“Since our 'Extract' was published from Mr.
Stephens' 'Incidents of Travel,' &c., we have found another important
fact relating to the truth of the Book of Mormon. Central America, or
Guatimala [Guatemala], is situated north of the Isthmus of Darien
and once
embraced several hundred miles of territory from north to south.- The city
of Zarahemla, burnt at the crucifixion of the Savior, and rebuilt
afterwards, stood upon this land as will be seen from the following words in
the book of Alma:-'And now it was only the distance of a day and half's
journey for a Nephite, on the line Bountiful, and the land Desolation, from
the east to the west sea; and thus the land of Nephi, and the land of
Zarahemla was nearly surrounded by water: there being a small neck of land
between the land northward and the land southward.' [See Book of Mormon 3d
edition, page 280-81.]”
The only isthmus identified in the article is Panama’s Isthmus of Darien. But Panama is southward from Guatemala. The
Book of Mormon “small neck of land” was northward from Zarahemla.
(Alma 22:31-33;
50:34) Did the writers of the article confuse the “narrow strip of
wilderness”
(Alma 22:27) south of
Zarahemla and the northern “narrow neck”? This is an easy mistake to
make in a cursory reading!
Was Joseph Smith involved in any of the unsigned T&S
articles? Who edited what? A simple signature or “ED” (as in previous
articles) would have dispelled much controversy; but no, Joseph did not sign
his name, or give his “ED” to any of the articles featuring extracts of
John Lloyd Stephens’ 1841 bestseller. This is especially telling in light of the
fact that a signed letter to the Church (from Joseph Smith in hiding),
indicating the location of Cumorah, was published in the same issue
featuring the unsigned “ZARAHEMLA” piece. This is the unsigned piece over
which tour guides make such a clamor, barely mentioning several signed
articles by Joseph Smith, published earlier that year - articles which
placed the Book of Mormon narrative in mound-builder country of the
United States.
[7]
As for Joseph Smith’s epistle (indicating the Finger Lakes
location of Cumorah) it became
LDS Doctrine & Covenants section 128.
Mesoamerican setting devotees and tour guides have a lot
of sand under their feet! It seems they have a hard time bringing themselves
to fully disclose and discuss the secondhand and apocryphal stuff they have
dug up. Sources they selectively cite again and again and again.
[1]
At the end of the day, a tour guide sits with apocryphal rumblings and
inaccurate unsigned newspaper articles which contradict each other, and
which he wants so desperately to stick on Joseph Smith’s apron. The forward
to one tour guide’s book proclaims the author a “genius”! As for me and my
house, we choose LDS scripture (e.g.
LDS Doctrine & Covenants 128:20) over
the products of others’ mental digestion.
Oh, but Joseph would never have knowingly allowed
inaccuracies to be published and go uncorrected in the Mormon newspaper –
they say! Regardless of the brethrens’ good intentions, embarrassing and
inaccurate things were published in the T&S, even with Joseph Smith’s
name appearing in the publisher’s statement at the issue’s end. The unsigned
pieces, over which so many tour guides dote, in fact have scriptural
misattribution and contradictions in them which went uncorrected! [6]
In the fall of 1842, when the unsigned articles came out,
John Taylor was acting editor of the newspaper even though Joseph (keeping a
low public profile over the Boggs incident, HC 5:160-162) still
officially carried the title. Joseph had turned over his business affairs to
others, including
“the publication of our paper”.
(LDS Doctrine and Covenants 127:1; see also
TEACHINGS OF THE PRESIDENTS OF THE CHURCH - LORENZO SNOW, pg. 272) The Prophet needed to be able to
flee the city on a moment’s notice. He fled the seclusion of his home to
avoid arrest, more than once that fall. Joseph had enough to worry about!
The newspaper was not his highest priority. The November 15, 1842 edition of
the newspaper featured this statement by a much encumbered Joseph Smith:
“I beg leave to inform the subscribers of the Times
and Seasons that it is impossible for me to
fulfil [fulfill] the arduous duties of the editorial department any longer.
The multiplicity of other business that daily devolves upon me, renders it
impossible for me to do justice to a paper so widely circulated as the Times
and Seasons. I have appointed Elder John
Taylor, who is less encumbered and fully competent to assume the
responsibilities of that office, and I doubt not but that he will give
satisfaction to the patrons of the paper. As this number commences a new
volume, it also commences his editorial career. Joseph Smith.”
Tour guides have yet to address some poignant questions:
If Joseph Smith really wrote the unsigned articles on
Mesoamerica during his public absence (there is no record of this in his or
Wilford Woodruff’s journal) why is it when John Taylor later cites Joseph
Smith relative to John Lloyd Stephens’ discoveries, he quotes from Joseph’s
signed July 15, 1842 “American Antiquities” article which mostly deals with
Josiah Priest’s book and mound-builder archaeology in North America? I have
found no statement by John Taylor or Wilford Woodruff attributing any of the
unsigned T&S pieces to Joseph Smith.
It’s a fact that John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff managed
the Nauvoo printing office in the fall of 1842. [8] They
knew who wrote the unsigned articles. Unlike Joseph’s journal, the Woodruff
diary gushes over Stephens’ bestseller. [6]
Some tour guides turn to the redacted History of the
Church to argue that Joseph Smith mentions Stephens in his journal. This
is misleading! Go to the original source. It’s not in Joseph’s papers at
all! If tour guides truly wish to find an early Mormon source sympathetic to
the insert on Stephens in History of the Church
(25 June 1842, Vol. 5, pg. 44), they need look no further than
Wilford Woodruff’s journal for 13 September 1841
[2:126). You will not find the source of
the extraneous comment on Stephens in Joseph Smith’s journal. [6]
So
why didn’t John Taylor in later years attribute the unsigned articles to the
Prophet, if Joseph really wrote them, instead of quoting from Joseph’s
signed July 1842 article which only briefly mentions Stephens towards the
end?
[9]
Answer: because John Taylor knew who wrote the unsigned T&S articles.
He knew they were little more than provocative press with no high authority,
certainly not any given them by the Prophet. Here is what John Taylor wrote
years later on the subject of what Joseph Smith had to say about John Lloyd
Stephens’ discoveries:
“Some Teachings of the Prophet
THE BOOK OF MORMON RECORD.—Stephens and Catherwood, after examining the
ruins that were found at Guatemala, in Central America, and gazing upon
magnificent ruins, mouldering temples, stately edifices, rich sculpture,
elegant statuary, and all the traces of a highly cultivated and civilized
people, said—"Here are the works of a great and mighty people that have
inhabited these ruins; but now they are no more. History is silent on the
subject, and no man can unravel this profound mystery. Nations have planted,
and reaped, and built, and lived, and died, that are now no more; and no one
can tell anything about them or reveal their history."
Why, there was a young man in Ontario
county, New York, to whom the angel of God appeared
and gave an account of the whole. These majestic ruins bespeak the
existence of a mighty people. The Book of Mormon unfolds their history.
O yes; but his was of too humble an origin, like Jesus of Nazareth. It was
not some great professor, who had got an education in a European or an
American college, but one who professed to have a revelation from God—and
the world doesn't believe in revelation. But nevertheless it is true, and we
know it.—JD, 5:240-241, September 13, 1857.”
Now compare Joseph Smith’s statement on Stephens’ discoveries
(paraphrased by John Taylor), with its source, the article signed “ED” by
Joseph Smith:
“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.”
[10]
The Saints should read Joseph’s “American Antiquities” article in full! They
will find it really supports a North American mound-builder setting for the Book of Mormon! [7, 10]
According to Josiah Priest (who cites the noted explorer and historian
Alexander von Humboldt) mound building peoples, after departing the
Tower
of Babel eventually arrived in the
region of the Great Lakes or “lake
country”. Priest wrote:
“As favoring this idea of their [mound building
peoples] coming immediately from the region of
the tower of Babel, their tradition goes on to
inform us, that the tongues distributed…were infinitely various, and
dispersed over the earth; but that it so happened that fifteen heads of
families were permitted to speak the same language…These traveled till they
came to a country which they called Aztalan, supposed
to be in the regions of the now United States,
according to Humboldt. As favoring this idea, we notice, the word Aztalan
signifies in their language, water, or a country of much water. Now, no
country on the earth better suits this appellation than the western country,
on account of the vast number of lakes found there, and is even, by us,
called the lake country.”
[11]
There
are tour guides who are not eager to tell you that Joseph Smith agreed with
Priest and Humboldt; that descendents of mound building peoples eventually
migrated from the “lake country of America” to regions as far south as
Mexico.
[12]
Yes, Joseph Smith believed that the impressive and relatively recent ruins
in Mexico and Central America
had something to do with descendents of Book of Mormon people who
migrated there, but notice that Joseph never said that Book of Mormon
lands or cities are there!
Joseph Smith had read both volumes of Stephens’ bestseller and believed it
was “most correct” in regards to “the antiquities of this country” (North
America).
[13]
Joseph therefore knew that Stephens had devoted an entire chapter and more
to the conclusion that the magnificent Mesoamerican ruins were relatively
recent works - not truly ancient!
[4, 6]
Joseph delighted to find that Josiah Priest was not the only author to
discuss American Antiquities. Stephens’ work highlighted more than
the “comparative modern” Central American stone ruins; which according to
Stephens were
“not the works of people who have passed away, and whose history has become
unknown; but…they were constructed by the races who occupied the country at
the time of the invasion by the Spaniards, or of some not very distant
progenitors.” [4]
Joseph Smith picked up on Stephens’ summary of mound-builder antiquities in
his own country (the United States) as well. In the words
of Stephens:
“…a new flood of
light has poured upon the world, and the field of American antiquities has
been opened.”
“…In our own country, the opening of forests and the
discovery of tumuli or mounds and fortifications, extending in ranges from
the lakes through the valleys of the Ohio and Mississippi, mummies in a cave
in Kentucky, the inscription on the rock at Dighton…the ruins of walls and a
great city in Arkansas and Wisconsin Territory, had suggested…the strong
belief that powerful and populous nations had occupied it and had passed
away, whose histories are entirely unknown…”
[14]
It’s no coincidence that T&S articles signed by Joseph Smith follow
the list of mound-builder antiquities outlined by Stephens and elaborated by
Josiah Priest. Joseph Smith relates mound-builder antiquities to the Book
of Mormon account of Nephi building a temple in the land of Nephi,
whereas an unsigned fall article relates the account of Nephi’s temple
construction to anachronistic stone ruins in Mesoamerican jungles. [15]
Supposing Joseph wrote the unsigned article identifying
the eighth century A.D. ruins of Quirigua as “Zarahemla”, why did John
Taylor and the Quorum of the Twelve (including Wilford Woodruff) later
approve the geography of
Orson Pratt to annotate the 1879 edition of the
Book of Mormon? Pratt placed Zarahemla in
South America, in direct contradiction to the unsigned T&S
newspaper article.
[16]
Pratt had been excommunicated from the Church shortly
before the unsigned “ZARAHEMLA” piece came out. He was reinstated in 1843.
If President Taylor and Elder Woodruff knew that Joseph Smith had authored
the “ZARAHEMLA” (ruins of Quirigua) article, why would they betray the
Prophet’s views by publishing Orson Pratt’s geography to annotate the 1879
edition of the Book of Mormon?
The anonymous authors of the “ZARAHEMLA” newspaper piece
included this disclaimer:
“We are not going to declare positively that the ruins of
Quirigua are those of Zarahemla, but…”
The authors then take the stand that it will require more
proof …
“to prove that the ruins of the city in question, are not
one of those referred to in the Book of Mormon…”
Did they not believe Stephens’ assessment on the age of
the ruins? Did they not completely read Stephens’ volumes as Joseph said he
had?
If Joseph is supposed to have taught that Zarahemla
was in Central America how does this square with First Presidency member
George Q. Cannon’s equally authoritative (unsubstantiated) claim that Joseph
Smith had told some person or persons unknown that the Magdalena River of
Colombia was in fact the river Sidon (east of Zarahemla)?
[17]
Eminent Brother Cannon further claimed that “…It is also
known that the landing place of Lehi and his family was near what is now
known as the city of Valparaiso, in the Republic of Chili
[Chile]”.
[17]
President Cannon, like others of his day, became
convinced that Lehi landed on the coast of temperate
Chile
as far south of the equator as
Jerusalem
is north. This idea had been erroneously published by Church leader
Franklin D. Richards as a “Revelation to Joseph the Seer”. [18]
The source of the folly is an unsigned document in the handwriting of
Frederick G. Williams. The document asserts that Lehi landed on the coast of Chile
“thirty three degrees south latitude”. Frederick G. Williams, once a
counselor and assistant to Joseph Smith had, like Orson Pratt, been
excommunicated and reinstated. Church leaders eventually called into
question the authority of the William’s document and also withheld Orson
Pratt’s speculative geographic footnotes from twentieth century editions of
the Book of Mormon. [19]
George Q. Cannon, incidentally, worked in the Nauvoo
printing office as a young man.
Elder B. H. Roberts observed that the geography put forth in the Williams
document, and later unfairly attributed to Joseph Smith as a “revelation”,
dominated for a while the thinking of church leaders on the subject of Book
of Mormon geography. [2]
Elder Roberts further remarked:
“We need not follow our researches in any spirit of fear and trembling. We
desire only to ascertain the truth; nothing but the truth will endure … the
proclamation of the truth in any given case, or upon any subject, will do no
harm to the work of the Lord which is itself truth.
Nor need we be
surprised if now and then we find our predecessors, many of whom bear
honored names and deserve our respect and gratitude for what they achieved
in making clear the truth, as they conceived it to be—we need not be
surprised if we sometimes find them mistaken in their conceptions and
deductions; just as the generations who succeed us in unfolding in a
larger way some of the yet unlearned truths of the Gospel, will find that we
have had some misconceptions and made some wrong deductions in our day and
time. The book of knowledge is never a sealed book. …The generation which
preceded us did not exhaust by their knowledge all the truth, so that
nothing was left for us in its unfolding; no, not even in respect of the
Book of Mormon; any more than we shall exhaust all discovery in relation to
that book and leave nothing for the generation following us to develop.”
[2]
Concerned that “Book of Mormon geography” might lead to too great a
controversy, George Q. Cannon counseled Latter-day Saints of his day against
circulating detailed maps professing to give the location of Nephite cities
and settlements. [20]
Brother Cannon warned that if “our children be permitted
to conceive incorrect ideas concerning the location of lands inhabited by
the Nephites … it will be difficult to eradicate them [the erroneous
ideas]”. Truer words were never published! It is unfortunate that editor
Cannon had himself, in the same article, promoted erroneous geographic
opinions, probably based on Orson Pratt’s footnotes in the 1879 edition of
the Book of Mormon, and on the dubious Williams document.
Apparently it didn’t occur to brother Cannon and others
that since the seasons of temperate South American are half a year out of
phase with seasons of the Law of Moses (which require the “first month” be
in the spring of the Northern Hemisphere;
Exodus 12:1-2;
13:4,
10,
Leviticus 23:5-6,
Deuteronomy 16:6), that this fails to fit the scriptural account
placing the Nephite “first month” at approximately the same time as the
Passover “first month” when the Savior was crucified.
(3 Nephi 8:5) We know that faithful
Nephites and Lamanites “strictly” observed the Law of Moses “in all things”.
(2 Nephi 5:10,
Helaman 13:1) Their observance had to have included the
divine calendar. These scriptures make perfect sense when we understand that
Nephite lands are in the temperate Northern Hemisphere.
[21]
Despite the mass of confusion on the subject of
“Book of Mormon geography”, George Q. Cannon and his peers were certain
about the location of Cumorah! They knew it had been confirmed
through the Prophet Joseph Smith.
(LDS Doctrine & Covenants 128:20) Brother
Cannon listed Cumorah among the few geographic “points which can be
identified”. At the same time he entertained “no confidence” in proposed
Book of Mormon maps of his day, and discouraged their distribution.
[22] But the damage had already been done. Latter-day
Saints would carry geographic shrapnel in their brains for generation to
come.
Like President Cannon, I too have found Mormon opinion
and traditions on the so called subject of “Book of Mormon geography”, to be
a mass of confusion! I have found that I cannot trust many of the claims,
but turn my attention to the scriptures and things I know for certain Joseph
Smith said! I’ve become convinced that God didn’t intend the Book of Mormon
land, “choice above all other lands” to be a mystery.
(Ether 2:9-12) The covenant land setting of the Book of Mormon should be based on the
best sources: LDS scripture and verifiable statements by Joseph Smith. What
constitutes verifiable statements by the Prophet? For me, the answer is
straightforward: Verifiable statements by Joseph Smith are in his
handwriting and or authenticated with his signature! Here is where the
arm raises to the square and the false potency of many a tour guide’s
arguments slinks back to the jungle of confusion where it belongs.
Desperate Measures
Sentence length and vocabulary “analysis” in lieu of
Joseph’s signature is pseudo scientific bunk! These are desperate measures
taken by supporters of the Mesoamerican setting business. There is no
statistical method for sorting out each edit made by each contributor to the
unsigned articles. Without an approving signature or “ED”, it is impossible
to tell who stood by what in the unsigned articles.
[23]
Speculative liberties can be taken with an article which
no one intends to sign! Fall 1842 issues of the T&S even dropped the
explicit “IS EDITED by Joseph Smith” in the publication statement at the end
of the newspaper. Members of the twelve had been put in charge of publishing
the paper in Joseph’s name even when Joseph was not actively involved in
editing all of its contents. [6]
The publication statement at the end of each issue is not a
signature. There are those who desperately want it to be. Readers can trust
their common sense here. Folks should be asking why the T&S
extrapolations on John Lloyd Stephens’ bestseller were left unsigned. One
gets the sense that if certain tour guides had their way, they’d canonize
the unsigned articles and supplement the Doctrine and Covenants with
them.
Of course South and Central American setting tour guides
have it out for what they call “Great Lakes
settings”. Exaggerated and scripturally intractable geographies like the
Heartland Model are much more vulnerable. Tour guides may see Sister Olive’s
setting as the most threatening. They should!
For the record, Sister Olive’s setting doesn’t just
involve the region of the Great Lakes.
While it is true that the principal lands named in the Book of Mormon
are localized in the region of scriptural Cumorah (near Lake Ontario,
the Finger Lakes and Lake Erie), the Book of Mormon “south countries”
(e.g.
Mormon 6:15) are the same as those referred to as “south countries”
(south of Amherst Ohio and Lake Erie) by the Lord in
LDS Doctrine & Covenants 75:8,
17. The heartland of America,
south of Lake Erie, is truly Book of
Mormon territory, but it is not the principal Book of Mormon territory
heartland setting tour guides claim.
Cumorah being where scripture says it is
(LDS Doctrine & Covenants 128:20) the Book of Mormon “west sea” has to be Lake Erie. It’s that simple!
The native peoples “residing in the west” near Lake Erie were identified by the Lord as “the Lamanites”.
See for instance
LDS Doctrine & Covenants 32:1-2 and
History of the Church,
Vol. 1, pp. 118-120. Long standing Mormon tradition went too far in
claiming that the Lamanites were the ancestors of native peoples of North
and South America. Scripture never said it. Now the modern
Introduction to the Book of Mormon reads differently – implying the
presence of other ancient peoples in
America.
This writer has stated repeatedly that Lehi’s American
inheritance could have extended as far south as lands with seasons
compatible with the Law of Moses.
After the Law was fulfilled, the Lord could have extended the
blessing of the Promised Land to lands previously excluded by the Law’s
requirements.
[24]
Joseph in the Nauvoo period, named the whole of America as the land of Zion.
This does not mean he endorsed a hemispheric geography for the Book of
Mormon! There is no
verifiable statement by Joseph Smith promoting a hemispheric geography for
the Book of Mormon. Arguments to the contrary are pure speculation.
There are problems with the arguments:
If Joseph promoted a hemispheric geography for the
Book of Mormon as an oral tradition, why were Saints in 1838 free to
postulate that the extreme southern Nephite land and city of Manti
(south of Zarahemla) was in
Missouri?
[25]
Why did Apostle John Page (contemporary of Joseph Smith
and the Pratt brothers) think it okay to devise a non-hemispheric geography
based on the exciting, anachronistic discoveries featured in Stephens’ 1841
bestseller? [5]
Why didn’t Orson Pratt and his brother Parley agree on
their hemispheric geographies, and why didn’t they attribute either of their
geographies to Joseph Smith? Orson essentially admitted his hemispheric
model was supposition! [26]
Of course Apostle Pratt believed Joseph
when he identified certain mound-builders of North American as Nephites.
[27] It’s just that Elder Pratt went to
extremes with his mound-builder setting and spread it far and wide over
North and South America. [28]
Despite their contradicting geographic opinions, all
the early brethren agreed where the land Cumorah was, because that
much had been revealed in LDS scripture! The Book of Mormon’s
authentic American setting resides closer to where the early members of the
Church all agreed, than where their competing, far flung speculations
diverged!
Just because we have no written refutation from
Joseph Smith on the subject of Lehi landing on the coast of Chile, or Lehi
landing a little south of Panama (unsigned T&S article), Zarahemla in
Colombia, or Zarahemla in the jungles of Quirigua (unsigned T&S
article), or Manti (south of Zarahemla) in Missouri, does not mean Joseph
agreed with all these opinions.
Early members of the Church simply failed to seize upon
the scriptural fact that the land of Zarahemla was so near to
Jaredite country (including Cumorah, and the hill Ramah), that one region
could be mistaken for the other by travelers from the more southern land
of Nephi.
[29]
According to scripture,
Zarahemla cannot possibly be thousands or even many hundreds
of miles away from Cumorah! Based on
travel times recorded in
scripture, the maximum estimated distance between the
land of Nephi and the land of Zarahemla
is about 21 days on foot. But the minimum possible distance is on the order
of 12 – 8 = 4 days journey.
[29]
Sister Olive’s setting is not too
small! Critics should study their Bible and the relative distances of its
literary setting. The land
of Israel, where much of the biblical
narrative centers, is surprisingly small.
It took twentieth century members of the Reorganized LDS
church to first propose a Cumorah in southern Mexico, closer
to Stephens’ and Catherwood’s sensational but anachronistic discoveries. We
Latter-day Saints, like sheep, would later buy into the misguided idea.
[1] What LDS may not realize is that the RLDS
doctrinally dismissed LDS Doctrine & Covenants 128. This freed them
up to discount verse 20 which places “Cumorah” in the Finger Lakes region of
western New York.
Covenant Land
Identity Theft!
With all the good that may be to their credit, I believe
tour guides are doing the Saints a disservice. Not only are they prone to
misconstrue scripture, misrepresent Lehi’s covenant land of liberty (which
is not the land of Emperors Iturbide, Maximilian and Dictator Santa Anna etc,
2 Nephi 10:10-14), and unwittingly betray the true American remnant of the
House of Israel (the scripturally identified
Lamanites of North America; i.e.
LDS Doctrine and Covenants 10:46-51;
19:27;
28:8-9;
30:5-6;
32:1-2;
54:8;
57:4), but paid guides,
lecturers and authors are distracting the Saints from becoming prepared for
the reeling criticism that someday will come from the mainstream secular
community.
This attack will employ the defensible mound-builder
literary setting of the Book of Mormon – a setting already announced
by mainstream American History and Literature authorities.
[30]
One day the Mound-builder literary genre will be made
common knowledge by mainstream academia. It won’t take much to make the
Saints look silly. How could they have gotten something so obvious, so wrong
for so long? Respected secular authorities will cogently present to a far
larger audience than ever before, how the Book of Mormon fits
perfectly in the 19th century Mound-builder genre.
[31] It
will be explained that the Book of Mormon’s mythic setting was
inspired by the earthworks and old native fortifications of western
New York – the Smith family’s “backyard” as it were.
[32] These old sites were opened
and explored by 18th and 19th century amateurs called “money diggers”, who
told tales about them, and the people who made them.
[33]
More than a decade after the Book of Mormon was published, a
persecuted Latter-day Saint community latched onto John Lloyd Stephens’
bestseller in an effort to bolster faith and counter criticism.
Misadventures followed. Confused, exaggerated geographic traditions held
Mormon attention on places thousands of miles away. Thus, Mormons have in
large measure failed to focus on the authentic literary background of their
own sacred scripture. Now it takes the secular community to speak up and
help get on track, a people who claim to talk with God… Such will be the
majority view.
As
for the Lord’s ancient covenant people:
“…
behold, Zion
hath said: The Lord [Sacred
Hebrew Name: The Eternal, He Who Will Ever Be] hath forsaken
me, and my Lord [Hebrew: “Adonai”]
hath forgotten me – but he will show that he hath not. For can a woman
forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the son of
her womb? Yea, they may forget, yet will I not forget thee, O house of Israel. Behold, I have graven thee
upon the palms of my hands; thy walls are continually before me.”
(1 Nephi 21:14-16)
And scripture also warns:
“…when the Lord shall see fit, in his wisdom, that these sayings shall come
unto the Gentiles…then ye may know that the covenant which the Father hath
made with the children of Israel, concerning their restoration to the lands
of their inheritance, is already beginning to be fulfilled… And ye need not
imagine in your hearts that the words which have been spoken are vain…
Therefore ye need not suppose that ye can turn the right hand of the Lord
unto the left, that he may not execute judgment unto the fulfilling of the
covenant which he hath made unto the house of
Israel.”
(3 Nephi 29:1-9)
References and Links:
[1]
Promised Lands - Example of a Dubious Source
[2]
B. H. Roberts, New Witnesses for God, “IX. - The Geography
of the Book”, Vol. 3, pg. 499-503
[3] “STEPHEN’S WORKS ON CENTRAL AMERICA”,
Times and Seasons, October 1, 1843, Vol. 4, No. 22, pg. 346; April 1, 1845, Vol. 6,
pg. 855 – John Taylor, Editor and Proprietor
[4] John Lloyd Stephens, Incident of
Travel in Central America,
Chiapas
and Yucatan,
Vol. II, Chapter XXVI, “COMPARATIVE MODERN DATE OF RUINS”, pp. 442-443
[5]
Matthew Roper,
“Limited Geography and
the Book of Mormon: Historical Antecedents and Early Interpretations”, BYU
Maxwell Institute, 2004
[6]
Joseph Smith, Josiah Priest and the Times and Seasons
[7]
Book of Mormon lands & the Times and Seasons newspaper
[8]
Wilford Woodruff Journal, 22 September, 2 October, 1842; see
also The Papers of Joseph Smith Vol. 2, pg. 482 footnote
[9]
John Taylor, The Gospel Kingdom, pg. 357; see also Journal of
Discourses 5:240-241, September 13, 1857
[10] “American
Antiquities”, Times and Seasons, 15 July, 1842, Vol. 3, No. 18, pp.
858-860) – signed “ED” by Joseph Smith
[11]
Josiah Priest,
American Antiquities, “Traits of the Mosaic History found among the Azteca
Nations”, pg. 202, 1833
[12] ibid, pp. 191, 197-202; see also “Traits of the
Mosaic History Found Among the Azteca Nations”, Times and Seasons,
June 15, 1842, Vol. 3, No. 16, pp. 818-820, Singed “ED” by Joseph Smith; see
also
[6
,
7
]
[13]
Letter to John Bernhisel 16 November 1841,
The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, compiled and edited by Dean C. Jessee, S.L.C, Deseret Book, 2002,
pg. 533
[14]
John Lloyd Stephens, Incidents of Travel in
Central America, Chiapas and Yucatan, pp. 97-98
[15]
Compare
“American Antiquities”, Times and Seasons, 15 July, 1842, Vol. 3, No.
18, pp. 858-860 – signed “ED” (editor Joseph Smith]
with “EXTRACT”, Times and Seasons, September 15, Vol. 3, No. 22, pp.
911-915 - unsigned
[16]
Book of Mormon - 1879 LDS Edition,
Alma 22:31, footnote 2q, pg. 303
[17]
George Q. Cannon (editor), “Topics of the Times”, Juvenile
Instructor, July 15, 1887, Vol. 22, No. 14, pg. 221
[18] Franklin
D. Richards, A Compendium of the Doctrines of
the Gospel, 1887, pg. 298
[19] Vincent Coon, CHOICE ABOVE ALL
OTHER LANDS, Chapter 3 - Unsigned Articles and a Popular Book,
Brethren Speculate
[20] “BOOK OF MORMON GEOGRAPHY”, The Instructor, Vol.
73, No. 4, April 1938, pp. 159-160 - reprinted from the Juvenile
Instructor, January 1, 1890, George G. Cannon (editor)
[21]
Nearly NAKED WARRIORS in winter?
[22]
“Topics of the Times”, Juvenile Instructor, July 15, 1887, Vol. 22,
No. 14, pg. 221, George Q. Cannon
(editor); see also (20). Note:
Cannon actually writes “hill known as Cumorah”.
Many forget that Cumorah is a land.
(Mormon 6:5)
[23]
Lies,
Darned lies &
Statistics
[24] Seasons -
On the Extent of Lehi’s American Inheritance
[25] Journal of Samuel D. Tyler,
September 25, 1838
[26] Journal of Discourses, Vol.
14, pg. 325
[27] Letter to
Emma Smith from Zion's
Camp, June 4th, 1834,
The Personal Writings of
Joseph Smith, edited by
Dean C. Jessee, pp. 344-346
[28] Robert Silverberg,
The Mound Builders,
1970, pp. 72-73; see also
Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, pg. 131; Vol. 14, pp.
297-298; Vol. 16, pp. 56-57; Vol. 19, pg. 312
[29]
American Land of Israel
[30]
Robert Silverberg,
“…and the mound-builders vanished from the earth”
[31]
Thomas S. Garlinghouse,
“Revisiting the Mound-builder Controversy”,
History Today
[32]
Roger G. Kennedy,
Hidden Cities – The Discovery and Loss of Ancient North American
Civilization