How Theories Get Started – Part III

-->Continuing from the previous post regarding how theories get started despite the facts surrounding a theory so often show just the opposite of what the theorists is trying to claim. As mentioned in the previous post, the theory of the Great Lakes being the Land of Promise runs into trouble immediately with Samuel the Lamanite’s prophecy, as well as the theory of Central America being the Land of Promise runs into trouble regarding the Darien Gap. Here we have two other theories, regarding Malay and Africa, that run into trouble with what the Angel Moroni announced to Joseph Smith.

The Jaredites leaving Babylon on their trek to the seashore, which they would call Moriancumer

In addition, Apostle Mark E. Peterson in a talk entitled “The Angel Moroni Came!” in October 1983 General Conference, stated in part, “…including the account of still an earlier people, the Jaredites, who came to this continent from the Tower of Babel” This continent. Not the Asian continent as in the Malay Peninsula! Not the African continent, as in the Somalia-Comoros area! But this, i.e., the American continent!
    In addition, Joseph’s mother, Lucy Mack Smith, told that over a four-year period “During our evening conversations, Joseph would occasionally give us some of the most amusing recitals that could be imagined. He would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent, their dress, mode of traveling, and the animals upon which they rode” (Lucy Mack Smith, Biographical Sketches of Joseph Smith the Prophet, first ed., Liverpool: Published for Orson Pratt by S. W. Richards, Liverpool, 1853, pp84–85; emphasis added). 
    Once again, this continent refers to the continent of the Americas prior to when the U.S. government began demanding that North America be separated from South America in name terminology sometime prior to the Second World War.

A map created and Published in St. Dié (near Strasbourg) France, in 1507, which was labeled: Universalis cosmographia secundum Ptholomaei traditionem et Americi Vespucii alioru que lustrationes (The Universal Cosmography according to the Tradition of Ptolemy and the Discoveries of Amerigo Vespucci and others), its current repository is Library of Congress Geography and Map Division Washington, D.C.

Dating to April 25, 1507, this first map showing the name “America," was created by the renowned world map maker of the time, Martin Waldseemüller, which was to document and update new geographic knowledge derived from the discoveries of the late fifteenth and the first years of the sixteenth centuries, and included data gathered during Amerigo Vespucci’s voyages of 1501–1502 to the New World—Waldseemüller’s map supported Vespucci’s revolutionary concept by portraying the New World as a separate continent, with the Pacific as a separate ocean, and represented a huge leap forward in knowledge, recognizing the newly found American landmass and forever changing the European understanding of a world divided into only three parts—Europe, Asia, and Africa.

Schöner’s 1515 map of America re-drawn on an equirectangular projection and on the same uniform scale as that of Waldseemüller of 1507 (E.G. Ravenstein, Martin Behaim: His Life and His Globe, London, George Philip & Son, 1908, p36)

The problem with some people is their lack of understanding of correct terminology of North and South America. Currently there are many different continental models. In the United States, the model that is used and taught in schools is the 7 continent model (North America, South America, Asia, Europe, Africa, Oceania, Antarctica), which divides North and South America into two different continents; however, in many other parts of the world and most of Latin America, the continental model is of only 6 continents (America, Asia, Europe, Africa, Oceania, Antarctica) with the Americas as one single continent, with North, South and Central America simply the names of the regions within the continents. 
    In fact, while it might seem surprising to find North and South America still joined into a single continent in a book published in the United States in 1937, such a notion remained fairly common until World War II, which is when the U.S. began calling North and South America separate—which was coincidental, of course, with the idea that American geopolitical designs at the time, which sought both Western Hemispheric domination and disengagement from the "Old World" continents of Europe, Asia, and Africa. However, by the 1950s, virtually all American geographers had come to insist that the visually distinct landmasses of North and South America deserved separate designations. This was also the period when Antarctica was added to the list, despite its lack of human inhabitants, and when Oceania as a "great division" was replaced by Australia as a continent along with a series of isolated and continentally attached islands. The resulting seven-continent system quickly gained acceptance throughout the United States.

However, even today, it is still considered one continent in such areas as France, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Romania, Greece as well as much of Africa, all of Mexico and the countries of Latin America (“The Continents of the World,” nationsonline.org. Retrieved September 2, 2016. Africa, the Americas, Antarctica, Asia, Australia together with Oceania, and Europe are considered to be Continents; “Map and Details of All 7 Continents,” worldatlas.com. Retrieved September 2, 2016. In some parts of the world students are taught that there are only six continents, as they combine North America and South America into one continent called the Americas).
    The point of all of this, and an extensive explanation has been given, that there is absolutely no question that in the minds of those in North America at the time and in the U.S. specifically, the Americas (both North and South America) were considered a single continent when Moroni visited Joseph Smith on the night of September 21, 1823 and told him that “there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang” (Joseph Smith History 1:34, emphasis added). 
    This statement tells us that the “former inhabitants” were on the American continent (Western Hemisphere), and the writing of Nephi tells us “the source from whence they sprang,” i.e., Jerusalem (1 Nephi 1:4) and was, as this story begins, living “at his own house at Jerusalem” (1 Nephi 7), which, without question, tells us “from whence they sprang,” i.e., Jerusalem.
    So there is no possibility, as Malay theorists claim, that Lehi left Jerusalem, sailed to Malay, then later sailed to the Land of Promise or to the Western Hemisphere, since Moroni tells us the book is about the people of “this continent.”
    Yet, the theory of Malay persists.
    As one theorist claims: “My approach in doing this research has been to focus primarily on the text itself. Sometimes we may start off with certain biases. For example, we may want to create a geographical model that fits with certain statements made by the prophet Joseph Smith. Or, we may try to make our model fit with known locations of ancient Mayan or Olmec cities. My feeling is that these biases can lead us off course. The best thing to do, in my opinion, is to keep our minds open to all possibilities and focus on the text of the Book of Mormon itself.”
It is too bad most theorists do not do that in focusing on the descriptions Mormon left us.

Turning bits and pieces into an idea, an idea into a belief, a belief into a Theory

Yet, what starts as a singular belief, whether about the Great Lakes, Heartland, North America, Central America, Mesoamerica, etc., or about Malay, Africa, Baja, Florida or anywhere else, a short time ago has built into a full-blown Theory with all these different views, despite each being contrary to the scriptural record, its introduction, or the various supportive statements of Church Leaders throughout the time from Joseph Smith to now. That a singular statement may appear to match a singular idea is not the same as having all the information available to us, specifically in the scriptural record, as well as elsewhere, match the area being claims.
    Unfortunately, once an idea is introduced, even though it violates numerous scriptural references and statements, it quickly builds into a "fact"  based on uninformed "believers" repeating it, and soon becomes a Theory and then acquires a life of its own despite the lack of any overall and all-encompassing connection to the actual scriptural record and descriptions Mormon and others left us.