Author: Jonathan Neville

At Stake Conference this weekend, we sang “An Angel from on High,” a song that ought to settle the Cumorah issue because it’s based on actual Church history, not the M2C philosophies of men.

Even before he obtained the plates, Joseph knew the name of the hill was Cumorah because Moroni told him. We know this from Joseph’s mother, Lucy Mack Smith.

When he went on his mission to the Lamanites with Parley P. Pratt, Oliver Cowdery explained to people that Moroni said the hill was called Cumorah anciently.

Pratt wrote this hymn that memorializes what Moroni told Joseph Smith that first night–years before Joseph obtained the plates.

First verse:

_____

Oliver Cowdery wrote the most detailed account of Moroni’s visit, now found in Letter IV, which you can read in Joseph Smith’s personal history, here.

During his first visit to Joseph, Moroni explained that the history was “written and deposited not far from” Joseph’s home; i.e., Mormon and Moroni abridged the records while living in western New York.

This was well understood during Joseph’s lifetime. For example, Heber C. Kimball joined the Church with Brigham Young when they lived in western New York. (Kimball was later one of Brigham Young’s counselors in the First Presidency.) Kimball wrote,

“In the towns of Boomfield, Victor, Manchester, and in the regions round about, there were hills upon the tops of which were entrenchments and fortifications, and in them were human bones, axes, tomahawks, points of arrows, beads and pipes, which were frequently found; and it was a common occurrence in the country to plow up axes, which I have done many times myself. I have visited the fortifications on the tops of these hills frequently… The hill Cumorah is a high hill for that country and had the appearance of a fortification or entrenchment around it. In the State of New York, probably there are hundreds of these fortifications which are now visible, and I have seen them in many other parts of the United States.” Life of Heber C. Kimball, p. 25.

Our M2C scholars teach that President Kimball didn’t know what he was talking about.

Ask your Seminary or Institute or BYU or Sunday School teacher about President Kimball’s statement. Most likely, they have never heard what President Kimball wrote. They’ll consult the “experts” and come back to tell you President Kimball was mistaken, or speculating, or ignorant, solely because of M2C.
_____

It’s all very simple. The prophets have consistently and persistently reaffirmed this basic teaching that the hill Cumorah of Mormon 6:6 is in western New York.

Nevertheless, the M2C intellectuals (who, unfortunately, are very influential) have persuaded many members of the Church to disbelieve the prophets.

At least we have this hymn to remind us of what really happened.

Full lyrics.

1. 1. An angel from on high
   The long, long silence broke;
   Descending from the sky,
   These gracious words he spoke:
   Lo! in Cumorah’s lonely hill
   A sacred record lies concealed.
   Lo! in Cumorah’s lonely hill
   A sacred record lies concealed.
2. 2. Sealed by Moroni’s hand,
   It has for ages lain
   To wait the Lord’s command,
   From dust to speak again.
   It shall again to light come forth
   To usher in Christ’s reign on earth.
   It shall again to light come forth
   To usher in Christ’s reign on earth.
3. 3. It speaks of Joseph’s seed
   And makes the remnant known
   Of nations long since dead,
   Who once had dwelt alone.
   The fulness of the gospel, too,
   Its pages will reveal to view.
   The fulness of the gospel, too,
   Its pages will reveal to view.
4. 4. The time is now fulfilled,
   The long-expected day;
   Let earth obedience yield
   And darkness flee away.
   Remove the seals; be wide unfurled
   Its light and glory to the world.
   Remove the seals; be wide unfurled
   Its light and glory to the world.
5. 5. Lo! Israel filled with joy
   Shall now be gathered home,
   Their wealth and means employ
   To build Jerusalem,
   While Zion shall arise and shine
   And fill the earth with truth divine.
   While Zion shall arise and shine
   And fill the earth with truth divine.
6. Text: Parley P. Pratt, 1807-1857
   Music: John E. Tullidge, 1806-1873
7. SCRIPTURES

   Doctrine and Covenants 128:20, Joseph Smith-History 1:30-34

Photos of the hill Cumorah from Church history are available here:
https://history.lds.org/media/38-hill-cumorah?lang=eng#1

Account of the acquisition of Cumorah here:
https://history.lds.org/article/historic-sites/new-york/manchester/reclaiming-hill-cumorah?lang=eng

The Tabernacle Choir recorded the hymn here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhR3-ARQOQU

https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/facts-and-statistics

They have membership, unit, and other statistics by continent and country. They only show current statistics, however; they don’t show the detail for prior years.

They do show aggregate historical data, such as this:

Most people are familiar with this story; i.e., the Church has grown substantially since it was founded in 1830.

I was curious about how this compared with world population growth, so I found this chart that shows world population growth since 1800.

Comparing these two charts, it appears the Church has grown faster than world population overall, meaning that the Church is growing as a percentage of world population.

Next, I did a chart of comparative growth rates, using online data and projecting it forward. It’s well known that in the last year for which we have statistics (2017), the Church’s growth rate was the lowest in decades. If the current trend continues, in 2019 the growth rate of the Church will roughly equal world population growth rates.

This seems surprising to me because the Church is expanding into new countries, especially in Africa.  As the Church becomes better known in these areas, shouldn’t we expect greater growth?

Most of the growth in the Church seems to be coming from Africa, at least in percentage increases. Countries with large membership, especially in the United States, will continue to have more converts, even if growth is lower as a percentage.

This chart merely reflects percentage growth based on total membership. It says nothing about activity rates, such as sacrament meeting attendance, tithe payers, enrollment in CES, etc. Activity is partly reflected by the number of units; i.e., fewer units per capita generally means lower activity rates.

A good example is this chart of membership in Europe.

Because we don’t have the historical membership broken out by country, we can’t see where the growth is. I suspect much of the growth since around 2000 has been in Eastern Europe, where there was little Church presence until the collapse of communism.

The decline in the number of congregations suggests lower activity rates.

In France, for example, they are closing two branches that were operating when I was a missionary there decades ago.

What does all this mean?

There are many variables involved, and we all have our own experiences and opinions about these trends. We can’t isolate one factor as the main cause of the trends. However, in my experience, the Internet plays a major role.

Most investigators are inclined to google the Book of Mormon before they pray about it. When they do so, they quickly come across negative information, such as the CES Letter (which was published in 2013). FairMormon and others responded, leading to a back-and-forth that was mostly ineffective in terms of supporting the position of the Church.

(e.g., https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Criticism_of_Mormonism/Online_documents/Letter_to_a_CES_Director)

This coincides with the decline in growth rates. Correlation doesn’t equal causation, but maybe in this case there is a link.

After all, if you’re a sincere investigator (or a youth in the Church), and you encounter the CES Letter or other criticisms, what do you do? The critics challenge the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon, claiming there’s no evidence for it, etc.

If you go to CES, BYU, FairMormon, or Book of Mormon Central, you quickly learn that the CES Letter is correct: all of these supposedly faithful sources declare that the prophets were wrong about the Hill Cumorah in New York, which is the only specific link between the Book of Mormon and the real world.

Naturally, investigators and youth conclude that if the prophets were wrong about that, how can we trust other truth claims?

Because the Book of Mormon is the keystone of our religion, and because M2C teaches that the prophets were wrong about the Book of Mormon, little else matters.

IMO, until we accept what the prophets have taught, these trends will continue. 

_____

*h/t to http://ldschurchgrowth.blogspot.com/

Mary Whitmer and Moroni? Seriously?

The cover tells you everything you need to know. This is the wonderful painting that tells a false story. It’s titled “Mary Whitmer and Moroni,” but this beautiful painting depicts “Brother Nephi,” not Moroni.

I’ve discussed the problem with this painting before, since it represents the false account related in the Saints book (see here), but to summarize, Mary Whitmer herself referred to the man who showed her the plates as “Brother Nephi.”

Her son David said it was the same man he met on the road when he was bringing Joseph and Oliver from Harmony to Fayette. This was the messenger who was taking the Harmony plates to Cumorah. Joseph Smith identified him as one of the three Nephites.

David Whitmer described the man this way:

“an aged man about 5 feet 10 heavey Set & on his back an old fashioned Armey knapsack Straped over his Shoulders & Something Square in it.” 

On another occasion, David described him this way:

“While on the return journey from Palmyra, David noticed a somewhat aged-looking man who approached them on the road. He had a very pleasant face, about which, however, there seemed something peculiar, and he carried a knapsack on his back fastened with straps which crossed his breast. David asked him to take a ride, but he declined, saying: ‘I am going over to Cumorah,’ … Shortly afterwards, David relates, the Prophet looked very white but with a heavenly appearance and said their visitor was one of the three Nephites to whom the Savior gave the promise of life on earth until He should come in power.”

Nephi was one of the twelve disciples from whom the Three Nephites were chosen. We also know that the other nine were promised that at age 72, they would die and return to the Lord. See 3 Nephi 28. We can infer that the Three Nephites were changed at the same age, which explains why “Brother Nephi” was “aged-looking.”

The M2C intellectuals disbelieve these accounts because their whole M2C theory falls apart if there is one Cumorah and it is in New York, as the prophets have taught.

Notice how, to perpetuate their beliefs, the M2C intellectuals want us to accept the magical thinking that Moroni can appear both as a glorious resurrected being and as an old, 5’10” heavy-set farmer lugging the plates in a knapsack to the hill Cumorah–in Mexico.

Here is part of Oliver Cowdery’s description of Moroni:

“The stature of this personage was a little above the common size of men in this age; his garment was perfectly white, and had the appearance of being without seam.”

This is how artists have always depicted Moroni, with good reason.

___

The cover photo isn’t the only problem with this issue of BYU Studies. The first article is titled “Time the Translation of the Book of Mormon.” This is essentially the presentation made earlier in 2018 that deliberately omits the account of the messenger taking the plates to Cumorah.

I’ve discussed that here: http://bookofmormonwars.blogspot.com/2017/12/opening-heavens-but-censoring-history.html

https://calendar.byu.edu/event/devotional-lawrence-e-corbridge-general-authority-seventy

I encourage everyone to read/watch his talk. Critics such as the CES Letter are having a tremendous impact on members of the Church (and investigators), and Elder Corbridge gives some great advice.
_____

Here, I want to discuss why the critics are so successful. I think their success is largely attributable to the teachings of certain LDS intellectuals that are being promulgated by CES and BYU.

IOW, the CES Letter is persuasive to people because of the teachings of LDS intellectuals who teach the youth that the prophets are wrong. This includes not only M2C advocates but also the revisionist Church historians who support them.

For now, I’ll give just two examples.

M2C-approved BYU Fantasy map that teaches students to think of the Book of Mormon in a fictional setting – because the prophets are wrong

The Book of Mormon is the keystone of our religion. The critics know that, so naturally that’s where they focus.

But their job is made easy because both CES and BYU teach their students that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were ignorant speculators who misled the Church about the New York Cumorah.

To make sure students grasp the point, CES and BYU use fantasy maps in their Book of Mormon classes.

Really, when CES and BYU students are being indoctrinated to think of the Book of Mormon in terms of a computer-generated fantasy map that has no relevance to the actual planet Earth, the critics are redundant.

The critics claim that the Book of Mormon is fiction, but every student going through CES and BYU is learning that already.

By contrast, how did Joseph and Oliver respond to the early anti-Mormon claim that the Book of Mormon was fiction? Did they draw a fantasy map and publish it in Church literature?

Of course not.

Eight letters

Instead, they wrote the first Gospel Topics Essays, published as letters, explaining the facts regarding the restoration of the Priesthood, the visit of Moroni, and the location of the Hill Cumorah in western New York.

They declared it was a fact that this is the very Hill Cumorah where (i) Joseph found the plates, (ii) Mormon concealed the repository of Nephite records, and (iii) both the Jaredite and Nephite nation waged their final battles. (See Mormon 6:6 and Letters IV and VII).

How do our intellectuals respond? Do they support and corroborate what Joseph and Oliver taught?

No. Instead, they side with the anti-Mormon critics and insist Joseph and Oliver were wrong. 

They teach people to disbelieve these declarations by Joseph and Oliver that were republished multiple times during Joseph’s lifetime. 

For example, Joseph’s brother William, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve, republished Letter VII in New York City just two days after Joseph’s martyrdom in Carthage. 

These LDS intellectuals proceed to teach their students to disbelieve the teachings of all the prophets who have reaffirmed the New York Cumorah, including members of the First Presidency speaking in General Conference.
_____

According to the M2C intellectuals, Joseph changed his mind about the setting of the Book of Mormon when he read a travel book in 1841-1842.

Joseph Smith Papers, M2C-approved

Look at this comment in the Joseph Smith Papers, for example. This is in the Historical Introduction to Orson Pratt’s 1840 missionary pamphlet titled “Interesting Account.”

Pratt’s association of Book of Mormon peoples with the history of all of North and South America matched common understanding of early Latter-day Saints. Shortly thereafter, when John Lloyd Stephens’s Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan became available in Nauvoo in about 1842, JS greeted it enthusiastically and church members used it to map Book of Mormon sites in a Central American setting.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/appendix-orson-pratt-an-interesting-account-of-several-remarkable-visions-1840/1#historical-intro

In my view, this is an outrageously deceptive comment because Joseph Smith actually rejected Orson Pratt’s speculations.

Saints – M2C-approved

If you’re a faithful member of the Church who reads the commentary in the Joseph Smith Papers, the Saints book, or even the Joseph Smith lesson manual, you will never know what Joseph actually taught.

Why?

Because the M2C intellectuals and their followers don’t want you to know what Joseph actually taught. 

When he wrote the Wentworth Letter, Joseph Smith adapted parts of Pratt’s 1840 pamphlet. The Joseph Smith Papers comment explains it this way (same reference as above):

Interesting Account is not a JS document, because JS did not write it, assign it, or supervise its creation. However, two JS documents in this volume, “Church History” and “Latter Day Saints” (a later version of “Church History”), quote extensively from Pratt’s pamphlet. These documents made use of Pratt’s language to describe JS’s early visionary experiences and built on Pratt’s summary of the church’s “faith and doctrine” for the thirteen-point statement of church beliefs that came to be known as the Articles of Faith…  Interesting Account is therefore included as an appendix to allow convenient comparison with JS’s histories. 

“Church History” here refers to the 1842 Wentworth letter. While Joseph quoted from part of Pratt’s pamphlet when he wrote the Wentworth letter, he deleted all of Pratt’s speculation about the remnant of the Lamanites living in Central and South America and replaced it with this statement:

The remnant are the Indians that now inhabit this country.

This is the very passage that the Correlation/Curriculum Departments censored from the Joseph Smith Manual, as we’ve discussed before, such as here.

Why do the editors of the Joseph Smith Papers (JSP) claim Joseph “enthusiastically” “greeted” a travel book about Central America?

Because they continue to teach that Joseph Smith was the acting editor of the Times and Seasons, as opposed to merely the nominal editor. That teaching contradicts the historical evidence, as I’ve explained in detail in my three books about Nauvoo history. (This teaching causes other problems that I don’t have time to cover here.)

If you look at the footnote 6 to the JSP comment I linked to above, it references Terryl Givens for authority. Brother Givens also wrote the Foreword to John Sorenson’s Mormon’s Codex, in which he claims “So influential has Sorenson’s work on Book of Mormon Geography been that there is widespread consensus among believing scholars in support of what is now called the “Sorenson model,” which identifies the scripture’s setting with a Mesoamerican locale.”

Do you see how the M2C citation cartel works? 

Brother Sorenson writes M2C material, including Mormon’s Codex, which was published by Deseret Book and the Maxwell Institute. Brother Givens writes the Foreword. Then the Joseph Smith Papers cites Brother Givens to support the proposition that Joseph Smith enthusiastically greeted the very travel book that is the premise for Mormon’s Codex.

It’s all circular reasoning, but it’s effective because most Church members rely on these intellectuals and historians to relate history accurately. They don’t realize this is all driven by the M2C agenda.

Recall, Mormon’s Codex is the book that teaches this: “There remain Latter-day Saints who insist that the final destruction of the Nephites took place in New York, but any such idea is manifestly absurd. Hundreds of thousands of Nephites traipsing across the Mississippi Valley to New York, pursued (why?) by hundreds of thousands of Lamanites, is a scenario worthy only of a witless sci-fi movie, not of history.”

Among these Latter-day Saints whose teachings are “manifestly absurd” according to the M2C intellectuals are these: Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, Wilford Woodruff, Joseph F. Smith, Anthony Ivins, Joseph Fielding Smith, Marion G. Romney, James E. Talmage, LeGrand Richards, and many others who have declared, in their writings and in General Conference, that Cumorah is in New York.

These influential LDS scholars, who all believe in M2C, have infiltrated every department of the Church, and their work is found throughout the Joseph Smith Papers, as well as Saints, the lesson manuals, and the ubiquitous artwork and media productions.

They successfully indoctrinate people into believing M2C because the M2C citation cartel continues to censor the teachings of the prophets.

This all makes is much easier for CES Letter and other critics to undermine the faith of the Latter-day Saints.
_____

This is the tip of the iceberg, but today’s students don’t have to read CES Letter or other critical literature to lose their faith in the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon.

All they have to do is attend class at CES/BYU and learn how the prophets are wrong about so basic a fundamental as the location of the Hill Cumorah.
_____

A few years ago, that wouldn’t have been worth mentioning. Now, however, the Church History Department is telling missionaries to tell visitors that Joseph didn’t even use the plates.

Me, holding Part Three, in Moroni, Comoros

FARMS and BYU Studies are telling people Joseph didn’t actually translate anything anyway. Instead, as claimed in the new books by Royal Skousen published by FARMS and BYU Studies, Joseph merely read words that appeared on a seer stone in a hat.

See Royal Skousen, The History of the Text of the Book of Mormon: Part Three, The Nature of the Original Language.

If you still think Joseph actually translated the plates, you’re about to be marginalized by the intellectuals.
_____

The M2C intellectuals and revisionist Church historians always say I’m wrong, but as readers here know, I couldn’t care less what they think. That said, I think it’s essential to know what people are thinking. It’s important to have context and a good understanding of relevant facts. For decades, I have read the M2C literature, the notes in the Joseph Smith Papers, etc. I’ve attended lectures and conferences.

But it always gets back to the original sources.

On the topic of the language of the scriptures, here’s something that Brigham Young said that makes sense to me:

Last week, I noted that Lehi explained to his family what the Lord told him about the promised land.

9 Wherefore, I, Lehi, have obtained a promise, that inasmuch as those whom the Lord God shall bring out of the land of Jerusalem [i.e., Lehi’s group as well as Mulek’s] shall keep his commandments, they shall prosper upon the face of this land; and they shall be kept from all other nations, that they may possess this land unto themselves. And if it so be that they shall keep his commandments they shall be blessed upon the face of this land, and there shall be none to molest them, nor to take away the land of their inheritance; and they shall dwell safely forever.

10 But behold, when the time cometh that they shall dwindle in unbelief, after they have received so great blessings from the hand of the Lord—

11 Yea, he will bring other nations unto them, and he will give unto them power, and he will take away from them the lands of their possessions, and he will cause them to be scattered and smitten.

Joseph Smith translated this passage in Fayette, NY, in June 1829. The Book of Mormon was published in March, 1830. Two months later, Lehi’s prophecy was formally fulfilled by the government of the United States.

Here’s how the Library of Congress summarizes the history:

The Indian Removal Act was signed into law by President Andrew Jackson on May 28, 1830, authorizing the president to grant unsettled lands west of the Mississippi in exchange for Indian lands within existing state borders. A few tribes went peacefully, but many resisted the relocation policy. During the fall and winter of 1838 and 1839, the Cherokees were forcibly moved west by the United States government. Approximately 4,000 Cherokees died on this forced march, which became known as the “Trail of Tears.”

The U.S. government had been forcibly removing Indians from their tribal lands before this, but this Act led to the nearly complete removal of Indian tribes east of the Mississippi (River Sidon).

Here is a map and painting of the infamous “Trail of Tears.”

Although this map shows the removal of tribes from the southeast and upper Mississippi River basin in the early 1830s, Indian tribes from Ohio were also removed.

When you follow the history, you see how literally Lehi’s prophecy was fulfilled.
1. His descendants would dwell in unbelief.
2. The Lord would bring other nations unto them (France and England).
3. Their lands would be taken from them.
4. They would be scattered and smitten.

The Ohio History Connection explains:

Most Algonquian tribes allied themselves with the French until France lost its North American colonies in the French and Indian War (1756-1763). Fearing white settlement of their lands, many Algonquian-speaking peoples then sided with the British in the American Revolution, and in the War of 1812. By the 1840s, most Algonquian-speaking tribes had been forcibly removed west of the Mississippi under increasingly aggressive U.S. American Indian removal policies.

If Lehi had a vision of the future, this painting depicts it.

The outcome of the Indian Removal Act is shown in this map.

Notice how the area around the Mississippi and east from there has very little land left for the Native Americans who once lived there.

This strikes me as a direct fulfillment of Lehi’s warning and prophecy, published in the Book of Mormon before the Indian Removal Act was signed by the President.

For those unfamiliar with the proposed geography in Moroni’s America, which is based on the text of the Book of Mormon, here is a map showing the major areas described in the text.

Recall that Joseph Smith himself described the states of Ohio, Indiana and Illinois as “the plains of the Nephites.”

You can see that description here (scroll down to the last line):
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/letterbook-2/62

_____

The Book of Mormon makes so much more sense when we heed and believe the teachings of the prophets, starting with the New York Cumorah.

1. More religiously orthodox. Utah Mormons were more devout on almost every testimony question. These differences were less pronounced on questions of basic Christian belief (God, Jesus, etc.) and more visible on specifically Mormon questions about the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, and the role of apostles and prophets today. For example, there’s a twenty-point difference between the Utah Mormons who strongly agree that the Book of Mormon is a “literal, historical account” (69%) and the non-Utah Mormons who do (49%). In many cases on these testimony questions, non-Utah folks would choose the second option of “somewhat” agree rather than “strongly” agree. So it doesn’t mean they don’t believe in Mormon teachings, but they may hold them less tightly than Utah Mormons tend to.

This indicates that 1/3 of devout Utah Mormons don’t strongly believe the Book of Mormon is a literal, historical account, and less than 1/2 of non-Utah Mormons believe that.

I suspect that the difference between the Utah and non-Utah Mormons is partly attributable to Utah Mormons having fewer interactions with people who challenge their faith in the Book of Mormon; i.e., they let bias confirmation guide them. 

Those who make inquiries on the Internet quickly realize that outside of a handful of M2C intellectuals and their followers, no Mesoamerican scholars see any links between actual Mayan culture and the Book of Mormon. As I’ve shown many times, the so-called “correspondences” touted by the M2C intellectuals are illusory and unpersuasive to those who are outside the M2C bubble.. 

_____

The difference could also be attributed to demographics; i.e., non-Utah Mormons are generally younger, and younger LDS are less likely to believe the Book of Mormon is a literal history because of what LDS youth are being taught in CES and at BYU.

As LDS youth go through CES and BYU and learn the Book of Mormon by referring to the fantasy map, even fewer will believe it is a literal, historical account.

BYU fantasy map that teaches the prophets are wrong about the New York Cumorah

This map is the work of fine scholars at BYU who claim it is the best representation of the geography-related passages in the text. Of course, they really mean it’s the best representation of their M2C-driven interpretation; other interpretations of the text fully support the teachings of the prophets.

CES fantasy map

CES uses a similar map.

BOMCC publishes short articles they call a “Kno-Why.” I don’t take the time to respond to these any more, partly because

(i) they merely rehash things the M2C citation cartel (M2C is the acronym for the Mesoamerican-two Cumorahs theory) have written over the years, which I’ve already responded to, and partly because

(ii) many of the Kno-Whys are not no-wise. Some are actually good, and some are great (as they should be, given the amount of money BOMCC spends to create them.)

The problem comes from the taint of M2C, which I call Mesomania. BOMCC is so determined to establish M2C in the minds of Church members that they continue to censor material that contradicts M2C. They continue to reject what the prophets have taught about the New York Cumorah, and they continue to resort to sophistry to confuse and mislead the Saints.

No-wise #497 is a good example. It’s titled “Where is the Land of Promise?” It contains the same semantic arguments put forward by M2C proponents for decades.

I ignored it at first it because readers of this blog already understand the M2C tactics and dogma. But there are always new readers, and if you’re not well-versed in the M2C problem, you probably won’t understand what’s wrong with no-wise #497.

Censorship is effective because readers don’t know what has been censored. That’s why the M2C employees get away with censoring and even changing the teachings of the prophets, as we’ve seen in the book ironically titled Saints: The Standard of Truth and the lesson manuals on the teachings of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young.

BTW, my comments on previous BOMCC no-wisees are here:

http://www.bookofmormoncentralamerica.com/
_____

The title alone tells us No-wise #497 is going to be a problem.

“Where is the Land of Promise?”

It falsely implies there is one land of promise. The correct question would include a who and a when; i.e., the answer depends on whose land of promise we are considering and in what time frame. There is not one single “land of promise.”

For Abraham, the “land of promise” was the area around modern-day Israel (Heb. 11:9).

For the Children of Israel, it was the same land (Joshua 23:5).

In Lehi’s day, the “land or promise” was the land given to him for his posterity. (2 Nephi 1)

In the 1830s, the “land of promise” was designated as Missouri (D&C  57:2).

In our day, the “land of promise” is wherever righteous people live.

This is all made quite clear in the scriptures and by the modern prophets (some of whom the no-wise eventually cite, although they continue to censor and repudiate other teachings of the prophets).
_____

Why did BOMCC publish this no-wise on the promised land??

No-wise #497 is part of their ongoing effort to get the Saints to believe M2C. IOW, BOMCC wants members of the Church to accept them, the scholars, whenever they disagree with the prophets. The people who write these no-wise actually claim they have been hired by the prophets to guide the Church.

And, ironically (but not surprisingly), as we’ll see, the conclusion of this no-wise contradicts its own original premise. This is the problem the M2C intellectuals get into when they resort to convoluted sophistry to mislead members of the Church.
_____

Here, I’ll point out that the entire no-wise is an effort to deny the plain language contained in President Oliver Cowdery’s letters. Letter IV describes Moroni’s first visit to Joseph Smith:

He then proceeded and gave a general account of the promises made to the fathers, and also gave a history of the aborigenes of this country, and said they were literal descendants of Abraham. He represented them as once being an enlightned and intelligent people, possessing a correct knowledge of the gospel, and the plan of restoration and redemption. He said this history was written and deposited not far from that place, and that it was our brother’s privilege, if obedient to the commandments of the Lord, to obtain and translate the same by the means of the Urim and Thummim, which were deposited for that purpose with the record.

This paragraph alone should resolve the matter. The Book of Mormon is a history of the aborigines of the United States, circa 1823, and Mormon and Moroni wrote and deposited the record not far from Joseph’s home; i.e., they lived in western New York when they abridged the Nephite records and they deposited both the original records and the abridgment in the hill Cumorah not far from Joseph’s home.

Separately, Letter VII declares it is a fact that the hill Cumorah of Mormon 6:6 is the same hill from which Joseph obtained the plates.

But plain language, even from prophets, never stopped intellectuals from trying to persuade members of the Church that the prophets are wrong.

Hence, we have no-wise #497.
_____

The no-wise begins by focusing on Lehi’s land of promise. BOMCC offers this table:

The Book of Mormon describes the identity and importance of this “land of promise” in various ways. These include:

At first glance, the table looks impressive. But since this comes from Book of Mormon Central Censor, we have to suspect they’re intentionally omitting something. (This is a rule of thumb that works every time when you read something from the M2C citation cartel.)

The table omits a key description. It’s laughable, really. Hopefully every reader is familiar enough with the Book of Mormon by now to recognize something is missing from this table.

Actually, the fine young scholars at BOMCC, aka NPCs,* who write these no-wise apparently don’t even realize what they’re doing. They’ve been conditioned to think M2C always and everywhere. Some of them literally “can’t unsee” M2C when they read the text. That’s the power of bias confirmation.

Sadly, most of their readers are also NPCs when it comes to M2C.
_____
*An NPC is a “non-player character,” explained here:
http://bookofmormonwars.blogspot.com/2019/01/npcs-at-bomcc.html
NPCs merely repeat the rote instructions they’re programmed to repeat, as we see in the M2C no-wises.
_____

Notice, the table quotes from 2 Nephi 1:5 and 1:10. What about the verses in between?

They censor those because they contradict M2C.

Look at the verses this no-wise omitted:

6 Wherefore, I, Lehi, prophesy according to the workings of the Spirit which is in me, that there shall none come into this land save they shall be brought by the hand of the Lord. [this would include the Jaredites, who occupied Lehi’s promised land (“this north country”) before his descendants did]

7 Wherefore, this land is consecrated unto him whom he shall bring. And if it so be that they shall serve him according to the commandments which he hath given, it shall be a land of liberty unto them; wherefore, they shall never be brought down into captivity; if so, it shall be because of iniquity; for if iniquity shall abound cursed shall be the land for their sakes, but unto the righteous it shall be blessed forever.

8 And behold, it is wisdom that this land should be kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations; for behold, many nations would overrun the land, that there would be no place for an inheritance.

9 Wherefore, I, Lehi, have obtained a promise, that inasmuch as those whom the Lord God shall bring out of the land of Jerusalem [i.e., Lehi’s group as well as Mulek’s] shall keep his commandments, they shall prosper upon the face of this land; and they shall be kept from all other nations, that they may possess this land unto themselves. And if it so be that they shall keep his commandments they shall be blessed upon the face of this land, and there shall be none to molest them, nor to take away the land of their inheritance; and they shall dwell safely forever.
_____

Middle Preclassic (1000 BC–400 BC)

M2C teaches that Lehi (and Mulek) landed in Mesoamerica, an area that, by 600 BC (the “Middle Preclassic period), hosted extensive civilizations. See a short description here.

Depending on which version of M2C you’re considering, the Nephites and people of Zarahemla were Mayans, or living among Mayans.

The M2C intellectuals want you to believe that Joseph Smith learned about all of this in 1841 from an illustrated travel book. They want you to believe that prior to that, Joseph was an ignorant speculator who misled the Church about the New York Cumorah. Plus, even after he learned the “truth” from the travel book, his contemporaries and successors continued to teach the false opinion about the New York Cumorah. Joseph’s own brother, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve, re-published Letter VII in 1844. Every prophet and apostle who has ever addressed the topic has reaffirmed the New York Cumorah.

Two things all M2C intellectuals agree upon.

1. All the prophets and apostles were wrong about the New York Cumorah.

2. The Nephites were not alone; they lived among other nations.

IOW, contrary to what Lehi was promised, according to M2C Lehi’s family did not possess the land unto themselves and they were not kept from all other nations.

How do the NPC’s at BOMCC deal with this problem?

They simply censor inconvenient scriptures, such as 2 Nephi 1:8-9, and move on.
_____

If we are searching for a land that fits all of the descriptions of Lehi’s promised land, we need to find a place that was not inhabited by nations around 600 B.C., such as the area now known as the southeastern United States.

Note that the Lord did not promise Lehi there would be no people in his promised land, but only that there would be no nations. This requirement is satisfied if Lehi’s promised land was already occupied by small groups of hunter/gatherers, but not if it was already occupied by large organized human societies (governments) such as what was present in Mesoamerica.

If this no-wise was not trying to mislead and confuse members of the Church, it would have addressed this issue instead of simply censoring these important verses from 2 Nephi 1.
_____

The no-wise next addresses the New Jerusalem:

The prophets Ether and Moroni prophesied that “a New Jerusalem” would be built in the land of promise (Ether 13:3–6, 9–10; cf. 3 Nephi 21:23–24). 

D&C 84:1-4 explains that the site for the New Jerusalem is in what is now known as Missouri (D&C  84:4).

4 Verily this is the word of the Lord, that the city New Jerusalem shall be built by the gathering of the saints, beginning at this place, even the place of the temple, which temple shall be reared in this generation.

This is another problem for M2C because they have both Ether and Moroni, who supposedly lived in Mesoamerica (specifically around the Hill Cumorah, which M2C claims is in southern Mexico) describing a location in Missouri, thousands of miles to the north.

Does the no-wise address this? No. Instead, it implies that maybe we don’t know where the site for the New Jerusalem is because it “could only be built on the principles of righteousness,” a bizarre non-sequitur. Here’s how they confuse and mislead their readers (this paragraph appears after the BYU Fantasy map):

Related to the concept of the land of promise and the New Jerusalem is that of Zion. Modern revelation identifies Jackson County, Missouri as “the land which [the Lord has] appointed and consecrated for the gathering of the saints” as “the land of promise, and the place for the city of Zion” (Doctrine and Covenants 57:1–2). While this usage of Zion refers to a specific location (much like how Zion is identified with the Old World city of Jerusalem in the Hebrew Bible), the broader concept of Zion can take on multiple meanings depending on context. 5

This is an accurate quotation of D&C 57, and they do cite D&C 84 in the footnote, but note how specific D&C 84:4 is, and how they don’t quote that one. Instead, they distract readers by conflating the concepts of the “land of promise,” the “New Jerusalem,” and “Zion.”

[BTW, many Church members don’t realize that some LDS intellectuals don’t think the New Jerusalem will be built in Missouri. Some say the idea of a “New Jerusalem” is not limited to one site; some say the early Saints forfeited the Missouri site; and some question the reliability of the revelations in the D&C overall. That’s a topic for another time.]

You can see why BOMCC wants to conflate the three separate topics when you read the next part of no-wise #497. My comments in red below. Original in blue.
_____

NO-WISE #497

Going back to the first part of the no-wise, we read this reasonable (albeit grammatically awkward) statement:

Because the Book of Mormon does not specify where physically in the New World the “land of promise” was located, or its range or extent, interested readers of the book have tried to answer these questions. 

As we saw at the outset, BOMCC censors key descriptions of Lehi’s “land of promise” because they think that what’s left after their censorship describes Mesoamerica. But there is another important part of Lehi’s prophecy in 2 Nephi 1 to consider:

10 But behold, when the time cometh that they shall dwindle in unbelief, after they have received so great blessings from the hand of the Lord—


11 Yea, he will bring other nations unto them, and he will give unto them power, and he will take away from them the lands of their possessions, and he will cause them to be scattered and smitten.

The Book of Mormon explains how Lehi’s descendants ended up dwindling in unbelief. Consequently, we should look for a situation in which “other nations” came upon Lehi’s descendants and took away the lands of their possessions, and caused them to be scattered and smitten.

The no-wise continues:

Historically, Latter-day Saint leaders have understood the land of promise given to Lehi and his descendants as encompassing the span of North and South America. 

I disagree with this framing of what “early Church leaders” taught for three reasons.

1. This was not what was taught by all LDS leaders.

2. Joseph Smith specifically refuted Orson Pratt’s ideas, as I’ll show below; and

3. Orson Pratt’s theory contradicts the covenant Lehi described. IOW, if all of the Americas, meaning the continents of North America and South America, were the “promised land,” how could anyone take away an entire hemisphere? And to where would Lehi’s descendants be scattered if the entire hemisphere was their promised land? 

According to this hemispheric theory, Lehi’s descendants would still be occupying their promised land even after it was taken away from them and even after they were scattered.

Now, let’s look at the references they cite. They start with Orson Pratt.

For instance, Elder Orson Pratt, writing in 1840, taught that “the Lord gave unto [Lehi’s seed] the whole continent, for a land of promise, and he promised, that they, and their children after them, should inherit it, on condition of their obedience to his commandments.”2 

This is another example of subtle censorship. BOMCC cuts this quotation so it ends in mid-sentence. Here’s the rest of Orson Pratt’s sentence:

but if they were disobedient, they should be cut off from his presence.

As we just read in 2 Nephi 1:11, the covenant was that their land would be taken away and they would be scattered. Orson Pratt didn’t address this part of the covenant because it doesn’t fit his theory of the entire continent being the promised land.

Do you see the problem? Under the “whole continent” theory, Lehi’s descendants would inherit the land of promise whether or not they were obedient to the commandments. The covenant was a nullity.

(BTW, when Pratt wrote the footnotes for the 1879 edition of the Book of Mormon, he specified that his hemispheric ideas were speculative. But he also specified that the New York Cumorah was a fact, not speculation. BOMCC never tells their readers about this distinction, either.) 

Here is the first part of footnote 2:

Orson Pratt, A[n] Interesting Account of Several Remarkable Visions (Edinburgh, Scotland: Ballantyne and Hughes, 1840): 17, online at josephsmithpapers.org.  

Let’s look at this 1840 pamphlet a moment.
_____

The first thing to notice is that Orson included quotations from Letter IV, one of President Oliver Cowdery’s eight letters on Church history and the restoration of the Priesthood. It was in Letter IV that President Cowdery explained explained what Moroni told Joseph, as we saw above:

He then proceeded and gave a general account of the promises made to the fathers, and also gave a history of the aborigenes of this country, and said they were literal descendants of Abraham. He represented them as once being an enlightned and intelligent people, possessing a correct knowledge of the gospel, and the plan of restoration and redemption. He said this history was written and deposited not far from that place, and that it was our brother’s privilege, if obedient to the commandments of the Lord, to obtain and translate the same by the means of the Urim and Thummim, which were deposited for that purpose with the record.

Orson didn’t quote this specific passage. Instead, he paraphrased part of it and wrote “After giving him many instructions concerning things past and to come, which would be foreign to our purpose to mention here, he [the angel] disappeared.” Nevertheless, Orson’s use of Letter VII shows how it was  considered authoritative. (You can read it in Joseph’s personal history here: 
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1834-1836/69

What does Letter IV tell us?

First, Letter IV explains that the Book of Mormon is the history of the aborigines of this country. Later, the no-wise cites Webster’s 1828 dictionary, so let’s see how the dictionary defines the term country. I won’t list the entire long definition, but you can see it here:
http://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/country

Webster’s: The kingdom , state or territory in which one is born; the land of nativity; or the particular district indefinitely in which one is born. America is my country or Connecticut is my country

The concept of hemisphere or continent doesn’t come within any definition of country. This is why BOMCC wants Church members to disbelieve President Cowdery’s letters, even though their own source (Orson Pratt) quoted from them. (It’s possible that Pratt recognized this problem and that’s why he didn’t quote what Moroni told Joseph, but Joseph himself corrected Pratt as we’ll see below.)

If we believe President Cowdery (who wrote these letters with the assistance of Joseph Smith, who later personally approved of them on multiple occasions), Moroni explained that the Nephites were the aborigines of the country where Joseph lived. These Native Americans are genetically, culturally, and linguistically distinct from those in Mesoamerica.

Second, Letter IV teaches us that Moroni told Joseph the record was “written and deposited not far from” Joseph’s home. This can only mean that Mormon and Moroni wrote the record in western New York. 

In any other situation, Letter IV would resolve the Cumorah issue once and for all. It originated with the President and Assistant President of the Church, was approved by both counselors in the First Presidency, and was approved by every member of the Twelve who ever discussed the topic of Cumorah, down through the present day.

But M2C advocates insist all these Church leaders are wrong.
___

There’s more to consider about the 1840 pamphlet.

Orson goes on to quote from Letters VII and VIII regarding Cumorah. Because he is focusing on the “Late Discovery of Ancient American Records,” Orson doesn’t get into the Book of Mormon narrative at this point, so he omits President Cowdery’s discussion of Cumorah in the context of Mormon 6:6. But again, he quoted President Cowdery’s letters as authoritative regarding the description of Cumorah.

Sometimes people wonder why the 1840 pamphlet is included in the Joseph Smith Papers. The Historical Introduction says, “Interesting Account is not a JS document, because JS did not write it, assign it, or supervise its creation. However, two JS documents in this volume, “Church History” and “Latter Day Saints” (a later version of “Church History”), quote extensively from Pratt’s pamphlet.”

This becomes relevant when we read the balance of footnote 2 in the no-wise.

Elder Pratt, in the same publication (pp. 16, 21), understood that the Book of Mormon describes Lehi’s colony as landing in South America, and that centuries later “the Lamanites . . . dwelt in South America, and the Nephites in North America,” making it clear that Pratt had a hemispheric New World geography in mind with his comments. This makes sense in light of how contemporary nineteenth century American English defined the concept of the “American continent.” See “America,” in American Dictionary of the English Language, online at webstersdictionary1828.com.

Notice, BOMCC cites Webster’s for America but not for country. 

More important, though, is how Joseph changed Orson Pratt’s language when he wrote the Wentworth letter. Interested readers can see my detailed explanation in my book Brought to Light, 

Here, I’ll just quote from a previous post on this point:

Joseph wrote the Wentworth letter by referring to Oliver’s eight historical letters and Orson Pratt’s pamphlet, “A Interesting Account of Several Remarkable Visions.” Orson Pratt spent several pages discussing his hemispheric model, including Central and South America. In the Wentworth letter, Joseph deleted Orson’s speculation and instead declared that the remnant of Lehi’s people “are the Indians that now inhabit this country.”

[Note: You can read the entire Wentworth letter in the Ensign here. However, the influence of the M2C intellectuals is so pervasive that the lesson manual, Teaching of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, actually deleted this critical passage from the chapter on the Wentworth Letter. Joseph had been concerned that Mr. Wentworth might not publish his article entire, but he didn’t need to worry about Mr. Wentworth; he needed to worry about the Curriculum Department that is dominated by people who believe M2C (the Mesoamerican/two-Cumorahs theory).]

Joseph’s contemporaries accepted the New York Cumorah, but they were enthusiastic about the ruins in Central America so they disregarded his declaration about the Indians in the United States. They disregarded the revelations (D&C 28, 30, 32) that identified the Lamanites as the tribes living in the United States. Benjamin Winchester, William Smith, and the Pratt brothers, all close friends and missionary companions who wrote and published profusely, shared a missionary zeal for linking the Book of Mormon to exciting finds in Central America. But Joseph never once shared their enthusiasm and the idea that he did has led intellectuals to reject what Joseph and Oliver actually taught about the Hill Cumorah.

This is a tragic mistake that can be easily rectified by returning to the teachings of the prophets and apostles about Cumorah.

[Note: If you want to know more detail about all of this, you can read my detailed blog posts here:
http://bookofmormonwars.blogspot.com/2015/06/peer-review-bomaf-joseph-smith-john.html

You can read how the employees in the Correlation Department promote M2C here: 
http://bookofmormonwars.blogspot.com/2018/04/how-correlation-department-promotes-m2c.html]
_____

No-wise #497 continues.

Elder B. H. Roberts similarly stated, “The Book of Mormon teaches that the two American continents [North and South America] are a promised land, consecrated to righteousness and to liberty, and especially dedicated to the seed of the Patriarch Joseph, son of Jacob, of Bible fame, and to the Gentile races, who shall in the last days be gathered to the land as well as the descendants of Joseph.”3 In 1968 President Alvin R. Dyer likewise taught, “America, or the continent of America, is the promised and choice land, choice above all other lands.”4

The first thing to note is that this quotation contradicts the premise for this no-wise. Recall this statement in the opening paragraphs:

Because the Book of Mormon does not specify where physically in the New World the “land of promise” was located, or its range or extent, interested readers of the book have tried to answer these questions. [emphasis added]

Elder Roberts was controversial for several reasons, but surely BOMCC doesn’t take his statement here to be literal because they started out by explaining that the Book of Mormon doesn’t specify where the land of promise is. As we’ve seen, it’s irrational to apply 2 Nephi 1 to the entire hemisphere because (i) there were already nations in the hemisphere when Lehi landed and (ii) because there would be no place for Lehi’s descendants to be scattered if the entire hemisphere was their promised land.

That said, Elder Roberts makes a valid point when he says the entire hemisphere is dedicated to the gathering of Israel. 

Of course, that’s also true of every spec of land on earth, as the modern prophets have explained.

Do you see how this works? The no-wise relies on Elder Pratt, who specifically admitted his ideas were speculative, and Elder Roberts, who made a statement even BOMCC doesn’t agree with (although Elder Roberts also made a separate statement about the gathering that the modern prophets have affirmed).

The larger point is that BOMCC repudiates the consistent and persistent teachings of the prophets about the New York Cumorah, and cites isolated statements of Church leaders solely to sow confusion so they can persuade Church members to accept M2C.
_____

Imagined map of the Book of Mormon Lands by Tyler Griffin, Taylor Halverson, and Seth Holladay, BYU

Next, no-wise #497 gives us the BYU fantasy map that teaches students

(i) the prophets are wrong about the New York Cumorah and

(ii) the Book of Mormon is best understood in a fictional setting.

Both of these teachings are deplorable, but that’s a topic for another day.

_____

Next, BOMCC has a paragraph on Zion that has nothing to do with the promised land and misquotes the tenth Article of Faith, but readers already know those fallacies.

Finally, the “Why” of the no-wise mingles the M2C philosophy of men with the teachings of the prophets. Here’s what it says:

So while the Book of Mormon teaches that what is now called the American continent was a “land of promise” to Lehi’s seed, and that later events on this land of promise would play a central role in the restoration of the gospel, the ideals and blessings of Zion are universal, and apply to men and women in all lands or countries who covenant to serve the Lord and do his will.

The last part of this sentence is great. It’s what the prophets have taught. I agree 100%. 

But the first part of the sentence is M2C rhetoric that contradicts the entire premise for no-wise #497; i.e., “the Book of Mormon does not specify where physically in the New World the “land of promise” was located, or its range or extent.”

I hope by now that you can see how, to promote M2C, BOMCC leads their readers down a path of confusion and disbelief in the teachings of the prophets. Mingling the M2C dogma with selected teachings of the prophets makes it all sound acceptable. A spoonful of sugar, etc. 
_____

Everything in this no-wise would be clear and understandable if BOMCC would simply heed and accept all the teachings of all the prophets, instead of repudiating (and censoring) what the prophets have taught about the New York Cumorah and related issues.

That’s why they continue to be Book of Mormon Central Censor.