Quotes on WHERE The Book of Mormon Happened 

You're welcome Darlene! I hope you enjoy it :)

you are entitled to your own idea but it can not convince me. I know that the BOM was written from the perspective of a man who lived in the 1800s. one evidence is that he used the name of Jesus which was never mentioned in other books in the old testament. secondly, the numbering of the chapters and verses of the bible was never done until recently by the bishop of the church of England. the dead sea scroll was not even chaptered and versed. amazingly, the texts of the book of Isaiah in the BOM were also divided into chapters and versed!!!! this shows that the man who wrote the book of Mormon was living somewhere not in the old testament times but in the 1800s.

Read Wayne Mays books ,will reenforce your out look.

the verse in alma 7:10 shows that BOM is written by someone who is not well versed with Micah the prophet.

@@123buraikake4 The 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon did not have chapters and verses. That was done in 1879 by Orson Pratt. Nephi quoted Isaiah from the plates of brass. The book is true and it testifies of Jesus Christ. Christ did visit ancient America after his resurrection. The promised land for the Tribe of Joseph is the United States of America. Lehi was a descendant of Joseph who was sold into Egypt. Joseph Smith translated Mormon and Moroni abridgement of ancient records and the unabridged small plates of Nephi using the Urim and Thummim. It's true according to the everlasting decree of God!

​@@123buraikake4 Actually Alma 7:10 is further proof of the divinity of the Book of Mormon. It states, "10 And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God." Bethlehem is about 5 miles south of Jerusalem which is part of the "land of Jerusalem" or the territory around the city of Jerusalem! The word "at" means in, by, or near. The phrase "at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers" refers to the area around the city of Jerusalem, not the city of Jerusalem! There are numerous references in the Book of Mormon to specific cities located in larger geographic areas that share similar names, e.g., the city of Zarahemla and the land of Zarahemla or Bountiful and the land of Bountiful or Cumorah and the land of Cumorah!

You're welcome! I've been trying to get this one out for a while now :)

@@MichaelP_IsMe I find your BoM videos like gold. Keep up the fine work!

@@EMonzon Thanks :)

I converted when I was 25. Always knew the Book Of Mormon to be true. Also read The Church History in The Fullness of Times. Never really thought about lands, and where it took place til one day I walked into an Institute Class, and seen a map of the BoM on a Central/South America setting. I remember thinking to myself... "That's wrong!"

You joined a cult with no real evidence of its validity! Great for you! Read the CES letter!

You're welcome! Glad you like it.

Whaaat 😮

There are also Native American stories about Bigfoot too

Right. Nobody wants to "flee" to South America. 😂

Joseph Smith said four times in writing that he did not practice polygamy. The LDS church denied that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy for 180 years. They finally told the truth in November 2015.

@@estherlewis7458 ..... I don't know where you're getting that information, Joseph did practice polygamy and this has always been known, but he did not have sex with the womenwhom he was sealed to and this is proven by the fact that they cannot find any descendants who are actually linked through DNA.

@@estherlewis7458 I will research what you've claimed here. The many men who took wives willy nilly seem to have tarnished the good men that were called to take on more responsibility by marrying a woman and becoming a father influence to her children. Many ppl make negative claims about Church doctrine without a sincere desire from God for truth. I have dug deeply in prayer and study to discover their claims were untrue. I have that desire for truth and thru study and prayer, the Holy Spirit will teach me as only HE can teach truth. So, I'll fearlessly check your claim out.

Joseph had 56 wives 4 with living husbands???? Follow him probably not!!! But love JESUS yes I do!!!

No, that was Brigham Young. He and his over sexed buddies frame Joseph Smith.@@temporarysp

do you think the heartland model fits your belife as well? I do 100%

Do you believe that skin color can change based on someones righteousness?

@@stevenhenderson9005 Well, Abraham got God down to 10 good people to be found in Sodom so the city would not be destroyed. It only came down to 4 and two angels got Lot, his wife and two daughters out before the firestorm from heaven. God seems to put a lot of requirements of people being good or repenting of sins else some form of punishment occurs.

@@guytrout7101 So what is it in your heart that causes you to believe that black skin is a cursing or punishment from God and white skin is a blessing? Please explain to me a time that God punished you for committing sin? and also explain how that affected your skin color?

@@stevenhenderson9005 Don't know but in the Old Testament there were several times God punished people for not doing what they told. Any issues pray to God for information.

But you do have to be within the church to accept the Covenants. The promised protection and blessings apply to those who are under the Covenants.

@@aisaxonawiat6484 of course

BOM cannot be true as it contradicts the Holy Bible. Mormonism teaches 3 levels of heaven, Jesus and satan are brothers, and that God was once a man who exalted himself to perfection! You teach that women have to be called forth to be saved by their husbands. JS was a seer and the Bible states to stay away from any medium! Satan is well aware of all of earths history and led JS to write a tall tale.

Yes! I visited it for the first time just this last April :) I'll have to watch that video.

I'm not sure if you're referring to my previous video about the current prophet, Russell Nelson, urging Church members to get the COVID-19 vaccination and to still wear masks when they can't be more than 6 feet apart, but if that is what you are referring to, then there is a major difference between a prophet of God just giving an opinion versus urging the entire global Church membership to do something. "Urge" is a very strong word. It means the same thing as the word "Exhort", which is the word that ancient prophets used. Today, the word "Urge" is a more common word than "Exhort". Sure, it's not the same as the word "Command", but it's still a strong word. Think of the many examples in the scriptures when people didn't do what the prophets of God "exhorted" (or "urged") them to do. And in January, Russell even came right out and said that the vaccine was an answer to the many prayers and fasting which he invited the world to do at the April 2020 General Conference. The vaccine is not any of the crazy things that so many people are saying it is. I trust the Lord and His current prophet. Anyway, coming back around to your comparison, if somebody's opinion (even a prophet) is that The Book of Mormon happened in all of the Americas or just a smaller part within, that's no big deal. But if somebody ignores a prophet's "urging" ("exhorting"), then that is a big deal. It doesn't necessarily mean that person is "sinning", but that person will most likely regret their decision sometime in the future, like somebody who never prepared a food storage (as the prophets urge us to do), and then had no food when the time came that they needed it.

@@MichaelP_IsMe :)

@@MichaelP_IsMe the jab is all of the crazy things people are saying it is. All of them.

President TRUMP demonstrated that early treatments were the key to overcoming the pandemic. That prophet spoke the truth ! GRACE is a 5 letter word folks.

@@Christ_in_You-theHope_of_Glory What in the heck are you saying?

Land South is South America, Land North is North America.

Also. If you want to make the argument about where missionary work has gone, the vast majority of it has been preached to the Lamanite peoples of Central and South America. Far less has gone to North American Lamanite descendants.

Very good! The Book does mention many thousands of Nephites and converted Lamanites departed Zarahemla hundreds of years before Christ, and migrated north to settle a land for their personal inheritances, some traveling a great distance to discover large bodies of water (Great Lakes fit the narrative); However, we don't have the history of these migrating Nephites, only a brief mention of them to let us know they exist. Any evidence discovered on the continent, only collaborates the Book's narrative that Nephites (and Jaredites before) occupied the entire continent. Alma 63, Helaman 3, Mormon 1:6, Moroni 1, Omni 1, & Ether. The Church's main focus and mission is to proclaim and teach the Gospel of Christ; Book of Mormon & Biblical geography are not topics the Church dwells on, thus many latter-day saints are unaware Joseph precisely claimed and declared, Zarahemla was in Central America. Joseph Smith as editor, with his assistants, Apostles John Taylor & Wilford Woodruff, unitedly as editors, published an 'important fact' in the Church's paper the Times and Seasons on October 1, 1842, entitled Zarahemla, They declared Zarahemla was in Central America, specifically in Guatemala. They went on to clarify they weren't declaring or naming a specific ruin as the exact location of the city of Zarahemla within Guatemala, only that it was within the borders of Guatemala. To substantiate the claim, Joseph, being very familiar with the details of the BOM, quotes Alma 22 describing the setting and region where Zarahemla was. There's no hearsay about it; we have the publication, it's real. The Church has never refuted the publication or claim. In fact, the Church's current statement on BOM geography verifies Joseph as editor during the publications relating to the BOM geography articles. It also says Joseph believed there were Book of Mormon evidence in both North and Central America; both are on this continent by the way, as Mormon called it. This cannot be discounted away, it's a fact in the history books. Look it up and read it for yourself. The T&S editorial is simply marvelous, notice how the editors clarify the city of Zarahemla, as the one burnt at the time of the Lord's crucifixion; why would they need to specify the Zarahemla burnt at the Savior's crucifixion; isn't there only one Zarahemla? Because, they knew there was another city, with the name of Zarahemla, developed by the Latter-day Saints across the river from Nauvoo. Joseph, John, & Wilford clarified it long ago, so no one would be confused by the different Zarahemla in Iowa. No need for speculation, Joseph clears it all up in the same edition of the T&S. Long before any scholar, researcher, book writer, or you-tuber pronounced their own theory as to the location of Zarahemla, Joseph had already declared it to be in Central America, in the southern region of the continent, just like the BOM describes. No scholars or theories needed to narrow down the general area, Joseph did it for us. Thanks, Brother Joseph! Also, know, in the same T&S Oct 1, 1842 edition, the editors (Joseph, John, & Wilford) refute the conspiring claims, suggesting Joseph had fled the area of Nauvoo and was no longer in charge. Truth is, Joseph was still in the area and still very much editor of what was published in the T&S Oct 1, 1842; while at the same time avoiding false arrest of conspiring men. Read the full edition, Joseph was still around and still very much in charge, as represented & substantiated by the T&S itself. So a very special thanks to the inspired editors(Joseph, John, & Wilford), for documenting this conspiracy so long ago and clearing it up, so future generations wouldn't have to speculate about it. Here's an interesting collaboration on what Joseph would have seen on available maps regarding Guatemala's borders when Joseph made his declaration; google - "map of Guatemala 1825" (or 1835, it doesn't matter) open a properly labeled historical map and notice Guatemala's borders back then extended as far north to include the Chiapas & Palenque areas of modern-day Mexico. Say what! A very interesting area indeed!

I agree that Zarahemla was in Mesoamerica, but I'm not just going to take Joseph's word for it. Every word out of Joseph Smith's mouth was not the words of a prophet. Sometimes he just speculated like any other man would. Prophets are not always speaking for God nor are they omniscient of every topic. I believe his Zelph story, for example, was just his own personal speculation, his own opinion.

I think a vast amount of this video was lifted from Wayne May. So, I think he knows of May’s work very well.

@@Icriedtoday You are right, but the author of thr RU-vid video did not say Wayne's name if he did. Probably an oversight and mistakes happen. I do science research and I put all sources in the reference and if I do reference a topic from a source, I put the original author's name in the writting.

@@guytrout7101 I've learned a lot of great stuff from Wayne and many others. See 26:58 in this video for a list of some of the people I've learned from.

@@MichaelP_IsMe We can see that but you did not reference where you got your information from. I research science information. The information I research I document in my writing as well on the Reference page. Doing so points the reader to the source and validates my research and conclusion. My work has been reviewed and the Reference Page is the first thing they look for. Being a science teacher, where you get your information is important. I you stated your source name it validates your work and their's. No I don't work for Mr. May but I know where it comes from but your viewers may don't. So a reference to the source creates a foundation of facts and truth.

​@@guytrout7101 Every single quote I go over in this video shows the reference of where it came from. There are a few brief moments in this video where I mention Mound-builders and Mayans, and during the first time I mention them, I show a list of people who have helped me learn, which includes Wayne May and his websites. And since this video is about quotes from church history and not about Mound-builders, I let the viewers know that they can get more information on the Mound-builders from some of my other videos and that they can get much more detailed information from people who have helped me learn, which again, includes Wayne May and his websites. There are also a few graphics I use in this video from various Wayne May presentations, which is shown on the screen each time. And Wayne May and his websites (along with other people and theirs) are in the description box of this very video. I refer people to Wayne and others I've learned from in almost all of my videos (and their description boxes).

😂

😅

God showed Joseph Smith where those places are.how and why the locations of the book of Mormon was changed if it was God given? Even the angel Moroni described the history of what happened.the book of Mormon contradicts itself that's why people are leaving the in droves the book of Mormon was written by a man's weird imagination or by the Devil himself.how can you translate the BOM by looking into a hat and translating from a stone in a couple of months? A seers stone for that matter.joseph Smith is a fraud,conman,liar, necromancer.

And so it was and is. According to the Book of Mormon, Nephites did occupy what is currently known as the heartland of the United States of America. However, what many don't understand is who these Nephites were or where they came from; applying all of the BOM's narrative and insightful passages tells us who they were and how they got there. The Book clearly says these Nephites left the main BOM lands of Zarahemla & Bountiful and migrated north, some by land, some by ship crossing a sea to the north country. The Book's own narrative says Zarahemla & Bountiful were in the southland of the continent (Mormon 1:6); besides a land route, there is also a sea between Zarahemla and the north country where the New Jerusalem will be built. A review of Alma 63, Helaman 3, mentions the migration of many thousands of Nephites and converted Lamanites all across the continent, these groups left the main Book of Mormon lands of Zarahemla & Bountiful, we do not have their full history. Yet, thanks to Moroni's updates during the 36 years he wandered after his father and people were destroyed, we do know the demise of the northern Nephites ended up being the same as the Nephites gathered at Cumorah in the land of Zarahemla, as the Lamanites continued to hunt Nephites across the continent decades after the battle of Cumorah; which is why the Lamanites were occupying the entire continent when the Europeans arrived. Here's an integral alignment check, a "thought-provoking question" so to speak for those who subscribe to the heartland theory as the land of Zarahemla & Bountiful; knowing from the Book's narrative that the narrow neck of land is near Zarahemla, and thousands of migrating Nephites left from the land of Zarahemla/Bountiful; if any of the narrow strips of land, between any of the Great Lakes, "is" the narrow neck of land, and if any of the Great Lakes, "is" the sea many Nephites sailed across to the north country, where would that place the choice land where the New Jerusalem will be built, Canada?? The thought makes reason stare. This is a huge piece that doesn't fit, not even with mental gymnastics. Any evidence discovered in North America, validates the Book of Mormon narrative, AND precisely collaborates Joseph's statements of wandering over the plains of the Nephites & Zelph story. It's all in the book folks. Alma 63, Helaman 3. Wait there's more; if reading the BOM and comprehending its geography is difficult for one to grasp, what would be a more reliable source, the insights from Joseph, or the speculation of modern-day, self-proclaimed, freelance book writers & you-tubers? Joseph was most familiar with the Book, he translated it, had visitations from its prophets, and had visions of its people, cities, and cultures; Joseph is the expert on the Book. So, has Joseph declared anything about the whereabouts of Zarahemla; why yes, yes he has. The Church's main focus and mission is to proclaim and teach the Gospel of Christ; Book of Mormon & Biblical geography are not topics the Church dwells on, thus many latter-day saints are unaware Joseph precisely claimed and declared, Zarahemla was in Central America. Joseph Smith as editor, with his assistants, Apostles John Taylor & Wilford Woodruff, unitedly as editors, published an 'important fact' in the Church's paper the Times and Seasons on October 1, 1842, entitled Zarahemla, They declared Zarahemla was in Central America, specifically in Guatemala. They went on to clarify they weren't declaring or naming a specific ruin as the exact location of the city of Zarahemla within Guatemala, only that it was within the borders of Guatemala. To substantiate the claim, Joseph, being very familiar with the details of the BOM, quotes Alma 22 describing the setting and region where Zarahemla was. There's no hearsay about it; we have the publication, it's real. The Church has never refuted the publication or claim. In fact, the Church's current statement on BOM geography verifies Joseph as editor during the publications relating to the BOM geography articles. It also says Joseph believed there were Book of Mormon evidence in both North and Central America; both are on this continent by the way, as Mormon called it. This cannot be discounted away, it's a fact in the history books. Look it up and read it for yourself. The T&S editorial is simply marvelous, notice how the editors clarify the city of Zarahemla, as the one burnt at the time of the Lord's crucifixion; why would they need to specify the Zarahemla burnt at the Savior's crucifixion; isn't there only one Zarahemla? Because, they knew there was another city, with the name of Zarahemla, developed by the Latter-day Saints across the river from Nauvoo. Joseph, John, & Wilford clarified it long ago, so no one would be confused by the different Zarahemla in Iowa. No need for speculation, Joseph clears it all up in the same edition of the T&S. Long before any scholar, researcher, book writer, or you-tuber pronounced their own theory as to the location of Zarahemla, Joseph had already declared it to be in Central America, in the southern region of the continent, just like the BOM describes. No scholars or theories needed to narrow down the general area, Joseph did it for us. Thanks, Brother Joseph! Also, know, in the same T&S Oct 1, 1842 edition, the editors (Joseph, John, & Wilford) refute the conspiring claims, suggesting Joseph had fled the area of Nauvoo and was no longer in charge. Truth is, Joseph was still in the area and still very much editor of what was published in the T&S Oct 1, 1842; while at the same time avoiding false arrest of conspiring men. Read the full edition, Joseph was still around and still very much in charge, as represented & substantiated by the T&S itself. So a very special thanks to the inspired editors(Joseph, John, & Wilford), for documenting this conspiracy so long ago and clearing it up, so future generations wouldn't have to speculate about it. Here's an interesting collaboration on what Joseph would have seen on available maps regarding Guatemala's borders when Joseph made his declaration; google - "map of Guatemala 1825" (or 1835, it doesn't matter) open a properly labeled historical map and notice Guatemala's borders back then extended as far north to include the Chiapas & Palenque areas of modern-day Mexico. Say what! A very interesting area indeed! So in summary, no scholars are needed to propose any theory to locate the region of the continent where the city of Zarahemla was; Joseph already took care of it in 1842; it's in Central America; to attempt to speculate this truth away is futile, and a tool used by those conspiring against the truth, to confuse people and sell books and you-tube clicks. All things considered, it all fits precisely as stated both by Joseph and the Book of Mormon narrative. No need to argue or debate. The Book of Mormon testifies of Christ, Joseph is the prophet of the restoration chosen by Christ. Best wishes in your search for Joy and happiness.

@@davus4242 Very well said. Thanks

@@davus4242 You say this in a few of your replies. The problem is this is all explained. Mostly, I feel sad that you wont believe the words of Christ. He never sent apostles to S America to any would be Lamanites there. It turns out that dna puts the Aztecs etx... as Asians and that the temples and carvings are Hindu.

Yes, the Jaredites were 10-footers so they were a good fit for the elephants, cureloms and cumoms (domesticated mammoths and mastodons). These beasts of burden were used to build the giant earthworks in the eastern United States. The Nephites inherited these earthworks and built some fortifications of their own. During the Jaredite famine at the time the snakes blocked movement to the land southward, these big beasts of burden went extinct because the Jaredites followed these animals and ate them when they died. These big animals were not hunted. The game animals escaped to the land southward which facilitated the famine. Eventually, the Jaredites repented and ended the famine.

Sounds like you got it all figured out.

@@Silentpartner2176 Well, I have studied and viewed many videos and talks by scholars of both ideas. By the way of the Pacific takes years while the Atlantic was recently tested in a sail boat, and it was less than a year. I am 83 years of age and I listened to the computer read the Book of Mormon to me and I pictured from the descriptions mid-America. Also DNA evidence and descriptions by Joseph Smith indicates mid-America. But most important is the message of the Book of Mormon. Thank you for your reply.

One group went through the Mediterranean, turned North & followed the European coast north, then did a sharp turn L, then sailed into the Saint Lawrence Seaway & spread into what is now Canada & USA! The rest is NORTH AMERICAN. HISTORY (CANADA AS WELL)!!!! There is a mutual treaty (Jay) between the us & Canada stating there is NO boundary between the 2 nations as far as Native Blood is concerned, we pass forth as needed between Canada/USA border all the time, I’ve done so many times, once in costume, celebrating the signing of the mentioned treaty! POW WOW TIME! JOIN WITH US & DANCE!!!!

@@neddamaccallum386 That is certainly an even shorter voyage that around the African southern coast. The Pacific trip from southern tip of the Saini desert (Bountiful) would be a very long and arduous journey. The DNA in peoples in Central America doesn't match and the stone buildings and art resemble south east Asia.

@@Silentpartner2176 ..... this idea is no longer theory but has been proven.

I encourage you to look into the Malay Peninsula theory. Thailand means "land of the free" and has never been colonized by any European power. The capital city of the Comoros Islands off the coast of Madagascar is named "Moroni." Nobody knows where the name comes from, but we know that the first people who settled Madagascar came from Southeast Asia. Lots of interesting stuff!

I share which quotes are actually declared by a prophet to be revelations from God (those are not opinions) vs. which quotes were said by a prophet but not declared as revelation (those may or may not be opinions) vs. which quotes were said by other people (those are opinions). Yes, the video is long because good research takes time, so I've included timestamps in the video description box so you can more easily pick up where you left off if you aren't able to watch the whole thing at once.

🤣

@@greggsutton3363: #IrrefutableTruth Pukana, Blahhh,,😝😜😛 Where did u say, u were from again🤦🏽‍♂️

"On the way to Illinois River where we camped on the west side. In the morning many went to see the big mound about a mile below the crossing. I did not go on it but saw some bones that were brought back with a broken arrow. They were laid down by our camp. Joseph Smith addressing himself to Sylvester Smith and said, “This is what I told you and now I want to tell you that you may know what I meant. This land was called the land of desolation and Onedages was the King and a good man was he. There in that mound did he bury his dead and did not dig holes as the people do now, but they brought their dirt and covered them until you see they have raised it to be about one hundred feet high. The last man buried was Zelf or Telf. He was a white Lamanite who fought with the people of Onedagus for freedom….” These words he said as the camp was moving off the mounds as near as I could learn he had told them something about the mound and got them to go and see it for themselves. I then remembered what he had said a few days before while passing many mounds on our way …"(Autobiography of Levi Hancock (1803-1882), pg. 27

What kind of moronic statement is that? Do you have anything coherent to offer?

Hey cousin!!

@@ryanreay4167 💪

Yes please! Whenever I give away Books of Mormon, I have to first write little notes next to those paintings explaining how they are incorrect.

I haven't seen anything from the current prophet that puts The Book of Mormon in a tropical environment or in Mexico. If you have references, could you please share them? An interesting thing to note is that parakeet bones are often found in Hopewell burial mounds of the eastern US, suggesting that the climate in the eastern US was warm enough to sustain parakeets during the Hopewell time period, which is the 500s BC to 400s AD.

Very good! The Prophet of the restoration and translator of the Book of Mormon said Zarahemla was in Central America; Joseph was the expert on the book. According to the Book of Mormon narrative, Nephites did occupy what is currently known as the heartland of the United States of America. However, what many don't understand is who these Nephites were or where they came from. In applying all of the BOM's narrative and passages, it tells us who they were and how they got there. The Book clearly says these Nephites of the 'heartland' left the main BOM lands of Zarahemla & Bountiful and migrated north, some by land, some by ship crossing a sea to the north country. The Book's own narrative says Zarahemla & Bountiful were in the southland of the continent (Mormon 1:6); notice, besides a land route, there is also a sea between Zarahemla and the north country where the New Jerusalem will be built. A review of Alma 63, Helaman 3, mentions the migration of many thousands of Nephites and converted Lamanites all across the continent, these groups left the main Book of Mormon lands of Zarahemla & Bountiful, some traveling a great distance north to discover large bodies of water (Great Lakes fit this narrative); however, we do not have their full history, only a breif mention of their journey north. Yet, thanks to Moroni's updates during the 36 years as he wandered after his father and people were destroyed, we do know the demise of the northern Nephites ended up being the same as the Nephites gathered at Cumorah in the land of Zarahemla, as the Lamanites continued to hunt Nephites all across the continent decades after the battle of Cumorah; which is why the Lamanites were occupying the entire continent when the Europeans arrived. Here's an foundational alignment check, a "thought-provoking question" so to speak for those who subscribe to the heartland theory as the land of Zarahemla & Bountiful; knowing from the Book's narrative that the narrow neck of land is near Zarahemla, and thousands of migrating Nephites left from the land of Zarahemla/Bountiful; if any of the narrow strips of land, between any of the Great Lakes, "is" the narrow neck of land, and if any of the Great Lakes, "is" the sea many Nephites sailed across to the north country, where would that place the choice land where the New Jerusalem will be built, Canada?? The thought makes reason stare. This is a huge piece that doesn't fit, not even with mental gymnastics. Any evidence discovered in North America, validates the Book of Mormon narrative, AND precisely collaborates Joseph's statements of wandering over the plains of the Nephites & Zelph story. It's all in the book folks. Alma 63, Helaman 3. Wait there's more; if reading the BOM and comprehending its geography is difficult for one to grasp, what would be a more reliable source, the insights from Joseph, or the speculation of modern-day, self-proclaimed, freelance book writers & you-tubers? Joseph was most familiar with the Book, he translated it, had visitations from its prophets, and had visions of its people, cities, and cultures; Joseph is the expert on the Book. So, has Joseph declared anything about the whereabouts of Zarahemla; why yes, yes he has. The Church's main focus and mission is to proclaim and teach the Gospel of Christ; Book of Mormon & Biblical geography are not topics the Church dwells on, thus many latter-day saints are unaware Joseph precisely claimed and declared, Zarahemla was in Central America. Joseph Smith as editor, with his assistants, Apostles John Taylor & Wilford Woodruff, unitedly as editors, published an 'important fact' in the Church's paper the Times and Seasons on October 1, 1842, entitled Zarahemla, They declared Zarahemla was in Central America, specifically in Guatemala. They went on to clarify they weren't declaring or naming a specific ruin as the exact location of the city of Zarahemla within Guatemala, only that it was within the borders of Guatemala. To substantiate the claim, Joseph, being very familiar with the details of the BOM, quotes Alma 22 describing the setting and region where Zarahemla was. There's no hearsay about it; we have the publication, it's real. The Church has never refuted the publication or claim. In fact, the Church's current statement on BOM geography verifies Joseph as editor during the publications relating to the BOM geography articles. It also says Joseph believed there were Book of Mormon evidence in both North and Central America; both are on this continent by the way, as Mormon called it. This cannot be discounted away, it's a fact in the history books. Look it up and read it for yourself. The T&S editorial is simply marvelous, notice how the editors clarify the city of Zarahemla, as the one burnt at the time of the Lord's crucifixion; why would they need to specify the Zarahemla burnt at the Savior's crucifixion; isn't there only one Zarahemla? Because, they knew there was another city, with the name of Zarahemla, developed by the Latter-day Saints across the river from Nauvoo. Joseph, John, & Wilford clarified it long ago, so no one would be confused by the different Zarahemla in Iowa. No need for speculation, Joseph clears it all up in the same edition of the T&S. Long before any scholar, researcher, book writer, or you-tuber pronounced their own theory as to the location of Zarahemla, Joseph had already declared it to be in Central America, in the southern region of the continent, just like the BOM describes. No scholars or theories needed to narrow down the general area, Joseph did it for us. Thanks, Brother Joseph! Also, know, in the same T&S Oct 1, 1842 edition, the editors (Joseph, John, & Wilford) refute the conspiring claims, suggesting Joseph had fled the area of Nauvoo and was no longer in charge. Truth is, Joseph was still in the area and still very much editor of what was published in the T&S Oct 1, 1842; while at the same time avoiding false arrest of conspiring men. Read the full edition, Joseph was still around and still very much in charge, as represented & substantiated by the T&S itself. So a very special thanks to the inspired editors(Joseph, John, & Wilford), for documenting this conspiracy so long ago and clearing it up, so future generations wouldn't have to speculate about it. Here's an interesting collaboration on what Joseph would have seen on available maps regarding Guatemala's borders when Joseph made his declaration; google - "map of Guatemala 1825" (or 1835, it doesn't matter) open a properly labeled historical map and notice Guatemala's borders back then extended as far north to include the Chiapas & Palenque areas of modern-day Mexico. Say what! A very interesting area indeed! So in summary, no scholars are needed to propose any theory to locate the region of the continent where the city of Zarahemla was; Joseph already took care of it in 1842; it's in Central America; to attempt to speculate this truth away is futile, and a tool used by those conspiring against the truth, to confuse people and sell books and you-tube clicks. All things considered, it all fits precisely as stated both by Joseph and the Book of Mormon narrative. No need to argue or debate. The Book of Mormon testifies of Christ, Joseph is the prophet of the restoration chosen by Christ. Best wishes in your search for Joy and happiness.

@@MichaelP_IsMe Parakeet bones, burial mounds, and speculated climate change; all weak misdirection (to discount Joseph), and mean nothing regarding the whereabouts of Book of Mormon lands of Zarahemla & Bountiful. However, the Book does mention thousands of Nephites and converted Lamanites departed Zarahemla and migrated north to settle a land for their personal inheritances, some traveling a great distance to discover large bodies of water (large bodies of water - not seas, as in the large fresh water Lakes, aka Great Lakes if you wish to speculate); yet we don't have the history of these migrating Nephites, only a brief mention of them to let us know they exist. Any evidence discovered on the continent, only collaborates the Book's narrative that Nephites (and Jaredites before) occupied the entire continent. Alma 63, Helaman 3, Mormon 1:6, Moroni 1, Omni 1, & Ether. On the clearer side of things, Joseph, the prophet of the restoration, and translator of the Book of Mormon, declared Zarahemla was in, what's referred to as Central America, within the borders of Guatemala. This is historical, we have Joseph's published document in the Church's paper the Times and Seasons October 1, 1842 - Zarahemla. The Church has never refuted the claim published by Joseph; in fact, the Church's current statement, provided by the brethren on the Church's website, acknowledges Joseph's beliefs regarding Book of Mormon lands, and substantiates Joseph as editor of the T&S for the 1842 said articles regarding Book of Mormon geography. Read the full October 1st edition, as it also refutes the conspiring speculations regarding Joseph not being around Nauvoo in control of the T&S and also addresses which specific Zarahemla Joseph was talking about. No need to get disgruntled, no need to discount or speculate the historic publication away, no need to gaslight saying Joseph wasn't involved with the publication of Oct 1st, when in fact he was editor at the time and responsible. If you know anything about Joseph, you would know, if Joseph didn't publish the Zarahemla claim and Joseph did not agree with it, he would have, had it retracted, just like when he had Oliver retract letters Oliver had written containing errors which incorrectly represented Joseph's first vision and Moroni's visit. If Joseph ever had an issue with something, he voiced it to clear it up. Joseph never refutes or has the Zarahemla article retracted, known why, because he was the one who published it. The reason it's not "signed" 'Ed' is because this article was a united declaration of Joseph as editor and his two assistant editors, Apostles John Taylor & Wilford Woodruff (all three would be Presidents of the Church, that's three powerful and compelling witnesses). It legitimate! The Book of Mormon says there were Nephites (and Jaredites before) all across the continent, including the beloved heartland; so yes, there maybe evidence found of such. Yet, no matter where any evidence is discovered, it doesn't negate the narrative of a wide spread population of Nephites (or Jaredites) in other locations of the continent, but it does precisely collaborate the Book's narrative. We know some folks will choose to align themselves with Wayne May and others in disagreeing with what Joseph declared and what the Church states he believed and published; we are all free to believe what we wish, no hard feelings. It doesn't matter where it happen. However, thanks to Joseph's publication, at least we know what Joseph believed regarding the location of Zarahemla, and it all fits the book's narrative; no scholars, book-writers, or you-tubers needed for that one, Joseph took care of it. After having carefully studying the Book of Mormon and Joseph's statements, coupled with personal experiences, I align and agree with Joseph, that Zarahemla is in the southern region of the North American continent (aka Central America or Mesoamerica). Best wishes to all in their search for Joy & Happiness! PS: Since the borders of Guatemala have changed since Joseph's day, it's interesting to review what Joseph would have seen on available published maps regarding Guatemala's borders in his day; google - "map of Guatemala 1825" (or 1835, it doesn't matter) open a properly labeled historical map and notice Guatemala's borders back then extended as far north to include the Chiapas & Palenque areas of modern-day Mexico. Say what! A very interesting area indeed!

What if somebody believes it took place in Central and South America?

@@halodisciple8459 FYI- Central America is part of the North American continent. So, technically if you believe it took place in Central America it still fits the Books narrative of 'this continent'.

Don't get side-tracked by labels, please know that Central America is part of the North American continent and according to the Book of Mormon, Nephites did occupy what is currently known as the heartland of the United States of America. However, what many don't understand is who these Nephites were or where they came from. In applying all of the BOM's narrative and passages, it tells us who they were and how they got there. The Book clearly says these Nephites of the 'heartland' left the main BOM lands of Zarahemla & Bountiful and migrated north, some by land, some by ship crossing a sea to the north country. The Book's own narrative says Zarahemla & Bountiful were in the southland of the continent (Mormon 1:6); notice, besides a land route, there is also a sea between Zarahemla and the north country where the New Jerusalem will be built. A review of Alma 63, Helaman 3, mentions the migration of many thousands of Nephites and converted Lamanites all across the continent, these groups left the main Book of Mormon lands of Zarahemla & Bountiful, some traveling a great distance north to discover large bodies of water (Great Lakes fit this narrative); however, we do not have their full history, only a breif mention of their journey north. Yet, thanks to Moroni's updates during the 36 years as he wandered after his father and people were destroyed, we do know the demise of the northern Nephites ended up being the same as the Nephites gathered at Cumorah in the land of Zarahemla, as the Lamanites continued to hunt Nephites all across the continent decades after the battle of Cumorah; which is why the Lamanites were occupying the entire continent when the Europeans arrived. Here's an foundational alignment check, a "thought-provoking question" so to speak for those who subscribe to the heartland theory as the land of Zarahemla & Bountiful; knowing from the Book's narrative that the narrow neck of land is near Zarahemla, and thousands of migrating Nephites left from the land of Zarahemla/Bountiful; if any of the narrow strips of land, between any of the Great Lakes, "is" the narrow neck of land, and if any of the Great Lakes, "is" the sea many Nephites sailed across to the north country, where would that place the choice land where the New Jerusalem will be built, Canada?? The thought makes reason stare. This is a huge piece that doesn't fit, not even with mental gymnastics. Any evidence discovered in North America, validates the Book of Mormon narrative, AND precisely collaborates Joseph's statements of wandering over the plains of the Nephites & Zelph story. It's all in the book folks. Alma 63, Helaman 3. Wait there's more; if reading the BOM and comprehending its geography is difficult for one to grasp, what would be a more reliable source, the insights from Joseph, or the speculation of modern-day, self-proclaimed, freelance book writers & you-tubers? Joseph was most familiar with the Book, he translated it, had visitations from its prophets, and had visions of its people, cities, and cultures; Joseph is the expert on the Book. So, has Joseph declared anything about the whereabouts of Zarahemla; why yes, yes he has. The Church's main focus and mission is to proclaim and teach the Gospel of Christ; Book of Mormon & Biblical geography are not topics the Church dwells on, thus many latter-day saints are unaware Joseph precisely claimed and declared, Zarahemla was in Central America. Joseph Smith as editor, with his assistants, Apostles John Taylor & Wilford Woodruff, unitedly as editors, published an 'important fact' in the Church's paper the Times and Seasons on October 1, 1842, entitled Zarahemla, They declared Zarahemla was in Central America, specifically in Guatemala. They went on to clarify they weren't declaring or naming a specific ruin as the exact location of the city of Zarahemla within Guatemala, only that it was within the borders of Guatemala. To substantiate the claim, Joseph, being very familiar with the details of the BOM, quotes Alma 22 describing the setting and region where Zarahemla was. There's no hearsay about it; we have the publication, it's real. The Church has never refuted the publication or claim. In fact, the Church's current statement on BOM geography verifies Joseph as editor during the publications relating to the BOM geography articles. It also says Joseph believed there were Book of Mormon evidence in both North and Central America; both are on this continent by the way, as Mormon called it. This cannot be discounted away, it's a fact in the history books. Look it up and read it for yourself. The T&S editorial is simply marvelous, notice how the editors clarify the city of Zarahemla, as the one burnt at the time of the Lord's crucifixion; why would they need to specify the Zarahemla burnt at the Savior's crucifixion; isn't there only one Zarahemla? Because, they knew there was another city, with the name of Zarahemla, developed by the Latter-day Saints across the river from Nauvoo. Joseph, John, & Wilford clarified it long ago, so no one would be confused by the different Zarahemla in Iowa. No need for speculation, Joseph clears it all up in the same edition of the T&S. Long before any scholar, researcher, book writer, or you-tuber pronounced their own theory as to the location of Zarahemla, Joseph had already declared it to be in Central America, in the southern region of the continent, just like the BOM describes. No scholars or theories needed to narrow down the general area, Joseph did it for us. Thanks, Brother Joseph! Also, know, in the same T&S Oct 1, 1842 edition, the editors (Joseph, John, & Wilford) refute the conspiring claims, suggesting Joseph had fled the area of Nauvoo and was no longer in charge. Truth is, Joseph was still in the area and still very much editor of what was published in the T&S Oct 1, 1842; while at the same time avoiding false arrest of conspiring men. Read the full edition, Joseph was still around and still very much in charge, as represented & substantiated by the T&S itself. So a very special thanks to the inspired editors(Joseph, John, & Wilford), for documenting this conspiracy so long ago and clearing it up, so future generations wouldn't have to speculate about it. Here's an interesting collaboration on what Joseph would have seen on available maps regarding Guatemala's borders when Joseph made his declaration; google - "map of Guatemala 1825" (or 1835, it doesn't matter) open a properly labeled historical map and notice Guatemala's borders back then extended as far north to include the Chiapas & Palenque areas of modern-day Mexico. Say what! A very interesting area indeed! So in summary, no scholars are needed to propose any theory to locate the region of the continent where the city of Zarahemla was; Joseph already took care of it in 1842; it's in Central America; to attempt to speculate this truth away is futile, and a tool used by those conspiring against the truth, to confuse people and sell books and you-tube clicks. All things considered, it all fits precisely as stated both by Joseph and the Book of Mormon narrative. No need to argue or debate. The Book of Mormon testifies of Christ, Joseph is the prophet of the restoration chosen by Christ. Best wishes in your search for Joy and happiness.

You are operating in left field. Ehhhhhhh could it be any more obvious????

Moroni himself (the man who deposited the plates), named the Hill Cumorah because that's where he deposited them.

@@johnnyrogers7416 lol reference? Which plates?

@@Heartsinmelody You can find that in the introduction of the Book of Mormon. Moroni was the last one who had the plates and deposits them in a Hill called Cumorah as told in the Book of Mormon. Joseph gets the golden plates from a hill near his home. Thus, it is the same hill, at the very least, the same hill that Moroni talks about.

@@johnnyrogers7416 you misread it. The introduction isn’t translated text, and in the intro it is referring to cumorah as the hill in New York because it had become known as that hill by the time the intro was written and added in the BOM (in the 20th century). The text of the Book of Mormon itself, the part that was translated, clearly states that all the records were hidden in the hill cumorah EXCEPT those that constitute the Book of Mormon. Your conclusions are not accurate. The intro to the Book of Mormon has changed, and may even change again. I would bank your arguement on this alone. Cheers.

totally against science

@@marksandsmith6778 Science is flawed my friend. We haven’t been told the truth by our governments or our scientists.

Lloyd Lee, Thank you for sharing that reference. I was going to put it in this video, but decided that I'd save it for a possible future video with more current quotes, because it doesn't affect the final map at the end of the video. The reason why is because the introduction to the The Book of Mormon was not written by a prophet, but was written by the apostle Bruce R. McConkie in 1981, and then slightly (but significantly) changed in 2013. Although, I assume the wording was approved by the prophets in both of those time periods or it probably wouldn't be in the introduction - but is that due to traditional opinion or revelation? I don't know. Something that we do need to consider is that whenever the prophet Joseph Smith spoke about The Book of Mormon in the recorded words that we have (both in his own words and in declared revelation from God), he always only used the singular words of "America", "continent", and "country". Not once will we ever find him using plural words like "Americas", "continents", and "countries". I have not yet found any revelation from God to a prophet saying it happened in both of the Americas. That doesn't necessarily mean there aren't any, but if there are, I haven't found them yet (and History Of The Church, Vol. 6, pg. 318-319, isn't one of them, because it's about the Land of Zion, not The Book of Mormon, so I left that section out of this video, but it's about a 20 minute section that I'll make into its own video later, because that reference is a very misunderstood reference about the Land of Zion). And yes, there are quotes from early apostles that claim The Book of Mormon happened on both continents (I listed a lot of them in the "Maybe" section at the end of the video), but none of them are claimed as revelation from God to His prophet. And the early apostles made their fair share of mistakes, so unless their words concerning Book of Mormon lands are declared by the prophet as revelation, I can't assume that their words are definite confirmation about Book of Mormon lands. So in all fairness, for now, I have to keep South America in the "Maybe" category. Nevertheless, like you said with all the time that has passed over the centuries, I'm sure there are descendants of Lehi's and Mulek's (and even Jared's) groups all over both of the American continents (and the Pacific islands).

@@MichaelP_IsMe That is fair, although we do sustain all apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators. It's worth considering I think. Are you familiar with this quote referencing the Prophet Joseph Smith? Sometime between 1833 and 1837 Fredrick G. Williams then 2nd councilor to the Prophet wrote when he was in a presidency meeting with Joseph Smith, “The course that Lehi traveled from the city of Jerusalem to the place where he and his family took ship, they traveled nearly a south, south east direction until they came to the nineteenth degree of North Latitude, then nearly east to the Sea of Arabia then sailed in a south east direction and landed on the continent of South America in Chili thirty degrees south Latitude” (Frederick G. Williams III, Did Lehi Land in Chile? p. 1. LDS Archives, MSD 3408 fd 4 v, S. L. C., Utah). Sorry, I didn't watch your entire video.

@@Silentpartner2176 Science fought COVID while Mormonism lied fudged and trembled. 1 example only.

I bet the DNA corroborates Guatemalan native American jews. Oh wait....

After the last Battle between the Nephites and Lamanites there's nothing saying that the warring Lamanites left over did not migrate from North America into Middle and South America........ I'm sure they did, and this would account for Prophets telling some South American Saints that they are descendents of Lehi.

@@karatevideosandmore7685 .... there is even evidence now of BOM peoples of North America migrating to Europe and other areas.

@@karatevideosandmore7685 According to the Book of Mormon, Nephites did occupy what is currently known as the heartland of the United States of America. However, what many don't understand is who these Nephites were or where they came from. In applying all of the BOM's narrative and passages, it tells us who they were and how they got there. The Book clearly says these Nephites of the 'heartland' left the main BOM lands of Zarahemla & Bountiful and migrated north, some by land, some by ship crossing a sea to the north country. The Book's own narrative says Zarahemla & Bountiful were in the southland of the continent (Mormon 1:6); notice, besides a land route, there is also a sea between Zarahemla and the north country where the New Jerusalem will be built. A review of Alma 63, Helaman 3, mentions the migration of many thousands of Nephites and converted Lamanites all across the continent, these groups left the main Book of Mormon lands of Zarahemla & Bountiful, some traveling a great distance north to discover large bodies of water (Great Lakes fit this description); however, we do not have their full history, only a brief mention of their journey north. Yet, thanks to Moroni's updates during the 36 years as he wandered, after his father and own people were destroyed at Cumorah, we know the demise of the northern Nephites ended up being the same as the Nephites gathered at Cumorah in the land of Zarahemla, as the Lamanites continued to hunt Nephites all across the continent decades after the battle of Cumorah; which is why the Lamanites were occupying the entire continent when the Europeans arrived. (see Moroni's writings) Here's a foundational alignment check, a "thought-provoking question" so to speak for those who subscribe to the heartland theory as the land of Zarahemla & Bountiful; knowing from the Book's narrative that the narrow neck of land is near Zarahemla, and thousands of migrating Nephites left from the land of Zarahemla/Bountiful; if any of the narrow strips of land, between any of the Great Lakes, "is" the narrow neck of land, and if any of the Great Lakes, "is" the sea many Nephites sailed across to the north country, where would that place the choice land where the New Jerusalem will be built, Canada?? The thought makes reason stare. Any evidence discovered in North America only validates the Book of Mormon narrative that descendants of Lehi occupied the continent, AND precisely collaborates Joseph's statements of wandering over the plains of the Nephites & Zelph story. It's all in the book folks. Alma 63, Helaman 3. Wait there's more; if reading the BOM and comprehending its geography is difficult for one to grasp, what would be a more reliable source, the insights from Joseph, or the speculation of modern-day, self-proclaimed, freelance book writers & you-tubers? Joseph was most familiar with the Book, he translated it, had visitations from its prophets, and had visions of its people, cities, and cultures; Joseph is the expert on the Book. So, has Joseph declared anything about the whereabouts of Zarahemla; why yes, yes he has. The Church's main focus and mission is to proclaim and teach the Gospel of Christ; Book of Mormon & Biblical geography are not topics the Church dwells on, thus many latter-day saints are unaware Joseph precisely claimed and declared, Zarahemla was in Central America. Joseph Smith as editor, with his assistants, Apostles John Taylor & Wilford Woodruff, unitedly as editors, published an 'important fact' in the Church's paper the Times and Seasons on October 1, 1842, entitled Zarahemla, They declared Zarahemla was in Central America, specifically in Guatemala. They went on to clarify they weren't declaring or naming a specific ruin as the exact location of the city of Zarahemla within Guatemala, only that it was within the borders of Guatemala. To substantiate the claim, Joseph, being very familiar with the details of the BOM, quotes Alma 22 describing the setting and region where Zarahemla was. There's no hearsay about it; we have the publication, it's real. The Church has never refuted the publication or claim. In fact, the Church's current statement on BOM geography verifies Joseph as editor during the publications relating to the BOM geography articles. It also says Joseph believed there were Book of Mormon evidence in both North and Central America; both are on this continent by the way, as Mormon called it. This cannot be discounted away, it's a fact in the history books. Look it up and read it for yourself. The T&S editorial is simply marvelous, notice how the editors clarify the city of Zarahemla, as the one burnt at the time of the Lord's crucifixion; why would they need to specify the Zarahemla burnt at the Savior's crucifixion; isn't there only one Zarahemla? Because, they knew there was another city, with the name of Zarahemla, developed by the Latter-day Saints across the river from Nauvoo. Joseph, John, & Wilford clarified it long ago, so no one would be confused by the different Zarahemla in Iowa. No need for speculation, Joseph clears it all up in the same edition of the T&S. Long before any scholar, researcher, book writer, or you-tuber pronounced their own theory as to the location of Zarahemla, Joseph had already declared it to be in Central America, in the southern region of the continent, just like the BOM describes. No scholars or theories needed to narrow down the general area, Joseph did it for us. Thanks, Brother Joseph! Also, know, in the same T&S Oct 1, 1842 edition, the editors (Joseph, John, & Wilford) refute the conspiring claims, suggesting Joseph had fled the area of Nauvoo and was no longer in charge. Truth is, Joseph was still in the area and still very much editor of what was published in the T&S Oct 1, 1842; while at the same time avoiding false arrest of conspiring men. Read the full edition, Joseph was still around and still very much in charge, as represented & substantiated by the T&S itself. So a very special thanks to the inspired editors(Joseph, John, & Wilford), for documenting this conspiracy so long ago and clearing it up, so future generations wouldn't have to speculate about it. Here's an interesting collaboration on what Joseph would have seen on available maps regarding Guatemala's borders when Joseph made his declaration; google - "map of Guatemala 1825" (or 1835, it doesn't matter) open a properly labeled historical map and notice Guatemala's borders back then extended as far north to include the Chiapas & Palenque areas of modern-day Mexico. Say what! A very interesting area indeed! So in summary, no scholars are needed to propose any theory to locate the region of the continent where the city of Zarahemla was; Joseph already took care of it in 1842; it's in Central America; to attempt to speculate this truth away is futile, and a tool used by those conspiring against the truth, to confuse people and sell books and you-tube clicks. All things considered, it all fits precisely as stated both by Joseph and the Book of Mormon narrative. No need to argue or debate. The Book of Mormon testifies of Christ, Joseph is the prophet of the restoration chosen by Christ. Best wishes in your search for Joy and happiness.

Yes but you must most that the vast majority of the black people in America were already here. We were called Indians when the Europeans came here. This lie of this huge slave trade from Africa must be retold in it's true light. They knew the black people here were Hebrews because we spoke Hebrew. How many black people in America and the Americas that you see who can speak Hebrew today. That goes to show how much slavery cursed God's people. I hope this guy knows that Jesus and Moses and all those other prophets of the bible were black men. I never read the Book of Mormon but maybe I will out of curiosity. He says some Israelites sailed here after the fall of Jerusalem. I will say that there were already Hebrew people long before that. Thousands of years before that. It was more the case of them leaving Jerusalem to come back to America. The original homeland of the Hebrews. Why do you think they already knew were to sail to. Black people have walked this land for many thousands of years before the native Americans even came here.

How?

@foottanghyena5620 It makes no sense that a group of people left Jerusalem 2600 years ago and wandered down to Yemen, where they built a boat to sail to America. It is pretty difficult to build a seaworthy boat, and these people were from an inland city. But it makes all the sense in the world that Joseph Smith simply made up the story.

@@runeaanderaa6840 no, they only obey what was God commanded them. They landed in Chile, until they reach the North land, the North America.

@foottanghyena5620 Why would God command them to do such an irrational task? They apparently started fighting right after getting to America, so not a good choice of people then. It still makes much more sense that the story is made up.

I do not believe that dark skin is (or ever was) a curse. I do not believe that God has ever thought less of dark-skinned people than of light-skinned people. If you want to believe that God once thought that way, then that's your choice. All of God's creations have beautiful variety in their appearances, including the human race. And all people are equally precious to God. Yes, I'm aware of the scriptures that talk about God turning Cain's skin dark and the original Lamanites' skins dark, but I do not believe that it's because God thought less of dark-skinned people than of light-skinned people. I believe God did that to Cain, Laman, Lemuel, etc. to test the light-skinned people on whether they would treat dark-skinned people as equals or not. Every shade of skin color is part of the beautiful variety that God has given to the human race. That's what I believe.

@@MichaelP_IsMe Apparently you do not know how to read the English language. I cited the scripture, 2 Nephi 5:21. Because, ostensibly, you are ignorant of the language I sadly shall be required to break it down for you. A curse is different than a physical/mental handicap or defect. As I wrote: a curse is but a physical manifestation of divine disfavour, it is NOT an indication of defectiveness. Nor did I say that this curse should last forever. It is clear that you do not understand this distinction because it appears that you were miseducated by teachers out of the Frankfurt School’s “critical theory” paradigm. Your response to my comment demonstrates that you seem to equate disapproval of God with some form of inherent mental or physical defect in Lamanites. No. This cursing, showing God’s divine disfavour, was put on them for a specific purpose. 2 Nephi 5:21-23; Alma 3:7-8; and see also, Moses 7:22. Now, show me a contrary scripture instead of simply regurgitating your high school social studies teacher. I need to add, that in modern days, we see a tendency to define, or re-define God. Because our often teachers have determined that the worst sin of all is racism, we seek to instruct God himself, informing him that he couldn’t have meant what he said “because that would be racist.” Let God define himself. Let us treat all of his children as we would be treated.

@@MichaelP_IsMe Please be careful about conflating the "curse" of darker skin with our current ideas of race identity. While this is easily confused, I believe we don't fully understand what was intended in the Book of Mormon. Also, whenever skin tone was mentioned, the different peoples mentioned were all of the same race but had simply divided themselves into different family camps. Lamanites and Nephites. The cursing of dark skin can be simply a sign of people who spend more time outdoors because they take on a more hunter/gatherer lifestyle vs building of permanent housing and cultivating fields and animal livestock. In fact, we know that Nephite culture was quite complex. They had many occupations that did not require much time outdoors in the sun. All of this is to say, we don't really know what was meant then since we don't have their or the Lord's perspective on such things. -- One more thing to note, Mormon admitted his weakness in writing and when he abridged the plates, much of the details and nuances of Lamanite/Nephite culture may simply be not very well conveyed.

Known to whom? History is being rewritten; it is being claimed that these things were known and much of it was)but in fact, they were previously in full denial. See early history of the Smithsonian Institute and the suppression of knowledge which helped shaped manifest destiny.

You are operating out there in left field.

@@aisaxonawiat6484 Yes, they most certainly are operating out there in left field.

I got whiplash reading this comment.

@@adamv4951 All Blind Following Yo-Yos, suffer from WhipLash! Hahaha

@@davidj.lebaron709nice ad hominem attack.

Hahahaha! Research mound builders. Theres evidence of great burial grounds !

@@barryvandyke4342 I’ve done a ton of research on mound builders. There is no compelling evidence linking the mound builders to the nephite and or lamanite civilizations. The Book of Mormon claims that there was a battle with up to or exceeding a million people around the hill cumorah. That would be the largest battle in the known history of the world. Bigger than any battle in any modern or ancient war by s long shot. There would be substantial evidence of the aftermath, especially if it happened around 400 AD. The problem is there is zero evidence. None. Zilch. Nada.

Joseph Smith is a fantastic story maker with genius level of imagination! It’s a fictional book with good lessons for the most part.

@@etcomehome39 sure, not disputing that. But it is fiction however. There was no Nephi, Mormon, Moroni, alma, etc… there was no angel or gold plates as described by Joseph. It was a con.

@@etcomehome39 ..... you obviously know nothing about the internal evidences of the Book of Mormon or the external support of the record.

You are guilty of your own confirmation bias, these facts have been confirmed and by non-lds scientist and archaeologist engaged in recent ongoing excavation. Furnaces have been found throughout North America and the slag is still there from the smelting process, weapons and other artifacts have been found, still inside their mold. You obviously have zero awareness of the research also taking place on the African continent where evidence of Lehi and his journey are found among the people in abundance and indigenous residents have known of their genealogy and origin for centuries. Phoenician records in North America have shown how corruption of the language has taken place and this can be seen within internal evidences of the Book of Mormon where Phoenician influence was not found until after the appearance of the mulekites in north America and from that time forward is found in abundance throughout the book of mormon.

Recent research traces those with haplogroup X very specifically back to the "Hills of Galilee" so you are wrong again.

@@aisaxonawiat6484 You said, "these facts have been confirmed and by non-lds scientist and archaeologist engaged in recent ongoing excavation." I did not say there weren't any similarities that could be found between the BoM cultural descriptions of the Jaredites, Lehites, and Mulekites and other cultures found in the Americas. If one starts with the belief in BoM historicity and is looking for evidence to support that belief, they will find "evidence" / correlations / similarities to support that belief. If the preponderance of scientific evidence actually supported BoM historicity, then belief that the BoM is an actual historical document of ancient american cultures would extend well beyond just believing members of the LDS Church. You said, "Furnaces have been found throughout North America and the slag is still there from the smelting process, weapons and other artifacts have been found, still inside their mold." According to the BoM, iron smelting and steel making date back to around 2200 BC with the Jaredites and continue unabated throughout the BoM narrative. I encourage you to do more research into metallurgy and its history. “First of all, there is an inherent improbability in specific items that are mentioned in the Book of Mormon as having been brought to the New World by the Jaredites and/or Nephites. Among these are the horse (extinct in the New World since about 7,000 B.C.), the chariot, wheat, barley, and metallurgy (true metalworking based upon smelting and casting being no earlier in Mesoamerica than about 800 A.D.). The picture of this hemisphere between 2,000 B.C. and A.D. 421 presented in the book has little to do with the early Indian cultures as we know them, in spite of much wishful thinking.” (Michael Coe, Mormons & Archaeology: An Outside View, p 42) You said, "You obviously have zero awareness of the research also taking place on the African continent where evidence of Lehi and his journey are found among the people in abundance and indigenous residents have known of their genealogy and origin for centuries." I probably have more awareness about evidence for and against BoM historicity than you think, and I would love to see this "research...taking place on the African continent" you refer to. Please share the sources. My guess is that it is research being conducted by LDS scholars of some sort. Just my hunch. Like I said before, if someone starts out with the belief that something is true and he/she is looking for evidence to support that belief, that person will find "evidence" to support their belief. If one starts out without a belief nor disbelief in BoM historicity and simply bases their conclusion about BoM historicity on the preponderance of evidence, the preponderance of evidence does NOT lead to the conclusion that the BoM is a historical record of God’s dealings with ancient people on the American continent, consisting of the Jaredites arriving shortly after the Tower of Babel from about 2200 B.C. to about 600 B.C. and ancient Israelites called Nephites, Lamanites, and Mulekites from about 600 B.C. to about 420 A.D., who traveled to the Americas in/on boats, populations grew to number in the multi-millions, built and occupied multiple geographically distinct cities, were proficient in iron smelting and steel making, used a steel bow, steel swords, domesticated elephants, horses, asses, livestock [cattle, oxen, cows, sheep, swine, goats, and more], chariots, and who are the ancestors of Native Americans. You said, "Phoenician records in North America have shown how corruption of the language has taken place and this can be seen within internal evidences of the Book of Mormon where Phoenician influence was not found until after the appearance of the mulekites in north America and from that time forward is found in abundance throughout the book of mormon." Are you suggesting that the Mulekites were the Phoneticians that some theorize came to the Americas around 350 BC?

@@aisaxonawiat6484 You said, "Recent research traces those with haplogroup X very specifically back to the "Hills of Galilee" so you are wrong again." Your ignorance on this topic and/or lack of comprehension of what I said is on full display here. You are correct that haplogroup X can be traced to the Middle East. I never said that it didn't. I said: "It is true that some Native Americans do have X2a but X2A DOES NOT trace back to the Mediterranean/Middle Eastern area. Again, this is a scientifically disproved claim trying to link Native Americans with the Middle East in order to support BoM historicity. “the presence of X2a in North America has been cited as evidence for two different trans-Atlantic migrations before European contact. First, Meldrum (2009) and Smoot et al. (2010) suggested that X2a is the result of an ancient Hebrew migration from the Middle East to North America approximately 2500 cal yr BP. This hypothesis is undermined, though, by four key findings: X2a is not found in the Middle East, none of the X2 lineages present in the Middle East are immediately ancestral to X2a, the date of coalescence for X2a (14,200-17,000 cal yr BP) significantly precedes the hypothesized migration from the Middle East (Perego et al. 2009), and haplogroup X2a was present in North America far earlier than the hypothesized Hebrew migration, having been found in the 8690-8400 cal yr BP Kennewick Man remains from Washington state (Rasmussen et al. 2015). Thus, X2a does not provide any evidence for an ancient Hebrew migration from the Middle East to North America...Thus, at this time, there is simply no evidence that X2a evolved in the Near East, Europe, or anywhere in West Eurasia...We remain unconvinced by the arguments advanced thus far in favor of a trans-Atlantic migration prior to 1500 cal yr BP or so. As we have discussed, X2a has not been found anywhere in Eurasia, and phylogeography gives us no compelling reason to think it is more likely to come from Europe than from Siberia. Furthermore, analysis of the complete genome of Kennewick Man, who belongs to the most basal lineage of X2a yet identified, gives no indication of recent European ancestry and moves the location of the deepest branch of X2a to the West Coast, consistent with X2a belonging to the same ancestral population as the other founder mitochondrial haplogroups. Nor have any high-resolution studies of genome-wide data from Native American populations yielded any evidence of Pleistocene European ancestry or trans-Atlantic gene flow. It is of course possible that genetic evidence of an ancient trans-Atlantic migration event simply has not been found yet. Should credible evidence of direct gene flow from an ancient Solutrean (or Middle Eastern) population be found within ancient Native American genomes, it would require the field to reassess the “Beringian only” model of prehistoric Native American migration. However, no such evidence has been found, and the Beringian migration model remains the best interpretation of the genetic, archaeological, and paleoclimate data to date.” (Does Mitochondrial Haplogroup X Indicate Ancient Trans-Atlantic Migration to the Americas? A Critical Re-Evaluation, Jennifer A. Raff & Deborah A. Bolnick, 06 November 2015) So, it is actually you that is wrong in telling me that I was wrong.

@@adamholloway7963 ....... you have already made up your mind so it would be a fruitless conversation if continued..... you are guilty of the very things you accuse others of and it is blatant hypocrisy but I'm sure you would take objection to that observation as well. Someone must have really hurt your feelings, to sit on a website constantly taking issue with other people's religious views........ you are banging your head against the wall wasting your time and mine.... give it up.

How is it a con?

Just curious? What makes someone come to a video and comment about something they don't believe? I honestly want to know. I don't go to flat earther videos and make comments that I don't believe it. That's just my perspective though.

@@SuperDerezzed Kids are reading this stuff and believing it. This is the crack cocaine of religions. I hope to oppose it every chance I get

@@SuperDerezzed Notice how Sandsmith ignored my comment.

People that seek to attack and destroy are not led by the spirit of God.