He seems like he thinks that the people in Mesoamerica was more advanced and complex.

@@confusedwhynot After seeing some of the ancient types of construction that the mound builder peoples and more recent tribes were capable of building, it is remarkable to me that anyone can assert that Mesoamerica was more advanced in any sense other than the superficial. I think in time, we may even discover evidence of written language from North America in ancient times.

Thank you for the resources.

​@@confusedwhynotthat's because they were

Yes, another reason for the heartland theory, this land is the one under a covenant.

and it was a land of liberty so the BofM could come forth! When has central America or south ever been a land of liberty?

And why do so many Native American (not Meso America legends support the Heartland theory. Why, out of all South and Central America would Missouri become the gathering place!? Etc etc

😂

Hilarious

😅good one, me too!

This guy.... totally converted to his view....to the exclusion of ANY opposition. Heartland DNA, meso time line, archeological connection with anything middle eastern, be damned.

Ahem, dear Bob, that is NOT what Brant wanted you to conclude...😁

Amen!!!! It doesn't matter where it took place.

Im thinking the same thing

yes, the spirit after I joined the church told me the North American idea, and what Joseph himself said makes sense to me!

Same. Rereading the BOM with the heartland model I mind, I am convinced it is the correct lens to view the events that occurred.

You said exactly what I'm thinking

I agree with you.

Yes, he's soooo educated and we should pay attention to him! Just like all the scholars, they think their opinions are better than what Joseph said? Just like all the CRT scholars at BYU!!! Didn't Joseph say Zerahemla(spelling? sorry) was right across the Mississippi river from Navou(spelling?).

Yup, if you don’t agree with him, you’re a racist. As soon as he said that, he lost all credibility. I don’t trust anything else he said.

That really bothered me too. I'd never even thought of that before. Perfect straw man argument!

So Brant, what are the good things about the heartland model......Answer: racism. He's comin hot.

He seemed angry the whole time...

He must be a lefty.

I was immediately put off by that....now I'm talking about it again even though I already left a comment. Where does this guy get off?

@@theephraimite Yup..he is a CRTer!!!

Yeah, I was so upset that I just stopped listening after that. The pride of the world is definitely in his heart.

Seems evangelical 😂

Yes, liberty so the Book of Mormon could come forth was definitely not in central or South America.

Sorry but the church’s official statement that there are no known locations of the BOM suggest you are not reading that scripture correctly

@@Heartsinmelody the 'official' Church position on things like this is and will always be that we do not know because it will never be 100% sure. This is why it is being debated.

@@danpiedra3910 no kidding. Because this is the official position it is incorrect to start claiming scriptural verses in the LDS cannon give the location of any particular place mentioned in the BOM. Any such interpretations are unfounded and not consistent with the offical church position. By all means debate, but quit claiming that a particular verse in the D&C (for example) gives the location of ancient Zarahemla when it is not the way the scripture should be read.

No scholars, are required for this one; just the prophet of the restoration, and translator of the Book of Mormon are needed. You are correct the Lord does know where the original Book of Mormon city of Zarahemla was, and Joseph does give us insight into where it was. First, it's important to understand, that Joseph did NOT say the Book of Mormon city of Zarahemla was located across the river from Nauvoo; nor does the D&C say the Book of Mormon Zarahemla is across from Nauvoo; what it actually says is misrepresented and twisted by "heartlanders". A close inspection of the D&C, shows the D&C does not actually say or mention anything about the city located across the river from Nauvoo, as being the location of the original Book of Mormon Zarahemla (the one burnt at the Savior's crucifixion, which is important, more on this later). Fact is, the Latter-day Saints developed a town across the river from Nauvoo, and called it Zarahemla, in honor of the original; that's all it is, it's just a special name reused for the Saints to endear, much like the city of Bountiful north of Salt Lake City is not the location of the city of Bountiful of the Book of Mormon; also recall when Nephi moved his family & friends away from Laman and Lemuel, to a place and named it Bountiful, in honor of yet another Bountiful in the old world, before they build the ship. Some other examples are: the city of Moroni settled by the saints in central Utah, is not the where Book of Mormon city of Moroni that sank. The cities Nephi and Lehi near Utah Lake are not the original locations of the cities of the Book of Mormon. The City Manti in central Utah is not the original location of the Book of Mormon city of Manti. The same goes for Mountains and hills, Mount Nebo, south of Utah Lake, is not the same Mount Nebo Moses stood upon overlooking the promised land of the Israelites. We could go on and on and on. So what has Joseph said regarding the location of the Book of Mormon Zarahemla? Let's review: The Church's main focus and mission is to proclaim and teach the Gospel of Jesus Christ; Book of Mormon and Biblical geography, are not topics the Church dwells on to fulfill its mission; thus many latter-day saints are unaware, that Joseph proclaimed and declared Zarahemla was in Central America; he even put it in writing and published it for all to read. If you're interested in relevant historical records, search the Church's website for a link to - "Times and Seasons October 1, 1842 Zarahemla". Joseph as Editor, together with his assistant editors, Apostles John Taylor & Wilford Woodruff (both of whom would become presidents of the Church, that's three powerful witnesses), unitedly declare, as an "important fact" - Zarahemla was in Central America, in the land of Guatemala. To substantiate the claim, Joseph, being very familiar with the details of the BOM, quotes and rehearses Alma 22 describing the region where Zarahemla was. This is what Joseph felt, believed, and published; there's no hearsay about it, it's not second or third-hand hearsay, we have the church publication. It's real and it's direct; no need to debate over it. The editors (Joseph, John, and Wilford) went on to clarify, that they weren't declaring a specific city mentioned from an explorer's book, they had previously discussed in previous editions of the T&S, as the city of Zarahemla. They didn't feel impressed to declare the explorer's named city, as Zarahemla, only that Zarahemla was somewhere in Central America. However, the editors state they are of the opinion that the previously named city, was one of the Book of Mormon cities. Read the full T&S article for more details. Keep in mind, that this clarification of a specific city previously named as not being Zarahemla, does not negate or dismiss the declared 'important fact', that Zarahemla was in Central America. They just don't give the exact location, but narrow it down to the borders of Guatemala. The 'important fact' of Zarahemla being in Central America, collaborates with the BOM narrative. To attempt to speculate this declaration away is futile. Also know, elsewhere in other articles, in the same edition of the T&S Oct 1, 1842, the editors refute the conspiring claims circulating about, suggesting Joseph had fled the area of Nauvoo and is on the run. 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 it's all there; Joseph was still around and still very much in charge, as represented & substantiated by the T&S article itself. So a very special thanks to the editors for documenting this conspiracy so long ago and clearing it up for future generations. Note: Joseph was Editor until November 15, 1842, a full six weeks after the declaration Zarahemla was in Central America; at which time, Joseph stepped aside as Editor and appointed John Taylor as the new Editor of the Times and Season. Logic and common sense dictate if John Taylor had published the Zarahemla claim on his own, without Joseph's consent, and if Joseph disagreed with it; would Joseph have promoted John to Editor six weeks after such a bold declaration?? The thought makes reason stare. Further, "if" as claimed by conspirators, Joseph didn't oversee the publication of the October 1, 1842 edition, and he disagreed with the bold declaration, know this, Joseph would have had it retracted, as he had assured readers he was responsible for the paper while he was editor. Joseph never had it retracted or refuted it. Truth is, Joseph is the one who published it; Joseph was Editor and owns the declaration, Zarahemla is in Central America. You either trust Joseph or you don't. Interestingly to note, the Church, has never refuted or retracted the publican either. Next, go to the Church's website and search - 'Book of Mormon Geography'. Notice, that the Church takes no stance on the exact location of BOM cities because no exact locations have been revealed. This is true, Joseph never gave an exact location. Also, note, in the same statement, the Church acknowledges Joseph's beliefs on the subject and further confirms and substantiates Joseph as Editor of the Times & Seasons in 1842 for the articles referring to Book of Mormon geography lands in Central America (aka Mesoamerica). Very interesting indeed. Kinda clears up any speculation by modern researchers and bookwriters. No need to argue, it is what it is, a statement of truth. Joseph, declares Zarahemla was within the borders of Guatemala, since borders change over the years, what were the borders of Guatemala in Joseph's day. Google search for - "map of Guatemala 1825" (or 1835, it doesn't matter), open a copy of a properly labeled historic map and notice Guatemala's borders back in Joseph's day extended as far north to include the Chiapas & Palenque areas of modern-day Mexico. Say what! A very interesting area indeed! Long before any scholar or modern-day researchers or bookwriters pronounced their own theories as to the location of Zarahemla, Joseph had already declared it to be Central America (still part of this continent, as Mormon called it). No scholars or theories needed to narrow down the general area, Joseph did it for us. And it all fits the Book of Mormon narrative. Thanks, Brother Joseph. With Zarahemla being in Central America, does the BOM narrative accommodate Joseph's claims of "walking the plains of the Nephites" and the Zelph stories? Yes, in fact, these stories actually collaborate with the BOM narrative precisely with no contradiction. Alma 63 and Helaman 3:3-5,12-16 state many thousands of Nephites left the land of Zarahemla & Bountiful and migrated to the northern country, both by land and by sea. This also accounts for how a Zelph-type character and converted Lamanites were living in the northern country during the last struggles. Remember these Nephites departed FROM the lands of Zarahenla and Bountiful sailing north across a sea. Per the Book's narrative, there is a sea, not just land, between Zarahemla and the choice land (as the Jaredites called it) in the north country where a New Jerusalem will be built. So yes, Joseph and the saint did walk plains of Nephites in the heartland of the north country (aka The United States of America), however, they weren't the plains of the Nephites of Zarahemla and Bountiful, they were plains of the Nephites who left Zarahemla & Bountiful. There are no contradictions by Joseph, and no mental gymnastics or exclusions are required to make it all fit. It's all in the book. The book itself, says there were Nephite cultures in the heartland of North America, that left the original lands of Zarahemla & Bountiful (the main land of the Book of Mormon). No academics or scholars are needed 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. With Zarahemla being in Central America, the southern region of this Continent, the narrative of the BOM fits perfectly, placing New Jerusalem north of Zarahemla, in the choice "heartland" of the current United States of America. The T&S editorial is simply marvelous, look it up and notice how in the article, the editors clarify and specify the city of Zarahemla in Central America, as the one burnt at the time of the Lord's crucifixion; why would they need to specify the one burnt at the Savior's crucifixion; isn't there only one Zarahemla? Because, they knew there was a modern city developed by the Latter-day Saints across the river from Nauvoo, also named Zarahemla. Joseph made sure to clarify, so there was no misunderstanding of which Zarahemla and location he was talking about. No need for speculation or misrepresentation of the D&C, Joseph clears it up in the same article of the T&S; thanks again, Brother Joseph!

Amen -still trying to give it a chance…

No he is right. As a black male member what he is saying is that we are looking at the book of mormon from a white culture view point about what existed and didn't. The winners determine history According to how they see it so you have to think out of the box. The fact that you have a pro lem with his comments is proof why President Nelson is getting that award next month from morehouse College in Atlanta because we still have members that has not followed the example of our prophet on race.

Yup. Huge turn off. Arrogant attitude lol

This is ridiculous! The whole issue is about non-white people. Do you understand that? It's about white Americans.

@@CwicShow wait, what is ridiculous? This comment or the guest's remark?

Yes, us little people!!!

We can't measure up to the holiest and wisest of BYU professors.

😂

“For when they are learned, they think they are wise “ the adoption of the mesoamerican model has hurt the church over the years. Trust in the word of the Lord, not the perceived knowledge of men.

yup....Oh sorry, yes, is a more scholarly way to say that!!! And scholarship is more important than what the actual prophet, Joseph, said!!!

🎉Thank youuuuu! Finally.😎

Agreed

Made me cringe😢

Yup

Yeah, as soon as he called me "selfish" for believing the Heartland model, I began to recognize his frequent use of manipulative diversion tactics of narcissists. I heard none of that condescension from Johnathan. - The religion of academia pays homage to itself. No man can serve two masters.

@@karlhaws2245 He comes across as assuming people can’t read or not capable of reason and logic. Intellectuals are often closed off from current or relevant information they must work within their paradigm, within the bureaucracy of their departments. It was also laughable to hear him describe population numbers of scattered villages of several thousands. He needs to read more.

yup, and the promised land was a land of liberty so the Book of Mormon could come forth. Central and South America have never been lands of liberty.

You are correct

Very good!!!

Exactly! Even Meso people believe there had to be substitutions to be able to practice the Law of Moses. Why would the Lord put his people in a location where they couldn’t practice the Law of Moses when that’s what He commanded them to do?

As for sheep, remains have been found on one site in Mexico around the time of the events in the Book of Mormon.

Amen!! He must be a CRT Activist also!!!

😂 lol ... I know right!?

Exactly. The geography does matter, just like it matters for the Bible. I want to know where it occurred and rejoice in its evidences, just like Joseph Smith and Zions Camp rejoiced when they saw evidences of its truth.

@@dhr161 Great point!

THIS^^^^^^^

I agree with you.

Heartland rings true as Nephite lands, because guess what, it's true, according to Mormon, there were Nephites living in the heartland? Yet, There's much much more to the story of Nephite lands. The Church's main focus and mission is to proclaim and teach the Gospel of Christ; BOM & Biblical geography are not topics the Church dwells on, thus many latter-day saints are unaware Joseph claimed and declared Zarahemla was in Central America; he even put it in writing and published it. If you're interested in historical facts, google - Times and Seasons October 1, 1842 Zarahemla. Joseph as Editor, along with his assistant editors, Apostles John Taylor & Wilford Woodruff (both of whom would become presidents of the Church), boldly declare as an "important fact" - Zarahemla was in Central America, in the land of Guatemala. To substantiate the claim and declaration, Joseph, being very familiar with the details of the BOM, quotes and rehearses Alma 22 describing the region where Zarahemla was. This is what Joseph felt and believed, and he published it, there's no hearsay about it. True story look it up. The editors as a united group, then went on to clarify, they weren't declaring an exact or specific city mentioned in an explorer's book, that had previously been named and discussed in a previous edition of the T&S as the city of Zarahemla. They didn't feel impressed to declare that specific city Zarahemla, only that Zarahemla was somewhere in Central America. However, they (Joseph, John, & Wilford) are of the opinion that the previously named city, was a city of the Book of Mormon, just not Zarahemla. Read the T&S article for the full details. Keep in mind, this secondary clarification of a specific city previously named as not being Zarahemla, does not contradict the declared important fact, that Zarahemla was in Central America. They just don't give an exact location, but narrow it down to the borders of Guatemala known at the time of publication. The important fact of Zarahemla being in Central America collaborates with the BOM narrative. You either trust Joseph or you don't. To attempt to speculate this declaration away is futile. 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 is on the run. 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 article itself. So a very special thanks to the editors(Joseph, John, & Wilford), for documenting this conspiracy so long ago and clearing it up for future generations. Keep in mind, earlier that year, when Joseph took over as editor of the T&S, he declared, and assured the readers, that he alone would be responsible for what was printed in the T&S while he was editor. Joseph was Editor until November 15, 1842, a full six weeks after Joseph makes the declaration that Zarahemla is in Central America; at which time Joseph steps aside as Editor and appoints John Taylor as the new Editor of the Times and Season. Logic and common sense dictate if John Taylor had published the Zarahemla claim on his own, without Joseph's knowledge and consent, and if Joseph disagreed agree with it; would Joseph have promoted John to Editor six weeks after such a bold declaration?? The thought makes reason stare. Further, "if" Joseph didn't oversee the publication of the October 1, 1842 edition, and he disagreed with the bold declaration, know this, Joseph would have had it retracted, as he assured his readers he was responsible. Joseph never had it retracted. Truth is, Joseph is the one who published it; Joseph was Editor and owns the declaration, Zarahemla is in Central America. You either trust Joseph or you don't. Next, go to the Church's website and search - 'Book of Mormon Geography'. Notice, the church takes no stance on the exact location of BOM cities, because no exact locations have been revealed. However, in the same statement on the Church's website, the Church does acknowledge Joseph's beliefs on the subject, and further confirms and substantiates Joseph as Editor of the Times & Seasons in 1842 for the articles referring to Book of Mormon lands and Central America (aka Mesoamerica). Very interesting indeed. Kinda clears up any speculation. Joseph, states Zarahemla is in Central America, within the borders of Guatemala, as he would have known it on the maps of his day. For additional & interesting collaboration on what Joseph would have known Guatemala to be in his day, google - "map of Guatemala 1825" (or 1835, it doesn't matter) open a properly labeled map and notice Guatemala's borders back in Joseph's day extended as far north to include the Chiapas & Palenque areas of modern-day Mexico. Say what! A very interesting area indeed! Long before any scholar pronounce their own theory as to the location of the land of Zarahemla, Joseph had already declared it to be Central America. No scholars or theories needed to narrow down the general area, Joseph did it for us. All things considered, it all fits. With Zarahemla being in Central America, does the BOM narrative accommodate Joseph's claims of "walking the plains of the Nephites" and the Zelph stories? Could both be accurate and plausible? Yes, in fact, these stories actually collaborate with the BOM narrative precisely with no contradiction. Alma 63 and Helaman 3:3-5,12-16 states many groups of Nephites left the land of Zarahemla & Bountiful and migrated to the north country, both by land and by sea. This also accounts for how a Zelph-type character and other descendants of converted Lamanites were in the northern country during the last struggles. Remember these Nephites departed FROM the lands of Zarahenla and Bountiful sailing across a sea. Also note, there is a sea, not just land, between Zarahemla and the land of a New Jerusalem in the north country. So yes, there are plains of Nephites in the heartland of the north country, aka The United States of America. There are no contradictions by Joseph, and no mental gymnastics or exclusions are required to make things fit. There are even statements in the BOM narrative that signal there was commerce trade happening between the Nephites in the land of Zarahemla/Bountiful and the migrant Nephites groups in the north country. It's all in the book. The book itself, says we will find evidence of Nephite cultures in the heartland of North America; any evidence found collaborates these other Nephite groups that left the lands of Zarahemla & Bountiful where the prophets Nephi through Mormon dwelt, which is in Central America. No academics or scholars are needed 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 speculate this truth away is futile. After studying the Book of Mormon and all of Joseph's statements, I agree with what Joseph published, Zarahemla, is somewhere in Central America (aka Mesoamerica), and also, that there were other Nephite groups who left the lands of Zarahemla & Bountiful that settled all across the north country, known currently as the "heartland" of the United States of America, as we have a brief mention of them in Helaman 3. Thanks, Mormon for including such a wonderful detail of information. Any evidence found of Nephites in the "heartland" collaborates Mormon's narrative and Joseph's claims, plain and simple. With Zarahemla being in Central America, the southern region of this Continent, the narrative of the BOM fits perfectly, placing the New Jerusalem north in the "heartland" of the current United States of America. That makes sense and fits the narrative perfectly. This editorial is simply wonderful, notice how they clarify the city of Zarahemla as the one burnt at the time of the Lord's crucifixion; why would they need to specify the one burnt at the Savior's crucifixion; isn't there only one Zarahemla? Because, they knew there was a modern city, with the name of Zarahemla, developed by the Latter-day Saints across the river from Nauvoo. Joseph, John, & Wilford wanted to clarify so no one was confused by the two different cities of Zarahemla. No need for speculation, Joseph clears it all up in the same edition of the T&S. With all said, It all adds up and feels right. The Book of Mormon is another volume of scripture, that testifies of Jesus Christ and His gospel. That's the message of the Book, and it's true! Among the writings of that message, are descriptions of where and when it took place. I agree with what Joseph claimed and published, Zarahemla is in Central America. And, there are also plains of the Nephites in the "heartland" as the Book of Mormon mentions there should be. The Book of Mormon is correct and true! Now you know; take care!

I think the Book of Mormon was tailored to fit this preexisting belief. Everyone in Joseph Smiths day was trying to explain the Native Americans and the prevailing theory was they must be a lost tribe of Israel. Joseph Smith clearly intended everyone to believe the Book of Mormon took place in the "Heartland". I have discovered the true location of the Book of Mormon events and peoples and can now clearly see how the true book was altered to fit America. This leaves me with a heartbroken hole in my life knowing what Joseph Smith did. I can sort of understand why he did what he did but it's still hard to see the truth. The problem will always remain that Joseph Smith intended the Heartland Model and this model lacks evidence. This is why a lot of people are drawn to the Meso-America Model. This model is also incorrect but is far more logical. The true discovery of Book of Mormon Lands has been really exciting. Imagine the feeling you were describing about the Heartland Model x100. I know because that's what I experienced. The problem is, as I mentioned, it doesn't fit what Joseph Smith said and therefore it has remained hidden from the world. Those that read the BOM believe JS and those that don't read it don't care where it took place.

​@@redfightblue Not to be contentious, just pointing it out for the readers; the presumption Joseph "intended everyone to believe the Book of Mormon took place in the Heartland" is preposterous and a false premise; only surmised by those lacking information or comprehension of provided details. Joseph's statements actually collaborate the Book of Mormon account accurately and they precisely fit. Let's review: 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 claimed and declared Zarahemla was in Central America; he even put it in writing and published it. If you're interested in the historical information available, google - Times and Seasons October 1, 1842 Zarahemla. Joseph as Editor, along with his assistant editors, Apostles John Taylor & Wilford Woodruff (incidentally, both would become presidents of the Church), boldly declare as an "important fact" - Zarahemla was in Central America, in the land of Guatemala. To substantiate the claim and declaration, Joseph, being very familiar with the details of the BOM, quotes and rehearses Alma 22 describing the region where Zarahemla was. This is what Joseph felt and believed, and he published it, there's no hearsay about it. This article, published while Joseph was editor, directly refutes the notion Joseph intended people to believe the Book of Mormon took place in the heartland. Joseph believed Nephites lived all across the continent, however, when it came to the land of Zarahemla, Joseph believed and knew it to be in Central America (aka Meso-America). Further, the editors as a united group, then went on to clarify, they weren't declaring an exact or specific city mentioned in an explorer's book, which had previously been mentioned and discussed in a previous edition of the T&S, as the city of Zarahemla. They didn't feel impressed to declare that specific city Zarahemla, only that Zarahemla was somewhere in Central America. However, they (Joseph, John, & Wilford) are of the opinion that the previously named city, was a city of the Book of Mormon, just not Zarahemla. Read the entire T&S article for the full details. Keep in mind, this secondary clarification of the specific city mentioned, as not being Zarahemla, does not negate or contradict the declared important fact, that Zarahemla was in Central America. They just don't give an exact location, but narrow it down to the borders of Guatemala. Joseph did not believe the main account of the Book of Mormon took place in the Heartland. Joseph believed that Zarahemla and thus the main story-line of the BOM was in Central America. Joseph knew that the entire continent was occupied by migrating Nephites hundreds of years before Christ appeared. Read the Book, it's all there in plain sight. Joseph's 'important fact' of Zarahemla being in Central America, collaborates with the BOM narrative. To attempt to speculate and discount this declaration away is futile. 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 is on the run. 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 article itself. So a very special thanks to the editors(Joseph, John, & Wilford), for documenting this conspiracy so long ago and clearing it up for future generations. Joseph was Editor until November 15, 1842, a full six weeks after Joseph makes the declaration Zarahemla is in Central America; at which time Joseph steps aside as Editor and appoints John Taylor as the new Editor of the Times and Season. Logic and common sense dictate, if John Taylor had published the Zarahemla claim on his own, without Joseph's consent, and if Joseph disagreed agree with it; would Joseph have promoted John to Editor six weeks after such a bold declaration?? The thought makes reason stare. Further, "if" Joseph didn't oversee the publication of the October 1, 1842 edition, and he disagreed with the bold declaration, know this, Joseph would have had it retracted, as he assured readers he was responsible for what was printed; Joseph never had it retracted. Truth is, Joseph is the one who published it; Joseph was Editor, and along with his two assistant editors as witnesses, owns the declaration, Zarahemla is in Central America. True story. Next, go to the Church's website and search - 'Book of Mormon Geography'. Notice, the church takes no stance on the exact locations of BOM cities; this is because no exact locations have been revealed. Albeit, in the same statement, the Church does acknowledge Joseph's beliefs on the subject, and further confirms and substantiates Joseph as Editor of the Times & Seasons in 1842 for the articles referring to Book of Mormon lands and Central America (aka Mesoamerica); very interesting indeed; kinda clears up speculation of if Joseph was editor, and also what Joseph believed (aka, intended others to believe about BOM lands). Joseph, clearly states Zarahemla is in Central America, within the borders of Guatemala, as he would have known it on the maps of his day. For additional & interesting collaboration on what Joseph would have known Guatemala to be in his day, google - "map of Guatemala 1825" (or 1835, it doesn't matter) open a properly labeled historical copy of the map and notice Guatemala's borders back in Joseph's day extended as far north to include the Chiapas & Palenque areas of modern-day Mexico. Say what! A very interesting area indeed! Long before any scholar pronounce their own theory as to the location of the land of Zarahemla, Joseph had already declared it to be Central America. No scholars or theories needed to narrow down the general area, Joseph already did; all things considered, it all fits. With Zarahemla being in Central America, does the BOM narrative accommodate Joseph's claims of "walking the plains of the Nephites" and the Zelph stories? Could both be accurate and plausible? Yes, in fact, these stories actually collaborate with the BOM narrative precisely with no contradiction. Alma 63 and Helaman 3:3-5,12-16 states many groups of Nephites left the land of Zarahemla & Bountiful and migrated to the north country, both by land and by sea. This also accounts for how a Zelph-type character and other descendants of converted Lamanites were in the northern "heartland" country during the last struggles. Remember these Nephites departed FROM the lands of Zarahenla and Bountiful, some sailing across a sea. So note, there is also a sea, not just land, between Zarahemla and the choice land mentioned by King Mosiah, in the north country where a New Jerusalem will be built upon this continent. So yes, there are plains of Nephites in the heartland of the north country, aka The United States of America. There are no contradictions by Joseph, and no mental gymnastics or exclusions are required to make things fit. There are even statements in the BOM narrative that signal there was commerce trade happening between the Nephites in the land of Zarahemla/Bountiful and the migrant Nephites groups in the north country. It's all in the book. The book itself, says Nephites lived all across this continent. No academics or scholars are needed 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. After studying the Book of Mormon, along with Joseph's other side statements, I agree with what Joseph published, Zarahemla, is somewhere in Central America (aka Mesoamerica), and that there were other Nephite groups who left the lands of Zarahemla & Bountiful that settled all across the north country, known currently as the "heartland" of the United States of America. Thank you Mormon and Moroni for including mention of these other Nephite groups. With Zarahemla being in Central America, the southern region of this Continent (another clue Mormon 1:6), the narrative of the BOM fits perfectly, placing the New Jerusalem, north of Zarahemla, in the Choice-land currently known as the United States of America. That makes sense and fits the narrative perfectly. This T&S editorial is simply wonderful, read it and 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 one burnt at the Savior's crucifixion; isn't there only one Zarahemla?? Because, they knew there was a modern city developed by the Latter-day Saints across the river from Nauvoo, the saints named Zarahemla in honor of the great city of the BOM. Joseph, John, & Wilford wanted to clarify so no one was confused by the two different cities of Zarahemla. No need for speculation, Joseph clears it all up in the same edition of the T&S. With all said, it all adds up and fits; Zarahemla is in Central America. The Book of Mormon is another volume of scripture, that testifies of Jesus Christ and His gospel. That is the message of the Book, and it's true! Among the writings of that message, are descriptions of where and when it took place. I agree with what Joseph claimed and published, Zarahemla is in Central America. And, there are also plains of the Nephites in the "heartland" as the Book of Mormon mentions there would be. The Book of Mormon is correct and true! Now you know; best wishes in your journey!

It would be fun to have an open dialogue with you. You obviously feel strongly about where Zarahemla is. My theory is radically different than anything you mentioned. I do not believe the Heartland or Meso-America. I believe the Book of Mormon was written by Ethiopian Jews in Ethiopia. The land South is Africa, the Land of Nephi is in Ethiopia which paces Zarahemla Northward in the Sahara, which is often spelled Zahara. Alma 22:32 is described in detail by Herodotus in Book 4, Chapter 40-42. This describes Africa, not America. Herodotus also describes the geography of Africa was discovered by a sailor in 600 BC. The sailor was Lehi and he discovered Africa, not America. The Book of Mormon is told from the perspective of Ethiopian Jews and migrations in Helaman 3 are North to Egypt. The "treeless" land to the North where they build with cement (stone) and ship timber (Lebanon Cedar) is Egypt. There is no possible example of shipping timber in Ancient America. It is well known Egypt built with cedar shipped from Lebanon. Because of Genesis 2:13, Ethiopian Jews believe the Garden of Eden is in Ethiopia. This is where they claimed their forefather, Lehi, was commanded to go in the Tree of Life vision. Out of Egypt and up the Nile to Ethiopia. The angel tells Nephi his seed will be destroyed on the river "thy father saw". This is the Nile River in Africa. The entire Tree of Life vision is a map of Africa. Out of Israel, through Egypt and up to Ethiopia. The danger in Egypt is defined clearly by Jeremiah in Jeremiah 44. Helaman 3:6 is an exact rebuttal of Jeremiah 44. This is exactly how an Ethiopian Jew would justify returning to Egypt after Jeremiah explicitly warned against it. Once you realize the Ethiopian perspective you can start to see it everywhere. For example, the Jaredites is the Ethiopian Jewish perspective on the origins of the world and the origins of Israel. The original Promise Land. The Jaredites journey North is down the Nile river to Ethiopia. The sailing is out into open water away from the river. The promise Land is Israel, not America. The Jaredites brought fruit, seeds, flocks and fish from the Garden of Eden in Ethiopia to populate Israel. This is how the Jaredites arrived at the Narrow Neck twice, once before sailing and once after. The Narrow Neck is the Isthmus of Suez in Egypt at the mouth of the Nile. Anyway I can go on and on. I can show how the 3 day journey Lehi took is from Suez to Cairo and that's the same 3 day journey taken in Alma. This is why places like Middoni and Ammonihah are Biblical Lands in the Middle East. MIddoni is accidentally spelled the Biblical way "Midian" one time. Zeezrom from Ammonihah is cleary associated with the Ammonites Zamzummims. See Dueto. 2:20. The "Land of Ishmael"? Give me a break. That's obviously Northern Arabia. I once read a article published by BYU claiming that the story in Alma about cutting off the arms of those stealing the flocks is closely related to Islamic tradition and therefore more proof that the Lamanites were similar to Islam. The author is clearly in the dark that the "Land of Ishmael" in Alma is in Arabia among the actual Islamic nations. Anyway, let me know what you think. I have much more to say if you're willing to listen. @@davus4242

I turned it off after the "white people" comment about four minutes in as I figured at that point how it was going to go. I chatted with my dad who stuck with it and he told me that my assertion was 100% right as far as how it ended up. I'd like to listen to someone who can explain the MA model without being directly and indirectly insulted.

​@@mwb78 ​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 proclaimed and declared Zarahemla was in Central America; he even put it in writing and published it. If you're interested in this historical record, google - Times and Seasons October 1, 1842 Zarahemla. Joseph as Editor, along with his assistant editors, Apostles John Taylor & Wilford Woodruff (incidentally, both would become presidents of the Church), boldly declare as an "important fact" - Zarahemla was in Central America, in the land of Guatemala; to substantiate the claim and declaration, Joseph, being very familiar with the details of the BOM, quotes and rehearses Alma 22 describing the region where Zarahemla was. This is what Joseph felt and believed, and he published it, there's no hearsay about it. Joseph believed Nephites lived all across the continent, however, when it came to the land of Zarahemla, Joseph says it was in Central America (aka Meso-America). Further, the editors as a united group, went on to clarify, they weren't declaring an exact or specific city mentioned in an explorer's book, which had previously been mentioned and discussed, in a previous edition of the T&S, as the city of Zarahemla. They didn't feel impressed to declare that specific city Zarahemla, only that Zarahemla was somewhere in Central America. However, they (Joseph, John, & Wilford) are of the opinion that the previously named city, was a city of the Book of Mormon, just not Zarahemla. Read the entire T&S article for the full details. This secondary clarification of the specific city mentioned in previous editions, as not being Zarahemla, does not negate or contradict the declared important fact, that Zarahemla was in Central America. They just don't give an exact location, but narrow it down to the borders of Guatemala. Joseph believed that Zarahemla and thus the main story-line of the BOM was in Central America. Joseph knew that the entire continent was occupied by migrating Nephites, hundreds of years before Christ appeared. It's all in the Book, in plain sight. Joseph's 'important fact' of Zarahemla being in Central America, collaborates with the BOM narrative; Joseph was the expert on the Book. 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 is on the run. 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 article itself. So a very special thanks to the editors(Joseph, John, & Wilford), for documenting this conspiracy so long ago and clearing it up for future generations. Joseph was Editor until November 15, 1842, a full six weeks after Joseph makes the declaration Zarahemla is in Central America; at which time Joseph steps aside as Editor and appoints John Taylor as the new Editor of the Times and Season. Logic and common sense dictate, if John Taylor had published the Zarahemla claim on his own, without Joseph's consent, and if Joseph disagreed agree with it; would Joseph have promoted John to Editor six weeks after such a bold declaration?? The thought makes reason stare. Further, "if" Joseph didn't oversee the publication of the October 1, 1842 edition, and he disagreed with the bold declaration, know this, Joseph would have had it retracted, as he assured readers he was responsible for what was printed; Joseph never had it retracted. Truth is, Joseph is the one who published it; Joseph was Editor, and along with his two assistant editors as witnesses, owns the declaration, Zarahemla is in Central America. True story. Next, go to the Church's website and search - 'Book of Mormon Geography'. Notice, the church takes no stance on the exact locations of BOM cities; this is because no exact locations have been revealed, not even by Joseph. Albeit, in the same statement though, the Church does acknowledge Joseph's beliefs on the subject, and further confirms and substantiates Joseph as Editor of the Times & Seasons in 1842 for the articles referring to Book of Mormon lands and Central America (aka Mesoamerica); very interesting indeed; kinda clears up speculation if Joseph was editor, and also what Joseph believed. Joseph, clearly states Zarahemla is in Central America, within the borders of Guatemala. For additional & interesting collaboration on what Joseph would have known Guatemala to be in his day, google - "map of Guatemala 1825" (or 1835, it doesn't matter) open a properly labeled historical copy of the map and notice Guatemala's borders back in Joseph's day extended as far north to include the Chiapas & Palenque areas of modern-day Mexico. Say what! A very interesting area indeed! Long before any scholar pronounce their own theory as to the location of the land of Zarahemla, Joseph had already declared it to be Central America. No scholars or theories needed to narrow down the general area, Joseph already did; all things considered, it all fits. With Zarahemla being in Central America, does the BOM narrative accommodate Joseph's claims of "walking the plains of the Nephites" and the Zelph stories? Could both be accurate and plausible? Yes, in fact, these stories actually collaborate with the BOM narrative precisely with no contradiction. Alma 63 and Helaman 3:3-5,12-16 states many groups of Nephites left the land of Zarahemla & Bountiful and migrated to the north country, both by land and by sea. This also accounts for how a Zelph-type character and other descendants of converted Lamanites were in the northern "heartland" country during the last struggles. Remember these Nephites departed FROM the lands of Zarahenla and Bountiful, some sailing across a sea. So note, there is also a sea, not just land, between Zarahemla and the choice-land, mentioned by King Mosiah, in the north country where a New Jerusalem will be built upon this continent. So yes, there are plains of Nephites in the heartland of the north country, aka The United States of America. There are no contradictions by Joseph, and no mental gymnastics or exclusions are required to make things fit. There are even statements in the BOM narrative that signal there was commerce trade happening between the Nephites in the land of Zarahemla/Bountiful and the migrant Nephites groups in the north country. It's all in the book. The book itself, says Nephites lived all across this continent. No academics or scholars are needed 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. After studying the Book of Mormon, along with Joseph's other side statements, I agree with what Joseph published, Zarahemla, is somewhere in Central America (aka Mesoamerica), and that there were other Nephite groups who left the lands of Zarahemla & Bountiful that settled all across the north country, known currently as the "heartland" of the United States of America. Thank you Mormon and Moroni for including mention of these other Nephite groups. With Zarahemla being in Central America, the southern region of this Continent (another clue Mormon 1:6), the narrative of the BOM fits perfectly, placing the New Jerusalem, north of Zarahemla, in the Choice-land currently known as the United States of America. That makes sense and fits the narrative perfectly. This T&S editorial is simply wonderful, read it and 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 one burnt at the Savior's crucifixion; isn't there only one Zarahemla? Because, they knew there was a modern city developed by the Latter-day Saints across the river from Nauvoo, named Zarahemla in honor of the great city of the BOM. Joseph, John, & Wilford wanted to clarify so no one was confused by the two different cities of Zarahemla. No need for speculation, Joseph clears it all up in the same edition of the T&S. With all said, it all adds up and fits; Zarahemla is in Central America. knowing from the Book's narrative that the narrow strip of land was near Zarahemla; not to be insulting to those who have been led to think the heartland was the land of Zarahemla & Bountiful; here's a quick alignment question that must fit the Books narrative; if any of the narrow strips of land, between any of the Great Lakes, is the narrow strip of land mentioned in the Book, and if any of the Great Lakes is the sea many thousands of Nephites sailed across when leaving the lands Zarahemla/Bountiful to get to the north county, where we know the New Jerusalem will be built, where does that place the New Jerusalem? Canada? The thought makes reason stare. However, with Zarahemla being in Central America as Joseph proclaimed, it places New Jerusalem in the choice-land country of the United State of America, being precisely north of the land of Zarahemla & Bountiful as the Book's narrative dictates. The Book of Mormon is another volume of scripture, that testifies of Jesus Christ and His gospel. That is the message of the Book, and it's true! Among the writings of that message, are descriptions of where and when it took place. I agree with the Books narrative and what Joseph claimed and published, it all fits, Zarahemla is in Central America. And, there are also, plains of the Nephites, in the "heartland" of America just as the Book of Mormon mentions there would be. The Book of Mormon is correct and true! Now you know; best wishes in your journey!

I served in Panama and feel the same way.

@@ED-wired I served in Belgium and feel the same way.

@@jonterry9843 when I was in Panama, we took a P-day with our district to see some big rocks with “maps” that a non-member was claiming proved Lehi and others came to Central America. It was weird. I wonder how much $ he made from those tours off silly missionaries. Honesty I can’t remember if we paid him or not, but it was a tourist spot in a touristy side of the country.

@@jonterry9843 lol!

@@ED-wired I saw many similar nephite tours on my mission, but they were for high paying members. My mission president kept saying "This is the land of the Nephites" , and I lived for 14 months next to the supposed Waters of Mormon. None of it matched as well as the Heartland model.

I know, how can we ever know that Joseph ever said anything!

Jonah for the win!

The promised land is not just the United States. Mexico has in many ways, been more promising for the church than the USA, that's why Brigham Young took the saints to Utah. When they started their journey they were heading to Mexico. It just happens to become part of the United States as soon as they got to Salt Lake

😮😅

If you knew the archaeological evidence for the heartland model.

@@theephraimite There's none. Faithful LDS people will maintain that there is, but if you speak to any expert in any relevant field of science you'll quickly realize that there's none.

@@rodneyjamesmcguire the BoM says the ancient inhabitants used metallic armor, swords, and other metallic weapons. Such have been found in many burial sites in North America. Look up a book written by William Connor titled Iron Age America before Columbus. William Connor is not LDS, by the way. I follow the evidence, not scheming so-called experts with an agenda.

Wouldn't rely on Wayne May as a reliable source. Watched some of what he shared and some of it was flat out false. My boss has a video of his and began showing him where things were false. Even opened up the BoM to prove it.

Nope, don't buy it. It's good to have different views and perspectives, but read the other comments below that counters the mezo model.

@@jarenthompson915 Um, the Pizza guy's comment above DOES counter the mezo model. Wondering what is you don't "buy" Jaren.

@@jonterry9843 Or was that Karen...sorry I couldn't help myself!!! Sorry, no offense??

@@jarenthompson915 Did you read what he said? 🤷🏼‍♂️🤔

That was a good laugh. I was trying to respond to the mezo guest, on the main thread, and my post ended up here, making me sound stupid. Good times. 1 Cumorah, it all happened in the heart land.

No doubt!

@@CwicShowplease don’t bring this Gardner guy on your podcast again. Noticed how he struggled so answer your questions as you pressed him. He’s ignoring the prophets and the evidence and forcing false theories on us and casting doubt on the translations and the D&C.

Ah, yes. Given how he presents this, my need to spend time or resources on anything touted by him is saved!

I am sure writing are sharp, - but based on this interview I will NEVER read any book he writes. Calling people racist is a strawman argument at best. If he believes his theory, back it up with out name calling - back it up with why.

I stopped 30 seconds in at the first mention of race, but it was long enough for me to agree with the entirety of your comment.

@@ClintThomsen the irony of the race comment is that there is an assumed (projected?) arrogance via supposed racial motivations for the heartland theory. I think that if the heartland proponents exhibited arrogance in their delivery, then it would become a relevant discussion. I found the comment... ironic. Unfortunately, I found the discussion about Joseph Smith more precarious than the race comment.

@@ldsmusician I didn’t make it that far, lol.

@@ClintThomsen You didn't miss anything you need in your life.

Thank you!

Was that at the Papago building? I was going to the Lehi Singles Branch back when President Hinckley rededicated that building. It would have been neat to hear those lectures. President Hinckley was rededicating local church buildings on the Navajo reservation, too.

Where can I find your interview with Jonathan Neville? I can't find it on your page.

Glad you enjoyed it!

The crops were more than beans, corn, & squash. The heartland can grow grain that lasts long & feeds millions.

But, it doesn't prevent anyone from going around, which is the point. The land Bountiful is not located there.

Moroni didn't carry the plates. Mormon carried the plates; and he did so during the 10+ years of retreat of the Nephites during their final struggles against the Lamanites.

Well said!!! ❤

Amen, and Joseph was the prophet...not a bunch of lofty scholars...like all the CRT scholars at BYU now!!!

Timeline works very well with meso though...

I love this idea. An honest, fair side-by-side debate would be super entertaining and informative!~

If you have ever read the truly snotty, childish and churlish responses of Steve Smoot, Mike Parker, and Robert Boylan to Jonathan Neville, I believe this shows it is impossible at this point in time. It's too bad also. They make enemies where none need be. I am quite turned off by the ridiculous attacks from the Mesoamerican believers.

And I.

More than before honestly

@@jonahbarnes5841 yup..this guy is so arrogant!

​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 clearly stated and declared Zarahemla was in Central America; he even put it in writing and published it. If you're interested in the historical record available, google - Times and Seasons October 1, 1842 Zarahemla. Joseph as Editor, along with his assistant editors, Apostles John Taylor & Wilford Woodruff (incidentally, both would become presidents of the Church), boldly declare as an "important fact" - Zarahemla was in Central America, in the land of Guatemala. To substantiate the claim and declaration, Joseph, being very familiar with the details of the BOM, quotes and rehearses Alma 22 describing the region where Zarahemla was. This is what Joseph felt and believed, and he published it, there's no hearsay about it. This article, published while Joseph was editor, directly refutes the notion Joseph intended people to believe the Book of Mormon took place in the heartland. Joseph believed Nephites lived all across the continent, however, when it came to the land of Zarahemla, Joseph believed and knew it to be in Central America (aka Meso-America). Further, the editors as a united group, then went on to clarify, they weren't declaring an exact or specific city mentioned in an explorer's book, which had previously been mentioned and discussed in a previous edition of the T&S, as the city of Zarahemla. They didn't feel impressed to declare that specific city Zarahemla, only that Zarahemla was somewhere in Central America. However, they (Joseph, John, & Wilford) are of the opinion that the previously named city, was a city of the Book of Mormon, just not Zarahemla. Read the entire T&S article for the full details. Keep in mind, this secondary clarification of the specific city mentioned, as not being Zarahemla, does not negate or contradict the declared important fact, that Zarahemla was in Central America. They just don't give an exact location, but narrow it down to the borders of Guatemala. Joseph did not believe the main account of the Book of Mormon took place in the Heartland. Joseph believed that Zarahemla and thus the main story-line of the BOM was in Central America. Joseph knew that the entire continent was occupied by migrating Nephites, hundreds of years before Christ appeared. It's all in the Book, in plain sight. Joseph's 'important fact' of Zarahemla being in Central America, collaborates with the BOM narrative. To attempt to speculate and discount this declaration away would be a mistake in judgement. 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 is on the run. 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 article itself. So a very special thanks to the editors(Joseph, John, & Wilford), for documenting this conspiracy so long ago and clearing it up for future generations. Joseph was Editor until November 15, 1842, a full six weeks after Joseph makes the declaration Zarahemla is in Central America; at which time Joseph steps aside as Editor and appoints John Taylor as the new Editor of the Times and Season. Logic and common sense dictate, if John Taylor had published the Zarahemla claim on his own, without Joseph's consent, and if Joseph disagreed agree with it; would Joseph have promoted John to Editor six weeks after such a bold declaration?? The thought makes reason stare. Further, "if" Joseph didn't oversee the publication of the October 1, 1842 edition, and he disagreed with the bold declaration, know this, Joseph would have had it retracted, as he assured readers he was responsible for what was printed; Joseph never had it retracted. Truth is, Joseph is the one who published it; Joseph was Editor, and along with his two assistant editors as witnesses, owns the declaration, Zarahemla is in Central America. True story. Next, go to the Church's website and search - 'Book of Mormon Geography'. Notice, the church takes no stance on the exact locations of BOM cities; this is because no exact locations have been revealed. Albeit, in the same statement, the Church does acknowledge Joseph's beliefs on the subject, and further confirms and substantiates Joseph as Editor of the Times & Seasons in 1842 for the articles referring to Book of Mormon lands and Central America (aka Mesoamerica); very interesting indeed; kinda clears up speculation of if Joseph was editor, and also what Joseph believed (aka, intended others to believe about BOM lands). Joseph, clearly states Zarahemla is in Central America, within the borders of Guatemala, as he would have known it on the maps of his day. For additional & interesting collaboration on what Joseph would have known Guatemala to be in his day, google - "map of Guatemala 1825" (or 1835, it doesn't matter) open a properly labeled historical copy of the map and notice Guatemala's borders back in Joseph's day extended as far north to include the Chiapas & Palenque areas of modern-day Mexico. Say what! A very interesting area indeed! Long before any scholar pronounce their own theory as to the location of the land of Zarahemla, Joseph had already declared it to be Central America. No scholars or theories needed to narrow down the general area, Joseph already did; all things considered, it all fits. With Zarahemla being in Central America, does the BOM narrative accommodate Joseph's claims of "walking the plains of the Nephites" and the Zelph stories? Could both be accurate and plausible? Yes, in fact, these stories actually collaborate with the BOM narrative precisely with no contradiction. Alma 63 and Helaman 3:3-5,12-16 states many groups of Nephites left the land of Zarahemla & Bountiful and migrated to the north country, both by land and by sea. This also accounts for how a Zelph-type character and other descendants of converted Lamanites were in the northern "heartland" country during the last struggles. Remember these Nephites departed FROM the lands of Zarahenla and Bountiful, some sailing across a sea. So note, there is also a sea, not just land, between Zarahemla and the choice land mentioned by King Mosiah, in the north country where a New Jerusalem will be built upon this continent. So yes, there are plains of Nephites in the heartland of the north country, aka The United States of America. There are no contradictions by Joseph, and no mental gymnastics or exclusions are required to make things fit. There are even statements in the BOM narrative that signal there was commerce trade happening between the Nephites in the land of Zarahemla/Bountiful and the migrant Nephites groups in the north country. It's all in the book. The book itself, says Nephites lived all across this continent. No academics or scholars are needed 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. After studying the Book of Mormon, along with Joseph's other side statements, I agree with what Joseph published, Zarahemla, is somewhere in Central America (aka Mesoamerica), and that there were other Nephite groups who left the lands of Zarahemla & Bountiful that settled all across the north country, known currently as the "heartland" of the United States of America. Thank you Mormon and Moroni for including mention of these other Nephite groups. With Zarahemla being in Central America, the southern region of this Continent (another clue Mormon 1:6), the narrative of the BOM fits perfectly, placing the New Jerusalem, north of Zarahemla, in the Choice-land currently known as the United States of America. That makes sense and fits the narrative perfectly. This T&S editorial is simply wonderful, read it and 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 one burnt at the Savior's crucifixion; isn't there only one Zarahemla?? Because, they knew there was a modern city developed by the Latter-day Saints across the river from Nauvoo, the saints named Zarahemla in honor of the great city of the BOM. Joseph, John, & Wilford wanted to clarify so no one was confused by the two different cities of Zarahemla. No need for speculation, Joseph clears it all up in the same edition of the T&S. With all said, it all adds up and fits; Zarahemla is in Central America. The Book of Mormon is another volume of scripture, that testifies of Jesus Christ and His gospel. That is the message of the Book, and it's true! Among the writings of that message, are descriptions of where and when it took place. I agree with what Joseph claimed and published, Zarahemla is in Central America. And, there are also plains of the Nephites in the "heartland" as the Book of Mormon mentions there would be. The Book of Mormon is correct and true! Now you know; best wishes in your journey!

I was thinking of that too. There is a sister who supports the Eastern North American model also, and she mentions that!!!

Oh the mesolanders aggressively pretend the little ice age never happened, and that the great black swamp was never a thing, and that water levels (despite transparent geological evidence to the contrary) have always been as they are now. 🙄

We know from the Book of Mormon itself that there were great changes to the land in 3rd Nephi before Christ came to the Nephites and Lamenites that we're the "more righteous" people.

Stop bro stop running from race. I'm fine with that as a black member

@Jabulani22 Shepo This has nothing to do with race. Nothing.

@@CwicShow dude come on it’s the first remark HE made. Lmao you’re acting like the people in your comment section are bringing up race for no reason. He basically called all heartlanders racist, did you miss it?

@@nickallen2288 My reply was not to the commenter but to one of the replies.

Amen!!!

I would be careful with that one. The X2a haplogroup probably entered North America over ten-thousand years before Lehi arrived. Personally, I think mtDNA is the wrong marker to look at, since it only tracks matrilineal descent. If I had to, with a gun to my head, select a better one that I think would give more conclusive results, it would be gene copy numbers and repeated elements, which are also more difficult to sequence with high-fidelity. However, my instincts tell me that God has not left very much genetic evidence of Lehi's migration...yet there might be some hope. If we can actually figure out what group the Jaredites belonged to prior to their exodus, I think we may then have a chance of looking for a connection. Jared's group seems to have been much larger, arrived earlier and went extinct after a much longer time period. Furthermore, there appears to have been remnant Jaredites after Lehi's arrival since so many Book of Mormon villains have Jaredite names. Just a thought.

No need to be careful on the X2 unless you hold to evolution..

Some food for thought... compare the land size of the peoples of the Bible with the Eastern half of the United States and Southern Canada.

Did I miss the name-calling? Shoot.

It seems to me the closest to name call I heard was when he inferred that those who believe the Heartland theory are basically racist. I am glad it does not affect your salvation, but there are many who's faith is shaken because of this and the stone in a hat theory being used by critics to disparage Brother Joseph, his family and Oliver. They are portrayed as ignorant at best, or dishonest.

Agreed, and now we all need to truly repeat this to Steve Smoot, Mike Parker, and Dan Peterson of Interpreter. They are the loudest, rudest, and most efforts into making enemies of everyone who disagrees with them. It frankly turns me totally off to their views.

The DNA of the indigenous people in north eastern United States matches that Druse and ashkenazi Jews. X2 a. The further west one goes in the United States and into Central and South America the greater is the Asian DNA.

I am by no means an expert, but there was a scholar that showed a connection between Uto-Aztecan language family and Semitic, and Uto-Aztecan is found all over South, Central, and some of North America. There's a large amount of native Americans that spoke a related language. This definitely doesn't narrow the answer down for your question, but it's a head start I believe.

Have been following Heartland since 2016. When Joseph Smith first sent missionaries to "The Lamanites" there were I think four tribes visited. Delaware, Sack&Fox were two, that remember. And there were the Mic-maq who had some similar writing to a historic document. There is a YT channel, "Michael P," who is quite concise in his dozen or so videos.

Over the centuries, some Lamanites might’ve migrated south.

Hi, Roland. In the last couple years I've looked into this topic extensively, including going through three different Great Courses from Edwin Barnhart on South, Meso, and North American pre-Columbian civilizations. My conclusion: You have lots of in-hemisphere migrations, at least two major invasions from Asia -- one around around 400 AD, another around 1200. Even if you knew one specific Book of Mormon geographic model was completely correct, trying to trace where all the people moved to between 400 AD and the time of European contact would be a task only divine revelation could ultimately settle.

If you are referring to editorials in the Times and Seasons (signed by an unknown Ed / Editor) , you need to do a little more homework. Joseph Smith never said anything that contradicts the heartland model else he was also contradicting himself. I recommend some of Jonathan Neville's books.

​@@leroybybee1013 Joseph Smith never used the Heartland mobel because it never existed. But I also know he wouldn't use it even if it did exist. Found in the archives of the church records show that Lehi and his company landed on South America and that there is but one Hill Cumorah. Anyone who uses Heartland or Farms (Mesoamerica) is wasting their time and have been dupped in believing in the philosophies of man mingled with scripture.

Mormon actually had the plates the majority of the time. When the extinction of the Nephites began Mormon unburied the plates from the Hill Shim and kept them during their retreat until they arrived to Cumorah and that's where Mormon buried them. Moroni only unburied the plates to finish the record and then buried them back up. The retreat lasted no less than 10 years. So realistically it was easy to move the plates from Central America area to NY.

I believe this scipture doesn't impede it. In 3 Nephi 8:15 Mormon wrote that some cities remained after the great upheaval (albeit in ruined condition). In addition, if Moroni was right about the hill Cumorah, it was the same as the hill where the Jaredites were destroyed (who came before the Nephites). In other words it survived as well.

@@giovannifarinacci5946 The Hill Cumorah is only mentioned after Christ's death, so it would not have been destroyed. And yes, I know some were not destroyed like Bountiful and Zarahemla, but a lot of other geographical markers are not mentioned after this great destruction. For example the river of and waters of Sidon are not mentioned after 3 Nephi 8. My point is, neither of these models as far as I can tell take into account the passage of time or geographic events like volcanoes and earthquakes.

@@travisgrant4623 it's true that we can't know how much changed. The researchers that support either model consider the locations that most support the details contained in the book. But in spite of the possible drastic reshaping of certain landmarks I find that many sites date to the period described in the text. For my case I support the Mesoamerican model which I find proposes a number of key extant landmarks that seem to correspond with dates as well as cultural parallels and contrasts. One of these (which I find very significant) is its proposal for the "narrow strip of wilderness" that physically divided the Land of Nephi from the Land of Zarahemla (Alma 22:27). But regardless, I prefer to be open to the possibilities. If we just assume it's impossible there's really no chance of discovering anything.

It's all ancient USA: From 600 BC to 400 AD, the clear Archeology record (compiled and dated by NON-LDS scholars) confirm the Adena and Hopewell cultures (i.e., the Book of Mormon nations) begin in southern USA (Florida, original land of Levi and family?), then move north (to Land of Nephi, perhaps Tennessee area ), then migrate further north and west (land of Zarahemla in Illinois, Missouri), and finally East and North (Ohio and Western New York, where things culminate). During the centuries AFTER the Book of Mormon history, various peoples moved to Central and South America.

I am with you on this!! I think both are can have some truth to it.

@@jonterry9843 This is how I see it as well. On the History channel, Scott Wolter had an episode that he claimed an early settlement of the Maya, was in the Georgia area and then proceeded to migrate southward.

This is a valid point. I am open to most ideas in the Heartland model but I myself believe that the promise land was all of the America's. That from all directions. North, South, east, and west...even the islands that the people have the blood of nephites and lamanites. My husband is Brazilian I do believe he has that lineage. But where it started, their landing, their wars, etc that is the unknown. I also believe there are many other cultures and people who have mixed in together. Others brought to these promised lands. Jaredites, mulekites, lehi's family, and more.

The Lamanites, who had time to disperse across many parts of the Western Hemisphere by the time Columbus arrived. Additionally, the islands on which he (Columbus) landed were peopled by Carib, Arawak and Ciboney Indians. It's also important to think of the Lamanites and more than just the offspring of Laman and Lemuel. As dissenters went over to the Lamanites, there would've been excursions from those respective groups, too.

@@kz6fittycent “he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land.” Nephi is saying that Columbus went to “seed of his brethren” who were in the promised land. We know where Columbus went to. He landed in the Caribbean Islands, but he also went inland into what is now call Mexico. And Nephi is saying saying that those people were the seed of his brethren. And Nephi calls all that land (the Caribbean Islands and Central America), the land of promise. And at that time, the land of promise for Nephi was the land that the Lord had promised to them. Heartlanders must admit that the Book of Mormon may have, at least in part, taken place in Central America.

@@sandraanastacio9184 I am more that willing to believe that the Book of Mormon took place in several parts of the North, Central and South America. Exactly what parts? I don’t know. I hope that God can reveal something. I just know it didn’t just take place in the Heartland Model region.