Reminds me of the lyrics to the old Simon and Garfunkel song: “a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest…la la la la la.”
Personally, I think looking at things in a broader context helps us understand things better. Looking at the macro to better understand the micro.
It’s the Monet painting illustration I periodically bring up. Pun intended.
As long as the Book of Mormon can be found on Wikipedia between Battleship Potemkin and The Call of Cthulhu, it is all good.
And who knows, if Shulem’s wishes come true, Delmarva Fictional LGT will find its way into Wikipedia and on out to the world at large. What are the chances you think?
Reminds me of the lyrics to the old Simon and Garfunkel song: “a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest…la la la la la.”
On a couch sits an apologist
A professor by his trade
And he carries the reminders
Of every correction laid on him
And shamed him 'til he cries out
In his anger and his pain
"I've got dossiers, I've got dossiers
and I'm still collecting names..."
And who knows, if Shulem’s wishes come true, Delmarva Fictional LGT will find its way into Wikipedia and on out to the world at large. What are the chances you think?
8 billion people now have a logical explanation for how Joseph Smith came up with the basic landform and location in which to fictionize a story about ancient Israelites coming to America. Believing Mormons can adopt it as well and fit it into their belief systems.
It's an all around winner for everyone.
Just think, MG, you were here on this board as it was conceived in real time and presented in the fashion in which I delivered it. That makes you a part of this whole wonderful experience. Congratulations! And congratulations to all those who participated in these threads because you've helped make history and were in on it from the beginning.
MG, Do you think Shulem is in error saying that there is no land south of the starting spot in the Book of Mormon.
Of course there are other consideration that could allow Shulem to be in error but this geographic consideration is a pretty central point for or against his picture.
Now, go and get the other 8,000,000,000 people in the world to do the same thing.
Regards,
MG
Might postpone that till they have some interest in Mormonism. ByTW, are you saying that most Saints would be uninterested/skeptical of their story's geographic origin?
Now, go and get the other 8,000,000,000 people in the world to do the same thing.
Regards,
MG
Might postpone that till they have some interest in Mormonism. ByTW, are you saying that most Saints would be uninterested/skeptical of their story's geographic origin?
I think most folks find it interesting that there is a detailed geography in the Book of Mormon to begin with, or at all. In a similar sense/vein as rather complex Chiasmus. Why is it even there?
I would imagine for the same reason that many readers are interested in the geography laid out on Lord of the Rings.
Interestingly enough, Tolkien apparently used a similar strategy to Smith’s:
Middle-earth is not an imaginary world. ... The theatre of my tale is this earth, the one in which we now live, but the historical period is imaginary. The essentials of that abiding place are all there (at any rate for inhabitants of N.W. Europe), so naturally it feels familiar, even if a little glorified by enchantment of distance in time.[T 13]
...if it were 'history', it would be difficult to fit the lands and events (or 'cultures') into such evidence as we possess, archaeological or geological, concerning the nearer or remoter part of what is now called Europe; though the Shire, for instance, is expressly stated to have been in this region...I hope the, evidently long but undefined gap in time between the Fall of Barad-dûr and our Days is sufficient for 'literary credibility', even for readers acquainted with what is known as 'pre-history'. I have, I suppose, constructed an imaginary time, but kept my feet on my own mother-earth for place. I prefer that to the contemporary mode of seeking remote globes in 'space'.[T 7]
I would imagine for the same reason that many readers are interested in the geography laid out on Lord of the Rings.
Interestingly enough, Tolkien apparently used a similar strategy to Smith’s:
Middle-earth is not an imaginary world. ... The theatre of my tale is this earth, the one in which we now live, but the historical period is imaginary. The essentials of that abiding place are all there (at any rate for inhabitants of N.W. Europe), so naturally it feels familiar, even if a little glorified by enchantment of distance in time.[T 13]
...if it were 'history', it would be difficult to fit the lands and events (or 'cultures') into such evidence as we possess, archaeological or geological, concerning the nearer or remoter part of what is now called Europe; though the Shire, for instance, is expressly stated to have been in this region...I hope the, evidently long but undefined gap in time between the Fall of Barad-dûr and our Days is sufficient for 'literary credibility', even for readers acquainted with what is known as 'pre-history'. I have, I suppose, constructed an imaginary time, but kept my feet on my own mother-earth for place. I prefer that to the contemporary mode of seeking remote globes in 'space'.[T 7]
mg, of course you are correct here. Joseph Smith was Joseph Smith an individual with his own interests and abilities. They would not match some other individual for comparisons.
Does his book have lands to the south of where the Nephites landed?
