I came across some interesting Book of Mormon geography theories. Some of which I was familiar with and a few that were new to me. I found them interesting to read through. I’m sure there are more theories out there, but here are a few for you to read through. I’ve included links for more information on each theory on the titles of the theory.
Mesoamerica Theory 1: Isthmus of Tehuantepec
As you can see in this map, this theory is the one in which people believe the main location for the Book of Mormon is in Central America and Mexico. The theory is that the land and continent formation is the same as today for the most part and that the archeological findings in that area could be related to Book of Mormon people. It is also a limited geography model in that the geography covers just parts of the Americas rather than all of North and South America.
Mesoamerica Theory 2: Part of the Caribean that sunk into the ocean
This theory is similar to the first theory, except the geography covers most of North and Central America and it also includes areas of the Carribean that have sunk into the ocean that appear to be cities and/or civilizations.
This theory is a relatively new one that I found the other day which claims that Lehi and company landed on the Baja Penninsula in Mexico. The theory is that this is one of the only locations in the world that supports a Meditteranean climate similar to the one Lehi and his family departed from.
This theory is that the whole Book of Mormon took place around the Great Lakes region.
This one is another relatively new theory. The theory is that the archeological findings in Mesoamerica do not support Book of Mormon civilizations and also that Lehi and company couldn’t feasibly make the journey 16,000 miles to the Americas. Therefore, they landed on the Malay Penninsula , which is in the area of Singapore and Thailand.
So now it’s your turn to share your thoughts. Which theory do you believe in or do you not believe in any of them? Take time to vote on which theory you believe in and feel free to leave a comment as well.
My goodness! I can’t believe no one has yet left a comment on this subject. Book of Mormon geography has always been one of my favorite subjects.
I picked Mesoamerica #1 because it’s best supported by the Book of Mormon itself. The BoM talks about a “day’s journey” from one place to another; without motorized transport, this would imply short distances covered, warranting a small area. In addition, another BoM verse talks about fevers, and the excellent quality of roots and plants to combat them. This sounds descriptive of a typical subtropical climate with some rain forest. Mesoamerica, definitely NOT the Great Lakes region. Also, the cataclysm accompanying the crucifixion of Jesus Christ is descriptive of massive volcanic eruptions and a possible Cat 5+++ hurricane, better fitting Mesoamerica than the Great Lakes region. Furthermore, if the Book of Mormon core homelands were subject to winter and snow, there’d be references to it in the BoM.
Of course, this brings us back to the “two Cumorah” theory. How to initialize a Cumorah in upstate New York with a Mesoamerica-based Nephite civilization is one of those metaphoric “mysteries of the kingdom” that we are simply destined to dispute for the foreseeable future.
I read about the Caribbean theory on another website which I can’t remember. It sounded enticing, except the distances seem too great.
This is one of my favorite topics. I hadn’t heard about the sunken Caribbean one before. That looks interesting.
I know Malay is hard for most people to fathom, but I think that’s the most intriguing one to me.
The popular MesoAmerican Hypothesis has no good supporting evidence, in my opinion. Major items like plants, animals, north south orientation, metals, metallurgy, wheeled vehicles, silk, peninsular setting, narrow neck of land, tillage agriculture, and many many things do not match the Book of Mormon. There are many place names (in appropriate locations) which are similar and a couple which are identical to Book of Mormon names, MesoAmerica has none. There is a Hill Mah (Ramah?) on a current day map in the appropriate location. Science has found that a group of people left there about 400 AD (the time of the last battles) and traveled with plants, animals, and beliefs and named a town in the new place Moroni. I therefore have proposed The Malay Hypothesis which has over 180 arguments favoring it over the MesoAmerican Hypothesis. Interest in the Malay Hypothesis is appreciated and more consideration of it is encouraged by fair minded people. It is an extremely important matter and should be considered seriously by all investigators. It is not a new theory, the first book was written in the early 90′s . It has been largely ignored, but deserves honest appraisal.
There is also a North American Theory
(see: “A North American Setting For The Book of Mormon” at http://brandley.poulsenll.org/ )
I wonder if there is some basis in Nibley on Book of Mormon Geography.
Ralph,
I think you have some valid points, however the reason why I think the Meso theory hasn’t recieved serious analysis is because of all the prophets and church leaders who have said it was somewhere on the American continent(s).
Or it could have been in Peru:
http://mormonmatters.org/2009/06/01/a-south-american-setting-for-book-of-mormon/
The distances match very well in Malaysia–over MesoAmerica. And the directions are better. The climate is subtropical matching the BofM and the medicinal plants match better in Malaysia over Meso. Early explorers found there were an amazing number of healing plants along the Malay Peninsula. And as for cataclysmic volcanic explosions, even in recent times there have been huge explosions in the Malay area: Krakatoa & Tambora. None have been recorded in Meso America… just volcanic lava flow… not explosive volcanos. A Mexican author describes an earthquake in Mexico about the time of Christ, but it was a small one and no one was killed. There was a recent tsunami in the Malaysian area. That is a serious weather condition. The Pacific fault line goes right by the Malay Peninsula. The BofM said there was a large amount of thunder. It was probably part of the volcanic explosions that caused that noise. The BofM said there were huge east winds that they were afraid of. There are huge typhoons that blow across Malaysia from the South China Sea. MesoAmerica is protectred from east winds by the Yucatan Peninsula and winds are attenuated (slowed down) when passing over land.
As Meso fits better than the Great Lakes theory, Malay fits extremely better than Meso. And there are 180 more reasons Malay is better.
Moroni didn’t call the hill in NY Cumorah. He said the plates are in the hill. Moroni didn’t put his plates in Cumorah, his father Mormon did and Moroni left with his. Science has proven that A group of people left Malaysia about the time of the last battles (400AD) and traveled to the islands near Madagascar and named islands Cumoros and a city Moroni. They brought plants, animals, beliefs, etc with them. That is how they proved that they went there from Malaysia. It is possible that Moroni sailed from there to NY. It is more probable than carrying them to NY from MesoAmerica with no beasts of burden and no wheeled carts of any kind.
Moroni was fleeing for his life.
Assuming minimal possessions and plates weighing around 60 lbs. (not factoring in the possibility of a pack animal), Moroni could very well have covered the ground between Yucatan and New York. Typical fit hiker can cover 30 miles a day with those kind of burdens. People hiking the Appalachian trail do it every year.
And we are given no time frame whatsoever for how long it took Moroni to bury the plates after the final Nephite battle. He could have wandered for over 10 years for all we know.
I think that the Malay theory was stated as a parody on the Mesoamerica theory, and then people started to take it seriously. Amazing!
ama49
Moroni told Joseph that the BofM is a history of the people of this continent AND THE SOURCES FROM WHENCE THEY SPRANG. Joseph only translated a small portion & then the plates were taken from him. Perhaps the portion that we have is of the trip to Malaysia on their way to America… and we don’t have the whole trip. Joseph was a man most of the time, and only a Prophet when God told him to say something. He had an opinion most of the time that wasn’t necessarily prophetic. If a bishop tells you something it doesn’t make it true. He may have heard something from someone he believed who heard something from someone he believed … etc and the first guy had good intentions, but maybe an assumption…
Theodore, Ralph Olsen is the author–it’s no parody. (He is the same Ralph posting here.) If you want to download the 300 page theory, go to http://www.mormonheretic.org/2009/04/18/my-first-scoop-the-unpublished-malay-theory/
Ralph,
Did not your Malay idea start as a parody?
Theodore,
Go to https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/file-index/12.html and read Ralph’s original Sunstone article. (You need Adobe Reader when it asks what to open the file with.) This article comes from 1993 I believe. Quoting from the article:
Initially, Book of Mormon lands were thought to occupy all of South America—“the land southward”—and North
America—“the land northward”—with the Isthmus of
Panama understood to be the “narrow neck of land” connecting the two. Those who have followed Book of Mormon scholarship for the past few decades have become aware of problems with this view. Indeed, a whole range of problems and difficulties, already well documented in many books, articles, and essays, make both the hemispheric and limited geography models seem untenable.3 Recent DNA studies of Amerindians have also convincingly shown that most of them are descended from peoples from Northeast Asia, not from the Middle East.4
Taken together, these problems have caused me to wonder for some time why very few researchers seem to have considered the possibility that Book of Mormon events occurred somewhere other than in America. In the physical sciences, when evidence indicates flaws in an accepted hypothesis, even if the inconsistencies might at first seem slight, researchers actively seek a better hypothesis. Mormonism’s Ninth Article of Faith reminds us that many truths are yet unknown, and Apostle John A. Widstoe has encouraged honest inquiry: “There can be no objection to the careful and critical study of the scriptures, ancient or modern, provided only that it be an honest study. . . a search for truth.”5 In the sciences, as in life, there is no shame in trying and sometimes failing; the shame comes in not trying at all.
Strengthened by sentiments like Elder Widtsoe’s and aware of the difficult problems with the settings currently being proposed as the site of Book of Mormon events, I have for some time now been actively searching for a more suitable location.6 And my search has led me to a surprising candidate: the Malay Peninsula in Southeast Asia.
In presenting what I label the “Malay Hypothesis,” I realize
I am suggesting that studies aimed at locating Book of
Mormon lands and accurately identifying the descendants of Book of Mormon peoples would need to undergo a radical paradigm shift—one that many would consider quite farfetched. I am fully aware that no Church leader, Joseph Smith included, has pointed toward a Southeast Asian setting, but neither have they made statements which rule it out.
Thanks Rick for inserting a section from my Sunstone article. No, Thoedore, I never considered it to be a parody. It is an honest scientific inquery intended to figure out where Book of Mormon events took place in hopes of proving the Book of Mormon is true.
Please consider all of my points, rather than just choose one to decide the validity of my theory. If I have 200 arguments why my theory works over Meso, finding one you question does not seriously raise a doubt about the Malay Hypothesis. There are still “199 reasons” why it is better than Meso. I don’t even claim to know how the plates got to NY. My points are only things I have found evidence for. I admit that I don’t know for sure how the plates got to NY, but neither does Sorenson. Without more evidence, all we can do is speculate about it.
There were no beasts of burden to be used in the Meso area and the plates may have weighed 200 lbs. if they were pure gold. A time frame doesn’t matter in my theory either.
From the descriptions of Joseph and his fellow eye-witnesses, it seems unlikely that the plates were actually “pure gold.”
Ralph,
I have downloaded your thesis and have begun to read it. I can see that you have done a great deal of research and are sincere in your belief that the Malay Peninsula may be a possible location for the Book of Mormon. However, I find at the outset that there are many things that are out of sync with the text of the Book of Mormon. I am not interested in cultural or archaeological circumstantial evidence of any proposed setting if it does not first fit the text.
The first item I disagree with is your re-routing of the Jaredites from northward to southward in order to get them into the Arabian Sea (page 13). In Ether we read:
“And when thou hast done this thou shalt go at the head of them down into the valley which is NORTHWARD. And there will I meet thee, and I will go before thee into a land which is choice above all the lands of the earth.” (Ether 1:42, emphasis added)
“And it came to pass that Jared and his brother, and their families, and also the friends of Jared and his brother and their families, went down into the valley which was NORTHWARD, (and the name of the valley was Nimrod, being called after the mighty hunter) with their flocks which they had gathered together, male and female, of every kind.” (Ether 2:1, emphasis added)
Babel was located on the Euphrates River. The simplest and most direct route to the Arabian Sea would be to take boats south down the river. Why would the Lord take them northward only a few miles (as you presume) where he would then meet them, to direct them into the Tigris River so they could then go back south?
The Tigris-Euphrates Valley is all one lowland. It is all one valley. To get to another major valley (that may have been worthy to be named after the mighty Nimrod) they would have to go northward up the Diyala River. This valley has been an important trade route through the centuries. Then we read:
“And it came to pass that they did travel in the wilderness, and did build barges, in which they did cross many waters, being directed continually by the hand of the Lord.
And the Lord would not suffer that they should stop beyond the sea in the wilderness…”(Ether 22:6-7)
Notice that they travelled in the wilderness before they built barges (a vessel that is rowed or oared rather than sailed) to cross many waters. The Tigris-Euphrates Valley was not the wilderness to them. It was populated at that time. If they were going to row into the Arabian sea from Babel they would have built barges right where they lived in the Tigris- Euphrates Valley and gone southward. Notice also that they did not stop “beyond the sea in the wilderness.” A sea surrounded by wilderness is and inland sea. The only inland sea that meets the criteria is the Caspian Sea. An interesting thing about the Caspian Sea is that the largest and longest and slowest river in all of Europe, the Volga, flows into its northern end.
Ralph, I agree with you that the Jaredites did not go overland through Asia, because in these barges they crossed “many waters.” But I disagree with you that they went south into the Arabian Sea when the scriptures are clear that they went northward.
There are several other things in the text of the Book of Mormon about the journey of the Jaredites that do not fit your model, and if the Jaredites did not go to Malay then neither did the Nephites.
Theodore
It is true they went north. I’m not arguing whether it makes sense or not. They went north to Nimrod which is near the source of the Tigress and the Euphrates Rivers. Then they wandered in the wilderness. It doesn’t say anything at all about how far they wandered in the wilderness. Then they built barges. And on the barges they went down one of those two rivers. They crossed many waters in that river. It doesn’t necessarily mean many oceans or lakes, it can mean many waters in the river… until they came to a sea which divideth the land. That is the Persian Gulf. There they built new barges and on the barges they went in the sea to the Promised Land. As I’ve emphasized many times, being on a homemade barge with no compass, no navigational skills, no way to take enough feed or water for themselves (and families), let alone their animals… there was no way they all could have crossed the Pacific. And having 8 barges, if they hadn’t stopped every night, they would have become separated and lost. So they drifted, and they were lucky they could even float that far, to the Malay Peninsula. Part of the time they were submerged so they couldn’t possibly have had any sails. So they had to rely on ocean currents. Fortunately there are ocean currents that go from south Arabia to the Malay Peninsula. There are none that go through the East Indies. So it is very unlikely they would have made it all the way to America.
Ralph,
You are claiming that the Jaredites went from Babel, on the Euphrates River and about 50 miles from the Tigris River, and travelled northward about 300 to 400 miles on foot. There they build barges and sailed back down one of these same rivers, past where they started out, and on for another 300 miles to the Persian Gulf. It doesn’t only not make any sense it is totally unreasonable. This is the opening foundation of the reasoning of your theory.
The Lord told them to go Northward to the Valley of Nimrod and there He would meet them and guide them where they should go from there (Ether 1:42). You are also making the Lord to appear to be totally unreasonable.
“4 And it came to pass that when they had come down into the valley of Nimrod the Lord came down and talked with the brother of Jared; and he was in a cloud, and the brother of Jared saw him not.
5 And it came to pass that the Lord commanded them that they should go forth into the wilderness, yea, into that quarter where there never had man been. And it came to pass that the Lord did go before them, and did talk with them as he stood in a cloud, and gave directions whither they should travel.” (Ether 2:4-5)
Ralph, please notice that after they came to the Valley of Nimrod, that the Lord commanded them that they should go into a wilderness “where never man had been.” This wasn’t the final destination. It was land they had to go through to get there. And they hadn’t built the barges yet so they couldn’t have floated back down the Tigris or the Euphrates.
“ 6 And it came to pass that they did travel in the wilderness, and did build barges, in which they did cross many waters, being directed continually by the hand of the Lord.
7 And the Lord would not suffer that they should stop beyond the sea in the wilderness, but he would that they should come forth even unto the land of promise, which was choice above all other lands, which the Lord God had preserved for a righteous people.” (Ether 2:6-7)
The land that was “choice above all other lands” was beyond the wilderness where man had never been. It was so far beyond that after they crossed “many waters” in those barges they had to build a new set of barges to cross the “RAGING DEEP.” (Ether 3:3) They also had travelled “MANY YEARS in the wilderness” before they built these new barges (Ether 3:3).
You are claiming that these many years in the wilderness were spent going 300 miles north where they built barges to float 600 miles south (many waters?), past the point where they had started, where they built new barges on the shore of the Persian Gulf, which is as placid as a lake. Also, none of this area was “wilderness” because the Valley of Nimrod had obviously been settled or it wouldn’t have been named “The Valley of Nimrod.”
Ralph, I agree with you that the Jaredites did not cross the Pacific. The went northward from Babel, built barges on the shore of an inland sea, which can only be the Caspian. To continue crossing “many waters” in these barges they had to row up the Volga, and with a 15 mile portage, down the Western Dvina River to the Baltic Sea, and around to the Western coast of Norway. From there, after many years in the wilderness, they built the new barges that would take them across the “raging deep” that “divides the land,” which is an apt description of the North Atlantic, to the eastern shores of North America. This is the only route that fits the description in the text of the Book of Mormon.
I’m sorry, Ralph, but your reasoning is out of sync with the text of the Book of Mormon.
Theodore, you’re being an ideologue.
You write:
“You are claiming that the Jaredites went from Babel, on the Euphrates River and about 50 miles from the Tigris River, and travelled northward about 300 to 400 miles on foot. There they build barges and sailed back down one of these same rivers, past where they started out, and on for another 300 miles to the Persian Gulf. It doesn’t only not make any sense it is totally unreasonable. This is the opening foundation of the reasoning of your theory.”
Unless, of course the way south was not a wise direction for them for other reasons. Political turmoil perhaps. Or maybe the way southward didn’t have what they needed. Or maybe the entire area south was basically one big impassable marshland.
Fact is, the story is really short on facts. You don’t know, and neither do I.
To tell the truth, I tend to agree with you that this idea is probably unlikely. But I don’t really care for how cock-sure you are about all this – and how closed to the possibilities here you seem to be.
Could it be that you’re just a tad too emotionally attached to this issue to be seeing it clearly?
Theories are fine. As long as we acknowledge that this is all that they are. You seem to be going further than that however.
Hello Seth,
You write:
“Theodore, you’re being an ideologue.”
One of the first things they teach in law school is if you cannot refute the evidence attack the witness.
“Unless, of course the way south was not a wise direction for them for other reasons. Political turmoil perhaps. Or maybe the way southward didn’t have what they needed. Or maybe the entire area south was basically one big impassable marshland.”
But this was the same southward that they would had to have gone to match Ralph’s hypothesis. They had to barge down these same major rivers (that went through the salt marshes).
“Fact is, the story is really short on facts. You don’t know, and neither do I.”
You are correct that neither of us know for certain. But there are certain facts given in the text which if followed lead to the most probable conclusions. If those facts are ignored or discarded to support a predetermined hypothesis that hypothesis is probably in error.
Theodore, perhaps you should stick to law, not BoM geography theories….
Mormon Heretic,
If you have any thoughtful geographical analysis of the text of the Book of Mormon on this issue I would be pleased to consider it. Your trying to focus on me personally, rather than on the evidence, indicates that you do not. (BTW I never went to law school, I just read about it.
)
I went to law school.
And I can tell you – getting a law degree doesn’t make you an expert on law either.
Theodore, my comment was meant tongue in cheek. I did not intend to ruffle feathers, which is why I added the smilie. I have devoted about a dozen posts to multiple geography theories on my blog, (I note Malay and South America links here are both articles I wrote). I hadn’t heard of the sunken Caribbean one, so that sounds interesting. I recently discovered a Baja California theory that is in the early stages of development, and I look forward to the information the authors are developing.
I guess you won’t find me arguing about where any event happened–Frankly I have no idea. If somebody wants to claim it happened in NY, or New Orleans or Guatemala, or Malay or Peru and it works with their theory, you’re not really going to get an argument from me. I’m more interested in the archaeological aspects: how does the theory explain elephants, chariots, DNA, silk? To me, those are more objective measures than “well, it says they went north, not south–that doesn’t make sense.” I’d rather let Ralph answer that–I don’t have a strong opinion one way or the other, so I tend to agree with Seth’s position that we probably shouldn’t get too literal when reading these things.
Mormon Heretic, you said:
“I’m more interested in the archaeological aspects…To me, those are more objective measures…
…we probably shouldn’t get too literal when reading these [Book of Mormon text] things.”
Our approaches to the this subject are diametrically opposed, and I disagree with both of your above statements. Jon L. Gibson, preeminent archaeologist at the Poverty Point archaeological site wrote the following words at the end of his booklet, “Poverty Point: A Terminal Archaic Culture of the Lower Mississippi Valley:”
“The preceding view of Poverty Point is a patchwork of facts, hypotheses, guesses, and speculations. Many equally sound interpretations can be drawn from the same data. This is the nature of archaeology. Trying to describe an extinct culture, especially its social and political organizations and its religion by means of artifacts is not an exact science, but is a rewarding and meaningful one.”
Archaeology is not at all an objective science. It is a more of a subjective art.
On the other hand, as the Prophet Joseph Smith stated, “The Book Of Mormon was the most correct book on earth”(HC 4:461). This correctness, or exactness, would also apply to the geographical descriptions contained within the pages of the book. Mormon wrote the book about three hundred and fifty years after the geological changes that occurred in America at the time of Christ’s crucifixion. He also wrote the book for our day, which he had seen. We may therefore be confident that his described geographical locations have not changed significantly from the time that he wrote it.
Discounting the text of the Book of Mormon when trying to locate the lands of the Book of Mormon is absurd. The prophets that wrote the book knew where they lived and were very careful and detailed in describing their locations. All we need to do is carefully read and follow their descriptions.
Theodore, I think you read my words too literally.“Discounting the text of the Book of Mormon when trying to locate the lands of the Book of Mormon is absurd.” I agree whole-heartedly, and I’m not discounting anything.
Anybody can draw a map. The first one to start showing evidence will be the one I jump on board. If that’s you, you won’t find a better advocate than me, so I ask you to use your powers of persuasion as to why your map is better. But simply drawing a map is not enough–you also need to explain certain things. I don’t want you calling an goat a sheep like Sorenson does, or a wooden club with obsidian spikes a sword (The BoM says the swords rusted, which and neither obsidian or wood rust.) Yes, I think some liberties can be taken with directions, but my lack of literalism has limits. Sorenson takes too many liberties with directions.
Find me any scientist who believes an elephant who lived in the Jaredite period for your theory, and I’ll jump on board. I’ve seen someone try to trash the theory of evolution because he says essentially, “well, this 20,000 year old elephant existed, therefore there could have been one in 2000 BC, and will help my BoM theory” This is absurd, and I hope you don’t resort to such tactics, or I’ll write you off in a heartbeat.
I’d like to hear how you rationalize your narrow neck of land–at first glance it is hard to recognize, and pardon me–I haven’t read your theory at all, so please be kind. I hope you haven’t taken too many liberties like Sorenson. (Let’s face it–all geographers have to take some liberties–though few authors will admit that.)
“The prophets that wrote the book knew where they lived and were very careful and detailed in describing their locations.”
They also knew what horses, culoms, cummins, and sheep were, as well as senines, gold, silver, wheat, timber, cement were. I’m not discounting anything here, so please don’t try to insinuate that I am. Book of Mormon geographers all try to make locations match their theory, and frankly they all have points of disagreement, which I do not find troublesome, even though you do.
I’ve already written up reviews of a few theories, including a Great Lakes Theory, Peruvian theory, and Malay theory. I have a Baja theory on the back burner. I try to be very kind even when attacked, though I have more difficulty being kind in adverse situations. I’d be happy to do a positive review of your theory some time, and attract readers to your website. If this appeals to you, then I ask you to offer a friendly tone. Some authors can be real condescending and that is a real turn-off.
I’m not an advocate of Sorenson, but I think he makes a good point when he says, “Is Los Angeles west, or south of Salt Lake City?” Most people would say west, but the reality is it is southwest. In the news, they refer to Tooele as west of SLC. I refer to Tooele as in the west too, yet I live in Utah County, and it is pretty much north-northwest of me.
Now, on the other hand, I think Sorenson gets too loose with his directions, so I disagree with his overall model. I seek for moderation in all things, which is why I try not to be too literal about locations. The first person who can find the equivalent of a “Welcome to Zarahemla” sign in the location they think it should be, will have me as a big advocate of their theory.
Mormon Heretic,
I also do not subscribe to theories that try to skew directional descriptions in the Book of Mormon. Mormon and Moroni both saw our day and were writing to us, and the text was translated into the American English of Joseph’s day. They were not trying to deceive or confuse us.
However, I think Larry Poulsen’s theory of directions in the Book of Mormon has merit. He explains that east was the direction of the rising sun between the solstices and west was the direction of setting sun between the solstices. Thus, east and west both had angles of 47 degrees leaving north and south with the wider angles of 133 degrees each. (See http://bomgeography.poulsenll.org/bomdirections.html ) Although I do disagree with Larry on his Mesoamerica setting.
As for Zarahemla, my investigation finds just such a welcome sign at the Poverty Point Archaeological Site in Louisiana. I describe it in the first 24 pages of my thesis if you are interested in looking at it. (see http://brandley.poulsenll.org/ )
I read page 24, and I’m not sure that qualifies as a “welcome to Zarahemla” sign, but I’m willing to take a look at your theory sometime here in the future. Could you email me at mormon heretic at gmail dot com? As I read the theory, I’d like to ask clarification questions if you don’t mind. (I have a long list of future posts, but I’ll try to work you in, though probably not for a couple of months.)
The Lord has often allowed man to interpret and come to their own conclusions of many things.
Personally… I stand back.. and look at the conclusions man kind has come up with.. and see what results come of it. Then.. I imagine another interpretation.. and the results that it might have produced.
So.. based on me doing that.. looking back into the 1830.. lets assume that the Lord tells Joseph.. “This is a BooK.. about an ancient people.. who lived in what you now call Thailand… and my dealings with them.”
Tell me.. What kind of interest do you think American people of that time period would have given it? Some would have automatically assumed that it had to do with or be similar to… religions of the east. I don’t think.. based on the way people are.. that they would have given it much interest.
That is still not saying that a remnant of that people did not still travel here.. and integrate with the peoples that lived here on this continent. So… in reality.. it is a story of the peoples of this continent. Just not sure which peoples.
So.. the Lord allowed the early Mormons to believe that it was of the American Indians.. and then later.. the people in Central America. It went well. Now after 179 years of not knowing exactly where the people originated from.. yet still believing the book… if the truth came out that it was from Malay… would it change your current belief in the Book or in the Church?
Not me!
And because the world today is much much smaller than it was in the early 1800′s.. For the book to have originated in Malay rather than Meso.. would now not be hard to swallow.
My vote is Malay.
Yes, the Lord allows everyone to believe what they want to believe, even if they ignore the testimonies of those who were there at the time.
How does the Malay theory deal with Moroni stating to Joseph Smith in Upstate New York that “there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent”? (see Joseph Smith History 1:34)
This account begins in Babel and then Jerusalem, and ends at Cumorah.
How does the Malay theory deal with the fact that it was Moroni who first told Joseph Smith that the hill in Palmyra New York, was anciently called Cumorah?
(see HC 1:184; Milton V. Backman, Jr., Eyewitness Accounts of the Restoration, p. 233; History of Joseph Smith by his Mother Lucy Mack Smith: The Unabridged Original Version, Compiled by R. Vernon Ingleton, Stratford Books, 2005, p. 159)
Theodore – If what you are saying is the absolute truth.. just look at the words you quoted and apply them.
You said: “there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent”?
What does the word “former” mean? As in they don’t live here anymore? If they don’t live here.. then how could the American Indians be considered a part of that? They still live here don’t they? They were still living here in 1830.. no?
So just what does “former inhabitants” mean?
I believe that a remnant of the people of the Book of Mormon are here and this history is about their ancestors.
Do you not think that the Lord had a knowledge of where in time Joseph would need to live.. what country.. the time period, the place.. before he was born? Could not Moroni be directed where to bury the plates and what to say to Joseph.. so Joseph would indeed find them?
Could not the hill in NY have anciently been called Cumorah.. as well as another place in this world be also called Cumorah? Could this not be part of the PLAN?
Do we think that all these humans that lived on this planet named the places the did with no inspiration from God to do so?
Imagine how the Lord names two places with the same name (Cumorah).. In one place.. such and such happens.. but he deposits the records in another place with the same name. It is man who makes the inference that it must be the same place… not God.
There is a PLAN.. and it is not left to chance.
Theodore, I get it, you like a North American model. Right.
Now – could you can the macho posturing about how everyone who doesn’t agree with you is somehow either blinded or lacking in faith? I’ve been blogging long enough to know hyperbole when I see it, and your posts frankly reek of it.
I don’t have any particular preference about geography models for the Book of Mormon. As far as I’m concerned, they’re all neat. And I think certain people could stand to tone down the holy war on this issue just a notch (even if they have a line of DVDs they have to sell).
We don’t have authoritative designation of the hill outside Joseph’s home as being Cumorah. The only reference to the hill as such comes from its usage in early Church history – probably from Oliver Cowdery or WW Phelps.
Neither does the Book of Mormon state that the gold plates were buried there. In fact, the one time the hill and the plates are mentioned, it is made explicit that they weren’t buried there at that time (Morm 6:6). Moroni did not bury the plates until nearly 36 years of wandering later.
Theodore, that’s plenty of time to transport a 60 pound parcel from Mesoamerica to upstate New York (even by foot), if that’s what people want to believe.
It’s also possible that Moroni simply wandered around the Great Lakes region for 36 years and then stopped by upstate New York to drop the plates, if that’s how you roll.
Seriously, I don’t care. But your rhetoric is waay over the top on this. You act like anyone who doesn’t share your pet theory is some variety of either idiot, or spiritually impaired.
I don’t appreciate it.
Seth,
Why is it that when I present some solid evidence with documentary references, instead of a scholarly examination and discussion of it you refer to the evidence as “rhetoric” and angrily attack me personally? I think that my “tone” is far more civil than yours and it is not my intention to offend anyone. I have no DVD or book to sell. I am only seeking for the truth and seeking to counter, with evidence, what I believe to be falsehood.
BTW Mormon 6:6 does not say that Moroni did not bury the pates in the Hill Cumorah, nor could it. Mormon, who wrote that verse, was dead before Moroni finished the book and buried the plates. It was Moroni who told Joseph Smith that the hill in which he buried the plates was called by the ancients Cumorah (see previous references).
Yeah, I figured you’d think I was talking about you with the DVD thing the moment I hit “send.”
I wasn’t, for the record. Probably should have left it off.
I also think you’re trying to make me claim too much with Morm 6:6. I worded it pretty carefully. See if I’m making the claims you say I’m making.
One thing though, wasn’t Lucy Mack Smith’s account taken down in 1845 – well after “Cumorah” had already become the common usage for the hill among the Mormon population?
Yes, that is true. Following Joseph’s meeting with Moroni one year before Joseph received the plates, Lucy recalls her son as saying, “It was the angel of the Lord. As I passed by the hill of Cumorah, where the plates are, the angel met me and said that I had not been engaged enough in the work of the Lord.” So, according to his mother, Joseph knew the ancient name of the hill one year before he received the plates. He could only have known that from Moroni. By itself this testimony could be subject to question. However, it is consistent with Oliver Cowdery’s testimony and David Whitmer’s testimony, so we have three witnesses that it was Moroni who told Joseph the hill in Palmyra was Cumorah. That Lucy recalled this conversation many years after the fact does not diminish its validity. It is common that one’s long term memory is clearer with age. I now recall things in great detail that I hadn’t thought about for years. My short term memory is another issue, of which I’d rather not discuss.
Or it could just be Lucy subconsciously putting the name “Cumorah” into the narrative, even though Joseph never actually said the word.
Happens to people all the time. I’ve seen my own dad do it when retelling stories from the past – he tends to add in additional context that he has since gained after the event in question.
So, I’m afraid I don’t see this as enough evidence to hang an entire geographic model from.
If it were Lucy’s testimony alone I might agree with you. However, Oliver Cowdery made the following statement in January of 1831, less than one year after the Book of Mormon, which he mostly wrote, was published.
“This Book, which contained these things, was hid in the earth by Moroni, in a hill called by him Cumorah, which hill is now in the state of New York, near the village of Palmyra, in Ontario County” (HC 1:184).
So it was clear to Oliver Cowdery that Moroni had told Joseph Smith that the hill in Palmyra was called Cumorah. The Book of Mormon does not say where Moroni buried the gold plates so the only way the early saints could have known the hill by that name was because Joseph Smith told them. The only way Joseph Smith could have known was if Moroni had told him. There is no evidence for the unfounded supposition that Joseph Smith misunderstood Mormon 6:6 to mean that Moroni also buried the Book of Mormon plates in Cumorah.
“…therefore I made this record out of the plates of Nephi, and hid up in the hill Cumorah all the records which had been entrusted to me by the hand of the Lord, save it were these few plates which I gave unto my son Moroni.” (Mormon 6:6)
A high-school seminary student could not misunderstand this simple statement and to suggest that the Prophet Joseph Smith, who translated the book, and Oliver Cowdery, who wrote it, somehow both misinterpreted this passage is an insult to both of their intelligences.
So it really boils down to whether Oliver was correct or not.
And the fact that there is no viable evidence nor reasonable alternative explanation as to why Joseph and Oliver and their associates referred to the hill in Palmyra as Cumorah, other than Moroni told them it was.
Sure there’s a viable alternative – Oliver simply made a mistake based on a misreading of Mormon 6:6.
As for Joseph – none of his correspondence so designates the hill. Stuff quoting him as calling it such seems to be largely after-the-fact writings from people who could easily be just taking the name of the hill for granted.
But Oliver didn’t say that he learned it from Mormon in the Book of Mormon. He said that the angel Moroni called the hill Cumorah. Oliver, Second Elder of the Church, who was with Joseph in the translation and whenever keys of the priesthood were transmitted from angels, certainly was in a position to know. A misreading of Mormon 6:6 is an unsupported assertion that someone made up out of whole cloth to support the Mesoamerica Theory. There is no evidence for it. If you can find any evidence to support this assertion please let me know.
As for Joseph Smith, his testimony of Cumorah is canonized in the Doctrine and Covenants.
D&C 128:20
“And again, what do we hear? Glad tidings from Cumorah! Moroni, an angel from heaven, declaring the fulfilment of the prophets–the book TO BE REVEALED.” (emphasis added)
This scripture reinforces the other evidence that Joseph Smith knew that Cumorah was the name of the hill before the Book of Mormon was translated.
You can’t use D&C 128:20 to support your theory.
It’s just talking about Cumorah – no matter where it’s located. So the scriptures here reinforce nothing.
I don’t have to find any counter-evidence because you haven’t presented any evidence that I find conclusive to begin with. I’ve already demonstrated why you’re “obvious” readings are not the only possible readings here. To this, you respond with a retreat to how “obvious” it is.
That’s not an argument. That’s begging the question.
It is not obvious” that Oliver was giving an eyewitness account of what an angel said. It is not obvious that the popular concept of Cumorah being an hill in New York came from anything other than a popular folk idea based on a misreading of Mormon 6:6 (which does not say the gold plates were ever buried in Cumorah to begin with). Joseph Smith never once mentions Cumorah, except in the imaginations of others years after the fact.
The quotes you’ve provided have been nice and all – but they are not a slam dunk at all. The meaning is not “obvious” – no matter how many times you assert it.
MrNirom
(In response to your post above on Oct 13 at 6:10 pm)
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. You are right, when Moroni told Joseph Smith that the book contained a record of the “former” inhabitants he was speaking correctly. The Book of Mormon is a record of the Nephites. They are the ones who kept the record and it was primarily about them. When Moroni spoke those words the Nephites hadn’t lived on this continent for about 1600 years. Those Nephites who dissented and joined with the Lamanites became Lamanites (see 2 Nephi 5:23; Alma 3:9; 17:19; 43:4). The Nephites were the former inhabitants of this continent. They inhabited this continent from about 600 BC to about 400 AD.
The probability is zero that Moroni would rename a hill Cumorah, that was not the hill where his father, his family, his friends and his entire civilization fought and died. This would be like Admiral Nimitz renaming Cape Cod to Pearl Harbor. Moroni would never have let Joseph Smith misunderstand the location of the hill Cumorah. This is where lay the bones of his father, his family and his people. To Moroni, Cumorah was sacred, hallowed ground.
Theodore,
I did not say that Moroni renamed it.. I said that the ancient inhabitants named it that.. and it was Moroni who told Joseph he buried the plates in the place that the ancient inhabitants called Cumorah.
There were more than just Nephites who inhabited this continent. I suppose that according to the Book of Mormon’s definition of what a Nephite is.. anyone who is not a Nephite… is a Lamanite. But that of course in no way reflects the genealogy of the peoples that lived here.
Did not the Nephites name some of their cities after the cities in Israel? Do we today not name cities after other cities? Look up the city called Paris. There are more in the USA than in France. So it is not far fetched that people move.. and name new cities for old ones they left behind. Just look at Utah if you don’t believe me.
Let me ask you this. Lets just say for example sake.. that Malay was indeed the BoM lands. So.. Joseph had received a revelation… or was told by Moroni that the Book of Mormon is a history about the people who lived in an area that we now call Thailand and many centuries later.. a remnant of that civilization migrated to this continent. How receptive do you think people of 1830 America would have responded to receive new scripture about a place and time that has nothing to do with this country they live in?
Personally.. I believe that if it had been disclosed.. the people of that time would not have been interested at all as they would have made assumptions that the Book of Mormon surely had something to do with religions of the east.. and not the west.
But in today’s world.. this big ole earth is much smaller now. And to find out that the BoM lands were in Malay.. and not in Meso… would probably not upset too many people. In other words.. it would be more acceptable today.. than yesteryear.
I also had to go back and actually read what Moroni told Joseph… he said: “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.”
Everyone assumes that the source means Israel. What if our assumption is wrong?
The Book of Mormon clearly states where Lehi and Nephi started from. But that group moved and was taken to a “choice” land.. and that is what the Book of Mormon is actually about. Their lives in this promised land.
Through DNA testing have we not found out that the American Indian is of Asian descent? If the American Indian is a remnant of that people in the Book of Mormon.. would not the fact that they come from Malay fit the puzzle?
I guess that it is very hard to switch ones idea of what they thought was truth. Non members of the church are asked everyday to evaluate their belief system that they have had… listen to our understanding of the Gospel presented by the missionaries.. and come join our church. We ask them for an open mind.
I look at the Meso vs Malay that Brother Olsen offers and I have to question.. Why is everyone so bent on making the BoM lands Meso?
Look at what he says again about the problems with Meso.. that is cured with Malay:
Directions, e.g. the totally wrong orientation of Tehuantepec. E-W vs N-S
No Middle East script or hieroglyphics or writing material (e.g. clay tablets).
No reasonable similarity to Middle East languages.
Serious chronology mismatches, e.g., no advanced culture in 3,000 B.C. (Jaredite).
Tehuantopec is far too wide to cross in 1.5 days and is not long enough.
None of the Book of Mormon animals were there during BofM times.
Important Mesoamerican animals, including Bison, Jaguars, Turkeys and Quetzal birds are not mentioned in the B of M.
There were no useful wheels or carts or chariots or carriages or beasts of burden to pull them.
Virtually no Middle East grains, fruits, vegetables, spices, or other plants were grown there.
It has no major river (Sidon) which runs continuously north.
Virtually no Middle East grains, fruits, vegetables, spices, or other plants were grown there.
It has no narrow strip of mountain wilderness extending across the Land Southward.
It has neither East nor West Sea.
Mesoamerican Hypotheses provides no way to explain why Book of Mormon people exhibited Oriental thought and behavior.
No evidence of explosive-type volcanic eruptions to explain the cataclysmic events at the time of the Crucifixion.
Many massive stone temples (ziggurats) were constructed with huge expenditures of time and energy. Yet there is no mention of stone buildings in the Book of Mormon.
Mesoamerican Hypotheses provide no reasonable way to incorporate the Polynesians into the Book of Mormon family.
Most advanced Central American cultures originated after the Jaredites and Nephites had all been annihilated.
=====================================
For me.. there is more consideration that must be given to Malay. We have to be seekers of truth.. where ever it might take us. Not our will be done.. but his.
I disagree Theodore.
You simply cannot insert yourself into the mind of a Nephite who died over 1000 years ago and talk about “zero probability.”
You don’t know what makes this guy tick. For that matter, I don’t think you or I really know what Lucy Mack, Joseph, Oliver, or WW Phelps were thinking either.
This is speculative. The end.
The idea that there are two hill Cumorah’s is highly speculative as there is no evidence in support of it.
I’m not advocating two Cumorahs
But I agree with you that all the theories hatched on this subject – yours included – are highly speculative.
I think that the “Two Cumorah” theory is the Achilles’ Heel of both the Malay theory and the Mesoamerica theory.
The more evidence there is for a theory the less speculation there is.
The mesoamerican model does not require “two Cumorahs.”
MrNirom,
I don’t think that either the Latter-Day Saints of the Nineteenth Century, the Twentieth Century, or those of the Twenty-first Century would have cared whether the events of the Book of Mormon took place in Malay, or Japan, or New Zealand, or Siberia. I certainly don’t. As a matter of fact we are waiting for a companion volume from the Lost Ten Tribes and are quite interested to find out where in the world it may come from (2 Nephi 29:13).
However, what we are concerned about is ignoring and/or twisting the words of the prophets, both ancient and modern, who have made it very clear that the events recorded in the Book of Mormon did occur in America. This is a discredit to the prophets.
Theodore,
I can understand why you would not think that. You are not of that time period. And if you read enough about Joseph Smith.. and just look at the Book of Mormon itself.. you would begin to see that the people were NOT ready for all the truth.
We only got 1/3 of the Book of Mormon. Would you say that we could have handled the other 2/3? Someone would have to disagree with that because the Lord didn’t give it to us.
And still to this day… 179 years later the Lord has not seen fit to give it to us.. we must not be ready for it.
Joseph received many revelations about many things he did not share with the Saints.
It is recorded in Herber Kimball’s Journal that the Prophet Smith one said: “Would to God Brethren I could tell you who I am… Would to God I could tell you what I know. But you would call it blasphemy and seek to take my life.”
Think about that. What do you think the Prophet could tell them that they would consider it to be blasphemy?
Prov. 25: 2
2 It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.
Seth,
You will have to explain to me why you think the Mesoamerica theory does not require two Cumorahs. The whole concept of the Mesoamerica theory is that the geography of the events of the Book of Mormon were limited to a small area of Mesoamerica.
Mesoamerican theory:
One Cumorah – in Mesoamerica
Moroni simply traveled to upstate New York to bury the plates (given 36 years and God’s guidance, this is hardly far-fetched)
Modern LDS simply associated the hill in New York with Cumorah as an act of local story-telling, and the name stuck.
There you are – one Cumorah.
MrNirom,
You need to study up a bit more on the geographic theories. At least several of your objections to the Meso theory have been already addressed.
You might want to have a look at FAIR’s resources on this score:
http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon_geography
That should be a good place to start for you. Check the table of contents for additional resources.
Seth,
They are not my objections.. but those stated by Brother Olsen.
In reading some of the sources you provided.. here is what I see them saying:
General authorities have indicated that no one knows the location of Zarahemla.
Leaders of the Church have long been clear that there is no “official” or “revealed” geography for the majority of Book of Mormon events, including those which take place in the New World.
It is not clear exactly when the New York hill from which Joseph Smith retrieved the gold plates became associated with the name “Cumorah.” Joseph Smith never used the name in his own writings when referring to the plates’ resting place. The only use of it from his pen seems to be D&C 128:20, which uses the phrase “Glad tidings from Cumorah!”
I have not found any new answers to these questions. You seem to have easily dismissed them all with the flip of your wrist and a comment “At least several of your objections to the Meso theory have been already addressed.” Perhaps you would enlighten me as to which “several” you are talking about? You don’t have to give me a detailed explanation of how they have been answered… just which ones were.. and maybe who it was that answered them. That would point me the right direction.
Thanks.
Also.. I noticed that FAIR has not done any looking into the differences between Malay and Meso at all.
In doing a search on Malay on the FAIR website it gives one reference:
Book of Mormon geography/All models table – FAIRMormon
Olsen 2004, 2004, Non-Western Hemisphere, Malay Peninsula, Malaysia, Malaysia, Other, Kelantan, Malaysia, LDS, External, edit …
en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon_geography/All_models_table
Not much there and certainly no opinion.
I even spoke with Michael Ash in an e-mail about the Malay theory and his answer to me was:
I don’t know if anyone from FAIR has addressed the Malay theory yet. I do remember reading a Sunstone article on this a while back.
Personally, I susbscribe to the Meso theory as the best fit. I’d have to revist the Malay theory to give my reasons for a rejection of this particular model.
Mike
So.. I am waiting.
I wasn’t claiming the Malay theory had been addressed at all.
I was posting the link in response to your assertions about the problems with the Mesoamerican theory.
For example, FAIR has put up stuff explaining why livestock is not a problem for a Mesoamerican model.
Same thing with your claim of no grains being found. Likewise, the Mayan language actually is written in heiroglyphs and there are very real possibilities of semitic root contributions.
A lot of the stuff you were talking about is addressed by FAIR’s resources. Not all in the direct article I linked to, but there were quite a few additional links from that point. Did you look at those?
I have spoken to Ralph Olsen, and he has asked several people at BYU to review his theory. Nobody has, and it is a real source of frustration to him.
By the way, there is a guy named George Potter who has done some excellent work in Yemen. He believes he has found the location of Nephi’s harbor. It is an ancient shipbuilding harbor, which dates to the time of Nephi. I really need to do a post on it sometime, because I find his research fascinating.
Anyway, Potter has recently switched his focus to Peru. He believes Nephi landed there, and Book of Mormon lands are located there. I just did a brief post on his 10 reasons for Peru.
Hey Everyone,
I’m not sure how I overlooked this in the past, but one big thing that makes people ignore the Malay theory is right from the introduction of the Book of Mormon.
It reads:
…”It is a record of God’s dealings with the ancient inhabitants of the Americas …”
The fact that the Church and it’s leaders have written that show the leadership of the church supports some type of theory on the American continent.
ama49:
You are right.. and even the Malay theory does not state that those from the Book of Mormon did not travel to the America’s at some point in time. To say people did not leave Malay and travel to South, Central or North America is very possible. If the American Indians have Asian DNA.. and they are a remnant of the Malay people.. then the statement is very accurate.
Again.. it is spending the time to check it all out. I wonder if they did any research on the old buildings in Malay to see if they used the same cubit as measurement for their buildings. But then.. the Book of Mormon never mentions stone buildings does it? I just did a seach of the scriptures in the book of Mormon looking for the word stone.. or brick… and there is no mention of buildings made of this material. Yet Meso is full of Stone built buildings.
Hey.. we just need more people who are willing to do some deep research into it instead of just settling on what they have so far.. which isn’t that much. I mean.. even the names of cities in Malay are so much better and closer to the Book of Mormon that is Meso.
Mormon Heretic,
The other day when i read your little post on the Peru theory, I ordered the video by Potter. He presents 20 points in the video why it is plausible for the Book of Mormon to have been in the general region of Peru/Chile.
Some of his evidences include some points that shoot down the Meso theory the MrNirom has already suggested.
I’ll have to admit, it is pretty persuasive and is worth checking out.
AMA,
It sounds like Mr Nirom has read Olsen’s theory–he states Olsen’s position pretty well. Olsen believes that his theory can integrate with any of the American theories: Great Lakes, Meso, Baja, Peru…. I also want to add that the introduction to the BoM was added by Bruce R McConkie I believe. The church as already changed it from “principal” to “among”, so I don’t know how reliable Bruce’s introduction should be since it didn’t come from Joseph Smith. But your point is well taken, and I have told Ralph that is going to be a big barrier for most people to accept his theory.
I do like Potter’s work. I purchased some of his videos about Lehi in Arabia, and I must say that the video production is a bit amateurish with bad sound quality. I’m hoping this new video is better–you’ll have to let me know what you think. I’ve purchased quite a few books and videos on many subjects, and find I need to conserve a little money. But if you like it, let me know. I’ll look into buying it if it’s good.
MH,
The video isn’t the best quality, but for 6 bucks you get what you pay for. He basically plays some funky music on it and talks point by point about the Peru theory. It’s very amateurish at best, but worth 6 bucks.
Thanks AMA, I’ll have to check it out.
For an interesting read about the calamities at the time of Christ, and where they might have occured, forget about volcanoes and do a Google search for the story of Eliza Bryan and her story of the New Madrid earthquakes of 1811-1812, along the Mississippi River. When I first read this I felt that I was reading a different version of 3rd Nephi!!!
If you want to read about earthquates & winds & tsunamis and all sorts of east winds to be afraid of …scary weather & natural disasters… the Malay Peninsula is right in the middle of it. And it also was anciently.
Responses to critiques of the Malay Hypothesis:
The “More Promising Land of Promise” provides evidence, on page 10, that church authorities did not know the location of the Land of Promise. Their beliefs were based upon the notions of Joseph Smith that it occupied all of North and South America and that all American Indians are descendants of Lamanites. You will note that the ‘authorities’ have now decided that that notion of Joseph’s is wrong and it must have taken place in a smaller geographical area such as MesoAmerica. If his opinion was wrong on that, it could have been wrong on other things.
The Jaredites went north to the Nimrod area (to collect valuable plants and animals and to find trees and to learn how to build barges). Some traveling in the local wilderness would have been required. They then went down the many waters comprising the Tigris drainage system going southeast. There are several seas in the upper Tigris wilderness that they could have gone beyond. They floated down to the Persian Gulf (the great sea which divideth the lands) Eth 2:13. Here they built improved barges on which they floated in coupled gyres (refer to ‘maps’ that describe winds & currents) along the Asian coast. They were extremely fortunate to be able to go as far as the Malay Peninsula. Much later, small groups hived off to go into the Pacific Quarter (the only quarter left on earth where man had never been!). A few finally reached the Americas (the most choice lands). Marshland near the mouth of the Tigris River was probably impassable on foot.
Mormon 6:6 clearly indicates that Mormon hid many gold plates in the Hill Cumorah; a few more were turned over to his son, Moroni. The final battles, involving hundreds of thousands of combatants were raging at that time. In order to save his life AND the plates, surely Moroni would have had to flee with them. Somehow they were taken to a hill near Palmyra, NY and buried there. There is good evidence that people from Southeast Asia went to Madascar 400 AD (the time of the final battles). A group of people took plants, animals, beliefs, and artifacts which science has determined to have come from the Malay area, at that time. The existence of a city there named Moroni in the off-shore Comoros (Cumorah?) Islands provides good evidence that they were Nephites! Some could have sailed from there with the plates to the New York area and left them in a hill near Palmyra. Joseph told us that Moroni said that the plates ARE IN THE HILL. To my knowledge, he was never told it was the Hill Cumorah. And neither evidence of countless weapons, arrowheads, nor of Mormon’s other gold plates have been found in the Hill Cumorah area of New York. And, even if it was named Cumorah, in accord with the Malay Hypothesis, it could have been named after the hill on the Malay Peninsula (now called Hill Maw!). If they went to Madagascar and named the islands Comoros, there is a good chance they would also name a hill in NY Cumorah.
The gold plates provide an account of former inhabitants of this continent AND THE SOURCE FROM WHENCE THEY SPRANG. They tell virtually nothing about the Middle East! They tell a great deal about a source which is either the Malay Peninsula or a source very similar to it! And from there many hived off and sailed to the Pacific Quarter (the quarter where man had never been (Eth 2:5). Traditionally we Mormons thought Polynesians originated in America and sailed west into the Pacific Ocean. They didn’t. They sailed east from Southeast Asia! And there they were kept from the knowledge of other nations for hundreds of years. In accord with DNA evidence, only a few of these Middle Easterners ever reached America. And there is good evidence that some of them landed at locations other than MesoAmerica. There were many Lands of Promise. Not Just One!
Stubbs has recently reported the FIRST good evidence of a Middle East connection to ancient America. The Uto-Aztecan language has many similarities to Hebrew! But the Aztecs came to America from a Pacific Isle! And Long after Book of Mormon times! (1100 AD) and landed in the northwest Mexico area! (not in MesoAmerica!). All in good accord with the Malay Hypothesis.
Many thanks to those who have been willing to consider the Malay Hypothesis with open minds. I now have 220 arguments favoring the Malay Hypothesis over the popular MesoAmerican Hypothesis. . . And I haven’t stopped searching.
R.A. Olsen
The Pacific fault line runs right next to the Malay Peninsula. they have had Enormous volcanic explosions, even in historical times. Earthquakes, tsunamis, destructive east winds are quite common along that fault line. The comparable events in Central America are much less common and far less destructive. At the time of Christ a Mexican author in Central America wrote of the destruction caused by an earthquake and it was so mild that no people were killed.
At the time of Christ there was apparently a huge volcanic explosion in Southeast Asia. It was so destructive that it caused darkening even as far away as Palestine and some tremblilng of the earth, even in Central America… but the main explosion was in Southeast Asia.
In the scriptures it says that Book of Mormon people were to go to an “uninhabited quarter.” And they were to be kept from the knowledge of other nations. We Mormons have been told to believe for many decades that America was uninhabited when the Jaredites first came and they and the Nephites were to be kept from the knowledge of other nations.
Scientific evidence has indicated that America was settled thousands of years (at least 20 to 30,000) before Book of Mormon times. Now that anthropological evidence clearly indicates that the Americas were settled way prior to Book of Mormon times, and few, if any, of the Native Americans have DNA which matches the DNA of the Middle East, Now we are expected to believe that they intermarried with the numerous inhabitants so their DNA has become virually nonexistant.
Interesting that there has been almost a complete reversal in our beliefs…. but this doesn’t seem to be upsetting to many of our experts. The Malay Hypothesis is consistent with the scriptures. It proposes that the Book of Mormon people did go to an “uninhabited quarter of the Pacific.” Then, as Polynesians, they were kept from the knowledge of all others for hundreds and hundreds of years. Only a few small groups of the Polynesians came on to America so their DNA was diluted by many thousands of Native American people.
The Malay Hypothessis is consistent both with scientific evidence and Book of Mormon accounts.
I think you guy can get some idea from link here
http://www.endera.info/
Hope this can assist you regarding B0fM. Thanks
I’m Indonesia, and my name is soni, i have read about Prom prof santos website Profesor Santos http://atlan.org/atau m
andhttp://atlan.org/articles/checklist/#checklis…
Indonesia is the atlantis and atlantis is the origin aryan place is that right?
guys are you talking about Melayu ( mala) is the aryan people (shame mode on) ,we build the bigest building in 800 AD ,Borobudur one of the seven magnificent of the world.Indonesia is now is the world no 1 , Islam country , we already have the bigest empire Shrivijaya ( Hindu) .
but i’m tann, but not proud ,
we fell we are the same with you that was the Human race , why you guys so crazy about aryan peoples ???
FB : indiglo@email.com
Having just read a book titled “Lehi Never Saw Mesoamerica” I found at http://www.nephicode.com, I vote for the OTHER category above. This book will astound all Book of Mormon geography enthusiasts. It is different, well written, long, and with more footnotes and references than I have ever seen. More importantly, it is the only book on the subject that is not merely someone’s belief or opinion, but every point made is reference directly to the Book of Mormon text and explains things no other author or theory has so far stated to such a degree. I don’t usually recommend anything, but if you are interested in the subject, I highly recommend this read. There are also three other books in this series, and I am now reading the second one: “Who Really Settled Mesoamerica,” and find it as interesting and detailed as the first.
Zion, August 14, 2010
Book of Mormon Geography
By
Miguel Angel Tinoco Rodriguez
Occam’s Razor theorem as understood by the logic of the scholars or the scientific community suggests to the mid that where all things are weighed equally, in order to differentiate truth from error or deviation, one must not go beyond the mark or to explain redundantly and without necessity the truth of any given thing. And also that when we are confronted with diverse or pluralistic opinions, the simplest explanation tends to be the right one.
Occam’s razor (or Ockham’s razor) is the principle that “entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity” (entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem). The popular interpretation of this principle is that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. However, this is often confused, as the ‘simple’ “is really referring to the theory with the fewest new assumptions.”
As far as pinpointing with exactitude the geographical locations of the book of Mormon, the prophets have time and aging told us the mind of God concerning it; whoever, scientist and scholars time and again go beyond the mark to make manifest their deep ignorance.
Therefore, I do not believe any of these purported and proposed theories concerning the geography of the book of Mormon as explained, for they are only that, theories that do not conform to written facts. These theorems are all too limited in scope and too broad in ambiguity which only lead to multiplicity uncertainties or UGATH darkness in the minds of people.
In a little over five hundred year we have filled and inhabited nearly the whole continent of America. More than twice our cultural life span the Jaredites, the Nephites and the Laminates nations inhabited and dominated these lands. Here they worked and walked therein, therefore, they knew at least as much if not more than what we now know about these territories. People these days are trying to make them look ignorant as if they knew not where precise cardinal points of the world were.
I understand about the ignorance or scriptural analphabetism of the peoples of the world, but why is it too hard for a great many of the people of this Church of Jesus Christ and their cat minded scholars to take the Lord’s words as given by his mouth the prophets? It is not written in the scriptures that the Lord delight in simplicity and plainness? And is it not written also that the weak things of the world will come forth to confound and to dethrone the mighty and strong ones? That the weak and unlearned would overpower the wise and leaned?
With an eye single to the Glory of God, I will tell you what you have not previously considered about the book or Mormon words. A good heart and a willing mind of a fourteen year old Aaronic priesthood teacher can decipher this locations and geography of the Book of Mormon better than the leading scientists and scholars and their cat minded followers amongst us. For instance, if the prophets of today have told us that Lehi and his party when they were brought here by the hand of Lord, that they originally landed in the paced called Chile, so it is. Take it or leave it. Who are we to contend against the wisdom of God? Even the foolishness of the Lord is wiser and his weak things stronger than men
But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
(New Testament | 1 Corinthians 1:23 – 25)
The English language must be the most direct language of earth to communicate a thought or idea, but it is also the most phonetically imperfect and misleading language of them all. But if you must know, for starters if reformed or confounded languages, the word CHILE transliterated or correctly arranged reads LECHI; or LECHEE as with a strong Latin or Hebrew pronunciation. One just has to put the syllables in the right location until it sounds right. Now, Chile is a very long and narrow country from south to North like a piece of cheese. Lehi did not have to Land in the midst or southernmost par of it. Even nowadays, a bordering location between Chile and Peru is a good enough locality as a landing port for Lehi and his party to substantiate the truth as spoken by the prophets of Today. And it also serves well as a landing place for a big ark. And that place today, if I were to land in it as Lehi did, I or my people would call it the place of the Arc. And today in that very spot, there is a place so called, even ARICA or the place of landing of the Ark or Arca. Go ahead, Google or map it and as it was yesterday, it is today and it will still be there tomorrow and forever.
Now the Lord may confound our languages due to our iniquity to keep us dumb, blind and mute, but he is not a deceiver. If the Old world geographies have kept their old names during all these millennia despite of language barriers, so does the new world places. The only difference is that we ARE SO DULL OF HEARING AND BLIND THAT WE DO NOT RECOGINZE THE WRITTEN WORD OR THE SPOKEN LANGUAGE.
If we truly read the scriptures as intended; and we try to remember the names of peoples and places therein regardless of how old and boring they are, perhaps we can learn something new. What use there would be for temples without names? And also, if we learn some basic Egyptian and Hebrew terminology; or at the very least; if we attempt to read backwards even English or Latin or Spanish as in Hebrew; plus a adding a little Ladino or a little pre-Columbian pronunciation, anyone can Identify pretty much any place in the book of Mormon in today’s world. Some examples are these:
Please visualize the locality and meaning of the word TIMNA where Joshua domiciled himself when he divided the promise land among the tribes of Israel; or the nearby place called GOLAN, or the low lands as the port of ELAT or ELIAT. These are commonly known places in the Holy land and in the scriptures. If I were to move away from there to a distant and faraway land in order to remember my roots I would use the same names or terminology in my new locality perhaps with a little word or syllable reformation. Even if my last name is ELIAB I would surname one of my children BAILE or LEIBA or IBAEL, LEBAI or if my Hebrew roots are strong I would even use the Y instead of the I as in the name BAILEY. Or if my name anciently was PETER Bar Jonah, I would be called today PEDRO or PETER BARAHONA. Or If I were to be a descendant of the inglorious sons of the High Priest Eli. OPHNI, PHINEAS, ICHABED that lived during the times of Samuel the prophet. Or even the surname CAIPHAS the killer High priest that Lived in the times of Samuel the prophet and during the crucifixion of Christ, I would look at someone that is surnamed as of OPHNI like PINO, FINNO/ FOR PHINEAS, someone surnamed as ESPINA. PINAES or FINESS or ZENIFF/ For ICHABED BEDOICHA or BEDOYA, or even FAICAS instead of CAIFAS
Now the word MANTI of the hill named in the book of Mormon, this is no other than TIMNA or TIMNAT as in the Bible. Do you see where the reformation of language words lead? Now the word GOLAN is no other than LOGAN or OGLAND, the place where the giants lived. And ELAT, in the low lands is no other than the port of TELAH. In North America, even Logan Utah, is named after the Jerusalem place Golan by some Ephratas living nearby. Even the word you already know UTAH has a self evident meaning or interpretation. As you know it means TOP of the mountains. Or HAT as in HATU or the word UTAH backwards. This is so as to say or suggest to the mind the place the HAT OF THE GIANT HILLS; or the hills with a white or snowy hat. All interpretations lead to the top. To learn these things is fun and very constructive when the spirit of the Lord takes the lead over the carnal mind, ear, eyes, mouth and flesh.
Most of these lands in America were first discovered, conquered and colonized by JEWS or undisclosed Israelites. They were the agents of the gentile nations that were expelled or sent here from their captivity to work for them. And the Lord that inspired them to navigate also gave them aid. They were the most professional and literate of men in those; and also in our days. And they were the ones that named pretty much every city and or new settlement in America. The Lord our God brought them here and it was his duty and responsibility to also inspire them to name the places anew also for his own purpose. Some places even kept redundantly both their new and primitive names.
I, for instance was born in the city of TEGUCIGALPA in Honduras, Central America. Honduras is another name that signified both Bottomless pit and Homes of wisdom without limits. The closest match of the name of this city that I did find in the book of Mormon was JACOBUGAT or Jacob-Ugath, in their native language pronunciation it would sound like CHAICALP-UGET or JAICAB-UGAT. Both of these words have strong Hebrew pronunciation as in YAIKUB UGAT or Jacob the Great. Depending wheter Ugat is pronounced with an E or with and an A at the end, this is to signify the place of bread, bakery, and brick. Or as opposite to the word UTAH, UGATH is great deep or bottomless pit, the place Masonry, secret combinations or even where the great mount or the supplanter ascends. This is the place from where the peace was taken from the earth during the times of King Jacob the government supplanter.
Now as far as the Book of Mormon geography it is concerned, these people were no fools. They were exceptional mathematicians and more earth landed than many of or modern Pharisees, Scribes and Sadducees that are eager to learn and never get to a knowledge of the truth. Our scholars should stop partaking of the forbidden fruit or of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for in so doing they are digging deep into hells mouth by looking beyond the mark.
One with a little orientation and good will and a correct heart can discover by the spirit of truth great hidden wonders, marvels and mysteries. As in the ongoing theories pertaining to the Geography of the Book of Mormon, perhaps all the three, even the Gulf of Darien, the Tehuantepec Gulf and even the Honduran Gulf may qualify as a narrow strip of land as described in the Book of Mormon. But even a small child with simple understanding knows that it refers to the Gulf of Darien in Panama, near the Panama Canal. The Lord will not be so infamous as to try to deceive a kid in search for truth. The land of abundance or Bountiful is no other than Norwest Colombia, in Antioch, Medellin. This place from Colombia has a subtropical climate good for every needful plant and roots, fruits and exotic flowers in all their varieties for textile coloring and manufacture. It is even more suitable for life than Guatemalan’s eternal spring climate.
Now, the Sidon, Pison, Gion, Gibbon, Ondis, Dibos, Donsi, Nisbon, Dison, Dixon, Xodis, Ondix, Xibon, Shiblon, or eve Xideon river pr Valley’s name is to me as spiritual as Gazelem o code name river of water is not other than the Magdalena river in Colombia. It is hidden in plain sight, but people are quick to guess but slothful to search, so they do not find. The head of the waters of this river; or the Aqua-doors of this river is where the Riplakish or great Andes mountain do end. This is right above Quito in Ecuador. The names say it all, AQUADOOR. And in that place also is where there is a small south Anti-Parrah or barren wilderness or desert that serves a s a barrier. The Sidon River runs from South to North and it empties in the North Sea. At the North end or near its delta, there is also a small portion of the river that runs from East to West. And close by to the West of the same area is the MARACAIBO basin or the inland fallen sea, the place of arms. That area serves as or leads to the so called Sea West. And on the South side of the Sidon river, opposite to the side where the Hill Manti is, nearing at the head of this river there is also a curvature that runs from it is a East to West, yet the river still flows there from West to East. This is where the Nephites ambushed the Crossing Lamanites as per the words of the prophet Alma. There is also a smaller river adjacent to the West of the river Sidon that also has a small curvature from East to West, and its waters run from East to West then to go north and empty into the Sidon.
Now, when these precise longitudes and latitudes are precisely or assertively established as landmarks one can begin to pinpoint as the Lord will reveal it where the ancient Book of Mormon Settlements and cities where, are and will continue to be. But one must first learn to walk before endeavoring to run or rush in. Here is the patience of the Saints. I am a just a scribe instructed unto the Kingdom of Heaven who is sharing things new and old from the treasures of my Lord in his Holy Name.
Jesus saith unto them, Have ye understood all these things? They say unto him, Yea, Lord.
Then said he unto them, therefore every scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old.
(New Testament | Matthew 13:51 – 52)
Attentively yours
This is a servant in the hands of our beloved SOTER, even Jesus Cristos, for whose glory alone, I write, amen and amen.
Miguel Angel Tinoco Rodriguez