What is so Difficult About Getting it Right?

It always seems particularly odd that a theorist, an academician, and the so-called guru of Mesoamerican Land of Promise geography cannot get a simple passage in the scriptural record correct. Take John Sorenson in his book An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon (p269), in which he recounts the story of Hagoth, the Nephite shipbuilder who appears in only five verses, 207 words, in which we find out all there is written and implied about Hagoth. 
    First, let’s take a look at what Sorenson writes about this man. “What about the LDS tradition that Hagoth, the Nephite shipbuilder who failed to return home was an ancestor of the Polynesians?” He then talks about Polynesia for a moment, and adds, “It remains impossible to demonstrate any clearcut connection between the two areas, although debate continues. Having been a missionary in Polynesia, I am well aware of the Hagoth theme in LDS tradition, but the evidence available does not support it as historically based fact.” He then talks about being a missionary in Polynesia, adding, “Those who choose to believe that Hagoth reached Polynesia must rely mainly on faith rather than on reliable evidence. The Book of Mormon itself, of course, says only that the man and his mates disappeared from the knowledge of the people in Zarahemla. For all they knew he might have died at a ripe old age on the west Mexican coast without a suitable vessel in which to make the return voyage. And neither do we.”
    Second, let’s take a look at Sorenson’s comments more closely:
1. Sorenson: “That Hagoth, the Nephite shipbuilder who failed to return home”
    Fact: “And it came to pass that Hagoth, he being an exceedingly curious man, therefore he went forth and built him an exceedingly large ship, on the borders of the land Bountiful, by the land Desolation, and launched it forth into the west sea, by the narrow neck which led into the land northward’’ (Alma 63:5).

In the five verses making up the story of Hagoth, there is not a single mention of Hagoth going anywhere, let alone not returning home. It is simply a made up comment from Sorenson and has no basis in the scriptural record whatsoever. The only place in the entire record associated with Hagoth is his shipyard which was located “on the borders of the land Bountiful, by the land Desolation, and launched it forth into the west sea, by the narrow neck which led into the land northward.”
    Other than that, there is not a single mention of any locality associated with Hagoth. Nor is there a single mention or even suggestion he went anywhere at all. So Sorenson introduces in the very beginning a comment “failed to return home” that is entirely is own idea and has no basis in fact, and certainly based on not a single verse, commnet, or innuendo of the scriptural record.
2. Sorenson: “Those who choose to believe that Hagoth reached Polynesia must rely mainly on faith rather than on reliable evidence”
    Fact: In the entire five verses about Hagoth, or anywhere else in the entire Book of Mormon is there a single mention or even suggestion of Polynesia, or a place like or in the location of Polynesia. The word and location simply does not appear anywhere in the scriptural record. There is also no basis anywhere in the scriptural record to suggest that Hagoth ever sailed anywhere, including to Polynesia. On the other hand, there is a fact that a ship sailed from this shipyard on the West Sea, taking an unknown course to an unknown destination: “And it came to pass that one other ship also did sail forth; and whither she did go we know not” (Alma 63:8).

Yellow circles are the Gyres of the Pacific Ocean, with arrowheads showing their direction (clockwise in the north and counter-clockwise in the south). Red Line is the Equator and weak counter-current; White Line and Arrow is Lehi’s course to reach the South American Land of Promise; Small Yellow Arrows is the Gyre inner currents which curl down into Polynesia. The two Purple Arrows show the unknown ship’s course from either South America or Central America

Now reason tells us certain things: 1) The ship took an unknown course, which means it did not go north where the other three ships went (Alma 63:5-7). Nor would it have gone southward which land was controlled by the Lamanites (beyond Zarahemla), and obviously would not have been going south toward Zarahemla since they had just come from there (Alma 63:4). That, then, leaves west (east would be inland). Now what lay to the west? West of Mesoamerica is the Counter-Current along the Equator, which moves from west to east, therefore his ship would not have been able to sail off against the winds and currents, even if they were as weak as the counter-current is. And if they tried to pick up the southern arm of the North Pacific Gyre current, it would have taken them across the Pacific to Japan, and if they dropped down to the northern arm of the South Pacific Gyre current, it would have taken them toward the Philippine Islands, and more likely dropping down into the southern arm that sailed southwest-ward toward Polynesia.
    If the Land of Promise was in South America, and this ship’s unknown course was west, then it would have dropped directly into the southern arm of the northern branch of the South Pacific Gyre. Now, those are the choices—this other ship would have gone nowhere else from either Mesoamerica or South Americas, and the most likelihood, as Thor Heyerdahl’s Kon-Tiki drift voyage showed, the currents and winds would have taken a westward moving ship out and down into Polynesia.
3. Sorenson: “The Book of Mormon itself, of course, says only that the man and his mates disappeared from the knowledge of the people in Zarahemla”

This is all that is said anywhere in the scriptural record about the man Hagoth and his activities, which has nothing to do with Hagoth's mates, or their sailing anywhere together, let alone disappearing from anyone or any place

Fact: Again, in the entire Book of Mormon scriptural record there is not a single instance of Hagoth ever being lost either on land or on the sea, with or without his mates, from a shipwreck or any other reason. This comment, like the others, is strictly a figment of Sorenson’s imagination. Now there was a ship that left the shipyard along the West Sea that did not return, and Mormon thought it lost at sea, but that was simply an assumption on Mormon’s part. As he said, “And it came to pass that they were never heard of more. And we suppose that they were drowned in the depths of the sea” (Alma 63:8). The assumption here is that Alma wrote that statement and Mormon is merely abridging Alma’s record. Of course, all Alma and his people at the time would have known is that the ship did not return.
    Since the people on board were sailing to immigrate to another land, complete with many women and children, provisions and supplies (Alma 63:7), any number of explanations as to why the ship did not return are probable, such as they decided to sail off to a different, new land; the crew decided to stay with the immigrants and not return to the shipyard; after dropping off the immigrants and refitting their ship, they returned but were shipwrecked and lost; the ship was somehow damaged during sailing, during docking and unloading, etc., and the crew were unable or unwilling to return in a damaged ship; the ship was blown off course and ended up in a land they did not know and knew not how to return from it; the ship was blown off course, damaged enroute and made it to a safe landing somewhere to the north, etc.
    In all these scenarios, one as good and likely as another, and ships, despite movies and stories to the contrary, have managed to stay afloat after being damaged for long periods of time, in some rare cases, even after everyone aboard had died from thirst or starvation. The point is, however, we do not know what happened to that ship and its immigrant passengers, and just as likely as not would have sailed to where the currents took it down into Polynesia—historical facts have shown this is far more likely than somewhere else, as Kon-Tiki proved.
4. Sorenson: “For all they knew he might have died at a ripe old age on the west Mexican coast without a suitable vessel in which to make the return voyage”

 

Fact: If that were the actual case, all suggestions to the contrary, surely Hagoth, if he was aboard, though there is no reason to believe he would have been, surely a shipwright who had built numerous ships, would have been able to build some type of vessel that could have taken him “and his mates” back to port.
    The question first asked, is “What is so difficult about getting it right?” is of paramount interest when we read someone using the scriptural record to build a possible answer to the Book of Mormon geography. If they cannot even get the scriptural record right, how certain can we be that they got anything else right? And how difficult can it be to just read a scripture and comment on what it says—not on what it does not say?