Where Does the Book of Mormon Take Place? - Part I

This will be the first of three parts about the possible location of the Nephites and Lamanites. This is a controversial subject with many differing opinions. The thoughts expressed here are what I have deducted through my own research and from the research of others. I will attempt to cite sources of information as best as I can, but some of what I write is speculation on my part.

Once I got to the end of 1 Nephi of the Book of Mormon, I had to ask myself "Where does this take place?" Obviously it is North, Central, and/or South America because the Golden Plates where found by Joseph Smith Jun. in Palmyra, New York. But where? I mean we know exactly (for most of the locations) where the events of the Bible took place, we can trace the names of these locations back to the time of Christ and even to the beginnings of Judaism, but the Book of Mormon is a different story. The Book of Mormon is (for the most part) a record of the Nephites who lived in the Americas from approximately 589 B.C. to 421 A.D. So it only covers 1,010 years of history in the Americas; unlike with the Bible which covers a much more vast amount of history in its location (the "Old World"). Therefore less of its text can be verified by other works of the region. Although the main reason for this is due to the fact that the events in the Book of Mormon took place in Central America in modern-day Guatemala and the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico (Although this point is still contended in the Church, but in my opinion the events did in fact take place in Mesoamerica). As you may remember, from Jr. High School History class, this area was controlled by a group known as the Mayans (as well as the Olmec before them). Well, the problem with the Mayans is not that they didn't leave written texts (unlike other ancient Native American civilizations in Mesoamerica), no, the Mayans left written records, unfortunately, we cannot decipher them. They are form of hieroglyphics (and to all those hopeful Book of Mormon enthusiasts I would not jump to the conclusion they derive from "Egyptian" hieroglyphics necessarily, but you never know...). Another, somewhat large problem is a great deal of Mayan history was destroyed and altered with the coming of the Spanish Conquistadors. So many aspects of Mayan life are lost to us forever, and the pieces of history we do have are hard to decipher, but we're getting there...

On top of that the authors of the Book of Mormon wrote in a language known only as "Reformed Egyptian"; most likely a combination of Hebrew with Egyptian hieroglyphic chracters (there have been other examples of this from history - a link to Jeff Lindsay's blog, "Mormanity"). Basically the language of the prophets and authors was, most likely, not the same as the common language of the people. One could compare the use of Hebrew by Jews and Latin by Catholics; many times their scriptures were written in a different language than that of the populous, holding to tradition rather than adapting to secular life.

Okay, now where do we start? Well how about with the first location that is shared amongst the Bible and the Book of Mormon: Jerusalem. Jerusalem, 600 B.C., under the reign of Zedekiah is where Nephi's account begins (1 Nephi 1:4); Lehi, Nephi's father, began his departure from Jerusalem into the wilderness (1 Nephi 2:4). Lehi then lead his family by the borders of the Red Sea, and after three days of travel in the wilderness the family pitched tent in a valley by the side of a river of water (1 Nephi 2:5-6). Lehi named the river Laman, after his eldest son, and it emptied into the Red Sea and the valley that was near the mouth he named Lemuel, his second eldest (1 Nephi 2:8-10). So where in the world do we find an area with such characteristics? Well, we need to find a valley that contains a continuously flowing river into the Red Sea.

Here is where critics will immediately write off the Book of Mormon arguing that there is no river that continuously flows into the Red Sea. One critic asks LDS Apologetics to "Please name the continually-flowing river that emptied into the Red Sea".^[1] He then writes about the "inaccuracy" presented already with Lehi's account of coming to "the borders which are nearer the Red Sea" (1 Nephi 2:5). He goes on:

I can imagine Joseph Smith narrating this story with a map of the middle east in front of him, mistaking the Gulf of Aqaba for the Red Sea... Giving Joseph the benefit of the doubt, lets assume Lehi and his family only traveled to the Gulf, and not (as the text says) to the Red Sea.^[1]

The Book of Mormon says Lehi "came down by the borders near the shore of the Red Sea; and he traveled in the wilderness in the borders which are nearer the Red Sea..." (1 Nephi 2:5). I find no fault in the text here, in fact, I find evidence in support of the Book of Mormon. The Gulf of Aqaba is located at the very southern tip of modern-day Israel, it separates the Sinai Peninsula from Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Now the Gulf of Aqaba and Gulf of Suez are results of Sinai's bifurcation of the northern Red Sea. Both of the Gulfs have been referred to as the "arms of the Red Sea". A researcher, Ron Wyatt, makes the argument that the "'Red Sea' is used to refer to all sections of that sea - the main body, the Gulf of Suez, and the Gulf of Aqaba".^[2] Wyatt makes the argument that Moses crossed, in Exodus 13, the Gulf, referring to them as the Red Sea, but that is beside the point. It is most likely that those at the time also viewed the "Gulf of Aqaba" to be of the Red Sea, or to at least be "in the borders of the Red Sea" (1 Nephi 2:5).

Now back to the question of where the River Laman and Valley of Lemuel are located. Well I have heard of two possible locations that could be River Laman/Valley of Lemuel. The first is a great candidate for the river 12 miles north of a town called Maqna located at the junction of the Red Sea basin and Gulf of Aqaba in Saudi Arabia. This discovery was made by George Potter in an article for the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship (FARMS), Potter writes,

Eight miles north of Maqna, we came to our first surprise. The southern end of the mountain range that here forms the shoreline seemed to drop directly into the waters of the Gulf of Aqaba. There was just enough room for the coast guard dirt road to pass between the giant cliffs on the right and the watery gulf on the left. We followed the narrow road for another four miles, with waves occasionally breaking over our path. Rounding the base of a cliff, we came upon a truly spectacular sight. A magnificent narrow canyon just ahead of us ended in a palm-lined cove. The brilliant blue shades of the clear gulf waters and the sky framed the scene.

What can we reasonably say about the river Laman from the Book of Mormon? First, the river was quite surely not a major stream. Otherwise a permanent settlement, and a name, would have accompanied it. Second, Lehi gave the river a name, so it probably had no name that he was aware of (see 1 Nephi 2:8). It is hard to imagine that any substantial flow of water in the Near East would go unnamed, implying that the stream did not amount to much and probably was a localized phenomenon. Third, the river Laman was in the wilderness (see 1 Nephi 2:6), a place generally devoid of people. Fourth, the waters of the river Laman emptied into the sea (see 1 Nephi 2:9) in the area where Lehi had camped, which must have been at the north end of the Red Sea, near the Gulf of Aqaba. Fifth, Nephi described the stream as “continually running" (1 Nephi 2:9). Finally, the river Laman ran through a geographical feature that Lehi called the valley of Lemuel (see 1 Nephi 2:6–10). Our initial visit confirmed that the stream in the canyon met at least all of the physical criteria.^[3]

I believe George Potter's location of the River Laman is quite plausible: it is a three day walk from the tip of the Gulf of Aqaba, we have a continuously flowing river (also supported by the vegetation surrounding it), we have a location right on the Red Sea, and we have a valley with high walls that could protect Lehi and his family's tents as they camped near the windy Red Sea.

Photos by George Potter of the Valley of Lemuel

Left: The River Laban

Right: The Valley of Lemuel

(I actually 'swipped' these two pictures from Jeff Lindsay's Book of Mormon Evidences Page - The Valley of Lemuel: Another "Blunder" Becomes Evidence FOR the Book of Mormon)

Now the second location has only recently been labeled as a plausible area, mainly due to the fact that it is considerably closer to the Red Sea than the site near Maqna. The other location is argued by Jeffery R. Chadwick to be near Bir Marsha, a location near the Gulf of Eilat. He states in his article for the FARMS Review, "The Wrong Place for Lehi's Trail and the Valley of Lemuel":

My own guess is that one of the wadis near the shore at Bir Marsha would be the strongest candidate for the actual valley of Lemuel. Why Bir Marsha? Because it is the furthest point south that one can travel along the east shore of the Gulf of Eilat. About fifty miles south of Ezion Geber, along that shoreline, high mountain cliffs jut out into the sea, cutting off the coastal path just south of Bir Marsha. It would take at least two days for Lehi’s party to cover those fifty miles on camels. If they proceeded more slowly (looking for a campsite) or if any were traveling on foot, it would take the group three days to go from the Ezion Geber area to Bir Marsha. They would then have pitched their tents in a secluded canyon in the mountain face just a few hundred meters from the Bir Marsha shoreline. With a seasonal winter stream running in the wadi to provide them with water, Lehi then gave the small river and the high-walled valley the names of his two eldest sons.^[4]

This other proposed spot is also plausible, even though it is not a "continuously flowing river" (as in all year round) it does "continuously flow into the Red Sea" (as opposed to other areas). Supporters of this location explain, in accordance with Lehi's Sermon: "And when my father saw that the waters of the river emptied into the fountain of the Red Sea, he spake unto Laman, saying: O that thou mightest be like unto this river, continually running into the fountain of all righteousness!" (1 Nephi 2:9), that Lehi meant only the river continuously flowed into "the fountain of the Red Sea", not that it flowed year-round.

Both possible locations are plausible and I myself, as of now, am unsure which I prefer, but I present both to you, to show plausibility of the Book of Mormon text as a whole.

The party most likely stayed near the River Laman for quite some time, to allow for the multiple visitations to Jerusalem and other activities that took place while they were still camped (1 Nehphi 3 and 1 Nephi 7). Then we get the arrival of the Liahona which directs Lehi to take his family, Ishmael's family, and Zoram's family and travel for the space of four days in the same south-southeast direction until the party set up camp in a place they named Shazer (1 Nephi 16:13). Now where could Shazer be? Well according to the Book of Momon it was in an area where they could "go forth into the wilderness to slay food for our families" (1 Nephi 16:14). This means the area had to hold some type of vegetation so that animals would be able to live there. So Shazer was obviously some type of "oasis" or area that had a bit of vegetation so that game could live there. Jeff Lindsay has a great article that goes much further in depth on the plausible location of Shazer than I do: The Place Shazer in the Arabian Peninsula. I will cite a bit of his article here:

Regarding the name "Shazer," Hugh Nibley wrote:

"The first important stop after Lehi's party had left their base camp was at a place they called Shazer. The name is intriguing. The combination shajer is quite common in Palestinian place names; it is a collective meaning 'trees,' and many Arabs (especially in Egypt) pronounce it shazher. It appears in Thoghret-as-Sajur (the Pass of Trees), which is the ancient Shaghur, written Segor in the sixth centurey... It may be confused with Shaghur 'seepage,' which is held to be identical with Shihor, the 'black water' of Josh. 19:36. This last takes in western Palestine the form Sozura, suggesting the name of a famous water hole in South Arabia, called Shisur by Thomas and Shisar by Phillby... So we have Shihor, Shaghur, Sajur, Saghir, Segor (even Zoar), Shajar, Sozura, Shisur, and Shisar, all connected somehow or other and denoting either seepage--a weak but reliable water supply or a clump of trees. Whichever one prefers, Lehi's people could hardly have picked a better name for their first suitable stopping place than Shazer. (Lehi in the Desert [Salt Lake City, Utah: Bookcraft, 1952], p.90.)"

[L]et us note that Shazer is introduced in a classic Hebraism: "we did call the name of the place Shazer" (1 Nephi 16:13). In normal English we would say that we called the place Shazer or named the place Shazer, but in Hebrew one would say that he called the name of the place, for it is the name that is called, not the place itself. This point is made by John L. Sorenson and Melvin J. Thorne, eds., Rediscovering the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City and Provo: Deseret Book Co., Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1991), p. 89.

It turns out that there is a perfect fit for Shazer, a large, extensive oasis region with what is said to be the best hunting in all of Arabia, and it is in the right location to have been a four-days' journey south-southeast of the established location for the Valley of Lemuel, near a branch of the ancient frankincense trail and in the region of Arabia near the Red Sea called the Hijaz. This oasis is in the wadi Agharr.[5]

Okay so now we have a "perfect fit" for Shazer, an area where there is ample vegetation to sustain animals, therefore an area where Nephi and his brethren could have hunted game. Then, after the party had most likely restocked on food and rest, they moved on, "following the same direction, keeping in the most fertile parts of the wilderness, which were in the borders near the Red Sea" (1 Nephi 16:14). Now Nephi's account goes on to tell us the travel continued "for the space of many days" (1 Nephi 16:17). On their way Ishmael dies and is buried at a place called Nahom. What is distinct here is Nephi says, "And it came to pass that Ismael died, and was buried in the place which was called Nahom" (1 Nephi 16:34) as opposed to other areas such as Shazer where he makes the distinction, "we did call the name of the place Shazer" (1 Nephi 16:13). This means Nahom was an area not discovered or created by Lehi's party, therefore we must ask does a real area closely phonetically to the name Nahom exist in Arabian Peninsula, where one could/would bury someone? The answer is yes. There is a site in Yemen, known as NHM, which I believe is Ishmael's burial place. Now most of you reading may be confused, how is NHM the same as "Nahom"? Well the Hebrew alphabet is purely based in constants, and no vowels. Now vowels are used in spoken Hebrew, just 'left out' of written Hebrew.^[6] On top of the plausible name, three alters were found by the Nephi Project from NHM, which would make it a plausible burial location as well.^[7]

After Nahom, the party traveled "nearly eastward from that time forth" and along the way the "women did bear children in the wilderness" (1 Nephi 17:1). Finally they reach an area they call Bountiful (1 Nephi 17:5). Nephi's description of the area is as follows, "And we did come to the land which we called Bountiful, because of its much fruit and also wild honey; and all these things were prepared of the Lord that we might not perish. And we beheld the sea, which we called Irreantum, which, being interpreted, is many waters" (1 Nephi 17:5). It took Lehi and his party eight years of travel through the wilderness to reach Bountiful (1 Nephi 17:4) the land where Nephi will build his ship (1 Nephi 17:8).

Bountiful is one of the most detailed areas described in Lehi's journey, there is much criteria possible locations must fit in, in order to be considered plausible. First, the location must be almost due east from Nahom (we will use NHM as the plausible location of Nahom, as stated above). Second, it must have abundant fruit, hence its name (1 Nephi 17:5-6). Thrid it must be located on the coast. Fourth, it must have 'mountains' somewhere in the vicinity (1 Nephi 17:7). Fifth, it must have some type of ore reserves near by (1 Nephi 17:10). Sixth, there needs to be good trees for shipbuilding (1 Nephi 17:8). Seventh, there must be ore found close by for the making of Nephi's tools (1 Nephi 17:9-10). Eighth, there needs to be areas of freshwater, for drinking and a prolonged stay. Surprisingly, with Bountiful, we have two great, plausible areas where it could be located.

The first is known as Salalah and the second is Wadi Sayq. Salalah seems to provide a much greater deal of fruit and timber than Wadi Sayq, but this could be due to modern irrigation patterns, therefore unavailable in Nephi's time. Both areas have abundant trees, fruit, mountains, ore, a place to build a ship, and are nearly directly east from Nahom; but the trees, mountains, and such are in a much closer vicinity in Wadi Sayq than in Salalah. I believe that Wadi Sayq looks to be more plausible than Salalah. Wadi Sayq is almost directly east of Nahom, as opposed to Salalah, which is a bit further north. Wadi Sayq offers an inlet that would have been quite useful for launching his ship. It also has a large body of fresh water, which would be essential for setting up a camp for the period of time it would take the party to build the ship. Also there have been recent findings of ore in the area of Wadi Sayq, which is quite astonishing because much of the Arabian Peninsula does not have such reserves.^[8]

In conclusion, Lehi's venture across the Arabian Peninsula was a long and arduous one. I only touched upon the geography of the journey, not the realistic physical, mental, and spiritual hardships members of the party experienced: hunger, loss of faith, exhaustion, fear, death, depression, etc. Although Nephi's account of the journey, in relation to the entirety of the First Book of Nephi, is quite small, it actually gives us a great deal of information, specific information. Could a farm boy with a fourth grade education, who's vast traveling most likely only consisted of the area in between New Hampshire to Ohio, 'make-up' such specific facts and locations only to have them proved to be true decades after his writing them? Absolutely not. Critics can (and do argue) that there were books about Arabian geography that Smith could have used to write the Book of Mormon, but texts like this did not exist anywhere close to him at the time he translated the Book of Mormon. S. Kent Brown, Chairman, Department of Ancient Studies, BYU writes about the posibility of such materials to Joseph Smith Jun.

[T]he ease of access to written sources in, say, a local library. A student assistant and I have gone through all of the works known to have been in the collection of the Manchester Public Library before 1830, a resource that would have been available to Joseph Smith in his teens and later. None of the works in that collection which claim to deal with the ancient Near East would have given him good information on ancient Arabia. And in our review we spotted nothing that bears a familiar ring in the narrative of First Nephi. The only other library resource that young Joseph could possibly have drawn on was that of Dartmouth College. As most are aware, the Smith family lived in Lebanon, New Hampshire, from 1811 to late in 1813[he was between the ages of 5 and 8 during this time], before moving back to Vermont. The home where the Smith family lived in Lebanon was just down the road from Dartmouth College. There are two problems that a researcher must surmount in determining whether Joseph Smith during these years might possibly have put his hands on works such as Robert Heron’s English translation of Carsten Niebuhr’s description of Arabia, or Jean-Baptiste D’Anville’s map titled Orbis Veteribus Notus, or even an English translation of Pliny’s Natural History, or Gibbon’s The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, all of which dealt with ancient Arabia in one way or another. (1) The first concerns the dates of the acquisition of these works by Dartmouth’s library, or by any other major library in the United States. In the case of Robert Heron’s two-volume translation of Niebuhr’s work that was published in1792, the acquisition date at the Dartmouth library is 1937, more than 140 years after it appeared in print...

Hence, it is clear that, in the case of Dartmouth College, this work was not available in its library when the Smith family lived in the town of Lebanon, New Hampshire. Thus, in my mind, one cannot draw conclusions about any influence of such a work on young Joseph Smith...

Even if — hypothetically — such resources were available in the Dartmouth library before 1810 or so, a researcher would have to determine when young Joseph Smith could possibly have spent enough time there to glean information about ancient Arabia. One will recall that Joseph Smith became seriously ill in Lebanon early in the year of 1813, after turning seven years old, and was unable to function normally for several months following the surgical removal of bone from his leg. In light of the above, a researcher would have to make a case for Joseph Smith actively reading and gleaning when he was the age of a typical first or second grader, while taking into account that these were the periods when, if he were well enough, his father needed him for the work on the farm that the family had leased in Lebanon. In this light, it seems impossible to sustain a hypothesis that any library resource which dealt with Arabia, and particularly with NHM, influenced the very young Joseph Smith, or was even consulted by him. That works which dealt with Arabia in one way or another may have available in libraries in the then United States is possible. But demonstrating that Joseph Smith ever visited such institutions, or even knew of libraries that owned these works, lies beyond what the modern researcher can show.^[9]

As one can see, Joseph Smith Jun. could not have used 'outside' research and resources other than the Golden Plates he was given by the Angel Moroni. Besides the geographical information in the Book of Mormon; that only a true scholar of the region, with access to vast amounts of modern-day resources, could give us or one who actually walked these lands and experienced these things could have written (a very unsubtle nudge telling you that Nephi was a real person who experienced these thing and his record is a true record of his journey and a true record of the Lord Jesus Christ, I mean just incase you missed it...), the emotion one feels when they read Nephi's account would be hard-pressed to receive even from a professional literary author and only could be invoked by a first person storyteller who actually experienced such events (another subtle nudge). Joseph Smith Jun. was neither of these things. I testify the account of Lehi's journey, along with the rest of the Book of Mormon, is true. It was revealed to Joseph Smith Jun. by God and his only begotten son Jesus Christ.

I hope this brief (although it didn't feel so brief writing it...) overview of plausible geographical locations of Book of Mormon in the Near East, will help you build your testimony (as it has mine) of the truth of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Book of Mormon, and the Gospel of Jesus Christ; whether you are a member, an investigator, or just a regular reader.

My next installment will deal with Lehi's journey through the Pacific. Stay tuned for more!

[1] Landstrom, Eric. "A River Against Mormons." Protestant Apologetics and Theology. 02 Feb 2008. 14 Feb 2008
[2] Wyatt, Ron. "The "Red Sea"." Wyatt Archaeological Research. 14 Feb 2008 .
[3] Potter, George. "A New Candidate in Arabia for the "Valley of Lemeul"." The Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship Brigham Young University. Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS). 20 Feb 2008 .
[4] Chadwick, Jeffery R.. "The Wrong Place for Lehi’s Trail." The FARMS Review 17.2(2005) 214. 19 Feb 2008 .
[5] Lindsay, Jeff. "The Place Shazer in the Arabian Peninsula." Book of Mormon Nuggets. 21 Jan 2004. 15 Feb 2008 .
[6] Parsons, John J.. "Introduction to Hebrew Vowels." Hebrew for Christians. Hebrew for Christians. 20 Feb 2008 .
[7] Potter, George and Wellington, Richard. "Nahom, northern most Frankincense Trail to east in Yemen." The Nephi Project. 1998. The Nephi Project. 15 Feb 2008 .
[8] "Book of Mormon Geography: Old World." FAIR Wiki. 16 Jan 2008. Foundation for Apologetic Information adn Research. 20 Feb 2008 .
[9]Brown, S. Kent. "On Nahom/NHM." The Nephi Project. 23 Feb 2001. Department of Ancient Studies, BYU. 20 Feb 2008 .

Power of Prayer

Prayer is a powerful thing (probably one of the most general statements ever). But in all seriousness prayer is immensely powerful. It is our means of conveyance to Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ. How lucky are we to be able to directly talk to God? I can bear my testimony of how well prayer works. Many times in my life have I prayed and asked for help. This may not sound like a big deal but my father and brother were about to drive our two 'jet-skis' (really a Seadoo Bombardier and Yamaha Waverunner) back to the marina which was a little ways away. The problem was a big storm was moving in, it was pouring like crazy and I could see many lightning strikes out at sea. I was slightly worried... so I prayed, I prayed for the safety of my father and brother. And not three seconds after I said "Amen" the clouds opened and the sun seemed to pierce the storm, for it immediately stopped, rain and all. Now some would call that coincidence perhaps; but I knew, I felt the Holy Spirit as I prayed and I knew my message got through.

Now the aforementioned anecdote is just an example of prayer that was answered somewhat immediately. Prayer, from my experience many times takes a bit longer to receive an answer. Have faith and be patient, 'good things come to those who wait'.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is heavily driven by prayer. The restored Church of Christ was founded on prayer. A young boy named Joseph Smith Jun. read a verse in the General Epistle of James, "if you lack any wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally... But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering" (James 1:5-6). Because of a boy's simple prayer the world changed forever. The Book of Mormon also shows how important prayer is,

"For if ye would hearken unto the Spirit which teacheth a man to pray ye would know that ye must pray; for the evil spirit teacheth not a man to pray, but teacheth him that he must not pray. But behold, I say unto you that ye must pray always, and not faint;... ye shall pray unto the Father in the name of Christ, that he will consecrate thy performance unto thee, that thy performance may be for the welfare of thy soul" (2 Nephi 32:8-9).

Lastly one of the most important prayers I've ever made was posed in the Book of Mormon, by Moroni, "Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things... and ponder it in your hearts. And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things" (Moroni 10:3-5)

One cannot just pray... "Pray always, lest you enter into temptation and lose your reward" (D&C 31:12). One needs to keep commandments, have faith, do good that allows them to have the Holy Spirit really bless them with its presence.

"I would that ye should be humble, and be submissive and gentle; easy to be entreated; full of patience and long-suffering; being temperate in all things; being diligent in keeping the commandments of God at all times; asking for whatsoever things ye stand in need, both spiritual and temporal; always returning thanks unto God for whatsoever things ye do receive" (Alma 7:23).

One also needs to 'do'; one cannot simply sit and wait for things to happen, God helps those who help themselves right?

I am writing about prayer tonight because my family has been having some trouble. My mother just told me, "we just need to pray; just say a prayer." My parents instilled in my brothers and I, at a young age, a great priority when it came to prayer. They taught me its power, and the Church only furthered that lesson.

Helping the Public Understand the Church

Today I went to newsroom.lds.org, just to check out the latest happenings with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I read an article that stated that Elder M. Russell Ballard and Quentin R. Cook, the two apostles in control of public affairs for the church, recently announced that they would attempt to increase efforts to help the public better understand the Church. I think is is great The world around us are all too often ignorant to the Church's true beliefs and values. Whether they are misinformed, or misguided by anti-Mormon propaganda, or (most commonly) just do not know about the Church because they have never been told. For that last reason is why the Church has got one of the best (and probably the best well-known) missionary programs in the world. But, the problem lies (many times) with where investigators go to seek out information on the Church.

Put yourself in the shoes of a investigator, you do not really know anything about the Church other than its name, but you wish to learn a little more. Now are you going to:
A)Call your local Stake Center and request the Missionaries visit you?
B)Request a free Book of Mormon?
C)Simply 'Google' Mormons?

Well you, probably like most of America, would simply search for 'the Mormon Church' on the internet. I mean, in all honesty, when I first started talking to my friend about the Church, that's what I did... I looked up 'Mormon', and oh what I found... Lucky for me I did not turn away at the first sight of 'bad' information about the Church. I proceeded to look at the other side of that argument. I always looked at what the Mormons had to say to refute this or that claim. And that in itself is one of the biggest problems. When did we go on the defensive? It seems many times that members of the Church are forced onto their heels with attack after attack on the Church. I guess it is less 'how did we go on the defensive?' and more how are we stuck on the defense, it seems, at all times. By the way, the offensive would not be to attack other churches or religions, that would go against D&C 18:20, "Contend against no church, save it be the church of the devil". It would be nice for our beliefs to be known to the world; this is what Elder M. Russell Ballard and Quentin R. Cook are trying to do, inform the populous of the truth. One could argue it a 'preemptive' strike against further attacks, but really I think it Missionary work; spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ; helping those who are misinformed, uninformed, or misguided; preaching God's true message, and teaching what His true Church is. I cannot tell you how refreshing it would be if I was able to simply ask the 'Average Joe' off the street what he knew about the Church and he was able to rattle off as much information (correct information, that's the key) as most Americans can about other institutions, such as the Roman Catholic Church or Protestant churches.

I lightly touched on the internet. As most members know already the internet--for the most part--is the anti-Mormon catapult in which they can heave tons of misinformation and false information onto those who are looking for legitimate answers. Hopefully this will better in the near future and hopefully Elder M. Russell Ballard and Quentin R. Cook's work will help this too.

I have to say something in relation to my early search for information of the Church. When I first started I of course went to Mormon.org but soon started to branch out and started finding confusing and strange information. I was bewildered and was looking for answers. My friends and their families were always helpful and answered my questions, but I could not go to them with every single one of my thousands of questions, although knowing how nice and supportive they are they would have, no doubt, been more than happy to try to help. So fortunately I stumbled upon this site JeffLindsay.com. It helped me so much. The information Jeff Lindsay compiled on his LDS FAQ and Book of Mormon Evidences helped me get that logical confirmation along with the spiritual one I was already (and still am) receiving. I cannot say how thankful to him I am for all of his help.

Oh the Double Standards We Live By...

I was just walking out of my Comparative Politics class today, when I heard two people talking behind me. They were talking about politics; one was a girl and one was a guy. The girl was talking about Obama and how great he was and the guy was somewhat downtrodden because he liked Romney, and he had just dropped out (to my chagrin also...). When the girl heard this she said, "Well good, no way we let a Mormon in the White House." The guy was confused and asked what she meant by that. She responded, "Well I mean he's a different f---ing religion...". When I heard this I turned around and just looked at her and shook my head, I think I also unconsciously gave her the stink-eye (I'm kicking myself because I wish I had said something, but really I liked what the guy was saying and I wanted to hear what was said next). When the male speaker hear this he was slightly taken aback and playing the devil's advocate he said, "well if you think being a Mormon is controversial, what about being the first black person running?" Apparently this was a stunning rhetorical question to the girl and she immediately responded, "How can you say that? You're so racist!"

Oh the double standards we live by... I was dumbfounded, I could not believe she would have the audacity to accuse him of being racist when she herself was being the prejudicial bigot. I mean he never said it was bad for Obama to run, he just was just trying to say it was also, like with Romney and Clinton, a first. I was at a loss for words, I just kept shaking my head. They must have known I was doing so because of her comments. How come it is okay to denounce religion and hate someone for their beliefs, but when someone even mentions skin color (with not an ounce of negative connotation) there is a huge uproar?

The world around us is so ignorant to what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes and what they are. I remember hearing a story told, after Katrina hit in New Orleans a news reporter was interviewing a man who had lost his home and almost everything he owned; he said it has been very difficult but he was so greatful for the help he was getting from volunteers. The news reporter asked what groups the volunteers were from and he said there were two: those from "the Mormons' Church and those from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints". I always smile when I hear that but really it is so true. People really have no idea when it comes to the Church, they do not know the Church has over 13 million members, that they have active Missions in 162 countries, that the Book of Mormon has been translated into 105 different languages. This is a global Church, a global Christian Church, not a cult or anything of that nature, it is a legitimate church, loved by millions.

This might be news to the world, but guess what? The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) ARE CHRISTIAN. What?!?! Mormons are Christian, how?!?! I know, I know, it's a shocker, but they believe in the Christ of the Bible. In my opinion "Mormons'" practices and beliefs align most with the early Church, right after Christ's death and resurrection, than do other 'traditional' churches.

It's so sad to think that in today's world, where we pride ourselves on equality and fairness, people can still be so prejudicial to others' beliefs. I am going to quote something and its not scripture, it's from a little thing written a couple hundred years ago called the Bill of Rights, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". I know, I know that's talking about Congress, but I think it's meant just as much to Congress as it is to the individual, we should be accepting of all people not matter race, creed, or religion; none of us should ever "prohibit the free exercise" of religion.

"JUST LIK A MORMON!!!"

I was watching a video today on Youtube. It was a reply, put up by FAIRLDS (FAIRLDS.org) to an anti-Mormon video entitled The Bible vs. The Book of Mormon. I was reading some of the comments left by 'passionate' viewers and I read one; I wish I could say it 'shocked' me, but unfortunately I see the same type of comments all too often. The comment read,

Just like a MORMON!! The BIBLE IS TURE and the BOOK OF MORMON IS FALSE!!! MORMONS LIE! LIE! LIE! LIE! LIE! LIE! The Video The Bible vs The Book Of Mormon IS TRUE AND ON THE NOSE!!!!! MORMONS ARE LIERS!!

I can understand being passionate about something, but passion should not turn into such unadulterated hate. Although, it seems to happen all too much. I think personal beliefs and ideals are wonderful, but when one lets them push he or she into extremism and into such prejudicial practices, there is a big problem. I assume the author of such an 'articulate piece of work' is an adult (I hope dearly no child is already tainted with such bigotry, remember children are pure and innocent - D&C 93:38), if they are, that is a serious problem. They sound as if they are throwing a temper tantrum. If I was to act in such a behavior (I mean back when I was in diapers) my father would have taken me over his knee so fast... Personally I look at an 'argument' like this and try as I might I just cannot take it seriously, and I hope that others who read it do not either. I hope and pray that others look at such comments and can see the hate from which they stem, and hate for what reason? Did the Church somehow horribly, horribly wrong this person? What is the personal vendetta that so many have with the Church? The only reason I can come up with is jealousy. Perhaps they are jealous and wish too that their families can be sealed together for all time and eternity; perhaps they are jealous of those who are able to walk in the Lord's house, which was restored in this last dispensation; perhaps they are jealous of the laying on of hands and the gift of the Holy Spirit through baptism by fire... Well I all I have to say is don't be jealous. Come unto the Church bask in these wonderful gifts God has bestowed upon us.

I don't mean to sound rude, and I don't mean to pick on this comment too much, especially over others (trust me this is a fairly typical type of comment); but if you are going to discuss the LDS Church, the least you could do is formulate your arguments with correct grammar and spelling. I know the Bible and the Book of Mormon are true. I'm not sure about either being "ture"... but I just hope the commenter isn't trying to insult the Bible... because I'm a big fan.

"Just like a MORMON". I don't know this person's experience with Mormons, but honesty is one the Church's highly coveted principles. I have never met with a Bishop for a Temple Recommend but I have heard that one of the questions that are asked is about one's honesty in all their dealings. Also Article 13 of the "Articles of Faith" states "We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men...". Honesty is a key principle that all members try to uphold. How can the author of this comment make such a inaccurate and utterly false claim? I'm not trying to make the argument that every member of the Church is a 'saint' (the Church title I think says that well enough), just like in all groups/institutions there are some who do not quite practice all the principles to their fullest, but the majority of members are devote and follow the 'Articles of Faith' as well as the other commandments of Christ. Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints cannot be labeled "LIERS" (again the author has such a way with words...); there is no precedence or evidence to support such an asinine claim, in fact, the evidence, which is present, proves the opposite: the Church is all about honesty, not lying.

Now I think if I were to hear you say, 'you're just like a MORMON!', well, gosh, I'd take that as a compliment; I mean you think I'm hard working; true to my convictions; believe in the good of all people; I am continually "obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law"; I practice healthy behavior; I hold the utmost respect for my fellow man; I am "honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous..."; I am enduring; I seek after the things that are "virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy"; etc. I'd simply be flattered if you thought I was "Just like a MORMON".

Just in case any of you lot were wanting to watch the video I was, the link is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkLX6WdRyA0 (sorry to all those at BYU... can't really do too much about Youtube...)

My First 'Real' Fast Sunday

Today, much of America sits down together around the television to watch the Super Bowl with their assorted foodstuffs: potato chips, tortilla chips, buffalo wings, jalapeno pretzels, cheese, meat, crackers, assorted sodas, etc (can't tell I'm getting a bit hungry can you?). I too am one of those Americans enjoying the Super Bowl, but I won't be one of the ones enjoying stuffing my face during it, no, not this year. Today is my first 'Fast Sunday' where I am fasting for something. Back when I was allowed to go to Church, I had been to previous Fast Sundays, watching everyone bear their Testimonies, building my own Testimony, and strongly feeling the Spirit.

A week or two ago a great friend of mine out at BYU, talked to me about the upcoming first Sunday of the month. She knows all about my love of the Church and desire to be baptized, and she is just as well acquainted with the problems that lay before me and my baptism. She told me that she had told a lot of her friends and family about me and the issues that I am facing, and they were planning on fasting and praying for me this Fast Sunday. When I heard this I was taken aback. I couldn't believe that people that had never even met me would be so concerned about me and help me without even thinking twice. I can't express how grateful I am to those who are helping so very much with their prayers and their sacrifices. All of these people are so full of charity, doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. Seeing this type of charity is a little surprising to me, I've never had so many do so much for me. Thank you all.

In the Book of Mormon, 2 Nephi 26:30, there is a definition of charity. "Charity is love" (2 Nephi 26:30). When I first read this I was a little confused, but after interacting a great deal with many different members of the Church I feel as if I understand it now. All the members I have met have always welcomed me in with open arms, trying to help me as much as possible. They don't do this for personal gain, or as 'repayment' for something I have done for them. They do it fully out of charity; they do it out of love. They love the Church and they truly want to share that feeling the Church gives them with others.

This is a thing I've noticed about the Church, how members just give unconditionally. Now I'm not saying one doesn't find this in other churches and groups, but I have experienced so many different examples of charity, with the Church. One example is when I first (also the only time...) went to Church here at college. I walked to the Stake Center and immediately when I got to the parking lot a very nice woman approached me. She knew that I wasn't a member of the Stake, and she asked about me. I told her I was a "very, very serious investigator", but not yet a member because my parents did not want me to join, just yet. She asked how I got to Church and I told her I walked from campus. When she heard this she was very surprised, she called her husband and her son over. She said, "Look at this boy here he walked two miles from campus and he's not even a member." I was pretty embarrassed, it really was not a big deal. And then she immediately said, "We would just be more than happy to drive you if you need a ride or anything." She was just the first of many to unselfishly offer me a ride or any type of help I needed. I appreciate so much all the kindness and unselfish acts I have experienced from these members of the Church.

Why the Name "Admirer of Ammon"?

I chose the name "Admirer of Ammon" in rememberence of the great missionary in the Book of Mormon, Ammon. A good portion of the story takes place in the Book of Alma chapters 17-19, but his story is continued later in Alma. (Just a head's up if you already have a knowledge of the Book of Mormon you can basically skip the next paragraph, if not, enjoy.)

Ammon began as a skeptic of the Church of Christ and tried to turn people away from the teachings of the prophets; that is until a life changing encounter with an angel caused him to fully come unto the Gospel of Jesus Christ. From that point on he, his three brothers, and Alma the younger devoted themselves to God's work. He and his brothers felt they should teach the Gospel to their brethren, an apostate group, the Lamanites. Ammon went to one of the kings of the Lamanites, King Lamoni, and declared himself as a servant to the king; Ammon was assigned to help attend to the king's flocks. Ammon, in a miraculous feat, defended the flocks from a great number of thieves. He smote of many of their arms in defense of the king's property. He used the arms as evidence of the thieves attack. King Lamoni was taken aback and inquired as to how Ammon could pull-off such a great feat. Ammon then used this opportunity to preach unto the King of the ways of God. The King and many of his people were then converted, thanks to Ammon's missionary work in the land.

Okay, that is a very,very simplified version of the story of Ammon, but I just wanted to give those who had never heard it the basic gist of it. I have a great admiration of Ammon. He is an amazing example to all, of how we should go to great lengths to preach the Gospel. and act as an instrument in the saving of many's souls. I hope to be somewhat like Ammon (granted I'm not the best at chopping off people's arms...), to be an "instrument in the hands of God to bring, if it were possible, their brethren... to the knowledge of the truth" (Alma 17:9).

On a somewhat related side note there is a interesting Foundation of Ancient Research and Mormon Studies' (FARMS) article by Bruce H. Yerman entitled, Ammon and the Mesoamerican Custom of Smiting Off Arms (The article can be found at http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?id=183&table=jbms). The article states,

Cutting off an enemy's arm in battle not only rendered him utterly helpless but also netted the victor a grisly trophy to carry from the scene of battle that would validate his prowess in hand-to-hand combat. Documents from Mexico and Guatemala reveal such a pre-Columbian custom.

I apologize to those with weak stomachs, but I cite this evidence in support of the Book of Mormon. I pose a rhetorical question, How would a 'country boy' farmer, with a education level that on par with a fourth grader, from a rural area in New York, in 1830 "come up with" something so specific, that we know have found actual evidence supporting it? The chances he simply 'made it up' are slim to none. Joseph Smith could not have known the arms of enemies were used as "trophies", just as they were used by Ammon when he presented them to King Lamoni. This is just one small example of culture, technology, and customs in the Book of Mormon that have recently been discovered, through archaeological evidence to be true of Mesoamerican groups (the most probable location of the Book of Mormon). Evidence like this just help me build my testimony that I know the Book of Mormon is true and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is, truly, God's Church here on earth.

The Beginning of the Blog

Well I won't try to fool anyone, this is my first blog, so please bear with me. One big influence I have for starting a blog is to shed some light on an ever growing, controversial subject of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I say controversial because it seems more and more (especially on this great 'internet highway' we travel on) misinformation, false information, and simply ignorant and bigoted information are being spread around by "anti-Mormons" (for lack of a better term).

I myself am no stranger to the--at times hostile--attacks on the Church. I was introduced to the Gospel in my senior year of high school, by long time friends who were LDS (life-long members). One of them gave me the Book of Mormon, upon my request. I was curious to see just what the deal was with this church. What I had learned of the church was mostly hearsay and from such great outlets like South Park (which does not exactly accurately represent the faith...). Once I picked up the Book of Mormon I immediately felt the Spirit. I learned so much from my reading. I took the challenge posed by Moroni, and was answered back a resounding "Yes", the Book of Mormon is in fact true and was divinely translated by Joseph Smith Jun. I was ready to join the Church, be baptized, but apparently my parents were not (and still are not) ready for me to do so. They became worried about my interest in the Church and started looking at the all too readily available anti-Mormon rhetoric out there. So now I am somewhat "forbidden" from going to Church; I have thus far respected my parents wishes and plan on continuing to do so.

Enough background history on myself. Another driving force I have for starting a blog is from a speech by Elder Russel M. Ballard. In which he stated, "The Lord over the centuries has had a hand in inspiring people to invent tools that facilitate the spreading of the gospel. The Church has adopted and embraced those tools, including print, broadcast media, and now the Internet... Now, to you... and all other faithful members of the Church, as you graduate from this wonderful university, may I ask that you join the conversation by participating on the Internet...".

Well that's about it for my 'introduction'. Hopefully I'll be able to clear up some misconceptions of the Church, as well as talk a bit about myself.

Lastly I just wanted to make it clear that I am NOT affiliated with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the views I share are my own.