Continuing
from the last post on how far afield theorists go when they start out by
committing themselves to a pre-determined location for the land of Promise,
then set about to prove it.
The
continuation of this problem is establishing a firm conviction on the meaning
of a single verse—or a single idea—as almost the entire, total basis of the
Land of Promise location. This is seen in Rodney Meldrum’s map (left) who
champions the single idea of what he calls “the Heartland Theory,” meaning the
heartland or center of the U.S., being the Land of Promise, even though his
various lands are in the wrong position from one another according to Mormon’s
clear and concise descriptions.
Another
is seen in the Theorist Peter Covino‘s claim of the single verse, Helaman 3:8, who
built an entire concept around it, claiming this scripture shows that the Land
Northward was the entire area that the Nephites expanded in, therefore limiting
the Sea South to that of the Land Northward, and calling it the H38 Virus (for
Helaman 3:8) when people do not agree with him, claiming all other models are
wrong because they are infected with that virus, i.e., the Land Northward is
surrounded by water—the four seas mentioned and excluding the Land Southward
entirely. This when the scripture itself reads just the opposite and is far
more inclusive: “And it came to pass that
they did multiply and spread, and did go forth from the land southward to the
land northward, and did spread insomuch that they began to cover the face of
the whole earth, from the sea south to the sea north, from the sea west to the
sea east” (Herlaman 3:8).
Or,
Phyllis Carol Olive deciding that she would start with the Hill Cumorah in
upstate New York, then tried to fit the rest of the Land of Promise
descriptions around that single belief. The result was a map and model that had
several lands in the wrong position to one another, such as the Land of
Bountiful to the east of the Land of Zarahemla (when Mormon tells us it was to
the north [Alma 22:29]), and placing the Land of Many Waters and the hill
Cumorah in the Land Southward to the east of the Sea East (when it was in the
Land northward, and nothing ever mentioned about anything existing to the east
of the Sea East in the entire scriptural record which mentions the Sea East
more than 20 times).
Hauck’s Map of Mesoamerica, which has
an odd arrangement of seas, placement of the narrow neck and that of Bountiful
and the eastern seashore, with Desolation and Land Northward to the west rather
than north of Zarahemla and Bountiful, etc.
Or,
F. Richard Hauck, who constructed an abstract geometric model, in which he
created a settlement and route network of the Land of Promise. Once he created
that network, he began with “the tip of South America, the original,
theoretical model was gradually worked north to the Arctic. Only one locality
on the continent met the topographic conditions he had identified.” In the
process, he found that the “physical environment of the model correlated with a
portion of Mesoamerica,” and from that he began his placement.
Or,
the Theorist who has taken the single verse: “And behold, it is wisdom that
this land should be kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations; for
behold, many nations would overrun the land, that there would be no place for
an inheritance” (2 Nephi 1:8), and decided that meant the Land of Promise would
be hidden from the view of any other people, group, or nation, therefore, that
“hidden land” could not be adjacent to an ocean where people would sail past, but
inland, hidden from any passers-by, in the lands around the Great Lakes area of
the U.S. This, in opposition to Jacob’s comment: “but we have been led to a
better land, for the Lord has made the sea our path, and we are upon an isle of
the sea” (2 Nephi 10:20).
Or
to those who pick a verse or idea to the exclusion of all others. As an
example, the Mesoamerican theorists who claim the land runs east-west (rather
than north-south as Mormon so often describes), while claiming either the Grijalva or Usumacinta rivers, which flow south to north is the River Sidon,
yet, in their skewed “Nephite North” arrangement of their models, the rivers
actually flow west to east, and empty into the Sea East (Gulf of Mexico). This,
despite Mormon telling us the River Sidon flowed south to north past Zarahemla
(thus the Theorists creates a problem in that he skews the land to run in the
wrong direction, which brings the rivers into the wrong direction, i.e., you
cannot change one and not the other).
Or
as Duane R. Aston in his book wrote: “Of all the points of Book of Mormon
geography, the ‘line’ that separated the lands of Desolation on the north and
Bountiful on the south, is perhaps the most mysterious” (Alma 22:32). Yet,
Mormon’s description is quite clear as he writes to his future readers (Mormon
3:17-20), to show where the Lamanite and the Nephite boundaries were and how
the Land of Promise was laid out—he said, “Thus
the land on the northward was called Desolation, and the land on the southward
was called Bountiful… And now, 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” (Alma 22:31-32).
Aston
only mystifies this clear wordage because he has his mind made up that this
line is not the boundary (the narrow neck of land) between the two larger land
masses (Land Northward and Land Southward), but the escarpment that creates the
Niagara Falls that is the line that ran through the land.
Red Line is the escarpment, or long
steep slope fault line, although no such separation of landforms between the
Land Southward and the Land Northward (the cliff over which the Niagara River
falls) is mentioned, suggested or hinted at in the scriptural record
Or,
the single idea of the requiring the Land of Promise to be around the Great
Lakes, Aston claims that the Land of Many Waters and the Hill Cumorah were in
an area in the Land Southward (instead of Northward as Mormon tells us) and to
the east of the Sea East, though nothing in all of the scriptural record
suggests anything was to the east of the East Sea.
Or,
since Aston is so convinced the Great Lakes is the Land of Promise, he doesn’t
have enough seas to match Helaman 3:8, therefore decides to have Lake Erie both the Sea East and the Sea South, and
Lake Ontario both the Sea East and
the Sea North, and, like Peter Covino, creates a south sea to the south of the
Land Northward and holds the Land Northward in a separate section as the land
completely surrounded by water, i.e., the four seas.
Thus,
he says, “Taken collectively, those things lead to much confusion for those
geographers that attempt to identify directional seas in more simplistic models
for Book of Mormon geography, where only two or three seas are envisioned.
Yet,
Helaman makes it clear why four seas are mentioned, as he is stating how much
the Nephites have expanded in all of the Land of Promise (not just the Land
Northward), and shows it by saying from sea to sea, as we in America talk about
“from sea to shining sea,” meaning the entire country, Helaman used this same
meaning when he stated: “they did
multiply and spread, and did go forth from the land southward to the land
northward, and did spread insomuch that they began to cover the face of the
whole earth, from the sea south to the sea north, from the sea west to the sea
east” (Helaman 3:8).
When
the mind is made up about a location, mistakes are constantly made when trying
to apply a scriptural statement to that location that simply does not apply
because the area is not the same land. As can be seen time and time again, with
every pre-determined location model, the scriptural record suffers from changes
in meaning to complete elimination, in order for a match to be made. Take for
example the map below which shows the East Sea and the West Sea totally out of
position in relation to the Land Southward, with the Sea East to the north of
that land among other mistakes in the descriptions Mormon left us.
Red Arrow point to Sea East, which is
located on the map to the north of Zarahemla, not the east as Mormon describes;
Blue Arrow: shows the Sea West not bordering on the Land of Nephi as Mormon
describes
Brown Arrow: Land Northward; Blue
Arrow: Sea East, located north of the (Green Arrow) Hill Cumorah and Land of
Cumorah; Red Arrow: Zarahemla located south of the East Sea, west of Cumorah,
and north of (Yellow Arrow) West Sea, all in opposition to Mormon’s
descriptions
Yellow
Arrow: Land of Zarahemla (no east or
west sea around) is to the east of (Green Arrow) Lamanite lands, which is to
the west by a considerable distance of (White Arrow) the Land of Nephi, which
also has no West Sea bordering it, or nearly completely surrounding it as
Mormon describes
Brown Arrow: Lehi’s landing site
adjacent to the Sea East; Red Arrow: Land of Nephi to the West of (Blue Arrow)
Desolation and the north of (Green Arrow) Bountiful; Sea East north of Sea
West—all in opposition to Mormon’s descriptions
As
these various maps of the Great Lakes and Heartland models show, none comply
with the descriptions that Mormon left us for our better understanding of the
locations of the various lands within the Land of Promise. All, plus numerous
others of Land of Promise models, result in such errors because of a
concentration on one or two verses or descriptions rather than the entire land
Mormon described.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I've always been a believer of the Central and South American theories. I've been to ruins throughout central and south America. However, it never rang true. This Hopewell connection is hard to disregard. Additionally, all the evidence of Hill Ramah and Hill Cumorah, not to mention the places Joseph Smith indicated such as Zarahemla and Manti. I'm leaning toward the Eastern US model being about as accurate as anything put forward today and I'm quite excited about it as well. It's been a fun journey to learn something new and to realize if nothing else if the "Prince of America" Moroni had visited even Columbus and is trying to protect this great land of liberty. I can think of no other land in central or south america that could lay claim to a land of liberty or freedom. God has set this land as a standard. You make good points, but I think there is much truth to a true North American model. Just my opinion.
ReplyDelete