Is the Internet Confounding the Revision of History

[_hopeofzion]

Thanks for clarifying that for me. I am interested in hearing more about what you believe the location of the narrative to be.

I believe that the narrative stretches from New York to Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana...and possibly as far as Missouri.
Again...if you are interested in why, I would highly recommend checking out materials and research from Wayne May. He has published books and has a periodical. I'm not sure what all sites there are out there, but here is one I found doing a Google search: http://www.hillcumorahhistory.com/

Forgive me if I mistook your position on this. Also, you mentioned that the Bible talks about a lost tribe coming to America, right? I'd like to discuss this further, if you don't mind.

Sure. I did not say that the Bible talks about the lost tribes coming to America specifically, but rather that they would be spread through out the world, and intermingled among the gentiles (people) of every nation, even unto the isles of the sea. If you would like some of those references, I will gladly find them and share them here.

I do not believe in any religion, and could be labeled as an atheist- though I loathe the term.

May I ask why?

I am nowhere close to a nihilist, though, and find much beauty, purpose, meaning, and absolute morals in life.

As does my father. Interestingly he has come to the point where he is no longer a hardened atheist, as he once was. He seems to believe there is some force at work, or an intelligence (down to the molecular level) that seems to enable life on earth to evolve and function. He doesn't go so far as to call it God... though he seems more open to the idea or possibility of God, just not defined as religions would define it.

I am also quite fond of Mormonism, and the members of the Mormon faith. Well, the sensible ones.

I am curious what you find about them that might explain this fondness?

[_GoodK]

Thanks for clarifying that for me. I am interested in hearing more about what you believe the location of the narrative to be.

I believe that the narrative stretches from New York to Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana...and possibly as far as Missouri.
Again...if you are interested in why, I would highly recommend checking out materials and research from Wayne May. He has published books and has a periodical. I'm not sure what all sites there are out there, but here is one I found doing a Google search: http://www.hillcumorahhistory.com/

Thanks, I will check out Wayne May. I assume he also explains how he learned that Joseph believed and taught this? I would also love to hear what you think the implications are (of the discrepancy about location).

Forgive me if I mistook your position on this. Also, you mentioned that the Bible talks about a lost tribe coming to America, right? I'd like to discuss this further, if you don't mind.

Sure. I did not say that the Bible talks about the lost tribes coming to America specifically, but rather that they would be spread through out the world, and intermingled among the gentiles (people) of every nation, even unto the isles of the sea. If you would like some of those references, I will gladly find them and share them here.

Sure, I would love to hear them and discuss them, if you care to.

I do not believe in any religion, and could be labeled as an atheist- though I loathe the term.

May I ask why?

Why I don't believe, or why I loathe the label atheist?

I'll answer the second question, because it is a much easier question to answer, especially after Sam Harris worded this argument so well last September,

Attaching a label to something carries real liabilities, especially if the thing you are naming isn’t really a thing at all. And atheism, I would argue, is not a thing. It is not a philosophy, just as “non-racism” is not one. Atheism is not a worldview—and yet most people imagine it to be one and attack it as such. We who do not believe in God are collaborating in this misunderstanding by consenting to be named and by even naming ourselves....http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfa ... heism.html

I am nowhere close to a nihilist, though, and find much beauty, purpose, meaning, and absolute morals in life.

As does my father. Interestingly he has come to the point where he is no longer a hardened atheist, as he once was. He seems to believe there is some force at work, or an intelligence (down to the molecular level) that seems to enable life on earth to evolve and function. He doesn't go so far as to call it God... though he seems more open to the idea or possibility of God, just not defined as religions would define it.

I am also quite fond of Mormonism, and the members of the Mormon faith. Well, the sensible ones.

I am curious what you find about them that might explain this fondness?

[/quote]

I find them to be kind, reasonable people. Good natured people. I find their doctrine less dubious than other Christian doctrine.

[_charity]

Charity, by design documents of a religious nature are just xeroxed memes propagated in the language of another culture. I am sure you think that the Bible was produced out of "everlasting principles" but realistically look to the reliable likelihood that it was (like every other religious document) ripped off from previous ideas and doctrines.

Mercury, LDS theology is that Adam and Eve were the human progenitors. The Gospel in its fulness was given to them by direct messengers from God.

Then as human history unfolded, those original, pural doctrines were distorted, corrupted, etc. and became the myths and legends we find in all cultures. So you see, when subsequent dispensations repeated those doctrines and stories, they weren't ripping off any of the surrounding cultures. They were going back to the original.

No.

What you are doing is using standard behavior and reinterpreting it to fit your world view. This is an intellectually dishonest approach.

You don't see things through your own world view? I have a news flash for you. WE ALL DO!

It is always instructive to learn about behavior. Didn't you ever play "Gossip" at a party? Tell one person a story, they tell someone else, and they tell someone else. Was the story at the end of the line the same as the begnning story? Stories changed over time.

[

All cultures borrow from other cultures. Your (borrowed) theory of dilution is not sound and I would appreciate it if you gave it another thought and dumped this idea, as it is pompous and backwards to believe that your world view is the distilate of truth instead of what it is, a patchwork of frontier occultic practices and early American christian teachings.

My world view is not a "distillation" of truth. I think I made it plain that there is an original "truth" which becomes distorted until God reveals and restores it again. LDS theology is not distilled from any cultural millieu. We have a restoration of the original truth.

Nibleys silly approach of playing mix-and-match with cultural comparison is a study in faith promoting rumor via poor interpretation of disparate cultures and their mythology.

People who can't understand what Nibley said shouldn't try to comment on it.

[
To continue in the belief that Mormonism is somehow a restoration of what is true is neither provable nor utilitarian. I would appreciate it if you would cease and desist propagating this silly line of reasoning.

Maybe not provable. But certainly utiliarian. It suits 13 million of us just fine. I would appreciate it if you would cease and desist with mocking and ridiculing concepts you cannot understand.

[_hopeofzion]

Thanks, I will check out Wayne May. I assume he also explains how he learned that Joseph believed and taught this? I would also love to hear what you think the implications are (of the discrepancy about location).

Well, in the early church it was always assumed that it took place in North America. After all, Joseph got the plates out of Hill Cumorah (a place talked about in the Book of Mormon). Joseph often referred to this country, the land of New York, Ohio, etc as the Book of Mormon lands, the Native Americans of North America as Lamanites, and he he even came across the remains or burial site of an ancient american, which I think they came across in Illinois, which he received a specific revelation in regards to his identity as a righteous lamanite. He received his name, and some information about who he was and what kind of man he was.

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that the idea of the Book of Mormon narrative taking place in Central America did not surface until the early to mid 1900's after some hidden or lost cities were discovered.

Sure, I would love to hear them and discuss them, if you care to.

Ok, I will just throw out some verses... beginning with the blessing the angel gives Jacob, who is renamed Israel, who is the father of the twelve tribes.

“I am the Lord God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac; the land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed; And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth; and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south; and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.” [Genesis 28:13-14]

Later there was a division in the Kingdom, and Judah remained in the south with Benjamin as the Kingdom of Judah, and the 10 tribes formed the nation of Israel in the north, led by Ephraim. Later, the Kingdom of Israel was carried off by Assyria.

“And Jeroboam drove Israel from following the Lord, and made them sin a great sin. For the children of Israel walked in all the sins of Jeroboam which he did; they departed not from them; Until the Lord removed Israel out of his sight, as he had said by all his servants the prophets. So was Israel carried away out of their own land to Assyria unto this day.” [2 Kings 17:23]

The Assyrians would conquer a people, and then scatter them among all the nations of the people they had previously conquered, dividing them up, making it easier to govern them, and less likely to have a conquered people gather together again to revolt.

After that, especially with the fall of the Assyrian empire, many who were once numbered among the tribes would wander, and migrate across the continent.

The prophets also speak of this, here are some examples:

“For, lo, I will command, and I will sift the house of Israel among all nations, like as corn is sifted in a sieve, yet shall not the least grain fall upon the earth.” [Amos 9:9]

And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea. And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.” [Isaiah 11:11-12]

Also, Hosea prophesied that Ephraim would “follow after the east wind.” Hosea 12:1

If you look at a map of the Middle East and Europe and imagine a wind blowing out of the east, which is driving a people westward from the northern parts of ancient Assyria, you’ll see that they would continually bump up against the Mediterranean Sea, and would therefore travel in a north-westerly direction. Following this path, they would end up passing through modern day Turkey, Greece and France. From there, they crossed the sea to England, where they would eventually take the ultimate leap westward in their migration across the Atlantic Ocean to the New World.



Of course, this cannot be proven. Just a point of interest... a possibility. Anyway...

I'll have to leave off here and pick up tomorrow... it's time for me to take off. Sorry I did not get to finish replying.

[_charity]

Thanks, I will check out Wayne May. I assume he also explains how he learned that Joseph believed and taught this? I would also love to hear what you think the implications are (of the discrepancy about location).

Well, in the early church it was always assumed that it took place in North America. After all, Joseph got the plates out of Hill Cumorah (a place talked about in the Book of Mormon).

The problem with this theory is that the Hill Cumorah was named AFTER the Book of Mormon was translated, and it was known that the plates had been hidden by Mormon in a place called Cumorah. The hill near Palmyra was not previously named. That cannot be used as evidence. It is backwards.

Joseph often referred to this country, the land of New York, Ohio, etc as the Book of Mormon lands, the Native Americans of North America as Lamanites, and he he even came across the remains or burial site of an ancient american, which I think they came across in Illinois, which he received a specific revelation in regards to his identity as a righteous lamanite. He received his name, and some information about who he was and what kind of man he was.

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that the idea of the Book of Mormon narrative taking place in Central America did not surface until the early to mid 1900's after some hidden or lost cities were discovered.

Sure, I would love to hear them and discuss them, if you care to.

The following are statements made about Book of Mormon georgraphy in the 1840's. The full FAIR wiki article can be fond at: http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon ... Statements

John Taylor, who was at the time editor of Times and Seasons, wrote in 1842 about a book by a non-member, John L. Stephens, Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan, which Joseph Smith also read and enjoyed:

"Mr Stephens' great developments of antiquities are made bare to the eyes of all the people by reading the history of the Nephites in the Book of Mormon. They lived about the narrow neck of land, which now embraces Central America, with all the cities that can be found. Read the destruction of cities at the crucifixion of Christ. . . . Who could have dreamed that twelve years would have developed such incontrovertible testimony to the Book of Mormon?"

In a separate news article two weeks later, he said, "It will not be a bad plan to compare Mr. Stephens' ruined cities with those in the Book of Mormon: light cleaves to light, and facts are supported by facts.

In April 1845, John Taylor wrote, "Joseph Smith was "one of the greatest men that ever lived on the earth; emphatically proved so, by being inspired by God to bring forth the Book of Mormon, which gives the true history of the natives of this continent; their ancient glory and cities:—which cities have been discovered by Mr Ste[ph]ens in Central America, exactly where the Book of Mormon left them."

This clealry shows that Joseph Smith, as well as others, had not revealed or set geography.

[_Mercury]

Charity, by design documents of a religious nature are just xeroxed memes propagated in the language of another culture. I am sure you think that the Bible was produced out of "everlasting principles" but realistically look to the reliable likelihood that it was (like every other religious document) ripped off from previous ideas and doctrines.

Mercury, LDS theology is that Adam and Eve were the human progenitors. The Gospel in its fulness was given to them by direct messengers from God.

Then as human history unfolded, those original, pural doctrines were distorted, corrupted, etc. and became the myths and legends we find in all cultures. So you see, when subsequent dispensations repeated those doctrines and stories, they weren't ripping off any of the surrounding cultures. They were going back to the original.

No.

What you are doing is using standard behavior and reinterpreting it to fit your world view. This is an intellectually dishonest approach.

You don't see things through your own world view? I have a news flash for you. WE ALL DO!

It is always instructive to learn about behavior. Didn't you ever play "Gossip" at a party? Tell one person a story, they tell someone else, and they tell someone else. Was the story at the end of the line the same as the begnning story? Stories changed over time.

[

All cultures borrow from other cultures. Your (borrowed) theory of dilution is not sound and I would appreciate it if you gave it another thought and dumped this idea, as it is pompous and backwards to believe that your world view is the distilate of truth instead of what it is, a patchwork of frontier occultic practices and early American christian teachings.

My world view is not a "distillation" of truth. I think I made it plain that there is an original "truth" which becomes distorted until God reveals and restores it again. LDS theology is not distilled from any cultural millieu. We have a restoration of the original truth.

Nibleys silly approach of playing mix-and-match with cultural comparison is a study in faith promoting rumor via poor interpretation of disparate cultures and their mythology.

People who can't understand what Nibley said shouldn't try to comment on it.

[
To continue in the belief that Mormonism is somehow a restoration of what is true is neither provable nor utilitarian. I would appreciate it if you would cease and desist propagating this silly line of reasoning.

Maybe not provable. But certainly utiliarian. It suits 13 million of us just fine. I would appreciate it if you would cease and desist with mocking and ridiculing concepts you cannot understand.

I replied to your blatant retardation in the terrestrial so as to allow for all to mock you.

[_hopeofzion]

Charity,

I don't know... When Wayne May presented all he had, the quotations from Joseph Smith confirmed again and again, that the land they were now on was the promised land, the Book of Mormon lands. Further, Wayne would bring up maps of N America, and using the descriptions in the Book of Mormon, clearly show correlation of geography, and then pictures of archeological sites that matched precisely what the Book of Mormon desribed.

It was truly overwhelming... and then all the artifacts from North America that matched the descriptions of items in the Book of Mormon.

Just recall if you will the description the angel gives Nephi of this land, when he shows him the future when the Gentiles come, and tell me if this is not a description of the United States?

[2 Nephi 7:16] Wherefore the promises of the Lord are great unto the Gentiles, for he hath spoken it, and who can dispute?
[2 Nephi 7:17] But behold, this land, saith God, shall be a land of thine inheritance; and the Gentiles shall be blessed upon the land.
[2 Nephi 7:18] And this land shall be a land of liberty unto the Gentiles: and there shall be no kings upon the land, who shall raise up unto the Gentiles.
[2 Nephi 7:19] And I will fortify this land against all other nations; [RLDS version of the Book of Mormon so chapter and verses may be different]

We cannot say that Central and South America fits this description.... that have not always been free, and there have been kings or tyants and dictators. But North America has always since the Gentiles came, been the beacon of freedom, and liberty unto the Gentiles, and a powerful nation which has been fortified and upheld from invasion by foreign powers.

We can go tit for tat about what Joseph said... but I know he indicated on numerous occassions that the land of North America was the Nephite land, whether you want to believe they may have extended south as well... but all I can attest to is this. When I saw the presentation of Wayne May, (having been raised all my life with the tradition that the Book of Mormon lands was in Central America) I knew... I KNEW it was right and true. I had the overwhelming confirmation of the Holy Ghost that what Wayne was testifying to was true. North America is the Book of Mormon lands.

p.s. I just found that there are a number of YouTube videos of some of his presentations, or parts of certain presentations...

here is one, you can search the rest.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKOpsXMgkEc

[_charity]

I am not argue with you over what you believe to be a confirmation of the Holy Ghost. Where the lands of the Book of Mormon were is not important. It is the message of the Book, the testament of Christ, that is important.

I agree with you, it is fascinating. And speculations are interesting.

[_GoodK]

Thanks, I will check out Wayne May. I assume he also explains how he learned that Joseph believed and taught this? I would also love to hear what you think the implications are (of the discrepancy about location).

Well, in the early church it was always assumed that it took place in North America. After all, Joseph got the plates out of Hill Cumorah (a place talked about in the Book of Mormon). Joseph often referred to this country, the land of New York, Ohio, etc as the Book of Mormon lands, the Native Americans of North America as Lamanites, and he he even came across the remains or burial site of an ancient american, which I think they came across in Illinois, which he received a specific revelation in regards to his identity as a righteous lamanite. He received his name, and some information about who he was and what kind of man he was.

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that the idea of the Book of Mormon narrative taking place in Central America did not surface until the early to mid 1900's after some hidden or lost cities were discovered.

Sure, I would love to hear them and discuss them, if you care to.

Ok, I will just throw out some verses... beginning with the blessing the angel gives Jacob, who is renamed Israel, who is the father of the twelve tribes.

“I am the Lord God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac; the land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed; And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth; and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south; and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.” [Genesis 28:13-14]

Later there was a division in the Kingdom, and Judah remained in the south with Benjamin as the Kingdom of Judah, and the 10 tribes formed the nation of Israel in the north, led by Ephraim. Later, the Kingdom of Israel was carried off by Assyria.

“And Jeroboam drove Israel from following the Lord, and made them sin a great sin. For the children of Israel walked in all the sins of Jeroboam which he did; they departed not from them; Until the Lord removed Israel out of his sight, as he had said by all his servants the prophets. So was Israel carried away out of their own land to Assyria unto this day.” [2 Kings 17:23]

The Assyrians would conquer a people, and then scatter them among all the nations of the people they had previously conquered, dividing them up, making it easier to govern them, and less likely to have a conquered people gather together again to revolt.

After that, especially with the fall of the Assyrian empire, many who were once numbered among the tribes would wander, and migrate across the continent.

The prophets also speak of this, here are some examples:

“For, lo, I will command, and I will sift the house of Israel among all nations, like as corn is sifted in a sieve, yet shall not the least grain fall upon the earth.” [Amos 9:9]

And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea. And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.” [Isaiah 11:11-12]

Also, Hosea prophesied that Ephraim would “follow after the east wind.” Hosea 12:1

If you look at a map of the Middle East and Europe and imagine a wind blowing out of the east, which is driving a people westward from the northern parts of ancient Assyria, you’ll see that they would continually bump up against the Mediterranean Sea, and would therefore travel in a north-westerly direction. Following this path, they would end up passing through modern day Turkey, Greece and France. From there, they crossed the sea to England, where they would eventually take the ultimate leap westward in their migration across the Atlantic Ocean to the New World.



Of course, this cannot be proven. Just a point of interest... a possibility. Anyway...

I'll have to leave off here and pick up tomorrow... it's time for me to take off. Sorry I did not get to finish replying.

I have to ask, ever read John Sorenson's 1985 publication: An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon, published jointly by Deseret Book and FARMS?

If not, you need to find a copy immediately. Chapter 1 refutes everything May presents. Literally chapter 1.

PS this book was published in the 80's. May is only repeating arguments already made by people like Vernal Holly.

[_hopeofzion]

I have to ask, ever read John Sorenson's 1985 publication: An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon, published jointly by Deseret Book and FARMS?

If not, you need to find a copy immediately. Chapter 1 refutes everything May presents. Literally chapter 1.

PS this book was published in the 80's. May is only repeating arguments already made by people like Vernal Holly.

First - Unless you have actually sat in on one of his presentations for a few hours, and seen all that Wayne May has to present, you cannot say he is only repeating arguments from someone else.

Second - I try to steer clear from anything where the aim is to refute something else. Anyone can write a plausible refute of just about anything. I try to focus on materials that focusing on what is true, not what is false. For example, if examining a religion, I would rather go to those who live it, and hear from them what they believe...then I can let the Spirit of Truth bear witness in my soul. I don't go and read books or articles designed to tear down that religion and find fault... like cult watch groups, etc.

Does this publication actually take all the evidence presented by Wayne May and specifically address it? And how would you know if it did. I know both the LDS and the RLDS has invested a lot into the idea that the Book of Mormon lands are in Central America... much the same way that Protestants, Catholics and even we have invested in the notion that God changed the Sabbath day to Sunday.... whether it is right or wrong, it's what we have decided it is.

Hope you don't think me too stubborn. I hope you will understand, I grew up in a church that did its best to demonstrated that the Book of Mormon narrative takes place in Central America. I have even read lots of stuff from FARMS over the years. All I can say is, it never really set right with me... and when I seriously considered all that Wayne May had to present, it blew me away, and I knew it was right. It was very liberating.

But as Charity said... it really isn't as important to know precisely where the event took place, than it is to benefit from the words in the book. Just as I don't have to know exactly where Jesus was born, or exactly where his cross stood, in order to benefit from His love and teachings. :)