Glass & Steel in the Book of Mormon, why a problem?

[_Tobin]

Are you under the impression that anyone here (aside from ldsfaqs) doesn't understand Mormonism?

No, but I get the distinct impression that a lot of people on here argue out of both sides of their face.

[_Runtu]

The Book of Mormon emerges from the mound-builder mythology of the early 1800s. Earthen mounds had been discovered in parts of the United States, which seemed to originate with a sophisticated ancient civilization. White Americans did not believe that Native Americans were capable of such sophistication, so legends began to emerge of a white, advanced civilization that had existed anciently in the Americas, but eventually the savage Indians had destroyed them. Ethan Smith's "View of the Hebrews" and Spaulding's manuscript are different takes on this legend, Smith suggesting that the lost civilization was founded by Hebrews, and Spaulding's tale describing shipwrecked Romans.

In the Finger Lakes region of New York where Joseph Smith grew up are a number of glacial drumlins, which are elongated hills formed by glacial movements. The following image from the US Geological Survey shows drumlins in Wayne County, New York, which are oriented northwest to southeast. Note that Palmyra is located in Wayne County.



In Joseph Smith's time, these glacial drumlins were believed to have been burial and other "mounds" built by the ancient mound builders. Thus, Joseph Smith in 1841 published articles describing the mound builders (based on Josiah Priest's work) as supporting the Book of Mormon.

If anything, Joseph Smith taught a hemispheric model, as the Doctrine and Covenants repeatedly refers to western Indian territory as the lands of the Lamanites. But the idea that Cumorah was not in New York does not originate with Joseph, either through revelation or personal opinion. On the contrary, Doctrine and Covenants 128:20 associates Cumorah with the revelation of the Book of Mormon; the verse makes no sense if Cumorah is in Guatemala.

So, then, what are the reasons for shifting Cumorah to Central America?

Mesoamerican civilizations provide the large populations and advanced cities that the Book of Mormon describes. New York-area Native Americans do not fit the model, as they were still largely hunter-gatherer societies, although some "mound builder" societies did show more advanced development.

It would be easy to describe why Mesoamerica is not a good fit, as their technologies, culture, religion, and history are a very poor match for Nephites and Lamanites. See, for example, Mormon Mesoamerica for a discussion of the problems. Mound-builder myths are a much better fit for the Book of Mormon than are Mesoamerican theories (see Book of Mormon Evidence for more).

[_Themis]

Two words: peanut gallery. Snide asides don't make an argument; neither does trying to evaluate Mormonism in a vacuum make any sense. I'd recommend the following for you: get a hobby like making model boats. You'll probably get a lot better at that than you ever will at understanding Mormonism.

I am not sure what vacuum you are talking about here. My point was that you know little of the issues accept what you have read from Fair and Farms. You have obviously taken what they say as fact by repeating some of their arguments that are incorrect. Some of us know this because we have taken the time try and confirm what some of them say.

You might also try more then asserting we don't understand Mormonism.

[_Runtu]

I am not sure what vacuum you are talking about here. My point was that you know little of the issues accept what you have read from Fair and Farms. You have obviously taken what they say as fact by repeating some of their arguments that are incorrect. Some of us know this because we have taken the time try and confirm what some of them say.

You might also try more then asserting we don't understand Mormonism.

In my experience, more often than not when you track down sources for FARMS/FAIR claims, they don't pan out. It's frustrating, but it reminds me of how important it is not to take everything at face value.

[_bcuzbcuz]

No, but I get the distinct impression that a lot of people on here argue out of both sides of their face.

Nope can't do it. Only got one good side to argue with. Was that a slight about my looks?

[_Runtu]

Nope can't do it. Only got one good side to argue with. Was that a slight about my looks?

I'm pretty level-headed: I drool out of both sides of my mouth.

[_beefcalf]

Tobin,

You may have come to the conclusion that you stand at odds with the various ex-mormons on this board. Take heart, however, because there is much that both you and we agree on. Perhaps I can point out how similar our positions are:

You state, when presented with quotes from past prophets and apostles, that these men didn't know what they were talking about, and that they were simply offering opinions. We say the very same thing!

You seem to believe that once a prophet has spoken, you will expend some amount of effort and study before deciding whether or not to trust what that prophet said. We believe the very same thing!

You find that it is worth your time to login to an internet discussion forum and discuss a topic which interests you. We do the very same thing!

See? We aren't so very far apart, are we?

[_Tobin]

See? We aren't so very far apart, are we?

Yes, I do realize that. I was once an ex-mormon and an atheist and quite happily so for a while. So I've been around the block a few times and seen what there is to see. No, I really don't have much of an issue with ex-mormons that have problems with modern-day Mormonism. It smacks of too much authority in too few hands that I doubt deserve that loyality. I myself have had an experience with God and am still trying to come to terms with it. I have re-evaluated Mormonism and found to my surprise that there may be some truth to it after all. But, you have to be very careful about it because there is a lot of junk that has accumulated over the years and discerning truth from fiction is a careful balancing act.

[_Tobin]

...Joseph Smith in 1841 published articles describing the mound builders (based on Josiah Priest's work) as supporting the Book of Mormon...

Wow, you really climbed out on a limb with this one. Guess what? In 1842, Joseph published an Op Ed written by him suggesting Guatemala as a perfectly fine candidate.

15 July 1842: Joseph Smith discusses high civilization in the Americas, uses mound-builders and Guatemalan ruins as an example

NOTE: Page 862 of this issue of the Times and Seasons states: "The Times and Seasons, Is edited, printed and published about the first and fifteenth of every month, on the corner of Water and Bain Streets, Nauvoo, Hancock County, Illinois, by JOSEPH SMITH"
If men, in their researches into the history of this country, in noticing the mounds, fortifications, statues, architecture, implements of war, of husbandry, and ornaments of silver, brass, &c.-were to examine the Book of Mormon, their conjectures would be removed, and their opinions altered; uncertainty and doubt would be changed into certainty and facts; and they would find that those things that they are anxiously prying into were matters of history, unfolded in that book. They would find their conjectures were more than realized-that a great and a mighty people had inhabited this continent-that the arts sciences and religion, had prevailed to a very great extent, and that there was as great and mighty cities on this continent as on the continent of Asia. Babylon, Ninevah, nor any of the ruins of the Levant could boast of more perfect sculpture, better architectural designs, and more imperishable ruins, than what are found on this continent. Stephens and Catherwood's researches in Central America abundantly testify of this thing. The stupendous ruins, the elegant sculpture, and the magnificence of the ruins of Guatamala [Guatemala], and other cities, corroborate this statement, and show that a great and mighty people-men of great minds, clear intellect, bright genius, and comprehensive designs inhabited this continent. Their ruins speak of their greatness; the Book of Mormen [Mormon] unfolds their history.-ED.

This statement was signed "ED," which attributes it directly to Joseph Smith.

...Doctrine and Covenants 128:20 associates Cumorah with the revelation of the Book of Mormon; the verse makes no sense if Cumorah is in Guatemala.

And down comes Runtu's house of cards. CRASH!!! After that disaster, he follows up with an even worse assumption and exercise in selective reading - he takes one simple line "Glad tidings from Cumorah!" and makes that into meaning that the hill Cumorah must be in NY. You do realize that Cumorah is where Mormon buried the Nephite record of which the Book of Mormon is an abridgement. It is in essence the "Glad tidings from Cumorah!" given to Joseph Smith. So, all you are doing is creating some additional fictional meaning here where NONE is stated.

[_Drifting]

...Joseph Smith in 1841 published articles describing the mound builders (based on Josiah Priest's work) as supporting the Book of Mormon...

Wow, you really climbed out on a limb with this one. Guess what? In 1842, Joseph published an Op Ed written by him suggesting Guatemala as a perfectly fine candidate.

15 July 1842: Joseph Smith discusses high civilization in the Americas, uses mound-builders and Guatemalan ruins as an example

NOTE: Page 862 of this issue of the Times and Seasons states: "The Times and Seasons, Is edited, printed and published about the first and fifteenth of every month, on the corner of Water and Bain Streets, Nauvoo, Hancock County, Illinois, by JOSEPH SMITH"
If men, in their researches into the history of this country, in noticing the mounds, fortifications, statues, architecture, implements of war, of husbandry, and ornaments of silver, brass, &c.-were to examine the Book of Mormon, their conjectures would be removed, and their opinions altered; uncertainty and doubt would be changed into certainty and facts; and they would find that those things that they are anxiously prying into were matters of history, unfolded in that book. They would find their conjectures were more than realized-that a great and a mighty people had inhabited this continent-that the arts sciences and religion, had prevailed to a very great extent, and that there was as great and mighty cities on this continent as on the continent of Asia. Babylon, Ninevah, nor any of the ruins of the Levant could boast of more perfect sculpture, better architectural designs, and more imperishable ruins, than what are found on this continent. Stephens and Catherwood's researches in Central America abundantly testify of this thing. The stupendous ruins, the elegant sculpture, and the magnificence of the ruins of Guatamala [Guatemala], and other cities, corroborate this statement, and show that a great and mighty people-men of great minds, clear intellect, bright genius, and comprehensive designs inhabited this continent. Their ruins speak of their greatness; the Book of Mormen [Mormon] unfolds their history.-ED.

This statement was signed "ED," which attributes it directly to Joseph Smith.

...Doctrine and Covenants 128:20 associates Cumorah with the revelation of the Book of Mormon; the verse makes no sense if Cumorah is in Guatemala.

And down comes Runtu's house of cards. CRASH!!! After that disaster, he follows up with an even worse assumption and exercise in selective reading - he takes one simple line "Glad tidings from Cumorah!" and makes that into meaning that the hill Cumorah must be in NY. You do realize that Cumorah is where Mormon buried the Nephite record of which the Book of Mormon is an abridgement. It is in essence the "Glad tidings from Cumorah!" given to Joseph Smith. So, all you are doing is creating some additional fictional meaning here where NONE is stated.

What has been found in Guatemala that adds credence to that location being the Book of Mormon setting?