P
Pahoran
Guest
Who are they? Where did they study? What are their credentials? What have they published?Serious non-Mormon BoM scholars
And thus you undermine your own argument. People who dismiss the Book of Mormon as “FICTION” are the last people to take the time to seriously study it to see where it fits in the real world. Why would you bother, if you start out by being convinced that it is not in the real world?say that it only roughly fits many geographies because it is FICTION.
Ask an archaeologist. The Church of Jesus Christ is not an archaeological institution.And Cumorah roughly fits Cahokia, which has been subjected to archaeological exploration. So why hasn’t Cumorah been subjected to archaeological exploration?
Only one out of two. Mr Meldrum does have a modest following, but his interpretation does serious violence to the text. In fact his view represents a folklore Mormon view that has been in full retreat for at least sixty years now. The “Limited geography theory” (LGT) is derived from a careful reading of the text, and the only one that actually makes sense of what the text says.As for a northern location for the book, I understand that Rod Meldrum’s contingent is quite large, and his interpretation does not do as much violence to a literal reading of the text.
By contrast, the “Global colonisation hypothesis” (GCH) or “Hemispheric geography theory” represents nothing more than popular assumptions about the text that got perpetuated by being passed around.
Please note that Mr Meldrum does not go into bat for the GCH. He’s actually adopted a Great Lakes LGT.
One word: snow.Why are you so opposed to that interpretation?
Which is a separate issue.Chariots are mentioned, as are elephants, cows, horses, wheat, oxen, flax, silk, donkeys, iron smelting, steel…
Regards,
Pahoran