Continuing with the previous
posts regarding one of our readers sending us information of a blog and asking
our opinion and comments.
Blog comment on Brant A.
Gardner’s reference that “Cumorah was either an impressive defensive position
or a metaphorical location for the destruction of a people—perhaps both, in
which the blog follows: “Already, we're veering into semantic
problems. Gardner uses the term "Cumorah" loosely, but the context
here suggests Gardner is referring to the hill Cumorah, which the text never
says is an impressive defensive position. The defenses were established in the land of Cumorah, the extent of which
the text does not explain. Mormon had to climb the hill to see his ten thousand
who were hewn down, which indicates they were in the valley. There is no basis
in the text for concluding the term refers to a metaphorical location.”
Response: First of
all, “metaphorical” means that it is characteristic of or relating to metaphor,
i.e., figurative. Obviously, that is the wrong word to use since “Cumorah” is
not a figurative area, place, or idea, but an actual hill and a defined land.
To understand this reality, Mormon tells us: “that we might gather together our people unto the land of Cumorah, by a
hill which was called Cumorah, and there we could give them battle” (Mormon
6:2).
Cumorah, then, is a hill named Cumorah, in a land named
Cumorah.
Mormon also states: “we did march forth to the land of Cumorah,
and we did pitch our tents around about the hill Cumorah; and it was in a land
of many waters, rivers, and fountains; and here we had hope to gain advantage
over the Lamanites” (Mormon 6:4).
Thus, we find that
the Hill Cumorah was located in the Land of Cumorah, which land was located in
the Land of Many Waters, Rivers and Fountains.” That is like saying the Jazz
basketball team plays in the Energy Solutions Arena in Salt Lake City in the
state of Utah.
This statement by
Mormon is quite clear and defining.
Blog comment: “I think everyone agrees that the Book of
Mormon setting cannot stretch from Mesoamerica to New York. Fortunately, Joseph
never said it did. It was Orson Pratt, Benjamin Winchester, William Smith, John
E. Page, etc., who made that claim. And it was Joseph in the Wentworth letter
who edited out the hemispheric
theory Orson Pratt was pushing.”
Response: It does not require
the Land of Promise to stretch anywhere. There were two locations, one, the
hill Cumorah around which the Jaredites and Nephites fought, and two, the hill in New York in which Joseph Smith unearthed the buried plates. There is
no suggestion anywhere in the scriptural record that these two hills are one of
the same. This is also true of the Land of Bountiful, one in the Old World
around the southern coastal area of Arabia, and one in the Land of
Promise—there is also another in the State of Utah. There was a City of
Zarahemla in the Land of Promise, and another in the State of Iowa; a city of
Nephi and a city of Manti in the Land of Promise, and both are also cities in
Utah; there was an Ephraim Hill in the Land of Promise and an Ephraim Hill in
Ephraim, Utah; as well as a city of Judea in the Land of Promise, and a city of
Judea in the Old World.
Left: Bountiful in southern Arabia (Salalah); Right: Bountiful in Utah,
which was originally named Sessions Settlement and North Canyon Ward before
being named after the Bountiful of the Old World found in the Book of Mormon in
1855
The point is, duplicate names are rather common, not
unusual. Why is it so difficult for some people to think there were two
areas called Cumorah?
It is also of interest to note
that according to the blog author, Orson Pratt was “pushing a hemispheric
theory,” while Oliver Cowdery was simply stating a fact that the hill Cumorah
in New York was the same as the hill Cumorah in the Land of Promise. It is
interesting how writers state facts in such a way that always tend toward their
point of view instead of treating these two attitudes or beliefs equally, i.e.,
if Orson Pratt believed in a hemispheric theory, then Oliver Cowdery believed
in a single Cumorah theory.
Blog comment to the suggestion
that Moroni himself may have called the hill Cumorah in honor of
the one in Middle America. He may even have told the Prophet Joseph Smith about
it, but of this we have no proof: “How
would Moroni be "honoring" a hill in Mesoamerica by misleading Joseph
into thinking the hill in New York was the one in Mesoamerica?”
Response: The point
here is that Moroni may have called the hill in upstate western New York the
hill Cumorah to tie the two hills together, one in the Land Northward where Mormon buried all the records, and the second where he buried the records in New York. If that took place, it is neither
misleading nor causing anyone to think the two hills were the same other than
those who advocate the Great Lakes or Heartland Eastern U.S. theories. But
certainly not misleading. And duplicate names have been given to various
places, both in the land of Promise and in the U.S. simply to honor or
reference the former name and places. It is not a conspiracy to name Bountiful,
Utah, after Bountiful in the Land of Promise, but an honorific reference to the
Book of Mormon name and location.
Blog comment: “Of course we have no evidence of how Joseph
might have used the term verbally…”
Response: Thus, we
have no evidence he used it at all! And the fact that he avoided using it, calling it the hill where the plates were buried suggests he did not use it at all.
Blog comment: “…written records reflect a small percentage
of contemporaneous oral communication. The Book of Mormon itself tells less
that it contains less than one percent of the history of the people. That is why Oliver's detailed
letters are so significant, not only regarding the New York Cumorah issue but
many other issues of Church history.”
Response: The point
is we cannot go around inserting names, places, events, or opinions into the
record or history that are not mentioned or even referenced as such merely
because we think they might have been left out. If the record doesn’t state it,
then we have no right to add it on our own.”
Blog comment: “Sorenson's
comments are pure speculation, derived from his own translation of the Book of Mormon…Contrary
to Sorenson's claim, the New York location is in close proximity to the narrow
neck of land, as the Joseph Smith translation describes it.”
Response: At no time
in the scriptural record does it state that the hill Cumorah is near the narrow
neck of land or in close proximity to it. The information we have, by Mormon,
is that the hill Cumorah is in “the
land of Cumorah, by a hill which was called Cumorah, and there we could give
them battle…we did march forth to the land of Cumorah, and we did pitch our
tents around about the hill Cumorah; and it was in a land of many waters,
rivers, and fountains; and here we had hope to gain advantage over the
Lamanites” (Mormon 6:2, 4).
Moroni tells us: they came “over and passed by the hill of
Shim, and came over by the place where the Nephites were destroyed, and from
thence eastward, and came to a place which was called Ablom, by the seashore”
(Ether 9:3). Moroni also tells us that Coriantumr’s army in the final days of
the Jaredites pitched their tents around the hill Rama, which “was that same
hill where my father Mormon did hide up the records unto the Lord” (Ether
15:11), and after a day of flight, the battle was renewed and when the last
Jaredite Coriantumr killed Shiz that day, that “And the Lord spake unto Ether,
and said unto him: Go forth."
And he went forth, and beheld that the words of the Lord had
all been fulfilled; and he finished his record; and he hid them in a manner
that the people of Limhi did find them” (Ether 15:33), telling us that the last
Jaredite battles took place where the expedition of Limhi found Ether’s plates,
and described: “having traveled in a land among many waters, having
discovered a land which was covered with bones of men, and of beasts, and was also
covered with ruins of buildings of every kind, having discovered a land which
had been peopled with a people who were as numerous as the hosts of Israel. And
for a testimony that the things that they had said are true they have brought
twenty-four plates which are filled with engravings, and they are of pure gold”
(Mosiah 8:8-9).
In Alma, Mormon says this area
where the Jaredite ruins and bones was far northward “The Land of Desolation, it being so far northward that it
came into the land which had been peopled and been destroyed, of whose bones we
have spoken” (Alm 22:30).
From
all of this we find:
1.
Mormon hid up in the hill Cumorah all the records which had been entrusted to
him, except for the few he gave his son Moroni (Mormon 6:6)
2.
The hill Cumorah was in the Land of Cumorah
3.
The Land of Cumorah was in the Land of Many Waters
4.
The Land of Many Waters was beyond or north of the Land of Desolation
5.
The Land of Desolation was north of the Narrow Neck of Land
Thus
it cannot be said that the hill Cumorah was near
the Narrow Neck of Land, nor that it was in close proximity to the Narrow Neck of Land.
6.
If we add to that the statement by Orson Pratt May 18, 1873 in the Journal of
Discourses Vol 16,p 50, that “the hill Ramah, afterwards called Cumorah, where
the Jaredites were destroyed as well as the Nephites,” we find that both Ramah
and Cumorah are the same hill, placing both descriptions far to the north of
the narrow neck of land.
(See the next post,
“America is the Land of Promise—But Where is America? – Part XIII,” for answers
as to where the overall Land of Promise is located and to what land the
Prophets have spoken and the Lord indicated)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment