Jonathan Neville

August 11, 2017Uncategorized

The missionaries are defenseless – Part 2 – DNA Gospel Topics essay

The second category of common questions investigators ask missionaries involves DNA and ancient America.

The questions are some variation of this: “If the Book of Mormon is true, why is Native American DNA Asian instead of Hebrew (or Middle Eastern)?”

I’d be surprised if any proselyting missionary in an internet-savvy area doesn’t hear this question daily.

The expected answer, of course, is the Gospel Topics essay on DNA, which you can read here:

https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-mormon-and-dna-studies?lang=eng

I’ll include relevant quotations in this post so you don’t have to go to that link, but it might be helpful to have the essay open in another screen if you’re reading this on your computer.

These essays have done a lot to educate people, LDS and otherwise, and get them thinking about difficult questions. But because this DNA essay is trying to support and defend the Mesoamerican and two-Cumorahs theory, it is not very effective when viewed from the perspective of missionaries, investigators, and faithful members who want answers.

You’ll notice that footnote 6 claims “the Church takes no official position except that the events occurred in the Americas.” That is true of the Church, but not of this essay, as I’ll show below.

A major problem for many investigators (and members) is that this essay establishes Darwinian evolution as a foundation for understanding the DNA issue with the Book of Mormon, a topic I address in the next post of this seriest. For now, I emphasize that I’m not focusing on the science vs religion issue here. Instead, I’m focusing on how missionaries answer questions about the DNA.

(On the merits, I think it would make more sense to consider multiple working hypotheses instead of embracing only one–especially when the essay does not explain how the evolution hypothesis it embraces can be reconciled with the scriptures.)
_______________

The first problem is obvious: this is an academic essay written by and for scientists and those used to reading scientific literature (or at least Popular Science).

It was not written for teenagers and ordinary investigators (other than the rare scientist who might be interested in the Church).

Because there are a lot of quotations below, I’ll put all quotations in blue, with my comments in black or red for the rest of this post.
_______________

Here’s an excerpt from the opening paragraphs of the essay to give you an idea of the tone and content:

“Some have contended that the migrations mentioned in the Book of Mormon did not occur because the majority of DNA identified to date in modern native peoples most closely resembles that of eastern Asian populations.2

[Note: Many missionaries and investigators are not familiar with footnote formatting and skip over them. Just as well, because when you click on this footnote, it goes to more academic verbiage and citations of LDS journals that adamantly and exclusively promote the Mesoamerican and two-Cumorahs theories.]

“Basic principles of population genetics suggest the need for a more careful approach to the data. The conclusions of genetics, like those of any science, are tentative, and much work remains to be done to fully understand the origins of the native populations of the Americas.”
_______________

For a teenager, a missionary, a non-scientist, and the vast majority of investigators, this essay is word salad.

Fortunately, buried at the end of the third paragraph if anyone reads that far, is the short version:

“In short, DNA studies cannot be used decisively to either affirm or reject the historical authenticity of the Book of Mormon.”

Compare that to the summary put out by one of the most popular Christian ministries (millions of copies of their DVD distributed, plus widespread online presence):

“This documentary accurately presents the consensus of the scientific community that northern Asia — not Israel — is the place of origin of the Native American Indians.”

The messaging disparity is obvious. It’s not even close.

Now, let’s look at the content of the Gospel Topics Essay.
________________

The first thing to note is that nowhere does the essay cite the Book of Mormon!

This leaves it up to investigators (and the Christian ministries that educate their members) to point out relevant passages to the missionaries.

Investigators who go to the Internet will find articles such as these that do cite the scriptures and the words of the prophets and apostles:

Who Are the Lamanites?

DNA and the Book of Mormon

While the essay does not cite scripture or seek to reconcile its theories with the scriptures, it does cite other articles that do. But these articles are the same ones cited by the detractors because they all promote the Mesoamerican theory, which is based on the premise that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were ignorant speculators who misled the Church about the New York location of Cumorah.

The second thing to note is that the essay itself embraces the Mesoamerican theory in several places. For example, look at this paragraph:

“The Book of Mormon itself, however, does not claim that the peoples it describes were either the predominant or the exclusive inhabitants of the lands they occupied. In fact, cultural and demographic clues in its text hint at the presence of other groups.6”

Here’s note 6:

“John L. Sorenson, “When Lehi’s Party Arrived in the Land, Did They Find Others There?” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 1, no. 1 (Fall 1992): 1–34. These arguments were summarized more recently in John L. Sorenson, Mormon’s Codex: An Ancient American Book (Provo, UT: Neal A. Maxwell Institute, 2013). Sorenson suggests that indicators in the book’s text makes it “inescapable that there were substantial populations in the ‘promised land’ throughout the period of the Nephite record, and probably in the Jaredite era also.” (“When Lehi’s Party Arrived,” 34). Though there are several plausible hypotheses regarding the geographic locations of Book of Mormon events, the Church takes no official position except that the events occurred in the Americas. See Book of Mormon Seminary Teacher Manual (2012): 196. (emphasis added)”

The essay purports to be neutral on geography, but it cites Mormon’s Codex, the epitome of Mesoamerican dogma. As an example, in Mormon’s Codex, John Sorenson ridicules the idea of the Hill Cumorah being in New York: “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.” Mormon’s Codex, p. 688.

Any investigator, missionary, or member who reads this essay, including the footnotes, can come away with no impression other than that the Church endorses the Mesoamerican theory. This makes the quotation from the Seminary manual about “neutrality” look ridiculous when compared with the references cited in the essay.

In fact, individuals associated with the Conclave cite these essays as evidence that the Church does quietly endorse the Mesoamerican theory.

Now, imagine you’re a missionary trying to answer the DNA question. You have an investigator who knows how to read. He/she is sincerely interested, so he/she reads the essay and the notes and the references. Let’s say this investigator knows about Letter VII (unlike the missionary). The investigator points out that the Church’s own web page is directly contradicting what Joseph and Oliver taught.

And the investigator is correct.

We now have an official essay on lds.org that claims what Joseph and Oliver taught is manifestly absurd.

This is exactly what our LDS scholars and educators have been teaching for decades, of course, but many members of the Church don’t realize it. This is the basic principle that underlies the Mesoamerican and two-Cumorahs theories.

And it’s not only Joseph and Oliver whose ideas were “manifestly absurd.” Our LDS scholars and educators teach that all the prophets and apostles who agreed with Joseph and Oliver about Cumorah being in New York, including all of Joseph’s contemporaries and more recent ones such as Joseph Fielding Smith and Marion G. Romney, were merely expressing their own opinions and were wrong, even when they spoke about this in General Conference.

How does the missionary explain that?

The assumption, apparently, is that people won’t actually read these essays, or if they do, they won’t read the notes, or if they do, they won’t read the references.

I don’t think that’s a sustainable assumption.
_______________________

There’s more.

Look at the paragraph again:

Juxtapose that with what Lehi said when he landed:

2 Nephi 1:8 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 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.

I don’t want to get into 2D arguments about semantics, but the basic premise of the Mesoamerican theory is that Lehi’s people were absorbed into the much more numerous and extensive Mayan civilization. All traces of Lehi’s people disappeared, except for some cultural artifacts or “correspondences” that are common to most human societies.

The basic premise of Moroni’s America (the North American setting, based on one Cumorah in New York) is that Lehi’s people encounters small groups of indigenous hunter/gatherers who joined with and followed Nephi and Laman, respectively, and that Lehi’s descendants are still identifiable today (e.g., D&C 28, 30, 32).

Which interpretation seems more congruent with Lehi’s teachings?
________________________

There’s more.

Look at this paragraph:

Joseph Smith appears to have been open to the idea of migrations other than those described in the Book of Mormon,8 and many Latter-day Saint leaders and scholars over the past century have found the Book of Mormon account to be fully consistent with the presence of other established populations.9

Note 8: “Facts Are Stubborn Things,” Times and Seasons 3 (Sept. 15, 1842): 922. This article is unattributed but was published under Joseph Smith’s editorship. See also Hugh Nibley, Lehi in the Desert, The World of the Jaredites, There Were Jaredites (Salt Lake City and Provo, UT: Deseret Book and Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1988): 250.”

This note perpetuates the mistaken narrative that Joseph endorsed the anonymous articles in the Times and Seasons. This narrative is part of the premise of the Mesoamerican theory; i.e., that Joseph was an ignorant speculator who misled the Church and expected scholars to figure out things he didn’t know, such as the location of Cumorah and the setting for the Book of Mormon. This means the entire Church was misled until our modern scholars rescued us from false tradition and figured out that Cumorah is actually in southern Mexico.

Note 9 is even worse.

“For a review of statements on this subject, see Matthew Roper, “Nephi’s Neighbors: Book of Mormon Peoples and Pre-Columbian Populations,” FARMS Review 15, no. 2 (2003): 91–128.”

I addressed this reference on my blog here, and I could say more about it now, but suffice it to say, it firmly promotes the Mesoamerican theory.

In fact, there is nothing in this Gospel Topics essay that presents any ideas that support what Joseph taught about Cumorah or support any geography theories other than Mesoamerica, despite the reference to neutrality in the Seminary manual, which is rendered meaningless by the essay.
________________________

There’s more.

The last paragraph before the even more obscure section (Understanding the Genetic Evidence) says this:

“What seems clear is that the DNA of Book of Mormon peoples likely represented only a fraction of all DNA in ancient America. Finding and clearly identifying their DNA today may be asking more of the science of population genetics than it is capable of providing.”

That looks like a fair statement, but when you analyze it, you wonder whether it was just poorly written or designed to obfuscate.

“What seems clear…” Is it clear, or does it merely “seem” clear?

“The DNA of Book of Mormon peoples likely represented…” Likely? It seems clear that this DNA likely?

The essay is hedging so much it really says next to nothing.

“represented only a fraction of all DNA in ancient America.” We have to infer they mean “human DNA” or the sentence states the obvious no matter what percentage of the human population was Lehi’s descendants; i.e., most DNA in ancient America is plant and animal.

Even with the inference, the sentence is meaningless because a fraction can be 1% or 99%. It can even be 150%. Assuming the sentence means to say a small or tiny percentage of human DNA, is there anything in the Book of Mormon text to support this idea? I’m not aware of any such passage. If we’re writing about the Book of Mormon, why not cite any scriptures?

In my view, of course, the Book of Mormon took place in what is now the United States, mostly east of the Mississippi. I would expect most indigenous DNA in western North America and Central and South America to be Asian, partly because of the Jaredites (who spent years crossing Asia before arriving) and because of other migrations from Asia.

But I would expect to find some Hebrew or at least Middle-Eastern DNA in the areas where Joseph sent missionaries to the Lamanites (D&C 28, 30, 32). More on that later.

For now, I’m interested in what investigators and missionaries are to make of this essay so far. We have two essentially meaningless sentences concluding the section titled “The Ancestors of the American Indians.” The gist so far seems to be that the Book of Mormon people, whatever their origin, vanished somewhere in Mesoamerica.
________________________

I’ll comment on the conclusion of the essay with my red insertions:

Conclusion

Much as critics and defenders of the Book of Mormon would like to use DNA studies to support their views, the evidence is simply inconclusive. [To the contrary; this essay has told us that it “seems clear” that it is “likely” that Book of Mormon people were such a small group that any evidence of them has vanished. They were completely absorbed by Mayans with Asian DNA.]

Nothing is known about the DNA of Book of Mormon peoples. [Nothing? We know they were descendants of Hebrew ancestors, at a minimum. They didn’t come from Japan, or Africa, or Western Europe. They left Jerusalem, where their ancestors had lived since the Exodus from Egypt. We can follow the migrations of Jews around the world. I doubt many investigators accept the essay’s reasoning here.]

Even if such information were known, processes such as population bottleneck, genetic drift, and post-Columbian immigration from West Eurasia make it unlikely that their DNA could be detected today. [Now we’ve persuaded ourselves that it is unlikely to find Lehi’s DNA among his descendants?]

As Elder Dallin H. Oaks of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles observed, “It is our position that secular evidence can neither prove nor disprove the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.”29 [I think this is also true of the Bible and the other scriptures. It’s not proof we seek–it’s plausibility and congruence between what we teach and what the scriptures teach. If we’re writing an essay about the Book of Mormon, shouldn’t we address what the text says instead of citing scholars who reject what Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith taught?]

Book of Mormon record keepers were primarily concerned with conveying religious truths and preserving the spiritual heritage of their people. They prayed that, in spite of the prophesied destruction of most of their people, their record would be preserved and one day help restore a knowledge of the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Their promise to all who study the book “with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ,” is that God “will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.”30 For countless individuals who have applied this test of the book’s authenticity, the Book of Mormon stands as a volume of sacred scripture with the power to bring them closer to Jesus Christ. [This is all awesome, except it omits a key point: the Book of Mormon was “Written to the Lamanites, who are a remnant of the house of Israel.” This entire Gospel Topics essay is dedicated to the premise that if there are any Lamanites left, their genetics were completely erased by the Mayan civilization they encountered. To paraphrase the essay, it seems clear that this notion is inconsistent with the text.]
________________________

With all of this in mind, put yourself in the position of a missionary. Your investigator asks the DNA question. You refer to the Gospel Topics essay (which you don’t really understand) and say that the DNA evidence cannot prove or disprove the Book of Mormon. You don’t realize it, but the investigator has done some research on the Internet, or talked to his/her minister or fellow Christians.

Investigator: “I’ve read the essay. It says the Book of Mormon took place in Central America and that all the Nephites and Lamanites became Mayans.”

Missionary: “It does? I mean, yeah, that’s right. Look at the paintings in the copy I gave you. Right there, Christ is visiting the Mayans.”

Investigator: “But Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery said the Hill Cumorah is in New York.”

Alternative 1.

Missionary (trained by LDS scholars and educators): “Yeah, well, they were just speculating. They were wrong.”

Investigator: “I see. It has been nice meeting you, but maybe you shouldn’t come again.”

Alternative 2.

Missionary (trained at BYU): “Yeah, well, they were just speculating. Cumorah can be anywhere you want it to be. We have this map you can stretch in any direction.”

Investigator: “I see. It has been nice meeting you, but maybe you shouldn’t come again.”

Alternative 3.

Missionary (trained by reading Letter VII and the words of the prophets and apostles): “Yeah, and it is in New York.”

Investigator: “I see. Then why does this essay and the illustrations in your own book say it all took place in Central America?”

Missionary: “Because the scholars haven’t read or don’t believe Letter VII and the prophets and apostles, but I’m not here to teach what scholars say.”

Investigator: “Tell me more.”

Source: Book of Mormon Wars

August 10, 2017Uncategorized

The missionaries are defenseless – Part 1 – Geography

I’m concerned about how missionaries are handling the common questions about the Book of Mormon.

Missionaries (lds.org)

I love the missionaries, and I love missionary work. I go on splits with the missionaries in our stake and I try to follow what’s happening elsewhere. I talk to returned missionaries, read their blogs, etc.

We all know how difficult it is to prepare teenagers to go on missions. Some are more ready than others. In many cases, missionaries encounter questions in the field they’ve never been asked before.

Often their own Mission President doesn’t want them to answer or even discuss these questions.

Now of course the missionaries are not “defenseless” in the broad sense of the term. They have the Lord with them. They are protected, as we all know, and the Spirit guides and directs them, touches the hearts of the people they meet, etc. But they are defenseless when it comes to answering and even discussing some of the most common questions they get from investigators and former Mormons.

And instead of being defenseless, they could be using these questions to bring people to Christ.

__________________

Before addressing these questions, I need to review the background from which missionaries come.

More and more I’m hearing from people afflicted with Mesomania that the geography doesn’t matter. “People either get a spiritual testimony of the Book of Mormon or they don’t,” the reasoning goes, “and geography has nothing to do with it.”

In fact, that’s sort of the rationale for the disastrous BYU “abstract” video-game map that puts the Book of Mormon into a fantasy setting. At BYU now, the setting for the Book of Mormon is wherever you want it to be, so long as you can pull and stretch it from an interpretation driven by Mesomania.

I think we all know the writing is on the wall: the Mesoamerican theory (and all non-New York Cumorah theories, aka “two-Cumorahs” theories) are dead men walking.

Proponents of these theories will increasingly claim that the geography doesn’t matter because that’s the easiest way for them to minimize their cognitive dissonance, but that approach is exactly what is causing missionaries so much trouble.

The geography issue is directly linked to the history issue, which boils down to whether or not you accept Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, and David Whitmer as credible and reliable witnesses. As more LDS people become fully informed and aware of the issues, fewer and fewer are sticking with Mesoamerica.*

It is to prevent fully informed decisions that FairMormon, BYU Studies, Book of Mormon Central, the Interpreter, Meridian Magazine and the rest [aka, the Conclave]** refuse to educate the Saints about Church history and the alternatives to the Mesoamerican/two-Cumorahs theories. For the same reason, BYU uses an “abstract” map instead of teaching students what Joseph and Oliver taught.

How does this affect the missionaries?

______________________

Missionaries relate that two of the most common questions people ask are, “Where did the Book of Mormon take place?” and “What about the DNA?”

These are natural questions for anyone who reads the Book of Mormon.

The question of setting arises as soon as people read about Lehi leaving Jerusalem.

Despite their natural curiosity, some people don’t care about the setting. They accept the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon on its face. They don’t even want to think about the geography issue lest it raise questions that don’t have answers.

This is basic psychology, and it’s true of adherents to every religion and nonreligion. On my first mission, I met Catholics every day who said they had their religion and they didn’t want to know about mine, even when they didn’t know what their church taught or didn’t believe it when they did.

Most people resist ideas that might cause them to change. That’s what makes missionary work difficult. (Google “people resist change” to see explanations for why people resist change.)

Lots of LDS people–maybe the majority of active LDS–are also in this category.

This is why BYU’s “abstract” map works. It’s easy and familiar to students raised on video game fantasy worlds. Apparently most students don’t know or care about the implications of thinking of the Book of Mormon in a fictional setting that teaches Joseph and Oliver were mistaken.
_________________

Resistance to change is a wall. It keeps most people safely inside the traditions they grew up within and protects them from outside challenges and threats. Only a few members of a community climb the wall and venture outside. Some return, but others are never seen again.

Every person a missionary meets is surrounded by such a wall of varying height. The wall is built of bricks such as inertia, uncertainty, loss of control, defensiveness, peer pressure, etc.

Christian ministers recognize the threat of Mormonism. The wall between traditional Christianity and Mormonism is lower because of common beliefs in the Bible and in Christ.

For that reason, anyone who attends a Christian church has probably been told to ask Mormon missionaries these questions. I’ve seen it in their ministry materials. I’ve been with the missionaries when these questions were asked, and I’ve had them tell me about other times when people ask these questions.

_________________

Let’s look at the first common question missionaries get and the natural follow-ups.

“Where did the Book of Mormon take place?”

If you’re a missionary, how do you answer? Something along these lines:

1. We don’t know.

2. The Lord has not revealed it yet.

3. Central America (based on the artwork in the Book of Mormon they gave the investigator).
4. Mesoamerica (if they’ve been educated by the Conclave).
5. Wherever you want it to be, aka Fantasyland (if they’ve been educated at BYU recently).

An investigator who has been prepped (or who has read the Introduction) will ask, “Isn’t the Hill Cumorah in New York?”

If you’re a missionary, how do you answer? Something along these lines:

1. We don’t know.

2. The Lord has not revealed it yet.

3. (If educated by the Conclave or at BYU recently) That was a false tradition started by unknown early Saints and embraced by Joseph Smith for a while, but then he changed his mind and said it was up to scholars to figure out.

An investigator who has been prepared by any of numerous Christian ministries will ask, “Didn’t Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery say the Hill Cumorah is in New York? Don’t you accept them as prophets? And what about all the other prophets and apostles who have affirmed that, including in General Conference?”

If you’re a missionary, how do you answer? Something along these lines:

1. Yes, but… I’m sorry, could you repeat the question?

2. Yes, but… I’m sorry, I’m not sure about Oliver Cowdery. I’ll have to get back to you on that.

3. (If educated by the Conclave or at BYU recently) That was just Oliver’s opinion. Like Joseph, he embraced a false tradition started by unknown early Saints. Our modern scholars know better than Joseph and Oliver did. Plus, every speaker in General Conference who affirmed the New York Cumorah was expressing his own opinion and was wrong.

You get the idea. Missionaries are defenseless when they encounter these questions.

I’m told that in many areas, they have been instructed to drop investigators who pursue this line of questioning.

To me, these sound like honest, sincere, reasonable (and inevitable) questions anyone would have when they read the Book of Mormon and Church history. The Christian ministries don’t have to make up quotes to cause trouble; they simply cite our own history.

Eliminating investigators who have these questions serves only to restrict the pool of potential converts. Apparently, that’s a risk many Mission Presidents are willing to take because they, themselves, can’t answer the questions and they want to protect the missionaries from entertaining these questions when investigators pose them.

Here’s the tragic part: the answers provided by our LDS scholars and educators raise more warning flags than the investigators (and missionaries) had already.

Even missionaries find it difficult to accept the idea that Joseph and Oliver were honest, credible and reliable about everything except this one detail: the New York location of the Hill Cumorah.

(Actually, most members find it difficult to accept that idea, too. Most just are ignorant of the facts, thanks to the Conclave.)

When we have situations where investigators and former Mormons are asking missionaries questions that the missionaries have never asked themselves, and the missionaries have no viable answers, where does that leave the missionaries?

Is telling them to drop the investigators who have these questions a viable long-term solution?

Or is this approach contributing to the 40% of returned missionaries that leave the Church or go inactive within three years of coming home?

_____________________

Tomorrow I’ll post comments about the second common question.
_____________________

*(Recap: If you still believe in the Mesoamerican, “two-Cumorahs” setting, you are taking the position that (i) Joseph and Oliver were ignorant speculators who misled the Church about the location of Cumorah, (ii) we should trust modern LDS scholars and educators more than Joseph and all of his contemporaries and successors, and (iii) we can’t even rely on General Conference talks when they contradict what our LDS scholars and educators are teaching now.)

**Collectively, I’ve labeled these the “citation cartel” in the past. I’ve agreed to stop calling them this if they can provide another term for the collective, but so far they haven’t. I don’t want to call them the Borg. I don’t know a non-pejorative term for Groupthink, but if anyone has one, I’d be happy to use it instead. For now, I’ll call them the “Conclave.”

Source: Book of Mormon Wars

August 9, 2017Uncategorized

Good things Book of Mormon Central has done

If not for their Mesomania, Book of Mormon Central (BOMC) would be a wonderful web page.

Because of their Mesomania, BOMC is unreliable; i.e., contrary to the Church’s position of neutrality, BOMC continues to promote exclusively one theory of Book of Mormon geography, which unfortunately includes the “two-Cumorahs” theory which is based on the premise that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were ignorant speculators who misled the Church about Cumorah being in New York. Mesomania infects BOMC’s editorial choices throughout the web page, their selection of articles for their archive, etc.

Despite their Mesomania, however, BOMC has some excellent resources that I encourage people to use in their studies. Most important, they provide access to Royal Skousen’s invaluable work on the Book of Mormon text.

https://bookofmormoncentral.org/content/book-mormon-earliest-text

https://bookofmormoncentral.org/content/analysis-textual-variants-book-mormon

Here’s an example. This “KnoWhy” includes a phenomenal graphic:

https://knowhy.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/why-does-the-book-of-ether-begin-with-such-a-long-genealogy

Here’s the graphic:

https://knowhy.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/why-does-the-book-of-ether-begin-with-such-a-long-genealogy

Other KnoWhys are less useful because of Mesomania.

For example, this one.

https://knowhy.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/why-were-three-key-witnesses-chosen-to-testify-of-the-book-of-mormon

BOMC’s Mesomania relies on the premise that Oliver Cowdery, Joseph Smith, and David Whitmer misled the Church for over 100 years by claiming Cumorah was in New York. According to BOMC, modern LDS scholars know better than Joseph, Oliver and David. In my view, BOMC does more to undermine the reliability and credibility of these men than anyone else, because BOMC purports to represent the best of LDS scholarship on the Book of Mormon.

This is all to say, definitely use some of the resources of BOMC, but be careful. Very careful, just as you should be when you consult FairMormon, BYU Studies, the Interpreter, etc.

Source: Book of Mormon Concensus

August 8, 2017Uncategorized

Whatever Happened update – plates

I made a change in the book, Whatever Happened to the Golden Plates? It pertains to pages 162-3.

A lot of people have been asking me whether the Three Witnesses and the Eight Witnesses saw the same set of plates.

There isn’t enough data to say one way or another. I’ve looked at this in several ways, and now I think it’s likely that both groups saw the Harmony plates, but not the plates of Nephi.

Plates “solid as wood”

In connection with the experience of the Three Witnesses, David Whitmer said part of the plates were “solid as wood,” which has generally been understood to mean he was describing the sealed portion.

That’s how the plates are portrayed in Church media and visitors centers, such as this example from the Priesthood Restoration site.

However, readers of Whatever Happened know that I think the Harmony plates, “the Original Book of Mormon” as Joseph put it, included a compartment that contained the Nephite interpreters or spectacles. Presumably it was made of metal like the plates. It would appear “solid as wood” to David Whitmer, who, like the other Three Witnesses, did not handle the plates when the angel showed them. (Although later in life, they each said they did handle the plates, which is one reason why I think they handled them when they were moving them from Mormon’s depository in the Hill Cumorah.)

The Eight Witnesses didn’t see an angel, but they did handle the plates. They didn’t provide detailed descriptions, with one exception.

Joseph Smith, Sr., was one of the Eight Witnesses. He said that under the first plate, or lid, Joseph found a pair of spectacles. From this I infer there was a compartment in the set of plates for the spectacles. While it’s possible Joseph Sr. observed plates on another occasion, there is no evidence of that. If the only time he saw the plates was with the other seven of the eight witnesses, then he could only have known about the compartment on that occasion (unless someone else described the compartment to him on another occasion, which seems unlikely).

This makes sense for a few reasons.

First, Joseph already had the Fayette plates (the plates of Nephi) with him in Fayette. It wouldn’t make sense for the angel to come get the Fayette plates from him just to show them to the Three Witnesses a short distance away. Possible, but unlikely.

Second, no one mentions Joseph using the spectacles in Fayette. He used them in Harmony only, so far as we can tell. (Some LDS historians claim Joseph didn’t use the spectacles after the 116 pages were lost, but his mother says he used them when he got the message to contact David Whitmer, near the end of the Harmony translation period.) It’s possible Joseph had the spectacles in Fayette and just didn’t use them, but if he didn’t have them in Fayette, it was because there was no compartment in the plates of Nephi to hold them.

Third, the scriptural instructions about the witnesses point to the abridged plates, not the plates of Nephi.

Ether 5:

1 And now I, Moroni, have written the words which were commanded me, according to my memory; and I have told you the things which I have sealed up; therefore touch them not in order that ye may translate; for that thing is forbidden you, except by and by it shall be wisdom in God.

2 And behold, ye may be privileged that ye may show the plates unto those who shall assist to bring forth this work;

3 And unto three shall they be shown by the power of God; wherefore they shall know of a surety that these things are true.

4 And in the mouth of three witnesses shall these things be established; and the testimony of three, and this work, in the which shall be shown forth the power of God and also his word, of which the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost bear record—and all this shall stand as a testimony against the world at the last day.

From this, we see that the three witnesses would be shown the plates Moroni was responsible for; i.e., the plates his father gave him, plus the ones he wrote. So they definitely saw the Harmony plates.

Nephi also prophesied about the 3 witnesses, as well as “a few according to the will of God,” which apparently refers to the 8 witnesses. [BTW, it’s interesting that both Moroni and Nephi say the 3 witnesses would behold it “by the power of God,” but the additional witnesses would view the record “according to the will of God.” That’s exactly how it played out; i.e., an angel showed the plates to the 3 witnesses, but Joseph showed the plates to the 8 witnesses without any divine power or manifestation involved.]

Nephi’s prophecy is fascinating because he refers to “a book” as a separate document from the one he is writing. Nowhere does he say “this book.” Instead, it is “a book” that shall be delivered to Joseph. He never connects his own writing, or at least his own plates, to this “book” that would be delivered to Joseph. That’s because the “Original Book of Mormon” as described by the Title Page consisted solely of abridgments and Moroni’s final words that sealed the book.

The only reason we have the plates of Nephi–the Fayette plates–is because Martin Harris lost the 116 pages of the Book of Lehi. If Martin had lost, say, the pages in which Mormon abridged the account of King Benjamin, the divine messenger could have gone into the depository at Cumorah and obtained the original records of that period.

To be sure, Nephi does address “all ye ends of the earth” in 2 Nephi 33:10. This makes sense because he expected his words to be read among his people until their final destruction. In 2 Nephi 32:6, he explains that his people should follow the doctrine of Christ “until he shall manifest himself unto you in the flesh.” At that point, he tells his people, “the things which he shall say unto you shall ye observe to do.”

Nephi gives no indication I can find that he expected his original writings to be published in the book that would be delivered to Joseph Smith.

Nevertheless, there are two ways in which Nephi’s words would have been published to the world even if Martin hadn’t lost the 116 pages.

First, Nephi’s words would likely, if not surely, have been included in Mormon’s abridgment, just like his quotations of King Benjamin, Alma, etc. If/when we ever recover the 116 pages, we may find quotations from Nephi.

Second, all the Nephite records will some day come forth and be published to the world, which would include the original plates of Nephi along with others.

There are a lot more interesting things in Nephi I hope to discuss soon.

Here is what Nephi had to say about the witnesses.

2 Nephi 27:

6 And it shall come to pass that the Lord God shall bring forth unto you the words of a book, and they shall be the words of them which have slumbered.

7 And behold the book shall be sealed; and in the book shall be a revelation from God, from the beginning of the world to the ending thereof.

8 Wherefore, because of the things which are sealed up, the things which are sealed shall not be delivered in the day of the wickedness and abominations of the people. Wherefore the book shall be kept from them.

9 But the book shall be delivered unto a man, and he shall deliver the words of the book, which are the words of those who have slumbered in the dust, and he shall deliver these words unto another…

12 Wherefore, at that day when the book shall be delivered unto the man of whom I have spoken, the book shall be hid from the eyes of the world, that the eyes of none shall behold it save it be that three witnesses shall behold it, by the power of God, besides him to whom the book shall be delivered; and they shall testify to the truth of the book and the things therein.

13 And there is none other which shall view it, save it be a few according to the will of God, to bear testimony of his word unto the children of men; for the Lord God hath said that the words of the faithful should speak as if it were from the dead…

2 Nephi 28:2 And the things which shall be written out of the book shall be of great worth unto the children of men, and especially unto our seed, which is a remnant of the house of Israel.

Source: Book of Mormon Wars

August 8, 2017Uncategorized

Letter VII Background

For new readers (and old) I prepared this brief background on Letter VII that you can use to explain to other people.
___________

Letter VII background

With the assistance of Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery wrote a series of eight letters about the early history of the Church. They were initially published in the Messenger and Advocate in 1834-1835. Part of Letter I is included in the Pearl of Great Price. Letter VII is especially noteworthy because it declares it is a fact that the Hill Cumorah in New York was the scene of the final battles of the Jaredites and the Nephites. Letter VII also specifies that Mormon’s depository was located in the same hill, a teaching later reaffirmed by Brigham Young, Wilford Woodruff, Heber C. Kimball, Orson Pratt, and others.

Shortly after the letters were published, Joseph directed his scribes to copy all eight letters into his personal history (History, 1834-1836, found at http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1834-1836/83).

In 1840, Orson Pratt reprinted portions of the letters (including Letter VII) in his pamphlet, “A[n] Interesting Account of Several Remarkable Visions.” Joseph later adapted portions of this pamphlet when he wrote the Wentworth Letter in March 1842, although he replaced Pratt’s hemispheric concept with the simple statement that “The remnant are the Indians that now inhabit this country.”

Joseph desired that all members of the Church be aware of these letters. In the fall of 1840, Joseph gave them to his brother, Don Carlos, to reprint in the Times and Seasons. Letter VII was published in the April, 1841, edition of the Times and Seasons. Also in 1840, Joseph gave permission to Benjamin Winchester to reprint the letters in the Gospel Reflector, Winchester’s Mormon newspaper in Philadelphia. All eight letters were printed as a special edition of the Gospel Reflector in March 1841.

Responding to strong demand, the eight letters were reprinted as a pamphlet in England in February 1844.

Beginning in May 1844, The Prophet newspaper reprinted the letters in New York City. William Smith reprinted Letter VII on June 29, 1844—two days after the martyrdom.

All eight letters were reprinted in the Millennial Star and the Improvement Era. All of Joseph’s contemporaries and successors accepted Letter VII’s teachings about the Hill Cumorah in New York.

However, beginning in the 1920s, RLDS scholars reassessed the Book of Mormon and decided the narrative took place in a limited area of Central America. This meant that Cumorah, too, was actually somewhere in Southern Mexico. LDS scholars gradually adopted the same rationale.

Alarmed at the development, Joseph Fielding Smith, then Church Historian and an Apostle for 20 years, declared:

“This modernistic theory of necessity, in order to be consistent, must place the waters of Ripliancum and the Hill Cumorah some place within the restricted territory of Central America, notwithstanding the teachings of the Church to the contrary for upwards of 100 years. Because of this theory some members of the Church have become confused and greatly disturbed in their faith in the Book of Mormon.”

When he was President of the Quorum of the Twelve, Joseph Fielding Smith reissued his warning about the two-Cumorahs theory. However, LDS scholars and educators rejected his counsel, claiming it was merely his opinion and their own ideas were correct. Even now, in 2017, LDS scholars and educators actively teach that Joseph and Oliver were ignorant speculators who misled the Church about Cumorah being in New York. They teach that Joseph adopted a false tradition about Cumorah, and that all the Prophets and Apostles who reaffirmed the teaching of Letter VII were also expressing personal opinions—even when they spoke in General Conference.

The influence of these scholars permeates the Church. The two-Cumorahs theory is now being taught at BYU (where it is an integral component of the required Book of Mormon classes), in CES, and in Visitors Centers throughout the Church. Unlike in Joseph’s day, few Church members even know about Letter VII.

As President Smith warned, the two-Cumorahs theory has led many thousands of members of the Church—especially the youth—to lose their faith. It is an obstacle many investigators cannot overcome. The tragedy is Joseph and Oliver answered this question all the way back in 1835 and yet LDS scholars reject them.

Source: Letter VII

August 7, 2017Uncategorized

FairMormon conference wrap-up

Everything went about as I expected at the FairMormon conference.

And those attending BYU Education Week are going to hear the same things.

As are incoming BYU students.

So it’s time to get real.

By now, it is clear that FairMormon rejects the Church’s policy of neutrality on Book of Mormon geography. They steadfastly refuse to let their readers know (i) what Joseph and Oliver taught about the Hill Cumorah, (ii) that there are many members of the Church who accept what Joseph and Oliver taught, and (iii) that there is a coherent, detailed description of Book of Mormon geography based on the New York Cumorah.

Instead, our friends at FairMormon and BYU adamantly promote their two-Cumorahs/Mesoamerican theory and they just as adamantly reject what Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith taught about the New York Cumorah.

I don’t think FairMormon will ever be honest about the geography issue because few if any members of the Church will knowingly accept their premise that Joseph and Oliver were ignorant speculators who misled the Church about Cumorah being in New York.
____________________

FairMormon and BYU scholars explain away Letter VII by claiming it was merely “Oliver Cowdery’s opinion.”

Think about that for a moment. I’ll explain it in more detail below, after this graphic that summarizes what every BYU student is now going to have to learn. Whenever you see this map, you should think of what it represents.

This “abstract” map teaches that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were ignorant speculators who misled the Church about Cumorah being in New York.

The promoters of this abstract or fantasy map claim it accommodates any theory of Book of Mormon geography because you can pull and stretch it in any direction. That’s a ruse, of course, because the entire map is based on the Mesomania interpretation of the text. Any map, abstract or otherwise, that does not put Cumorah in New York is rejecting Oliver and Joseph.

There are really only two choices. Either Cumorah is in New York where Oliver and Joseph said it was, or… does it really matter where else Cumorah could be if it’s in a fantasy land as this BYU map portrays?

I reject the premise of an abstract map in principle on the grounds that it (i) rejects Joseph and Oliver and (ii) is entirely subjective. One glance at the BYU map and we see that it was created by using interpretations designed to fit Mesoamerica.

In fact, I’ll freely stipulate that the Mesomania interpretations of the text don’t fit with a New York Cumorah. Those interpretations are subjective and designed retroactively to fit the Mesoamerican theory. Think of what a Bible map would look like using this methodology without any reference to the real world.

If we just heed what Joseph and Oliver taught, we have at least one pin in the real world: Cumorah in western New York. What we should be doing is using technology to figure out maps that support what Joseph and Oliver taught, instead of using technology to undermine faith in them.

It is unbelievable to me that any LDS scholar or educator would reject what Joseph and Oliver unambiguously declared. Their teaching about Cumorah was reprinted more often than the scriptures in Joseph’s day; no other writings were reprinted more frequently. Oliver’s letters were reprinted in full five times during Joseph’s lifetime, in addition to being recorded in Joseph’s personal history. Portions were quoted in other works. The Book of Mormon itself was only printed four times during Joseph’s lifetime (including once in England), and the Doctrine and Covenants was printed only once. The 1835 edition of the D&C, by the way, was printed just one month after Letter VII was printed for the first time. (The 1844 edition of the D&C was printed shortly after Joseph was killed, although he had proofed it in 1843.)
________________

Our LDS scholars and educators actually want people to believe that their opinions are more reliable and credible than the explicit statement of Oliver Cowdery that it was a fact that the final battles took place in the mile-wide valley west of the Hill Cumorah in New York.

Why should we believe Oliver and not our FairMormon and BYU friends?

Here are three reasons to consider.

1. Oliver and Joseph had actually been inside Mormon’s depository in the Hill Cumorah in New York. To be sure, our FairMormon and BYU friends will tell you that Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, Wilford Woodruff, Orson Pratt, and others, were also confused (or lying) about that, or were relating a vision of a hill in Mexico that multiple people shared on multiple occasions. But right in Letter VII, Oliver Cowdery himself declared that the depository was in the Hill Cumorah in New York. He spoke from personal experience, not from academic, result-oriented interpretation of the text.

2. When he wrote Letter VII, Oliver was the Assistant President of the Church. He was the only person who accompanied Joseph Smith for the restoration of the Aaronic and Melchizedek Priesthoods, and a few months after writing Letter VII, Oliver and Joseph received important keys from Moses, Elias, Elijah, and the Lord Himself. To say Oliver misled the Church about Cumorah feeds the anti-Mormon argument that Oliver is not reliable or credible or trustworthy.

3. Joseph Smith helped write Oliver’s letters. Shortly after they were published, he had his scribes copy them into his own history. You can read them in the Joseph Smith Papers in History, 1834-1836, here: http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1834-1836/83.

Our LDS scholars want people to believe Joseph changed his mind about Book of Mormon geography. They insist he, like Oliver, was an ignorant speculator who misled the Church about Cumorah being in New York. Let’s look at their claim.

Instead of changing his mind, Joseph endorsed the letters multiple times and did what he could to make sure every member of the Church had access to them.

Consider what Benjamin Winchester wrote in the first issue of the Gospel Reflector:

“I would here observe to the members of the church in this section of country, that I had it (as is well known) in contemplation last spring [1840] to publish O. Cowdery’s letters giving a history of the coming forth of The Book of Mormon and, connected, with them, other original matter, such as I had written myself, which I asked permission or advice of J. Smith who said I was at liberty to publish any thing of the kind that would further the cause of righteousness. I also asked advice of S. Rigdon, who said he had no objection.”

https://archive.org/details/GospelReflector1841

In Joseph Smith’s view, Oliver Cowdery’s letters “would further the cause of righteousness.”

But in the view of our FairMormon and BYU friends, these letters should not be read, cited, or even mentioned because they contradict the Mesoamerican and two-Cumorahs theories, as well as the imaginary abstract map based on those theories.

In the fall of 1840, Don Carlos reported that Joseph gave him these letters to publish in the Times and Seasons. Letter VII appears in the April 1841 edition.

As of 1840 and 1841, Joseph held the same view he always had; i.e., that Oliver’s letters, including Letter VII, were important for every member of the Church to read. Did Joseph change his mind after 1841?

In February 1844, a special pamphlet consisting of Oliver’s eight letters was published in England. The editors introduced the letters by writing, “We have frequently been solicited to publish, in pamphlet form, the following letters of Oliver Cowdery… We at last avail ourselves of the opportunity to do so, being fully assured that they will be read with great interest by the Saint generally; while from the peculiar work on which they treat, together with the spirit of truthfulness in which they are written…we have no doubt but that many of the honest-hearted may, by their perusal, be led to a further examination of those principles, the origin of which is therein set forth.”

https://archive.org/details/lettersbyoliverc00oliv

Our FairMormon and BYU friends have a different opinion; they think no members of the Church, let alone investigators, should even know about these letters, let alone read them.

Our LDS scholars and educators want us to believe that Joseph changed his mind about Cumorah once he read the Stevens and Catherwood books about Central America. I’ve shown elsewhere that there is no evidence Joseph ever read those books; the evidence we have is to the contrary. But even if he did read them, even if he did approve of them, did he change his mind about Cumorah in New York?

The October 1, 1842, Times and Seasons includes what is now D&C 128, in which Joseph referred to Cumorah in the context of the other sites in New York and Pennsylvania. Recall, this was not long after he had asked his brother Don Carlos to publish letter VII in the same newspaper.

Now, 18 months later, we have the pamphlet published in England in early 1844 that contains Letter VII. Maybe Joseph didn’t know about it. Maybe it was published without his approval, or even over his objection because by then he had “changed his mind.”

But for that argument to work, our LDS scholars and educators must also persuade us that Joseph didn’t know about the newspaper titled The Prophet that was first published in New York City in May 1844. Or, if they admit he did know about it, are they going to say Joseph knew nothing about how the Church leaders appointed his brother William Smith to edit the newspaper? Or that the first issue of The Prophet published Oliver’s Letter I? Or that each of the first eight issues of The Prophet published another of Oliver’s letters?

If Joseph didn’t know his brother William published Letter VII in the seventh issue, it was only because that issue was published in New York on June 29, just two days after Joseph was martyred in Carthage.

From these facts we see that, from the time Oliver first published Letter VII in 1835 through his martyrdom, Joseph both explicitly endorsed Letter VII and allowed others close to him to reprint it. He never changed his mind about the New York Cumorah.

How could he, when he had visited Mormon’s repository in that hill multiple times?

And, as I’ve mentioned, Letter VII was subsequently republished in the Millennial Star and the Improvement Era.

To be clear, it wasn’t until Mesomania took over our LDS scholars and educators that Letter VII was relegated to the amnesia bin of Church history.
______________________

Back to FairMormon.

We’ll know that FairMormon lives up to its purported adherence to Church policy about neutrality on Book of Mormon geography when it lets its readers know three things:

1. Letter VII exists.
2. Joseph endorsed it multiple times and saw that it was reprinted more than any other single account of Church history.
3. There is a detailed map based on the text that supports what Joseph and Oliver taught in Letter VII.

As I said at the outset, I don’t think FairMormon will ever be honest about these three items because few if any members of the Church will accept their premise that Joseph and Oliver were ignorant speculators who misled the Church about Cumorah being in New York.

This is why I think it is a big mistake for anyone who wants to study the Book of Mormon to go to FairMormon.

And, of course, Book of Mormon Central is even worse because their mission statement focuses on showing that the Book of Mormon is a Mesoamerican text. They don’t even pretend to be neutral.

The rest of the firemen, including BYU Studies, the Interpreter, and Meridian Magazine, are ideological clones of FairMormon and Book of Mormon Central. As with FairMormon, we can’t expect them to ever present a full and fair comparison of the different models of Book of Mormon geography because they know most Church members will reject their two-Cumorahs theory.

If you’re planning to attend BYU Education Week as I am, watch how these things are portrayed.

Source: Book of Mormon Wars

August 4, 2017Uncategorized

Fahrenheit 451

Ray Bradbury’s classic novel, Fahrenheit 451, describes a future dystopian society in which books are banned. In this society, “firemen” don’t put out fires; instead, they burn books.

I once attended lecture by Bradbury at UCLA. He spoke about writing this and other books, some of them on a manual typewriter he had to rent at the school’s library. The novel makes us think about the value of books and what we would lose if they were banned.

But it also makes us think about the role-reversal of firemen, or as we would say today, fire fighters.

I mentioned in a previous post that Church leaders have lots of fires to put out. While that’s true, it’s also true that each individual has plenty of fires to put out. There are fires, or potential fires, at every level of our lives: personal, family, work, government, physical, spiritual, moral… the list goes on.

Lots of fires to prevent and extinguish.

As King Benjamin taught in Mosiah 4,

29 And finally, I cannot tell you all the things whereby ye may commit sin; for there are divers ways and means, even so many that I cannot number them.

30 But this much I can tell you, that if ye do not watchyourselves, and your thoughts, and your words, and your deeds, and observe the commandments of God, and continue in the faith of what ye have heard concerning the coming of our Lord, even unto the end of your lives, ye must perish. And now, O man, remember, and perish not.

Because we’re so focused on preventing and extinguishing all these fires, we sometimes lose sight of who the arsonists are.

Fahrenheit 451 played with our expectations because we normally look at firefighters as protectors and life savers. Instead, in the novel, the firefighters caused the fires.

Think about this in the context of Church history and Book of Mormon historicity and geography.
_______________

It’s no secret that many members of the Church face challenges to their testimonies. I showed some of the fires that consume testimonies, taken from the graphic I posted the other day, including four that I focused on.

1. Book of Mormon not ancient.
2. Church lies about its history.
3. Poor apologetics backfire.
4. 19th century teachings have been silently abandoned.

Each of these is directly related to the “two-Cumorahs” and Mesoamerican theories because those theories, widely taught by LDS scholars and educators, require adherents to believe that Joseph and Oliver were ignorant speculators who misled the Church about Cumorah being in New York.

In my view, this is akin to the firefighters in Fahrenheit 451. The very people we trust to build faith are the ones who question the reliability and credibility of Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery.
_________________

Most LDS people who know about Letter VII and its context accept what Joseph and Oliver taught; i.e., that there was one Cumorah and it was in New York. Oliver said this was a fact. He also said Mormon’s depository of Nephite records was in the same hill.

And he should know, since he and Joseph visited that depository multiple times.

Unfortunately, unlike in Joseph’s lifetime, few LDS today have ever heard of Letter VII.

Why?

Because many LDS scholars and educators reject what Joseph and Oliver taught. In fact, our leading university, BYU, specifically rejects what Joseph and Oliver taught by requiring new students to learn the Book of Mormon with an abstract map that puts Cumorah in a fantasy land.

Letter VII is not only not in the curriculum, it is never even presented to the students.

If you have been taught at BYU, or if you have children attending or planning to attend, you should be aware of what’s going on there. Read and share Letter VII and the historical context. You don’t have to accept abstract maps or any other map that shows Cumorah somewhere other than in New York.

Source: Book of Mormon Wars

August 3, 2017Uncategorized

Letter VII published in New York on June 29, 1844

William Smith, Joseph’s brother, was the editor of The Prophet, a Mormon newspaper based in New York City. William republished Letter VII in the June 29, 1844, edition. This was two days after Joseph and Hyrum were martyred at the Carthage jail in Illinois.

The timing is purely coincidental, but it is an interesting historical fact that people in New York were reading Letter VII which explains that the Hill Cumorah is in New York right about the time that Joseph was sealing his testimony with his blood in Carthage.

News traveled slowly in those days. On June 29, 1844, L.O. Littlefield wrote a letter from Nauvoo describing what had happened in Carthage. He sent it to the Editor of The Prophet, but it wasn’t published until the July 27, 1844, issue.

The June 29th issue also announced that William Smith was the editor of The Prophet.
__________________

It’s interesting that the first issue of The Prophet, published in May 18, 1844, included Oliver’s Letter I. The paper showed how significant these letters were to members of the Church in Joseph’s day by introducing the letters with this statement:

“As the important particulars, and incidents, connected with the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, have ever been, and are now, subjects of enquiry, we shall insert, for the benefit of those who are not acquainted with the coming forth of the above named work, one of the following letters, each week until we are published.”

Each subsequent issue published another of his letters.

My point here is that although Oliver’s letters had been published four times already (1835 – Kirtland, 1841 – Nauvoo, 1841 – Philadelphia, and 1844 – England), the editor of The Prophet thought they were so important that he republished them yet again, this time in New York.

The June 29th issue happened to be issue no. 7, which is why it contained Letter VII.

A fascinating coincidence, isn’t it?
_______________

Some readers may not be familiar with The Prophet. Here is an explanation from the DVD that accompanies Susan Easton Black’s excellent book titled The Best of the Prophet.

The Latter-day Saint Experience in the East, 1844–1845
Susan Easton Black

The Prophet is the key to understanding the Latter-day Saint experience in the East from 1844 to 1845. Although only one volume of newsprint, the newspaper contains fifty-two issues, spanning four pages in length, with each page divided into five columns. This translates into approximately twenty-five hundred single-spaced pages on 8½” x 11″ paper. And the masthead of the first weekly issue¹ on Saturday, May 18, 1844, proudly proclaimed, “We Contend for the Truth.” From the eighth issue on Saturday, July 6, 1844, to the final issue on Saturday, May 24, 1845, the proclamation was revised to include “Devoted to the Dissemination of Truth, Moral, Religious, Political, and Scientific.”²

^{Editors of The Prophet printed an unrelenting defense of Mormonism to counteract exaggerated reports and slanderous claims stemming from Hancock County, Illinois, and printed in eastern newspapers. Editors George T. Leach, William Smith, Samuel Brannan, and Parley P. Pratt confronted politicians, newspaper columnists, and even the governor of Illinois on statements that misrepresented Mormon faith and vilified discipleship. In contrast, they wrote in glowing terms of Joseph Smith and the thousands of Mormons gathered on the banks of the Mississippi in the Zion-like society of Nauvoo. They wrote words of encouragement to fellow believers in the East who were planning to migrate to the Illinois capital of Mormonism.}
^{Here is an excerpt from the book, pages 7-8}

[William] Smith wrote to Leach (the founder of The Prophet) on June 3, 1844, “I mentioned to them [Church leaders in Nauvoo] concerning yoru publishing a paper in New York, and the Prophet bid it God speed: the council also sanctioned it by a loud and general vote, so ‘go ahead’ and do the best you can–which I have no doubt you will do–and the rest I will tell you when I get there.”

…

With John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff engaged in publishing the Times and Seasons [in Nauvoo], Church leaders believed that a man equal to their apostolic status was needed to fill the editorship of The Prophet. Since William Smith was already serving a mission in the East, having been called on April 19, 1843, the choice seemed obvious. Church leaders met with Smith in May 1844 to ascertain his interest in being named editor of The Prophet. With the approbation of his brother Joseph and fellow members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, Smith agreed to take the helm of The Prophet.

^{_____________}

¹Two weekly printings of The Prophet were missed—October 26, 1844, and May 17, 1845.

²“Masthead,” The Prophet 1, no. 1 (May 18, 1844): p. 1, col. 1. Editors William Smith and Samuel Brannan added a scriptural caveat to the masthead: “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the Prophets” (Amos 3:7). See “Surely the Lord God . . .” The Prophet 1, no. 8 (July 6, 1844): p. 1, col. 1.

Source: Letter VII

August 3, 2017Uncategorized

If BYU believed Joseph and Oliver… some FAQs

In the previous post, I pointed out the difference between fantasy and real-world maps. Here I answer FAQs about what’s going on at BYU.
___________________

Question: Why does BYU now require every student to learn a fantasy map of the Book of Mormon?

Answer: Because BYU refuses to accept the clear, unambiguous declaration by Joseph and Oliver about the Hill Cumorah being in New York. They explained it in Letter VII, which you can read about here. BYU doesn’t even want students to know about Letter VII.

Question: Why does BYU reject Letter VII?

Answer: Because BYU wants students to believe that Joseph and Oliver were confused speculators who misled the Church about Cumorah being in New York. BYU wants students to believe everything Joseph and Oliver taught except what they taught about the location of the Hill Cumorah.

Question: Why does BYU question the reliability and credibility of Joseph and Oliver?

Answer: Because BYU’s fantasy map of Book of Mormon geography has no place for what Joseph and Oliver taught about the real Cumorah in New York.

You can see the full map here: http://bom.byu.edu/

Question: Why does this fantasy map look like Central America, except turned 90 degrees?

Answer: Because BYU used the standard Mesomania interpretation of the Book of Mormon, with a north-flowing River Sidon, a narrow neck that is an isthmus, etc. However, BYU doesn’t allow the teaching of Mesomania any longer. Instead, they created a fantasy map that resembles Central America, but is not an actual place anywhere on the planet. They made it “real” by assuming north = north. Otherwise, it’s basically the same Mesoamerican map that BYU has taught for decades. We can be glad that at least they’re not saying North = East like the Mesomania proponents still do. But that’s the only real-world element of this fantasy map.

Question: What are the short-term ramifications of BYU teaching a fantasy map?

Answer: In the short-term, it appears that most first-year students at BYU will accept whatever they’re taught in BYU religion classes because (i) they assume their teachers are approved by the Brethren and only teach truth, (ii) they want to pass classes, (iii) they are more focused on their majors, (iv) they don’t know Church history (i.e., Letter VII and the teachings of all of Joseph’s contemporaries and successors), and (v) they don’t have time/interest to focus on the Book of Mormon so they let their teachers tell them what to think. But there are some BYU students who recognize that teaching the Book of Mormon took place in a fantasy, video-game world is equivalent to teaching that the Book of Mormon is fiction. And there are a few BYU students who know about Letter VII and reject this fantasy map concept.

Question: What are the long-term ramifications of BYU teaching a fantasy map?

Answer: At some point, whether as missionaries or while dealing with co-workers/friends/family who have left the Church or otherwise challenge their testimonies, BYU students will learn what Joseph and Oliver actually taught about Cumorah in New York in Letter VII. They will think back on the fantasy map they were taught at BYU and experience cognitive dissonance between fantasy and reality. Some will live with the cognitive dissonance by ignoring it, putting it “on the shelf,” etc. Others will seek to resolve the cognitive dissonance by questioning everything they were taught by their religion professors. Some will begin to wonder why they’re supposed to believe everything Joseph and Oliver taught except this one point about the Hill Cumorah. For some, this fantasy map will become a crack in their testimony that will widen and lead them away from the Church. They will become part of the statistics that 40% of returned missionaries are leaving the Church. Others–hopefully the majority–will recognize this fantasy map for what it is–a manifestation of Mesomania ideology–and reject it in favor of what Joseph and Oliver actually taught.

Question: How can I learn more about what BYU is doing?

Answer: There is a helpful interview about the fantasy map here:

http://www.ldsperspectives.com/2017/08/02/book-mormon-geography/

Here are some observations about quotations from the interview:

“that will help bring the scriptures to life in a way that is historically accurate, “

Except there is zero historical accuracy with the Book of Mormon being placed in a fantasy world, especially when the actual history of Cumorah, explained in Letter VII, is censored.

“we can make their road to learning a little less bumpy, a little more exciting, and a little more real and relevant.”

A map of a fantasy world is definitely “a little more exciting” than the real world, but it is the opposite of “more real and relevant.” It turns the Book of Mormon into a fantasy book of wisdom, equivalent to the Lord of the Rings.

“If somebody finds something in their reading that says, “Oh, my goodness, this location can’t be there where they’ve got on the map.” Give us feedback, we can make version 40.”

Unless, of course, your reading involves what Joseph and Oliver said. No version of this fantasy map will ever include what Joseph and Oliver actually taught about Cumorah.

Source: Book of Mormon Wars

August 3, 2017Uncategorized

Fantasy vs real-world maps of the scriptures

For an excellent contrast between fantasy and reality, look at what BYU is doing.

There is a wonderful map of the scriptures that integrates the text with Google Maps. It puts a pin on the map for every location mentioned in the scriptures. Here’s a screen shot from Matthew, Chapter 2.

You can try it yourself: http://scriptures.byu.edu/mapscrip/

I encourage you to check it out. I can’t recommend it enough. The BYU team did an amazing job. It’s very helpful for many reasons if you’re studying the Bible or the Doctrine and Covenants.

For some reason, though, the Book of Mormon isn’t integrated with Google Maps.

I even went to Mormon 6:6, but there is no pin on Google Maps for Cumorah.

Seems strange, doesn’t it?

Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith told us exactly where Cumorah was–in western New York. If you travel south from Palmyra, along the road to Canandaigua, you pass the hill before arriving at Manchester.

They explained that the final battles of the Jaredites (involving merely thousands) and the final battles of the Nephites (involving tens of thousands) took place in the mile-wide valley west of Cumorah. They even cited what is now Mormon 6:6 when they explained that Mormon’s depository of Nephite records was in the same hill in New York.

You can read the description of Cumorah’s location right in Joseph’s history, 1834-1836, here, in the Joseph Smith Papers: http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1834-1836/90.

It’s also known as Letter VII.

Here’s what the map would look like if BYU didn’t reject what Joseph and Oliver taught: