More Comments from Readers-Part II

Comment #1: “You seem to have settled on the idea that the Gulf of Guayasquil is the area that separated the Land Northward fro the Land Southward creating a narrow neck. Is there no other area where this neck could be? Potter thinks he found an area much further south in the Lurin Valley” Linc T. 
    Response: Potter’s area is not a location that actually separates one land from the other, nor is there anything about it that would have caused people at the time to thinik of it as a “narrow neck of land,” but rather a “narrow pass,” since it is not in a “narrow neck” at all. It is simply a pass through the mountains—an important one, but only one of many in Peru. Even the Spaniards called this area a narrow pass, and they were quite leery of moving by horseback through it since in some areas they had to dismount to continue and would have been much easier pray for the attacking Inca. Nor is there anything about crossing this area in a day and a half.
    Comment #2: “I read where the “great fortress” of Sacsahuaman might well have been the great tower mentioned in Mosiah built by king Noah” Rhys A.
    Response: That seems to have been Venice Priddis’ view as she wrote in her book The Book and the Map; however, the facts seem to suggest otherwise. First of all, when the Spanish arrived and saw the three zig-zag walls guarding the entrance to the temple structure complex atop the Sacsahuaman hill overlooking Cuzco, they gazed upon the fortified complex that had a wide view of the valley and called it a ciudadela, or citadel, which comes from the diminutive of città, from civitas, which interpreted means “a strong fortress, typically on high ground, protecting or dominating a city”—a perfect description of Sacsahuaman.

The outer walls of Sacsahuaman, the one time vast complex of fortress, temple and towers that once stood behind these walls overlooking the city of Cuzco below are now gone, dismantled by the Spanish

    The word citadel also relates to a stronghold or fortified place intended as a final point of defense and into which people could go for shelter during a battle. In ancient Spanish terms, it was the third part of a medieval castle, with higher walls than the rest. It was to be the last line of defense before the keep itself. In various countries, the citadels gained a specific name such as "Kremlin" in Russia or "Alcazaba" in the Iberian Peninsula. In European cities, the term "Citadel" and "City Castle" are often used interchangeably. As an example, the Haitian citadel, which is the largest citadel in the Western Hemisphere, is called Citadelle Laferrière or simply the 'Citadel' in English.

The three outer walls, built in a zig-zag pattern to provide the most coverage for defense once stood a third higher before the Spanish dismantled the smaller stones on top

    The construction of Sacsahuaman, which so impressed the Spanish conquerors, has a broken line called Chuquipampa, which faces the main plaza, and slopes, containing 25 angles and 60 walls. The biggest boulder of the first wall weighs around 70 tons and was brought in from the Sisicancha quarry, over two miles away, and where, to this day, you can still see rocks that were only transported part of the way. Each of these walls has 10 fronts; the most important ones are known as Rumipunco, Tiupunku, Achuanpunku and Viracocha Punku. It is considered as one of the best monuments to have been built by mankind on the earth’s surface. The wall, otherwise known as the rampart, is definitely the most impressive part of the structure and has been built from huge carved limestone boulders, many of which weigh over fifty tons, and were a third again as high when the Spanish arrived. The walls were torn down as much as the Spanish could and used for their own buildings, leaving what is now seen.
    While the Spanish thought the construction was the work of the devil, it is understood today that the stones were roughly cut to their approximate shapes at the quarry and were then dragged by rope to the construction site – something that could mean that hundreds of men would be pulling the stone to the site. Once at the site, the stones were carved into their final shape and laid in place.

Top: Aerial view of the placement of the round tower base; Bottom: The rock foundation of the tower, all that is left of the giant tower that once stood 60-feet high

    On the other hand, the tower, which since the Spanish period when they tore all three towers down, is seen only as a round rock base and for many years archaeologists thought it was simply a design for the so-called eye of the puma, rounding off the design of Cuzco. Not until the old chronicles were read showing it was a tower when the Spanish arrived and stood some 60-feet high made of rock and stone did it become apparent that towers once stood alongside the huge building complex that marked the top of the hill, which the Spanish, in their extreme superstitious frenzy, demolished as soon as they could.
    Comment #3: “If the Inca are the final tribal connection of the foregoing Lamanite tribes that fought one another in a civil war as Moroni describes, how exactly did they come to power and unite all the other tribes in the Andean area?” Shelley G.
    Response: Any answer here would be sheer guesswork, since we have no record of what took place begween 421 and 1438 A.D., when the Inca first made their mark in history. We do know there was a fierce Civil War among the Lamanites that went on for many years, according to Moroni, after 36 years of constant warfare, there was “no end in sight” at the close of his record. We have printed a poem written a century ago about those years of constant war, unease and deprivation, but again, that might just be fiction.
    We also can suggest that these tribes broke down into small groups that were highly suspicious of each other and were constantly at war with one another as was found when the Europeans reached North America. When the Spaniards landed in Mexico and Guatemala, and finally South America, the Aztec and the Inca had pretty much subjugated the majority of these tribes, and were involved in Empire building. We also know that many of the regions the Incas conquered in the fifteenth century, such as the vast Chimor kingdom in northern coastal Peru had themselves highly developed cultures with efficient governments and economies and advanced systems of agriculture, trade, and manufacturing.
    As for the Inca, who had always been noted for their sophistication in these areas, which was mainly due to the advanced state of development of the cultures the Incas brought into their empire, had accomplished an Empire that stretched for over 2500 miles along the coast to the lowland jungles.

As for how they did it, it is well known the Inca had a highly developed give-and-take philosophy about governing their empire: They generally allowed conquered territories to operate in the same way they had before conquest, as long as the people living there fulfilled certain requirements, particularly by providing extensive labor to the empire. Though the Incas imposed their religion on the conquered states, they also adopted the gods of the defeated people into the empire's pantheon, which are all of the gods that a particular group of people worship. They ensured that every farmer had enough land to farm, and they provided craftspeople with materials for their arts. But life for the peoples conquered by the Incas was far from free. In order to maintain control over such a vast area and over millions of people, the Incas created an incredibly complex administrative system. Officials representing the empire carefully managed the work of the conquered people, demanding the maximum amount of work out of every individual.

More Comments from Readers – Part I

Here are more comments that we have received from readers of this website blog: 
    Comment #1: “The name of the city of Nephi is obvious as to its origin, but what would Shilom mean if it was a name the Nephites gave the city?” Cameron R.
    Response: From all we can gather from the scriptural record, the name would have been given by the Nephites during Nephi’s time. The Hebrew word shalom means “peace,” such as in a state of tranquility or quiet. Since this would bring to mind pastures and fields, it is likely that is why the site was so named. Having been built and, therefore, named by those who joined Nephi in leaving Laman, Lemuel and the sons of Ishmael in the area of first landing, it sounds reasonable they would have chosen such a name. It is also likely that Shilom and the hill north of it—the one Ammon and his friends stopped on before traveling down to the city of Nephi (Mosiah 7:5,7), were comprised mostly of fields and pastures, with a few homes scattered among the hills. The chronicler Garcilaso de la Vega said that the first homes were built on the slopes of the Sacahuaman hill. This district in northern Cuzco was called Collcampata (Qollqanpata: a type of terrace or bench) a place according to Burr Cartwright Brundage (Empire of the Inca, 1912) was hallowed, a sacred place to the Inca, which is on the way to Sacsayhuaman. East of there was a place called Cantutpata, or “district of the very lovely [bright-colored] flower”—similar to our carnation and used in the festival garlands of youths. Beyond was Pumacurcu district, named for Puma-Lion, and curcu-beam (Beam of lions). Garcilaso said there were a number of heavy wood beams to which lions were tied while they were being tamed for the king.
    Comment #2: “I think the idea of a submerged continent like your idea of South America is foolhardy and has no concrete backing on any scientific level” George M.
    Response: An interesting thought, but untenable in reality. The definition of a submerged continent is: “a continental mass, extensive in size, but mainly undersea. The terminology is used by some paleogeologists and geographers in reference to some land masses. The two main examples in this class are the Kerguelen Plateau and Zealandia.”  
    Thus, in geology, a submerged continent is a continental mass, extensive in size, but mainly undersea. The terminology is used by some paleogeologists and geographers in reference to some land masses.

Yellow Arrows point to areas of submerged continents that lie just below the surface of the sea; over time these have both risen and fallen

    Today, the scientifically acceptable submerged continent known as Kerguelen Plateau, is about 1367 miles long, is an oceanic plateau and a large igneous province in the southern Indian Ocean. It is also a microcontinent and submerged continent, and lies about 1865 miles to the southwest of Australia and is nearly three times the size of Japan (Scientist plays major role in study of underwater “microcontinent,” University of Texas at Austin, May 28, 1999; F. A. Frey, M.F. Coffin, et al., eds. “Leg 183 Synthesis: Kerguelen Plateau-Broken Ridge-A large igneous Province, 2003, Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program 183: 1–48)
    In fact, some areas of continental crust are largely covered by the sea and may be considered submerged continents, such as the Kerguelen Plateau with its continental origin together with its geochemical evidence pointing to the presence of continental lithosphere under the southern part of the plateau (J. Mahoney, W.  Jones, et al, Geochemical Characteristics of Lavas from Broken Ridge, the Naturaliste Plateau and Southernmost Kergulen Plateau, Chemical Geology, Vol 120, 1995, pp315-345; M. Storey, R.W. Kent, et al, 1992, Lower Cretaceous Volcanic Rocks on Continental Margins and their Relationship to the Kerguelen Plateau. In Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results, 12: College Station, TX (Ocean Drilling Program), pp. 33-53).
     Other such submerged continent is Zealandia, also known as Tasmantis or the New Zealand continent, is a nearly submerged continental fragment about 2.2 million square miles almost half the size of Australia, that sank after breaking away from Australia, and was completely submerged with most of it, 93%, remaining submerged beneath the Pacific Ocean today.

The plateau was produced by the Kerguelen hotspot, with a small portion of the plateau that breaks sea level, forming the Kerguelen Islands (a French territory) plus the Heard and McDonald Islands (an Australian territory), with intermittent volcanism continues on the Heard and McDonald Islands (F. Bénard, J. P.  Callot, et al, The Extra Plac Team, “The Kerguelen Plateau: Records from a Long-living/Composite Microcontinent,” Marine and Petroleum Geology 27 2010, pp633-649)

    Comment #3: “Many thanks for all your work to bring clarity to so many BOM subjects. We both know the doctrine and spiritual message is most important but why struggle under the burden of false assumptions, which cloud our understanding of the geography and culture. I wish all faithful LDS could know of your message of an Andean BOM setting” David C S.
    Response: Thank you for your kind words. To get the faithful to know of this when they are being hammered from all sides about Mesoamerica would take more than this one blog, I’m afraid.
    Comments #3: “You wrote an article a while back, and I quote: “In another recent study, biological anthropologist Agnar Helgason and colleagues used the Icelandic deCODE genetics database to arrive at a female line interval of 28.12 years for the most recent generations and 28.72 years for the whole lineage length.” While you gave one reference (Don Devine, Ancestry Magazine), you said there were others. Do you still have them?” Wyatt B.
    Response: Once again, we try to avoid using a lot of article space for references, but here they are: Don Devine, CG, CGI, “Research Cornerstones: How Long is a Generation? Science Provides an Answer,” Ancestry Magazine, Vol 23, No 5, September/October 2005; K. M. Weiss, “Demographic Models for Anthropology.” American Antiquity vol 38, no 2, April 1979, pp 1–39; Nancy Howell, The Demography of the Dobe !Kung, 2d ed., Walter de Gruyter, New York, 2000; Marc Tremblay and Helene Vezina. “New Estimation of Intergenerational Time Intervals for the Calculation of Age and Origin of Mutations,” vol 66, February 2000, pp 651–658; Angar Helgason, Birgir Hrafnkelsson, Jeffrey R. Gulcher, Ryk Ward, and Kari Stefansson, “A Population-wide Coalescent Analysis of Icelandic Matrilineal and Patrilineal Genealogies: Evidence for a Faster Evolutionary Rate of mtDNA Lineages than Y Chromosomes,” American Journal of Human Genetics, vol 72, June 2003, pp 1370–1388)
    Comment #4: “What makes you think the earth was divided between 2245 and 2006 B.C.?” Terisha G.

Response: Moses wrote that Shem was 100 years old when Araphaxad was born (Gen 11:10), making that 2346 B.C. (this is derived from numerous other dates stated previously in Genesis); Arphaxad was 35 when Salah was born (Gen 11:12) = 2309 B.C.; Salah was 30 when Eber was born (Gen 11:14) = 2279 B.C.; Eber was 34 when Peleg was born (Gen 11:16) = 2245 B.C.; Peleg was 30 when Reu was born (Gen 11:18); Peleg lived 209 years after the birth of Reu, making Peleg’s lifetime of 239 years from 2245 to 2006 B.C (Genesis 11:18-19). In the days of Peleg, the Earth was divided (Genesis 10:25).
    Comment #5: “Did I read somewhere that you once thought Mesoamerica was the Land of Promise?” Joe J.
    Response: “Excuse me for chuckling, but anyone who has known me over the years would find that humorous. However, I might say that way back when I was a teenager, though it was completely unimportant to me at the time, I thought like most of the Church that the Book of Mormon lands encompassed North America (Land Northward), South America (Land Southward), and Central America (Narrow Neck of Land). The first time I ever heard of Mesoamerica as the Book of Mormon lands was long after I was married when our Bishop held a fireside in which he went over John L. Sorenson’s book about Mesoamerica, where he served his mission. Again, I was not interested at the time, but I glanced through his book, looked up a few scriptural references from it and found Sorenson played rather loosely with his interpretation of scripture.  

A few years later a friend lent me his book Ancient America and the Book of Mormon by Thomas Stuart Ferguson and Milton R. Hunter. I found it interesting but extremely inconclusive. When I began to seriously look at where the Land of Promise was located, I decided to do what a friend of mine recommended—start with the scriptures and pay attention only to the scriptural record and see where it leads you—an experience I have outlined in more detail in previous posts on this  blog. I will say, though, that when you do this, all the scriptural record falls in place and no one is left having to explain away things that are written that don't fit a model, such as the many theorists of our day have to do.

What is Opinion and What is Not? – Part VIII

Continuing from the previous posts regarding what is actually “fact” and not just “opinion” when dealing with the Land of Promise location, in which the first question to be asked and answered should always be “What does the scriptural record actually say?” And also in continuing by listing the 32 scriptural descriptions that match what is found today in Andean, South America, and some only in that area. 
    Take all of these twenty-four scriptures (32 in all counting ones already listed) describing some part of the location of the Land of Promise. Every single one is found in the Andean area of South America, some of them nowhere else in the world.

Here are the 32 items with their scriptural references:
1) The four seas surrounding the Land of Promise [Helaman 3:8]—it was an island in the midst of the sea;
2) Two unknown animals that are for the  benefit of man [Ether 9:19]—found nowhere else (llama and alpaca);
3) Two unknown and important grains [Mosiah 9:9]—found nowhere else (quinoa and kiwicha);
4) Plants that cure killing fevers [Alma 46:40]—found nowhere else (quinine, the only cure and treatment for deadly, killing malaria is found only in Andean Peru);
5) Land of promise as an island [2 Nephi 10:20]—as stated by both Jacob, speaking in the temple, and Nephi, recording it in his record in which he stated: “I do not write anything upon plates save it is that I think it be sacred” (1 Nephi 19:6);
6) All manner of ore [1 Nephi 18:25; Ether 10:23]—ore is not just found anywhere, especially to a non-mining people, and large quantifies;
7) Roads and Highways [3 Nephi 6:8]—which led from city to city, from land to land, and from place to place; the road system in Andean, South America, was second only to Rome in length and quality;
8) Hagoth’s ships went northward where there is additional Nephite style civilization established [Alma 63:4,6]—it is obvious to any student of archaeology that South America, was the parent developer of culture to that of Mesoamerica, which lies to the north;
9) Forts, fortifications and resorts [Alma 48:5,8; 49:13,18; 52:6]—where Mesoamerica’s buildings were not necessarily built for defense, Andean South America buildings were fortresses and citadels as named by the invading Spaniards;
10) Fortified walls of stone [Alma 48:8; 50:5; 62:23]—built around cities and around the land;
11) Narrow neck of land that can be crossed in a day and a half [Alma 22:32; 63:5; Ether 10:20]—a narrowing that is easily seen in the area as the Bay of Guayaquil cuts into the land;
12) Defendable narrow pass [Alma 50:34; 52:9; Mormon 2:29; 3:5]—an extremely important area which frightened the Spaniards in having to pass through it because of its defendability;

13) Sea that divides the land [Ether 10:20]—divides the Land Northward from the Land Southward;
14) All manner of buildings [Mosiah 8:8]—there are literally thousands of buildings and ruins in Andean South America, from Colombia to southern Chile;
15) Great temple tower [Mosiah 8:8; 19:5]—a tower that provided line of sight into the surrounding communities (Shilom and Shemlon) and was still standing when the Spanish arrived;
16) North-South directions of the Land of Promise [Alma 22:27-34]—there is no question of its directions of north and south, yet the term northward would  also apply as the land curves slightly toward the north;
17) All manner of ore [1 Nephi 18:25; Ether 10:23]—including one that was ziff
18) Land of many waters, rivers and fountains [Mormon 6:4]—fountains being where water originates; old maps list the area in Ecuador as the Land of Many Waters;
19) Abundant crop growth [1 Nephi 18:24; 2 Nephi 5:11; Mosiah 9:9,14; 11:15]—the fertileness of Andean South America is well known, and not being a jungle or tropical like Mesoamerica, just about everything grows there;
20) No other people in Land of Promise [2 Nephi 1:6, 8-9]—kept from the knowledge of others unlike Mesoamerica;
21) Use of silks and fine-twined linen [Alma 1:29; 4:6 26; Ether 10:24]—expert rivaling Europe;
22) Metallurgy [Helaman 6:9; Ether 10:23]—expert rivaling Europe;
23) Volcanoes and earthquakes [3 Nephi 8, 9]—part of the Pacific Rim of Fire;
24) Circumcision (Law of Moses)  [2 Nephi 5:10]—only burial (mummy) evidence in Western Hemisphere;
    Plus the other descriptions already mentioned in earlier poslts:

25) Mountains, “whose height is great” [Helaman 14:23]—none greater in height in Western Hemisphere;
26) North-South directions of the Land of Promise [Alma 22:27-34]—where both north and northward make sense;
27) Mediterranean Climate where Lehi’s seeds grew that he brought to the Land of Promise [1 Nephi 18:24]—would have grown nowhere else;
28) Driven before the wind to the promised land, that is, legitimate wind and ocean currents taking Nephi’s ship “driven forth before the wind” directly to the Land of Promise [1 Nephi 18:8-9]—no other course from Arabia to Western Hemisphere for such a vessel as Nephi built and describes;
29) Both Gold and Silver and Copper in single ore [1 Nephi 18:25];
30) Forest adjacent to Lehi’s landing site where both wild and domesticated animals could have been found [1 Nephi 18:25]—2^nd largest rainforet in world;
31) Climate and soils adjacent to Lehi’s landing site where Mediterranean seeds could grow [1 Nephi 18:24]—including soil, soil group, temperature, precipitation and climate;
32) All manner of gold, silver and copper, adjacent to Lehi’s landing site [1 Nephi 18:25]—Chile and Peru are in the top five world producers of gold, silver and copper.
    There is no other model theorized in the Western Hemisphere that can match all of these scriptural references without changing, altering, adding to, or eliminating from, some of the information in the scriptural record. If you eliminate Sorenson’s changes to the scriptural record—he, and his fellow Mesoamericanists claim changing the north-south directions to east-west is not really a change in the scriptural record at all—and the other “opinions” he states that are inconsistent with the intent of the scriptural record, such as claiming Mormon’s description of a day and half journey to cover the width of the narrow neck being 144 miles which is obviously impossible for the average Nephite and Sorenson knew this so he wrote in that a Mohave Indian could cover 100 miles in a day, which clearly defeats Mormon’s purpose in trying to tell us how wide the narrow neck was.

Many other comparisons could be made, which we have done by the hundreds in blog articles and our books in the past—the point is, that no other theory can meet all these specific scriptural references, placing the Land of Promise anywhere other than Andean, South America, when the scriptures are followed as they are written and theorists eliminate their own interpretation of them and stop adding their own ideas, such as Phyllis Carol Olive and her Great Lakes theory placing the hill Cumorah east of the East Sea, having no mountains at all in her entire Land of Promise, and placing the Nephite lands next to Lake Erie, which could not he reached by sea in 600 B.C. under any circumstances.
When one uses the scriptural record, as it was and is written, it is impossible to justify any theory other than Andean South America by what is written in that record. Read our many articles on these matches and see for yourself.

What is Opinion and What is Not? – Part VIII

Continuing from the previous posts regarding what is actually “fact” and not just “opinion” when dealing with the Land of Promise location, in which the first question to be asked and answered is “What does the scriptural record actually say?” 

An example of the area of Coquimbo Bay and La Serena
    Continuing with what Nephi says they found at the point of their landing site:
6. “both the cow and the ox, and the ass and the horse, and the goat and the wild goat, and all manner of wild animals, which were for the use of men” (1 Nephi 18:25b). Again, most theorists when they come to this verse, busy themselves with concerns over the type of animals; however, since the forest is the key issue, one might wonder a little about that forest itself.
    First of all, it had to be large enough to house both wild (carnivorous) and domestic (herbivorous) animals in the same area. Secondly, there had to be sufficient food available for the life cycle of animals to be maintained, i.e., enough animals born to offset the amount killed by the wild beasts. So we are not talking about a small area of trees, but a forest of considerable size, yet one within walking distance of their landing site and obviously not far from where they pitched their tents and set up their settlement that would later be called "The (Lamanite) Land of First Inheritance.” It is interesting that such a forest exists just on the edge of La Serena, today called the Fray Jorge National Park, which is a temperate rainforest.
    This forest, by the way is the largest tropical rain forest in South America beginning about 1 1/2 miles inland from the bay at Coquimbo and covers approximately 103,301 square miles (of which 70% lies within Chile), and is the second largest of five temperate rainforests in the world. Still existing today, it is the only present rainforest in South America, and has multiple ecosystems, and includes at least five tree species indigenous to that area overflowing with ferns and cinnamon trees, and is home to the majestic Alerce tree, which can reach heights of 377 feet, and live for more than 3000 years, along with a variety of species including eagles, pumas and guanacos (wild parent of the llama). Of the estimated 87,687 square miles of original forest existing at the time of European contact, only about 40% remains today, suggesting it was probably even larger in Lehi’s time.

Top: At 30º south latitude, the western edge of the forest looking westward at the Pacific Ocean; Bottom: Looking over the forest eastward toward the distant Andes  
    Obviously, this rainforest was not only right next to La Serena and Coquimbo, but is certainly large enough to have housed all the animals Nephi described. What a joy it must have been for the colony to discover all these animals, and if there had been any question of why they were not told to bring them, it certainly would have been dispelled in seeing such an abundance of animals of all kinds.
7. The last thing Nephi mentions finding is “we did find all manner of ore, both of gold, and of silver, and of copper” (1 Nephi 18:25). It is interesting that there are two copper smelting plants on either side of Coquimbo Bay, and to the south is the Topado quartz-vein gold ore deposit located in the IV region of Chile, and linked to the nearest city of La Serena. In all, this general area of Chile ranks among the world's top five producer of all three of these metals today: gold, silver and copper.
    In addition to these descriptions of the Land of Promise from Nephi building his ship, setting sail, and reaching shore, then what he found there, there are numerous other areas where descriptions of the Land of Promise are given; however, until a land is found that matches all of these, the others cannot be discussed. We cannot get the cart before the horse. We need to find where Nephi landed his ship and where the Land of First Inheritance was actually located.
    Because the vast majority of theorists ignore this first part, they are forever floundering in trying to find a location, in every case having to change, alter, ignore, or add to the scriptural record to try and make their model fit the written word. This adding or changing effort first began with John L. Sorenson and his changing the cardinal compass directions of his model of Mesoamerica, which are almost 90º off from those mentioned by Mormon in Alma 22 and elsewhere, to the myriad of theorists there are today with ideas ranging from Malaysia, to Baja California, to Florida and the Caribbean, to the Great Lakes, Heartland, and the eastern United States. The fact that each of these models merely shows the lack of attention people place on the scriptural record, which is not open for personal interpretation, according to Paul, but should be taken the way the scriptural accounts are written.

Sorenson’s East-West Map; Following is Mormon’s Description of the Land: “And it bordered upon the land which they called Desolation, it being so far northward…that it came into the land which had been peopled and been destroyed…And they came from there up into the south wilderness. Thus the land on the northward was called Desolation, and the land on the southward was called Bountiful…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; 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” (Alm 22:30-32)
    But when you have the so-called guru of the Land of Promise location changing directions almost 90º, listing west as north and east as south, you create an entire generation of historians who feel completely free to alter and change the record, or ignore those parts they don’t agree with in order to maintain their own views. As an example, the entire land of Western New York is almost as flat as a pancake, from Lake Erie and Lake Ontario being the area’s sea level it rises across the westernmost region of the state of New York and includes the cities of Buffalo, Rochester, Niagara Falls, the surrounding suburbs, as well as the outlying rural areas of the Great Lakes lowlands, the Genesee Valley, and the Southern Tier—in other words, the entire Land of Promise claimed to be in Western New York or the Great Lakes region. As an overall understanding of how low this area is, the following cities, all through the proposed Book of Mormon site is shown as:
    Oswego 285 feet; Syracuse 381 feet; Ithaca 404 feet; Oneida 430 feet; Seneca Falls 449 feet; Newark 457 feet; Palmyra 480 feet; Rochester 505 feet; Buffalo 600 feet; Geneva 610 feet; Niagara Falls 614 feet; Auburn 686 feet; Dansville 705 feet; Elmira 873 feet; Batavia 873 feet; Corning 1093 feet; Cortland 1129 feet; Salamanca 1381 feet; Belmont 1391 feet. Now from Buffalo (600) Eire (595) and Cleveland (653) along the coast of Lake Erie (their Sea West) for about 175 miles shows that the coastal height of the area is about 616 feet—making a rough rise from the shores of Lake Erie into the area of Belmont, about 775 feet; and that of Lake Ontario (their Sea North), for 140 miles from the coastal town of St. Catherines near Niagara Falls (321) to Rochester (505) and Oswego (285) averages about 371 feet, so the highest rise from Lake Erie (their West Sea) to the highest level in Western New York at Cortland (1129) would be a rise of about 758 feet. These are rises of about fifteen feet per mile, which is hardly enough to mention.

Yet, in Helaman, Samuel the Lamanite makes it very clear that at the time of the crucifixion, “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).
    This was not just a statement of Samuel’s but he tells us an “thus hath the Lord commanded me, by his angel, that I should come and tell this thing unto you; yea, he hath commanded that I should prophesy these things unto you” (Helaman 14:9). Samuel also said the angel told him that all of these signs were for 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). Obviously, then, all would see these signs, they would be widespread so all could see them, and know for a surety that they were brought about as a sign by God. Mountains whose height is great is very specific!
    How on earth can anyone think Western New York would qualify for the Land of Promise when the Angel told Samuel to prophesy to the Nephites in Zarahemla that there would be mountains whose height is great rise up at the time of the Savior’s death? 
    Where are these mountains today? 
    Certainly not in western or southern New York state! Certainly not in the area of the hill Cumorah outside Palmyra. Certainly not in the area of the theorists’ Zarahemla!
    How clear, how plain and simple, how exact does the scriptural record have to be to show these Great lakes and eastern United States theorists that this area is not the land described in the scriptural record? 
    And that is just one issue. There are many others, such as where are the cities, the buildings, the roads, the palaces, the temples, the walls made of stone surrounding the cities and the land?
    It is a sad commentary indeed of so-called historians and scholars who write about the Book of Mormon but ignore what is written within its pages. The same can be said about every theory we find written today regarding the location of the Land of Promise except one.
    Only one area matches the descriptions Nephi gave us as listed in this series of posts.
Only one covers every single scriptural reference found in the Book of Mormon describing the Land of Promise. Only one connects every single scripture description to its location.
    Take all of these twenty-four scriptures (32 in all counting ones already mentioned) describing some part of the location of the Land of Promise. Every single one is found in the Andean area of South America, some of them nowhere else in the world:

(See the next post, “What is Opinion and What is Not? – Part VIII,” for more regarding what is fact about the Land of Promise and the scriptural record by comparing the scriptural account with the location and separating “fact” from “opinion” through the listing of 32 scriptures)

What is Opinion and What is Not? – Part VII

Continuing from the previous posts regarding what is actually “fact” and not just “opinion” when dealing with the Land of Promise location, in which the first question to be asked and answered is “What does the scriptural record actually say?” 

In the previous posts on this subject we have separated the scriptural record “facts” from the “opinions” regarding Nephi’s course to the Western Hemisphere to show the only place he could have landed, which was along the Chilean coast at 30º south latitude. Now let’s take a look at the “facts” instead of the “opinions” of what he found there.
    As was listed on the close of an earlier post in this series, there are seven points Nephi describes finding at, and relating to, the point of his landing as he states in 1 Nephi 18:24-25. First of all, on landing upon the “promised land,” Nephi says “we went forth upon the land and we did pitch our tents" (1 Nephi 18:23). Thus we see that they landed, left the ship and went ashore and pitched their tents. There should be nothing difficult about understanding this. Lehi and Sariah were of an age and health condition (1 Nephi 18:17-18) that they would not have been able to go far once landing. It should also be understood that you don’t “sail” up rivers in a deep ocean going vessel with a fixed sail that is being “driven forth before the wind.” Not even the experienced Vikings in their long boats sailed up rivers—they used their oars.
    This, in an of itself, should suggest to all eastern United States, Great Lakes, and Western New York theorists, that Nephi sailed across the sea and landed on the shore of the promised land—he did not say he sailed up inland rivers, crossed miles upon miles of land, in order to reach an inland lake in order to “pitch his tents.” We also need to keep in mind that this land of first inheritance, as Mormon placed it, was located “in the west, in the land of Nephi, in the place of their father’s first inheritance, and thus bordering along by the seashore” (Alma 22:28). Again, this should preclude all the theories involving the eastern United States, Great Lakes, and Western New York—it doesn’t of course, for these theorists simply ignore this part of the scriptural record. But it should be noted that Mormon’s words “and thus bordering along by the seashore,” shows us how obvious this was to Mormon, since where they first landed had to be along the seashore.
    So what did Nephi say he found in this point of landing?
1. “We did begin to till the earth,” therefore it had to be a place where there was tillable ground along the coast that would produce sufficient food to feed the colony that first year, combined with hunting and fishing.
2. “We began to plant seeds; yea, we did put all our seeds into the earth, which we had brought from the land of Jerusalem.” Now one of the interesting things about this seemingly unimportant comment, ignored by all theorists, rests in two parts: a) obviously, no one had been planting in this area before, so they were planting in virgin land without any prior experience in this location, and b) the seeds they were putting into the ground had previously grown and been produced in Jerusalem.
    There are two very important things about this that to modern man, would probably not even be given a second thought. However, in the world of Lehi in 600 B.C. or so [probably about 590 B.C., given about eight years in the desert before reaching Bountiful and another two years building the ship], the idea of dirt, soils, soil groups, precipitation, temperature, overall climate, all played an extremely important role to whether or not seeds would grow.

This is seen some 2000 years later when the Pilgrims landed in Plymouth, coming from the northern climate of England and Holland, that their seeds did not grow well in New England—so much so, that they would have starved had it not been for the Indians of the area who not only helped feed them through the winter, but showed them how to plant a special way that ensured a successful crop the following Spring and Fall. The same basic thing took place in Jamestown Colony, which nearly starved some ten years earlier when winter set in supplies ran short and the Indians were hostile.
    Growing seeds in another climate from those in which they were first raised or developed is not an easy matter. Even today, some 2600 years after Lehi, seeds need to be planted in an area to which they have been developed, and almost all seed packets have a range of locations to which they are recommended for planting, even with our modern technology for planting, feeding and harvesting. 

Consider in 600 B.C. the importance of such matters that would determine the success or failure of a new colony. Both the Pilgrim and Jamestown colonies learned this simple lesson the hard way, that seeds brought from the northern latitudes of Europe would not just grow anywhere along the eastern coast of the United States. Now in the area of Chile, at Coquimbo Bay and La Serena, along the latitude of 30º south, a unique climate exists, and the only area in the entire Western Hemisphere where all of the above criteria matches that of Jerusalem, i.e., the soil, soil group, precipitation, temperature, and overall climate is the exact same—called a Mediterranean Climate. There are only two of these climates in all the Western Hemisphere, and only five in all the world: Chile, Southern California, southern tips of Australia, the southern tip of Africa, and the Mediterranean coastal Basin in Europe. Having grown up in Southern California the first 65 years of my life, where frankly anything grows all year round—you just stick it in the ground, give it a little water, and it grows profusely.

Top: Front yard of our home in Southern California in the Spring, with the trees just starting to get its leaves—all the plants grew from 1-gallon containers the year before; Bottom: Front yard in late October after tree has lost all its leaves (daughter raking up last of the leaves)
    I was shocked beyond belief when I moved to Cedar City and tried to plant things—only the hardiest plants grow there and in the winter hardly anything grows at all; I actually thought that first winter everything we had planted through the Spring and Fall had died! I was flabbergasted that most of the plants grew again the following Spring!
    The Mediterranean Climate of Southern California is a remarkable thing. In fact, from this Mediterranean Climate, much of the United States gets its winter fruit. And it certainly provided for Lehi what Nephi wrote: “they did grow exceedingly; wherefore, we were blessed in abundance” (1 Nephi 18:24).

Elqui River flows from then Andes to its delta mouth at the Bay of Coquimbo, bringing cold, fresh water to El Serena
    Beyond the planting and harvesting, which would have been extremely important to a new colony, as well as finding fresh water, which is satisfied in this area by the Elqui River, which is a river of cold, pure water coming down off the snow-covered Andes and flowing through Las Serena to the Coquimbo Bay, Nephi mentions three other things in this immediate area.
5. “And it came to pass that we did find upon the land of promise, as we journeyed in the wilderness, that there were beasts in the forests of every kind…” (1 Nephi 18:25a). It is interesting that critic and member alike center their attention on this issue and see the cow and the horse, but do not stop to consider the more important comment and that is the comment “forests.”
    This means that in the close vicinity of Lehi’s landing site was a forest of considerable size (the size will be addressed shortly). Think of it. Not only is there a severe slackening of ocean current movement allowing a ship “driven forth before the wind” to disengage from the fast-moving current, but where there is almost no current at all so a ship with only fixed sails could maneuver (steer) out of the current and in toward shore. Secondly, at this exact location there just happens to be a very large bay, sufficiently long enough (long in the direction of travel, i.e., south to north) for an inexperienced crew to steer their ship toward shore and into the bay, but third, this bay just happens to be next to the coastal garden spot of the entire Chilean coast. The garden spot and only area anywhere alone the eastern Pacific coast from Baja California to the Drake Passage where seeds from Jerusalem would grow, especially grow exceedingly and provide an abundance.
    And right there, in that area where they were needed, was a large forest where numerous animals had gathered in their journey south from the narrow neck when the Lord drove them out of the Lamanite Land Northward with the poisonous serpents (snakes) so they would be available to the future Nephite nation, and especially their initial landing site where they would need them for plowing, planting, harvesting, and eventual packing and transporting Nephi’s camp northward.
    Isn’t it amazing how the Lord works his Plans.

(See the next post, “What is Opinion and What is Not? – Part VII,” for more regarding what is fact about the Land of Promise and the scriptural record by comparing the scriptural account with the location and separating “fact” from “opinion”)

What is Opinion and What is Not? – Part VI

Continuing from the previous posts regarding what is actually “fact” and not just opinion when dealing with the Land of Promise location, in which the first question to be asked and answered is “What does the scriptural record actually say?” (Not what I want it to say, not what I hope it says, not what it should say--but what it actually states).
    First of all, let us show what we mean by “opinion” as opposed to “fact”: In an article written by Richard G. Grant, entitled: “Lehi in the promised Land: What did he Find?” the author says: “Recently, experts on Pacific Islands navigation have suggested an alternative which should now be familiar to most 1998 inhabitants of this American continent: El Niño. El Niño is a reversal of the normal Pacific wind and current patterns. It's now known to occur about every ten years. Under El Niño conditions a Pacific crossing from either the Philippines or New Guinea could take a ship to either South or Central America.”

While the El Niño is a fact, the idea of sailing from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean to reach the Philippines or New Guinea is strictly opinion, since the South Pacific Gyre, which brings the circulation of the southern Pacific Ocean in a counter clockwise circulation is neither affected by El Niño, nor could it be because of the Coriolos effect, which also is not affected by El Niño.
    In short, El Niño moves from west to east along a very narrow course or current called the Counter Current of the Pacific, which runs between the North Pacific and South Pacific gyres. All El Niño does is increase the current flow and adjacent weather along this path, disrupting the ocean flow into Central America that curves up into Baja California peninsula and Southern California. It might also be understood that El Niño is a dangerous flow of water that is destructive to shipping, to populations, and island villages along its track. Any sailing ship caught in its path “driven forth before the wind,” would be hard pressed to survive, let alone reach a specific destination.
    Thus, while a current is established between the two gyres where the doldrums normally lie, it does not change the current flow coming off the southern Pacific Ocean, which precludes any vessel sailing through the Indonesian island archipelago for any sailing vessel “driven forth before the wind,” and even today takes the most experienced seamen to sail those waters from west to east into the Pacific.
    Thus, we see the difference between fact—yes, there is El Niño, but that does not change the fact that Lehi’s ship could not have sailed through Indonesia (opinion) under any circumstances. Even with fair winds (which do not blow in that direction any time of the year, in any year), the maneuvering capability necessary would have been far beyond anything Lehi and his families could have managed.

In another statement by Grant in the same article, he writes: “While there is not a great deal of detail in Nephi's record from which the point of landing can be determined with any certainty, there is one confusing comment that has led to some interesting speculation. Nephi said that they were on an "isle of the sea" (2 Nephi 10:20). While I've never read any speculation that the entire Book of Mormon history might have been lived out upon an island (no way would the text support such an assumption), I have encountered those who have concluded that the point of landing must be the southern coast of Chile. This conclusion satisfies both this identification by Nephi, as there are many islands along that coast, and the reported statement by Joseph Smith that Lehi's landing was in Chile. There are problems with both of these threads of evidence.”
    The “facts:” of this statement are 1) Landing on an island, 2) Landing on the western coast of Chile, 3) Joseph Smith’s (or Frederick G. Williams, Joseph’s Secretary and Counselor in the First Presidency) comment about landing on 30º South Latitude along the coast of Chile—a location also subscribed to by Orson Pratt and Franklin D. Richards. The “opinions” are: 1) There is not enough information from which the point of landing can be determined, 2) There are many islands along that coast—once north of Patagonia, which may have been under water at the time, there are no islands along the coast of Chile or Peru to warrant such a statement, and 3) While I've never read any speculation that the entire Book of Mormon history might have been lived out upon an island (no way would the text support such an assumption).
    The point is, there is only one place along the entire Chilean coast where a ship “driven forth before the wind” could have made landfall, and that is Coquimbo Bay, right at 30º South Latitude, where the strong currents and winds along the Humboldt Current die down to almost nothing. South of there is another bay at Santiago, but that area does not satisfy any of the other descriptions Nephi gave us of the landing sight. Nor do the winds and currents slow down sufficiently there to make landfall with Nephi’s ship and crew very likely.

In addition, there is nothing in the scriptural record after Jacob’s statement (2 Nephi 10:20) to indicate an island or a mainland regarding the Land of Promise. The “isle” (there was no such word as “island” used in normal language in 1829 New England) mentioned is not given a size, and if one thinks of it as a tiny island, like Easter Island (off the Chilean coast), or the Galapagos (off the Ecuadorian coast), then it would be very difficult to fit the Book of Mormon occurrences there; however in the “isle” that was the western shelf of the continent exposed above the water in western South America, including a portion of southern Colombia south to just below La Senera (Coquimbo Bay), Chile, and inland to where the Andes now rise up, then you have an island large enough for all the events described in the Jaredite, Nephite and Lamanite lands.
    Another opinion Grant states is: “In the Old Testament the Hebrew word most often translated isle by the King James scholars is now known to mean "coast land" or "boundary." Actually, the Hebrew word referred to literally means “far off land,” but that is assuming the word used, which was Reformed Egyptian, means that same thing and that is not likely. Besides, the word Joseph Smith used and the Spirit verified in the translation of the scriptural record means exactly as we have interpreted it—an island in the midst of the sea surrounded by water. Here Grant falls into the trap of quoting people like Sorenson and other Mesoamericanists who have tried to limit the value of the word “isle” as Jacob used it to describe the Land of Promise since it does not fit their scenarios and models. Another “opinion” Grant makes is “more probable explanation, however, is that Nephi and his people had not at this time made a sufficient exploration of the land to identify it as a continent rather than an island. With this thought in mind, we are to believe that Jacob would stand up in the temple during a two-day conference and make a statement he neither knew or fully understood, and that Nephi, who said he would write nothing in the record that was not sacred, copied down the statement without knowing of its truthfulness or sacredness.
   Another stated opinion by Clark is that "In their cultural experience, every land they had ever encountered off of their native continent had been an island. In Nephi's day, the concept of multiple continents likely did not exist.”

First of all, it is strictly opinion that Nephi and his people had not made sufficient exploration to have understood the actual size and circumstance of their Land of Promise. This is interesting based on the fact that Nephi rewrote his record onto the small plates 30 years after leaving Jerusalem, at least 20 or more years after landing in the Land of Promise. The other “opinion” is that Nephi had seen other islands—if he had, the record does not tell us that. The only possible disconnected land that Nephi might have seen would be across the Red Sea, and that would have been Egypt—hardly an island. The scriptural record is completely silent about any other island or land Nephi would have seen or crossed before reaching the Land of Promise.
    Now that we have firmly established there is a difference between “fact” and “opinion” when people write about the Book of Mormon lands, let’s take a look at what Nephi said he found when he landed to see what verification this landing sight has with the scriptural record.
(See the next post, , “What is Opinion and What is Not? – Part VI,” for more regarding what is fact about the Land of Promise and the scriptural record by comparing the scriptural account with the location)