of Promise being an island in the midst of the ocean over which they sailed (2 Nephi 10:20). And as we have discussed in this series and these pages numerous times, what they found where Lehi landed (1 Nephi 18:23-25).
    The problem is that people get so worked up about their own beliefs and models, they cannot stop and look beyond their own noses at what Mormon said, not what they “think” or “want” him to say, but what he actually said. 
John L. Sorenson's map of Mesoamerica ass the Land of Promise, that changes Mormon's directions 90º from a north-south land to an east-west land
 
The easiest case in point to show this is John L. Sorenson’s changing of the cardinal directions of the Land of Promise from a “north-south” land to an “east-west” land. How can anyone justify that? Yet, Sorenson takes pages and years of repetition to try and sell his point to anyone who will listen, from readers of his book, to those who listen to his lectures and those in his classroom, which he expects to hang on every word he has said.
    But Mormon did not say what Sorenson tries to tell us he meant! He said just the opposite of what Sorenson wants us to believe.
    Since no two theorists state things the same way, yet there is only one description we should be following—the Book of Mormon—how is it that people can come up with so many different theories—and each person wants us to accept his view as correct!
    One would think Mormon would be turning over in his grave.
    Take this comment from Phyllis Carol Olive, who is one of the theorists that believed fervently in the Great Lakes location for the Book of Mormon Land of Promise. She stated: “Even so, it is abundantly clear that if we are to find the lost lands of the Book of Mormon we must approach the matter in an entirely different way, for the old methods certainly have not brought us any closer to a consensus of opinion in regard to Book of Mormon geography” (The Lost Lands of the Book of Mormon, Bonneville Books, Springville, Utah, 1998, pp12-13).
    The truth of the matter is that we will never locate the Land of Promise unless we accept what Nephi says of how his ship was “driven forth before the winds,” and the course that such would dictate; the fact that Jacob said the Land of Promise was an island in the midst of the ocean over which they sailed; and all of Mormon’s comments, including Samuel the Lamanite’s prophecies of mountains "whose height is great," etc., etc., etc.
The extremely flat land of the Great Lakes area--not a hill in sight, let along mountains, "whose height is great" 
Just one point on this about Olive’s location. The Great Lakes is a very flat tableland where no mountains exist throughout all of the area considered by her to be the Land of Promise. On the other hand, Samuel the Lamanite, speaking the words the Lord put in his heart, said at the time of the crucifixion, valleys would become mountains, “whose height is great” (Helaman 14:23). Thus, no flat land could possibly be the Land of Promise—it is as simple as that!
(See the next and final post of this series, “Evolution of Land of Promise Geography – Part VII,” for more information regarding how the Book of Mormon Land of Promise geography came about).

33 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

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

    ReplyDelete
  3. Del these are some of the issues I have with your model.
    I would appreciate short concise answers if you choose to respond to these questions. Long drawn out answers are painful to read. If you cite North America for answers to items not found In south America that only supports North America models not South America.
    1) Migrating beast any evidence of migrating beast in South America (Alma 22:31)
    2) Head-plates no evidence of Head-plates in South America during BOM timeline (Alma 43:38)
    3) West Lamanites lived in tents any evidence of South American indigenous population that lived in tents (Alma 22:28)
    4) The Nephite building structure is wood. When timber was low they used cement in the Land Northward. Any South American tribes that used timber for the houses buildings and temples. Note that the Book of Mormon never states that the Nephites or Lamanites built there building from stone. (Helaman 3:7)
    5) Shipping the Nephites shipped timber to the land northward because of the lack of timber how do you suggest this was done in South America. Specifics like which river would be helpful. (Helaman 3:10)
    6) Earthen mound wall around ALL their cities. Do you have evidence that the indigenous people of South America used earthen mounds around all their cities? (Alma 50:1)
    7) Timber stockades and evidence the indigenous people of south America during the time of the Book of Mormon or any time for that matter used timber stockades around all their cities. (Alma 50:2)
    8) D&C 54:8 states that Missouri is a border of the Lamanites suggesting one side is Lamanite the other side is Nephites.
    9) Joseph Smith has made many statements that North American, American Indians as the laminates.
    10) Joseph Smith pointed to the Hopewell mounds as the Nephites.
    11) When missionaries were sent to the Lamanites see D&C they were always sent to North American, American Indians.
    12) The church has Identified the hill Cumorah as THE hill Cumorah. It has only one Hill Cumorah visitor center.
    13) Your East Sea is not supported by Academia. Atnthe time of the BOM your East sea does not exist by millions of years.
    14) Horses no evidence of horses in South America pre-European arrival (Enos 1:21)
    15) Cattle no evidence of cattle in South America pre European arrival (Enos 1:21)
    16) Goats no evidence of goats in South America pre European arrival (Enos 1:21)
    17) Wheat no evidence of wheat in South America pre European arrival (Mosiah 9:9)
    18) Barley no evidence of barley in South America pre European arrival (Mosiah 9:9)
    19) Iron Sword no evidence of Iron swords in South America pre European arrival (Mosiah 8:9)
    20) Breast-plates no evidence of breastplates in South America during BOM timeline (Mosiah 8:10)
    21) I would like to see a visual representation of all aspects of Alma 22.
    22) Generally south and meso American models place Lamanite wilderness always south of Zarahemla. The Lamanites were in wilderness on the South West and East of Zarahemla.
    23) You have Zarahemla close to the shoreline. But when Hagoth launches his ships him and thousands of men women and Children leave the Land of Zarahemla go by the Narrow neck and launch their boats. Why wouldn’t Hagoth launch from the Land of Zarahemla. In your model Zarahemla is closer to the shoreline than bountiful is.
    24) Hill Cumorah is in the South Countries Mormon ask the lamanite King permission to enter the Land of Cumorah essentially making one last stand.
    Why didn’t the Nephites continue to migrate north when they knew they were outnumbered and would lose to the Lamanites. A continued migration north would be their best option to preserve life. The land northward did not have Lamanites. With your model there would be no issue with a continued Northward migration (Alma 22:29, Mormon 6:2)






    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Del this is going to be a slam dunk answering these easy questions. Go get-em.

      Delete
    2. I cant wait.

      Are you going to map Alma 22 since its so easy

      Delete
    3. If del uses his creationist theories he can side step all of science and make his own theories.

      Delete
    4. David - the mapping has already been done and it fits quite well in South America. It doesn't fit at all in North America and I mentioned a number of things which you obviously ignore. Del has written extensively already about many of your points you want to make. All he would need to do is refer you to his many writings on the subject. It is clear on the other hand that you have no defense for you position. You can't even answer the most simple questions about your model because they simply don't fit. The Nephites landing in Florida/Mississippi is a great one. You call that the south sea and yet Alma 22:28 has they landed on the Sea West. your Sea west is Lake Erie and so that destroys your model right from the start. How do you explain that? Jaredites weren't blown 500 miles up stream just to get to a place that could not support millions of people. How do you explain that? If NA is the promised land why didn't the Lord land them in Virginia? It doesn't make a lick of sense what you are telling me because it's absolutely wrong. I don't care how light a barge is on the water you can't blow it up stream of a river. It can't happen and the Lord wouldn't do that. So it's nonsense and yet you don't seem to want to answer these questions. That is why I'm not going to spend any time with you model because its garbage all the way through. If Del wants to answer your questions then that's okay. If you would bother to read his stuff you would know the answers.

      Delete
  4. You haven't reviewed the six sea model

    ReplyDelete
  5. David, Don't need to because your maps right from the beginning are not correct. You have them landing in the sea South rather than the sea west and that alone destroys your lousy model. There are so many holes in your model that it's hard to mention in just a few lines. I've mentioned many and you still ignore them. So until you have something intelligent to say I guess we will have to disagree. Lehi never saw North America. And that's a fact!

    ReplyDelete
  6. David: You have listed 24 statements you want answered from me. Fine. I have already written a 12-part series in answer to all your comments and questions that you have posted on this blog, all of which have been answered numerous times over the years of this blog and easily accessible by you if you really wanted to know the answers. But I’ve saved you the time of looing them up (doubtful) on the blog and rewritten them all out for you.
    However, in seeing your comment “Long drawn out answers are painful to read” it seems doubtful you spend the time to read what has been provided for you in answer to your comments. Rarely do people learn much when they look for simple and singular answers. Also, for some reason you feel you are on the high road in this discussion, despite all the contrary comments you have received here from numerous readers of this blog.
    I posted several days ago in answer to your comments that I would answer you in a few days, but you keep hammering away with the same questions and comments. That 12-part series is complete now and already posted to appear on the 6th (three days from now) I believe, entitled “Answering a Reader’s Eastern U.S. Land of Promise,” Parts I through XII. At the conclusion to that I will post my brief answer to your 24 questions or comments above.
    Now, I have just one question for you. And I would be interested in an answer. This question is not about speculation or opinion, or someone’s ideas, or trying to claim that isn’t what was meant, but strictly one stated in the Book of Mormon that very clearly and precisely describes something in the Land of Promise, and unlike earth being piled up, which dissipates over time, or wood fencing, which disappears over time, or someone’s idea of something that questionable decides something means this or that, it is strictly a comparison between what is said in the scriptural record that existed and what is found today in your Land of Promise.
    The background of the question is: “…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, emphasis added).
    The question is: “Where are your mountains whose height is great?”
    And that is not a single mountain tucked away somewhere, or a hill someone calls a mountain, but actual mountains (plural) whose height is sufficient to be called “great” and whose appearance and existence is “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). And that these mountains would be found both in the Land of Zarahemla (where the prophecy was given) and in the Land of Nephi (where Samuel returned to also spread the word).
    There are many others that could be asked, but I’ll settle for that one question for now.

    ReplyDelete
  7. No you have not answered all my questions you have not even mapped Alma 22.
    A simple a google search would answer your question. Here are some of the mountain ranges of different states.


    There are three major mountain ranges in New York: the Adirondack Mountains, the Catskill Mountains, and part of the Appalachian Mountains.

    Mountain ranges in Tennessee Blue Ridge Mountains‎, Great Smoky Mountains‎

    Mountain ranges of Missouri Ozarks‎, St. Francois Mountains‎ , U.S. Interior Highlands‎


    ReplyDelete
  8. In terms of the largest mountain range in the Land of Promise (North America) your looking at the Rocky mountains.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hmmm pretty big problem there David and I'm sure Del will discuss this. Those mountains aren't all that high and they aren't in your land of Zarahemla. How do you account for the fact that those mountains aren't in the land of Zarahemla? Another problem I see is since you don't believe in creationism and Noah's flood is when did your mountains rise? They did not rise during the time of the Nephites but millions of years earlier. So that doesn't work either. Boy your model just took another big hit David. Nuts!

    ReplyDelete
  10. I guess the land of promise is in Nepal where Everest is

    ReplyDelete
  11. Concerning the destruction at Christ the Madrid fault is most likely what caused it.

    The New Madrid Fault
    The New Madrid fault lies along the Mississippi river and has earthquakes that match the earthquake mentioned in the Book of Mormon that preceded Christ’s visit to America. It’s also worth noting that, as described in D&C 125:3, Zarahemla is along the Mississippi river, in the earthquake zone of the New Madrid Fault.
    The Book of Mormon describes areas of land that sank and lands that lifted and shaking that lasted for long periods of time. It also describes a vapor of darkness to the point that they could not light fires.
    Now compare eyewitness accounts of a New Madrid quake that happened in 1811. At the time of the Earthquake the might Mississippi river flowed backwards.
    “In all the hard shocks mentioned, the earth was horribly torn to pieces – the surface of hundreds of acres, was, from time to time, covered over, in various depths, by the sand which issued from the fissures, which were made in great numbers all over this country, some of which closed up immediately after they had vomited forth their sand and water, which it must be remarked, was the matter generally thrown up. In some places, however, there was a substance somewhat resembling coal, or impure stone coal, thrown up with the sand. It is impossible to say what the depths of the fissures or irregular breaks were; we have reason to believe that some of them are very deep.” – Eliza Bryan
    “The surface was sinking and a black liquid was rising up to the belly of my horse, who stood motionless, struck with a panic of terror […] water spouts, hundreds of them throwing water and sand were to be observed on the whole face of the country, the sand forming miniature volcanoes, whilst the water spouted out of the craters; some of the spouts were quite six feet high… In a few minutes, on both sides of the road as far as the eye could see, was vast expanse of sand and water, water and sand. The road spouted water, and wide openings were to be seen across it ahead of me, then under me, and my [vehicle] sank while the water and sand bubbled, and spat and sucked till my axles were covered.” – J Fletcher
    “I went ashore, and found the chasm really frightful, as it was not less than four feet in width and besides the bank had sunk at least two feet. I took the candle, examined to determine its length and concluded that it could not be less than eighty yards long.” – John Bradbury (on the Mississippi River)
    “The earth was broken in many places and the openings filled with water. The houses much injured – the only brick chimney in the place entirely demolished…” – Daniel Bedinger
    “We were visited by a violent shock of an earthquake, accompanied by a very awful noise resembling loud but distant thunder, but more hoarse and vibrating, which was followed in a few minutes by the complete saturation of the atmosphere, with sulphurious vapor, causing total darkness.” – Eliza Bryan
    “A dense black cloud of vapor overshadowed the land.” – Godfrey LeSieur
    (Foretelling Christ’s visit to America there were incredible natural disaster. The Dakota Indians tell of an event passed down that matches the destruction explained in the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon states in 3 Nephi Chapter 8 there were “terrible tempest”, “terrible thunder”, “exceedingly sharp lightnings”, ”exceedingly great quaking of the whole earth”, ”many smooth places became rough”, “And many great and notable cities were sunk”.)
    “The thunder, which the Dakotas believe to be a winged monster, and which in character seems to answer very well to the Mars of the ancient heathen, bore down upon the Iowa village in a most terrible and god-like manner. Tempests howled, the forked lightnings flashed, and the thunders uttered their voices; the earth trembled; a thunderbolt was hurled at the devoted village, which ploughed the earth, and formed that deep ravine.”
    (Miner 1911 pg. 29)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whenever you run out of good evidence for a model you start making these really nonsensical statements. You started doing that when you told me that the barges of the Jaredites were blown upstream for 500 miles (excuse me a minute I can't stop laughing). This is true of the New Madrid fault. What did it do David? Have you ever looked at the evidence? It didn't do anything. A few cracks in the ground is all you can come up with? The description at the time of Christ FAR FAR FAR exceeds anything that has occurred on earth since the time of the flood (which you don't believe in). It says in Helaman that mountains were created whos height is GREAT David. Where are your mountains of great height in Zarahemla. There aren't any and you are making excuses for a lousy model. The New Madrid fault doesn't have the capability of casting up any mountains in a single 3 hour event. Its absurd!!!! Even the great earthquakes of our day lasts only minutes NOT 3 HOURS David. Your model is complete nonsense and you need to reject it and look for something else.

      Look, lets be honest - the only reason you believe your model is correct is you think Joseph and Oliver said they were here in North America. Joseph liked the MesoAmerican ruins and thought that they were a good match. Oliver thought they were here too but he was just guessing. FG Williams was the only one that wrote a true revelation that Lehi landed at 30-degrees north latitude. So that was your beginning point. You didn't bother to look for any of the clues that are found in the BOM. Instead you've concocted these wild theories as to where they lived. You've even reinterpreted the scriptures so that you can make them fit such as the land of 1st inheritance. None of it fits. Not one thing fits. Nothing!!!! The MesoAmerican model is far closer to the truth than yours by far. At least it has an hourglass shape to in with a real narrow neck even though it is a bit too wide. But it has many flaws too. Yours are fatal from the beginning and I really can't understand anyone even considering yours because its so wrong.

      I'm a geologist and my entire career was spent drilling holes in new damsites. With one or two little holes we would come up with a hypothesis as to depth to bedrock, type of rock, how the canyon was formed etc. As the drilling progressed our model changed. At times we had to throw it completely out because it was entirely wrong and we had to start over with a new model.

      You have fatal flaws in your model that cannot be reconciled. They are beyond absurd in fact and I consider them even fraudulent as I've stated before. I can't imagine anybody believing in your model except if you are wanting to make money off of it. So that is where I'm at with it. It's garbage and you are flaying around looking for a solution that simply doesn't exist in North America.

      Delete
    2. Whenever you run out of good evidence for a model you start making these really nonsensical statements. You started doing that when you told me that the barges of the Jaredites were blown upstream for 500 miles (excuse me a minute I can't stop laughing). This is true of the New Madrid fault. What did it do David? Have you ever looked at the evidence? It didn't do anything. A few cracks in the ground is all you can come up with? The description at the time of Christ FAR FAR FAR exceeds anything that has occurred on earth since the time of the flood (which you don't believe in). It says in Helaman that mountains were created whos height is GREAT David. Where are your mountains of great height in Zarahemla. There aren't any and you are making excuses for a lousy model. The New Madrid fault doesn't have the capability of casting up any mountains in a single 3 hour event. Its absurd!!!! Even the great earthquakes of our day lasts only minutes NOT 3 HOURS David. Your model is complete nonsense and you need to reject it and look for something else.

      Look, lets be honest - the only reason you believe your model is correct is you think Joseph and Oliver said they were here in North America. Joseph liked the MesoAmerican ruins and thought that they were a good match. Oliver thought they were here too but he was just guessing. FG Williams was the only one that wrote a true revelation that Lehi landed at 30-degrees north latitude. So that was your beginning point. You didn't bother to look for any of the clues that are found in the BOM. Instead you've concocted these wild theories as to where they lived. You've even reinterpreted the scriptures so that you can make them fit such as the land of 1st inheritance. None of it fits. Not one thing fits. Nothing!!!! The MesoAmerican model is far closer to the truth than yours by far. At least it has an hourglass shape to in with a real narrow neck even though it is a bit too wide. But it has many flaws too. Yours are fatal from the beginning and I really can't understand anyone even considering yours because its so wrong.

      I'm a geologist and my entire career was spent drilling holes in new damsites. With one or two little holes we would come up with a hypothesis as to depth to bedrock, type of rock, how the canyon was formed etc. As the drilling progressed our model changed. At times we had to throw it completely out because it was entirely wrong and we had to start over with a new model.

      You have fatal flaws in your model that cannot be reconciled. They are beyond absurd in fact and I consider them even fraudulent as I've stated before. I can't imagine anybody believing in your model except if you are wanting to make money off of it. So that is where I'm at with it. It's garbage and you are flaying around looking for a solution that simply doesn't exist in North America.

      Delete
  12. There are plenty of mountain ranges in North America.
    But you constantly make false statements. I'm curious quote the verse that states that Zarahemla has mountains. Otherwise your false statements remain false.

    ReplyDelete
  13. David you haven't answered the basic question that I asked you. Since you believe only in science NONE of the mountain ranges in NY came up 2,000 years ago at the time of Christ. I found the following in Wiki that describes the geology of your mountains in NY.

    Geologically, the Catskills are a mature dissected plateau, a once-flat region subsequently uplifted and eroded into sharp relief by watercourses. The Catskills form the northeastern end of, and highest-elevation portion of, the Allegheny Plateau (also known as the Appalachian Plateau). Although the Catskills are sometimes compared with the Adirondack Mountains further north, the two mountain ranges are not geologically related, as the Adirondacks are a continuation of the Canadian Shield. Similarly, the Shawangunk Ridge, which forms the southeastern edge of the Catskills, is part of the geologically distinct Ridge-and-Valley province, and is a continuation of the same ridge known as Kittatinny Mountain in New Jersey and Blue Mountain in Pennsylvania.

    Okay David the thing you need to focus on is the term mature dissected plateau. This means they are very old and eroded. How did they get eroded if they came up at the time of Christ? They didn't because they came up much earlier. So these mountains do not fit the description given in the BOM and again you redefine your terms to make your lousy model fit.

    Helman 14:23 And behold, there shall be great tempests, and there shall be MANY MOUNTAINS laid low, like unto a valley, and ther shall be MANY PLACES which are now called VALLEYS which shall become MOUNTAINS WHOSE HEIGHT IS GREAT.

    Now how does this fit the Catkills? Or any of the mountains where you say they lived? I don't see any. We have to exclude the Rocky mountains because even you do not show them living there at the time. So none of what you've said is true. It's all made up. The New Madrid fault certainly cannot make MANY MOUNTAINS RISE as it says here.

    The only place this happened 2,000 years ago is South America. That did come up and even Charles Darwin said that South America. I can quote what he said from his writings on his voyage of the Beagle to South America.

    Nothing fits the Heartland model and it's still garbage. Prove to me that your mountain ranges are young and then we'll have something to talk about. Until then go find a different model because yours doesn't work.

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

    ReplyDelete
  15. Since when do you believe in geological timelines. Now you want to quote geological timelines saying that those mountains never came up two thousand years ago. If that’s the case your east sea never existed at the time of the Book of Mormon not for millions of years. So do you believe in geological timelines or only the ones that support your model.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. David it was you that accepted the timeline. I'm saying your mountains don't match the BOM at all. They are erroded and older than 2000 years. So you answer the question why your lousy model doesn't fit. My model fits perfecly. Yours is gargage.

      Delete
  16. David, the geologic comment is from iTerry, a long time and very knolwedgeable geologist; it is not from me, which renders your above comment abut an East Sea meaningless. Elsewhere you that I use opinions--about the time line of 13,000 years or so, that is not an opinion of mine it is a fact from the Lord and from Moses and frankly, there word is far more believable than Academia.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Excellent Del, could't be said any better.

      Delete
  17. David: Also, and this is most important, the focus of Samuel's prophecy is the last part of Helaman 14:23, i.e., "whose height is great." That is significant because it was to show the Nephites and Lamanites (who he would later point this same thing out to) that these very high mountains could be seen by all and act as a testament to all in the Land of Promise that Christ died and brought about the atonement.

    You still haven't answer the one single question I've asked you--where are tall mountains in your Land of Promise, and more importantly, where are any mountains in your Land of Zarahemla?

    As to your Catskill Mountains, the highest peak is Slide Mountain at 4,180-feet, which, when speaking of mountains, is not much higher than a hill. As an example, the Rockies top out at 14,440-feet, four times higher than your Catskills. You seem to have little knowledge of mountains. In addition, these mountains are not even in the Nephite lands of your map, running about 100 miles north-northwest of New York City, starting just west of the Hudson River and moving toward southwestern Albany—all of which is located in the land on your map you label as “Lamanites,” and east of your Sea East.

    Though we have written this many times before, and since you evidently don’t avail yourself of this type of information, the Andes mountains in South America are the youngest mountains in the Western Hemisphere, and according to the newest geologic findings, which we have repeated here on several occasions, “popped up” suddenly in geologic terms. Couple that with Moses and the Lord’s stated time frame of the Earth, that places this happening very recently. And according to Charles Darwin, which iTerry mentioned to you, claims it happened during the time of man, having traveled over the Andes and found supportive evidence of such!

    Rather than keep attacking all the time, why don’t you absorb what is being said to you? And after you do, if you do such a thing, answer my one single question—where are the mountains in your Land of Zarahemla and where are the mountains “whose height is great” that the Lord put into Samuel the Lamanite’s heart to speak?

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

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

    ReplyDelete
  20. To a Nephite the term whos height is great is relative to where you live. To person who lives in Arizona the highest peak is in Arizona. 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 and iterry never did answer the question there is no verse in the Book of Mormon that states Zarahemla has mountains your 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.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Here it is David Helaman 11:25. Zarahemla had mountains. Again your model is garbage. I just looked at Del's posting this morning and he is systimatcally dismantling your rediculous model. I hope you can learn something from all this.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Here it is David Helaman 11:25. Zarahemla had mountains. Again your model is garbage. I just looked at Del's posting this morning and he is systimatcally dismantling your rediculous model. I hope you can learn something from all this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Zarahemla is not even mentioned in that chapter.

      It's a great verse about the gadiantion robbers to though.

      Helaman 11:25
      25 And they did commit murder and plunder; and then they would retreat back into the mountains, and into 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.

      Delete
    2. Go to the beginning of the section that is written Helaman 1:1 and you will find it. Your model is garbage. But you can't seem to analyze anything either. The robbers were conducting gorilla warfare against Zarahelma. If they were exposed in your Zarahemla then the Nephites would have fought the battle entirely differently. Theses are the reasons your model is so flawed. I' m surprised you keep hanging around here. You been showed so often that you are wrong that it's amazing to me. Now Del is destroying your model completely. Quite sad you still hold on to something so rediculous.

      Delete
  23. David: Tell me, where in your Book of Mormon does it specifically say that the Sea East and the East Sea are two different seas? Where does it tell you that Lehi landed along the South Sea? Where does it say that the hill Cumorah is in the land Southward? Where does it say the East Wilderness is to the East of the East Sea? Where does it say the Land of Ishmael is West of the Land of Nephi? Where does it say that the Land of Bountiful is enclosed in the north by the West and East Sea? Where does it say that the Land of Bountiful stretches to the East Sea? I mean where does it specifically, word for word, say any of these things? When one so arrogantly throws stones at another, it is best they not live in a glass house of their own.

    ReplyDelete