I look forward to his discussion on the Book of Abraham. I am sure my friends Egyptologists Tamas Mekis from Hungary and Kara Cooney from LA will be interested.
Good Podcast Ed! Ed is a very honest and thorough person. I know him personally as he is my cousin and is basically a brother as we are very close and grew up together.
I watched all of this, and thanks for sharing it. I have a few comments to add: - Ed's model is interesting, and is one that I've not yet come across. His model is actually somewhat close to the model proposed by Mark Alan Wright "Heartland as Hinterland: The Mesoamerican Core and North American Periphery of Book of Mormon Geography". Where they differ is in the location of the Hill Cumorah or Ramah, as mentioned in the Book of Mormon, where Mormon deposited the majority of the plates, except those he gave to his son Moroni, which were the plates which Moroni later buried himself, possibly in a different hill (the text doesn't say one way or the other). Ed places the hill Cumorah in NY state, where the Heartlanders place it, while Mark places it in Mesoamerica. I personally am a fan of Mark's model. The point where I have a major disagreement with both Ed and also many Heartlanders is that I would not be comfortable with conflating my personal testimony of the Gospel with any particular Book of Mormon geographical location, such as the Hill Cumorah. While I believe the hill is in Mesoamerica, I am happy to be corrected at any point in time if and when I find out its actual location. I find it actually more believable that Moroni, in his wanderings over many years before he buried the plates, traveled far to the north to escape his enemies, to a place where other Nephites had migrated to many years before, to take refuge amongst them. It makes perfect sense that he would not stick around all those years, amidst all who were hunting him down, only to deposit the records in the exact same hill his father had buried the other records in, many years ago. It makes sense to me that he would then deposit his small set of plates in a hill where he had wandered to, a safe place which was far from the turmoil of the last Nephite battles, the hill in NY state where Joseph Smith was instructed to find them. - It is very unfortunate that Ed had those bad experiences with Brant Gardner and some other BYU scholars in the past. I would hope that Ed and Brant and others will be able to clear those up disagreements and offenses at some point and that previous wounds can be healed, and forgiveness can be a part of that healing process. My impression is that that healing has not yet occurred to the point where it should. This seems to be a personal thing between Ed and others and I don't think it is a good idea to paint FAIR as a bad organization based on human shortcomings of a few individuals in the past. Personally, I am a big fan of FAIRlds and what they have done and continue to do to help me and others with questions that we might have that come up from time to time. - Near the end, I was not comfortable with Ed's condemnation of the 'nevillenevilleland' blog in such strong terms as he used. Similarly for Neal Rappleye's 9 year old article critiquing Jonathan Neville and the Heartland movement's previous statements (Steven added a link to that archived article) . I agree totally that both the name of the blog and the title of Neal's article should not have used Jonathan's surname as a 'pun' (nevillenevilleland), but should have been called something else. Also, some of the tone of the nevillenevilleland blog could be softened in a way to make it less judgmental. But I didn't have a problem with Neal's old article, other than the title. I thought his criticisms were not particularly unreasonable, from the standpoint of a normal debate of that nature, especially given the nature of the criticisms from Jonathan that he was answering. However, overall I don't see why they should be singled out for condemnation when the rhetoric I've seen from Jonathan Neville's many blogs and articles are just as judgmental (if not more so) and uncharitable as anything coming from some of the Mesoamerican folks. I've also seen Rod Meldrum write and say some pretty harsh and judgmental things about the Mesoamerican scholars as well, but more so from Jonathan and Rian Nelson. Overall, I'd like to see a significant softening of the tone of rhetoric coming from both sides, and I am starting to see a little bit of that, I think more softening from the Mesoamerican scholar side than from the Heartlander side, based on various recent videos I've seen this past year or so. I think it is unfair though to single out the Mesoamerican folks with a monopoly of the negative and judgmental rhetoric when it is has come from both sides. One last thing I'd like to say is that it is understandably difficult for the 2 sides to see eye-to-eye because of 2 main issues: 1) The Heartlander proponents are 100% convinced that Mormon's hill Cumorah is the one in NY state where Joseph Smith got the plates, and that the actual Zarahemla site is across the river from Nauvoo, IL, based on their interpretations of church history. Their entire geographical model is then based on this foundation, and science also takes a back seat to this idea, or else is contorted to fit those 2 anchor points. There is a great deal of skepticism of modern science, and a great deal of trust is placed in artifacts that are for the most part rejected by most mainstream scholars. They often accuse those who don't believe those 2 anchor points of 'not believing the apostles and prophets', and will not consider any model that does not absolutely have those 2 anchor points, or at least the Cumorah anchor point. 2) Mesoamerican proponents primarily look at the text and try to use modern scientific methods to figure out the geography. Historical statements by past church leaders are not necessarily taken at face value, when they pertain the Book of Mormon geography. Such statements can be seen as very possibly culturally based assumptions rather than divine revelation, or else there are alternate interpretations of these statements. A 'Heartland as Hinterland' model, as I mentioned earlier, can also help in this regard.
To each their own. Such is the nature of belief, testimony, unbelief and nonbelief. You naturally take seriously only what you have respect to in terms of belief.
The main issue for me with Mesoamerica, is there is no era of peace from 36 AD to 200 AD. The Hopewell have no war in that period of time, but Mesoamerica has an increase in warfare in the same time period. For example, in Teotihuacan the Temple of the Feathered Serpent was dedicated in 200 AD with 200 human sacrifices. I don't believe it is reasonable to believe the era of peace ended with an extreme of human sacrifice right off the bat.
The Narrow Neck of Land in the Heartland Model that makes the most sense to me is the Lower Peninsula of Michigan. The water level of the Great Lakes was higher back then. Between the Grand Kankakee Marsh and the Great Black Swamp in Book of Mormon times, they would come to within 25 to 35 miles from completely cutting off the Lower Peninsula of Michigan. The massive number of serpents blocking the path of the Jaredites would have come from those water-logged areas. Most of the Eastern United States would have been the hunting preserve of the Jaredites with the Adena in the Ohio becoming the civilization center after the serpents were wiped out enough travel into the land southward. I believe the Adena built Poverty Point, because it was constructed by hunter-gatherers who were very organized. The Jaredites would have had a lot of hunter gatherers to support civilization center, and so they could work together very efficiently because they would have been from the same civilization and ultimately the authority of the King over them.
This taking private conversations and making them public is so frustrating. It’s a sure way to end open dialogue. I have seen anti Mormons do it to Mormon missionaries, I have seen ex Mormons do it to their priesthood leaders and now to hear fair does it too is sad. Nobody will feel safe speaking off the cuff if this practice doesn’t change.
@@DasViking either way you have to see how ridiculous it is to have the theory or model of the month? It does not help that the only artifact relating to the BOM is a simple rock or seer stone. But, I guess there is a sliver of hope that it could prove to be a history of a real unknown civilization in the Americas that spoke Hebrew and wrote in Hebrew and Refotmed Egyptian, and have Jewish DNA.
@ericredd5590 It certainly seems crazy to have so many different models all the time, but I guess that is what science is.Having theory after theory until one theory is bulletproof?. I don't know, man, I don't know why it's so hard to pinpoint where the BOM took place. Maybe it's because it was such a small population compared to the rest of the Americas. I mean, you can easily fit hundreds of thousands into one city today, even with our big houses and businesses. All I really know is I've studied a lot of different religions, and none make as much sense to me as the LDS theology. That's just me, though. That's my journey thus far.
![KSI - Dirty [Official Visualiser]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VoDh1h1dPUE/mqdefault.jpg)
I look forward to his discussion on the Book of Abraham. I am sure my friends Egyptologists Tamas Mekis from Hungary and Kara Cooney from LA will be interested.
Good Podcast Ed! Ed is a very honest and thorough person. I know him personally as he is my cousin and is basically a brother as we are very close and grew up together.
Thanks man. Glad you could enjoy it!
Great video Steven and Ed!
It is fascinating to hear this history of developments that have occurred over the past 30 years.
Thank you.
Ok. I need a link to the smith '44 t shirt.
I watched all of this, and thanks for sharing it. I have a few comments to add:
- Ed's model is interesting, and is one that I've not yet come across. His model is actually somewhat close to the model proposed by Mark Alan Wright "Heartland as Hinterland: The Mesoamerican Core and North American Periphery of Book of Mormon Geography". Where they differ is in the location of the Hill Cumorah or Ramah, as mentioned in the Book of Mormon, where Mormon deposited the majority of the plates, except those he gave to his son Moroni, which were the plates which Moroni later buried himself, possibly in a different hill (the text doesn't say one way or the other). Ed places the hill Cumorah in NY state, where the Heartlanders place it, while Mark places it in Mesoamerica. I personally am a fan of Mark's model. The point where I have a major disagreement with both Ed and also many Heartlanders is that I would not be comfortable with conflating my personal testimony of the Gospel with any particular Book of Mormon geographical location, such as the Hill Cumorah. While I believe the hill is in Mesoamerica, I am happy to be corrected at any point in time if and when I find out its actual location. I find it actually more believable that Moroni, in his wanderings over many years before he buried the plates, traveled far to the north to escape his enemies, to a place where other Nephites had migrated to many years before, to take refuge amongst them. It makes perfect sense that he would not stick around all those years, amidst all who were hunting him down, only to deposit the records in the exact same hill his father had buried the other records in, many years ago. It makes sense to me that he would then deposit his small set of plates in a hill where he had wandered to, a safe place which was far from the turmoil of the last Nephite battles, the hill in NY state where Joseph Smith was instructed to find them.
- It is very unfortunate that Ed had those bad experiences with Brant Gardner and some other BYU scholars in the past. I would hope that Ed and Brant and others will be able to clear those up disagreements and offenses at some point and that previous wounds can be healed, and forgiveness can be a part of that healing process. My impression is that that healing has not yet occurred to the point where it should. This seems to be a personal thing between Ed and others and I don't think it is a good idea to paint FAIR as a bad organization based on human shortcomings of a few individuals in the past. Personally, I am a big fan of FAIRlds and what they have done and continue to do to help me and others with questions that we might have that come up from time to time.
- Near the end, I was not comfortable with Ed's condemnation of the 'nevillenevilleland' blog in such strong terms as he used. Similarly for Neal Rappleye's 9 year old article critiquing Jonathan Neville and the Heartland movement's previous statements (Steven added a link to that archived article) . I agree totally that both the name of the blog and the title of Neal's article should not have used Jonathan's surname as a 'pun' (nevillenevilleland), but should have been called something else. Also, some of the tone of the nevillenevilleland blog could be softened in a way to make it less judgmental. But I didn't have a problem with Neal's old article, other than the title. I thought his criticisms were not particularly unreasonable, from the standpoint of a normal debate of that nature, especially given the nature of the criticisms from Jonathan that he was answering.
However, overall I don't see why they should be singled out for condemnation when the rhetoric I've seen from Jonathan Neville's many blogs and articles are just as judgmental (if not more so) and uncharitable as anything coming from some of the Mesoamerican folks. I've also seen Rod Meldrum write and say some pretty harsh and judgmental things about the Mesoamerican scholars as well, but more so from Jonathan and Rian Nelson.
Overall, I'd like to see a significant softening of the tone of rhetoric coming from both sides, and I am starting to see a little bit of that, I think more softening from the Mesoamerican scholar side than from the Heartlander side, based on various recent videos I've seen this past year or so. I think it is unfair though to single out the Mesoamerican folks with a monopoly of the negative and judgmental rhetoric when it is has come from both sides.
One last thing I'd like to say is that it is understandably difficult for the 2 sides to see eye-to-eye because of 2 main issues:
1) The Heartlander proponents are 100% convinced that Mormon's hill Cumorah is the one in NY state where Joseph Smith got the plates, and that the actual Zarahemla site is across the river from Nauvoo, IL, based on their interpretations of church history. Their entire geographical model is then based on this foundation, and science also takes a back seat to this idea, or else is contorted to fit those 2 anchor points. There is a great deal of skepticism of modern science, and a great deal of trust is placed in artifacts that are for the most part rejected by most mainstream scholars. They often accuse those who don't believe those 2 anchor points of 'not believing the apostles and prophets', and will not consider any model that does not absolutely have those 2 anchor points, or at least the Cumorah anchor point.
2) Mesoamerican proponents primarily look at the text and try to use modern scientific methods to figure out the geography. Historical statements by past church leaders are not necessarily taken at face value, when they pertain the Book of Mormon geography. Such statements can be seen as very possibly culturally based assumptions rather than divine revelation, or else there are alternate interpretations of these statements. A 'Heartland as Hinterland' model, as I mentioned earlier, can also help in this regard.
I'm interested to see his Book of Abraham research
The battle over which pseudoarchaeological model of Book of Mormon geography should prevail.
To each their own. Such is the nature of belief, testimony, unbelief and nonbelief. You naturally take seriously only what you have respect to in terms of belief.
The main issue for me with Mesoamerica, is there is no era of peace from 36 AD to 200 AD. The Hopewell have no war in that period of time, but Mesoamerica has an increase in warfare in the same time period. For example, in Teotihuacan the Temple of the Feathered Serpent was dedicated in 200 AD with 200 human sacrifices. I don't believe it is reasonable to believe the era of peace ended with an extreme of human sacrifice right off the bat.
Why can't the narrow neck of land in the Book of Mormon be the Great Lakes? They're large enough to be mistaken for oceans.
That's a key idea in some flavors of the heartland model.
yep.
The Narrow Neck of Land in the Heartland Model that makes the most sense to me is the Lower Peninsula of Michigan. The water level of the Great Lakes was higher back then. Between the Grand Kankakee Marsh and the Great Black Swamp in Book of Mormon times, they would come to within 25 to 35 miles from completely cutting off the Lower Peninsula of Michigan. The massive number of serpents blocking the path of the Jaredites would have come from those water-logged areas.
Most of the Eastern United States would have been the hunting preserve of the Jaredites with the Adena in the Ohio becoming the civilization center after the serpents were wiped out enough travel into the land southward. I believe the Adena built Poverty Point, because it was constructed by hunter-gatherers who were very organized. The Jaredites would have had a lot of hunter gatherers to support civilization center, and so they could work together very efficiently because they would have been from the same civilization and ultimately the authority of the King over them.
There is not even the tiniest hint of winter conditions in the Book of Mormon.
Looks like you would probably favor a complete M2C Meso model then.
The word snow appears as a comparison, and some of the clothing.
@@VickiRasmussen The Nephites were not unaware of the phenomenon.
Mesoamerican vs Heartlander: when confirmation biases collide.
This taking private conversations and making them public is so frustrating. It’s a sure way to end open dialogue. I have seen anti Mormons do it to Mormon missionaries, I have seen ex Mormons do it to their priesthood leaders and now to hear fair does it too is sad. Nobody will feel safe speaking off the cuff if this practice doesn’t change.
IMO FAIR has always been and continues to be unfair to anyone afield of their pronouncements. They go for the jugular. 😢
They're harmless.......
Citation needed.
@@testtest648 What That FAIR is harmless?
Good!
@@TheBackyardProfessor I'm surprised you would say this Kerry.
Oh great another geography model for a fictional book.
None of these R credible as Evidence!!!
Or maybe it's a real book, and maybe it's helped millions to become closer to Jesus Christ.
I guess we all have different opinions.
This must be so hard for you
@@DasViking either way you have to see how ridiculous it is to have the theory or model of the month? It does not help that the only artifact relating to the BOM is a simple rock or seer stone.
But, I guess there is a sliver of hope that it could prove to be a history of a real unknown civilization in the Americas that spoke Hebrew and wrote in Hebrew and Refotmed Egyptian, and have Jewish DNA.
@ericredd5590 It certainly seems crazy to have so many different models all the time, but I guess that is what science is.Having theory after theory until one theory is bulletproof?.
I don't know, man, I don't know why it's so hard to pinpoint where the BOM took place. Maybe it's because it was such a small population compared to the rest of the Americas. I mean, you can easily fit hundreds of thousands into one city today, even with our big houses and businesses.
All I really know is I've studied a lot of different religions, and none make as much sense to me as the LDS theology. That's just me, though. That's my journey thus far.