We are continuing with John L. Sorenson’s book An Ancient American Setting for the Book of
Mormon, which is so extensively hyped by Mesoamericanists and Land of
Promise Theorists, especially because of Sorenson’s reputation as the one-time
Dean of Anthropology at BYU, and current status as Professor Emeritus, and
referred to as the “Guru of Book of Mormon Archaeology,” that it needs a
reality check every so often.
Continuing with Sorenson’s comments about the distance across the narrow
neck of land.
Just about everything is
in the wrong place in Sorenson’s Mesoamerica map from Mormon’s detailed
descriptions, yet Sorenson tells us that “hereafter I plan to assume that the
geography question is settled”
Sorenson continuing: “I have said often enough
that these results are not conclusive. Yet hereafter I plan to assume that the
geography question is settled, in broad terms. It is sensible to assume so in
order to get on with other matters. I am personally assured that the Nephite
map is now known with quite high probability. Furthermore, no other map
correlation will do; all others known to me contain fatal flaws. On the
contrary, the picture offered here is thoroughly plausible” (p47).
Response: When something is not conclusive how can
we assume the geography question is settled? In fact, not only is it settled in
Sorenson’s mind, he uses this “inconclusive geography” to base the rest of his
book upon and all his theories and future writing.
In the Foreword to his book, it is written: “This
book has been many years in preparation and will undoubtedly endure for many
years to come. It will become required reading for all people interested in the
antiquity of the Book of Mormon. Those who comment on the historicity of Book
of Mormon accounts henceforth are irresponsible or uninformed if they ignore or
neglect Dr. Sorenson’s present work.”
One can only wonder how irresponsible or
uninformed one is if they see and question Sorenson’s many mistakes and his
lack of scriptural agreement? Evidently, one should ignore truth and simply
take Sorenson’s word for things, even when he uses “inconclusive geography” to
prove his points.
Sorenson continuing: “Furthermore, no other map correlation will do; on the contrary, the
picture offered here is thoroughly plausible. That will become more apparent as
we proceed with our discussion. So let us examine more detailed evidence about
the match between the scriptgure and external sources” (p 47).
Response: It is interesting that Sorenson’s own
map (Map 4, p24) is far closer to Mormon’s description than his actual map of
Mesoamerica. So let us take a look at his final map, his Mesoamerica, the map
that is superior to and better than any other map because “no other map correlation will do.” (Correlation, by the way means
“a mutual relationship of connection between two or more things,” that is,
Sorenson’s points on his map should correlate with one another).
So let us begin with his comment on p 5: “"the first place to seek for knowledge of the
Book of Mormon, is the book itself."
While one can hardly disagree with such a statement, he goes on to say that: "We must...construct a map,
systematically and comprehensively.
Every statement in the volume (Book of Mormon) must be milked of
relevant information, and all of it ought to fit together without
contradiction.
Sorenson’s Map. Compare his locations with those stated in the scriptural
record. There is not a single match between the scriptural record and
Sorenson’s map locations—absolutely no correlation between the two at all
despite his own conditions that they must do so
1. Mormon: Land
Northward – To the north of Bountiful and the narrow neck of land (Alma
22:31)
Sorenson Map: Land
Northward – To the west of Bountiful and the narrow neck of land;
2. Mormon: Land
Southward – To the south of Bountiful and the narrow neck of land (Alma
22:31)
Sorenson Map: Land
Southward – To the east of Bountiful and the narrow neck of land
3. Mormon: Land of
Zarahemla – To the north of the narrow strip of land which was to the north
of the Land of Nephi (Alma 22:27)
Sorenson Map: Land
of Zarahemla – To the east of the narrow strip of land which is to the west
of the Land of Nephi
4. Mormon: Land of
Bountiful – To the south of the narrow strip of land, in the north of the
Land Southward (Alma 22:29; Helaman 1:17)
Sorenson Map: Land
of Bountiful – To the east of the narrow neck of land, in the west of the
Land Southward (which is in the east);
5. Mormon: Land of
Desolation – To the north of the narrow neck of land, in the south of the
Land Northward (Alma 22:29)
Sorenson’s
Bountiful is east of his Desolation instead of to the south of the land of
Descolation
Sorenson Map: Land
of Desolation – To the west of the narrow neck of land, in the east of the
Land Northward;
6. Mormon: City of
Zarahemla – North of the Land of Nephi and south of the Land of Bountiful (Helaman
4:5-7)
Sorenson Map: City
of Zarahemla – To the west of the Land of Nephi, and to the east of the
Land of Bountiful;
7. Mormon:
Jaredites inhabited the north country – Jaredite bones were so far
northward (Alma 22:29), they were destroyed on the face of the north country
(Ether 1:1)
Sorenson Map: Jaredite
Lands – Far to the west in the Land Northward, which is actually to the
West;
8. Mormon: Land of First Inheritance (Lehi
Landing site) – On the west in the land of Nephi, in the
place of their fathers' first inheritance, and thus bordering along by the
seashore (Alma 22:28)
Sorenson:
Land of First Inheritance: Located along the south seashore of
the Land of Nephi;
9.
Mormon: East and West Sea: The land was between the Sea East and the Sea
West (Alma 22:27), the land was surrounded by water except for a small neck of
land (Alma 22:32), there were many Lamanites in the west along the seashore (Alma 22:28)
and in the east along the seashore (Alma 22:29), thus the Sea East was in the
east and the Sea West was in the west.
Sorenson: East and
West Sea: His East Sea is in the north; his West Sea is in the south;
The
South Wilderness is the northern part of the narrow strip of wilderness which
was the wilderness area bordering on the south of the Land of Promise. This is
all one wilderness area that stretches to sea to sea and turns “round about”
northward along each seashore (Alma 22:27-28)
10. Mormon: South
Wilderness: This is the narrow strip of wilderness in the south of the Land
of Zarahemla, running from the Sea East to the Sea West (Alma 22:27); the other
South Wilderness was in the south of the Land Northward where the Jaredites
moved into after landing (Alma 22:31). At the time of the Jaredites, the Land
of Bountiful was referred to as a wilderness (Alma 22:31) since there were no
people living there.
Sorenson: South
Wilderness: Sorenson places the south wilderness to the north of the Land
of Zarahemla along the coast of the East Sea which is actually in the north
(Map 12, p 241).
These are just ten points related to Sorenson’s first
map of Mesoamerica to show that there is absolutely no correlation at all between Sorenson’s
placement and the scriptural record and Mormon’s descriptions.
It also might be of interest to note that on Map 8, p
170, using Soreonson’s own mileage chart, the Land of Shemlon (occupied by the
Lamanites) is 15 miles away to the south of the City of Nephi (Lehi-Nephi),
with low lying hills in between, yet Noah climbed upon the tower he built
(Mosiah 11:12; 19:5) and saw the Lamanites approaching (Mosiah 19:6). That is
some distance to see through low-lying hills, even “within the borders of the
land.”
The point is, anyone can draw a map. However, to be of
any value, it has to be within the confines of the scriptural record and match
that description. Sorenson’s maps are far from doing so.
Yet despite these glaring discrepancies Sorenson goes
on to say of his map: “Despite their
contributions, all previous maps have been incomplete and inconsistent in
dealing with the relevant information in the Book of Mormon. None are fully reliable. (pg. 6)
Building an internally consistent map is but the first step...Our first
task is to analyze from the text the key characteristics of the lands
described."
It is a shame that Sorenson never seemed to learn to
take his own advice.
In a moment of humility, perhaps, Sorenson states
on a different occasion, “We all should be willing to ‘be instructed more
perfectly in theory’ (D&C 88:78). I am willing to change my theories and
hypotheses, when the need is demonstrated.” It would seem that without
question, the need has been demonstrated.
(See
the next post, “More on Sorenson’s Land of Promise – Part VII,” for more information on
how far Sorenson is willing to go to stretch reality and believability to prove
his Mesoamerican Theory, and how often he write something is not in the
scriptural record when it plainly is)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment