More fun with the origins of M2C

Yesterday on eBay an 1892 edition of the Book of Mormon sold for $510.01.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/324656049567?hash=item4b97022d9f:g:VFgAAOSwXrtgt6G8 

I didn't buy it, although I considered it. (I already have too many old books.) But this 1892 edition is special because it included an awesome map of Book of Mormon geography. 

It featured a version of the hemispheric model that shows the Jaredites crossing the Atlantic to the promised land, the way everyone does if they're coming from Europe, the Middle East, or Africa.

 Except is also shows the Mulekites and Lehites crossing the Pacific! 

That's the least feasible route to the New World, other than hiking across Antarctica.

Of course, our M2C friends still insist Lehi crossed the Pacific somehow. Which is fine; people can believe whatever they want.

_____

On that topic, some people still think our LDS scholars came up with the "limited geography Mesoamerican model," featuring the "two-Cumorahs theory." This is the Mesoamerican/two-Cumorahs theory, or M2C, which teaches that the prophets were wrong about the New York Cumorah because, according to these scholars, the "real" Cumorah of Mormon 6:6 is in southern Mexico.

Readers of this blog are more informed than that. They know that M2C originated with RLDS scholar L.E. Hill over 100 years ago.

There's a great blog that features the development of the theory. You should check it out because it has lots of links to original material that anyone can read, share, etc.

https://twocumorahsolution.blogspot.com/p/blog-page.html

_____

Not to put too fine a point on it, but our friends at Book of Mormon Central still claim the Nephites were Mayans. Seriously, in June 2021 they still don't see the incongruity of keeping a Mayan glyph in their logo, juxtaposed with the definitely not Mayan writing on the plates?

And yet, supposedly the Book of Mormon is a Mayan codex.

We realize they are so deeply invested in M2C that they reject the Church's position of neutrality. They refuse to even inform their readers about alternatives to M2C based on the teachings of the prophets about Cumorah.

But how does it build faith to insist on an explanation of the Book of Mormon that their own webpage shows is ridiculous?

They should change their logo to reflect the actual language of the Book of Mormon.

At the very least, they should use one of the characters that was apparently copied from the plates instead of a Mayan glyph.

If someone can explain how they retain a Mayan glyph, knowing that the characters on the plates were anything but Mayan, send me an email at lostzarahemla@gmail and I'll clear up the question on this blog.