Author: Jonathan Neville

It’s not even in disguise.

They outright refuse to show any alternatives to their Central America theory of Book of Mormon geography.

BookofMormonCentral is a sham, basically.

I’ve done everything I know of to try to work with them and encourage them to at least let people know there are alternatives to their Central American theories, but without success. They are intransigent.

They are teaching the world–including the youth of the Church–the following:

1. There are two Cumorahs: Mormon’s Cumorah in southern Mexico (Mormon 6:6), and what they consider to be the “fake Cumorah” in New York, which was mistakenly named by unknown early Church members and is now known to the citation cartel as Moroni’s Cumorah. The idea that the hill in New York is the Cumorah 6:6 is a false tradition. You can see this on display in the North Visitors Center on Temple Square today.

2. Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery misled the Church about Cumorah being in New York for a century. It was only RLDS scholars, whose work was adopted by LDS scholars, who taught the truth about Cumorah being in Southern Mexico.

3. Although he was Church Historian and a 20-year member of the Quorum of the Twelve, Joseph Fielding Smith was speaking as a man and also misled the Church when he denounced the two-Cumorahs theory. He continued to mislead the Church when he repeated his warning about the two-Cumorahs theory when he was President of the Quorum of the Twelve.

4. Members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve who, in General Conference addresses, identified the New York hill as the site of the final battles of the Nephites and Jaredites were also misleading the Church.

5. Joseph Smith merely speculated about Book of Mormon geography. He changed his mind later in life and relied on scholars to figure out where the events took place. In D&C 128 he was referring to an unknown hill in Mexico.

6. D&C 28, 30, and 32 reflect a quaint folk belief among early Church members that the Indians were Lamanites. The real Lamanites are in Central America.

I could go on, but you get the picture.

All of this leads to my title, taken from Jacob 6.

8. Behold, will ye reject these words? Will ye reject the words of the prophets…

12 O be wise; what can I say more?

[This is cross-posted from lettervii.com, here: http://www.lettervii.com/2017/01/why-some-people-reject-letter-vii.html]

Since I published my commentary on Letter VII (Letter VII: Oliver Cowdery’s Message to the World about the Hill Cumorah, here), there have been several efforts to persuade members of the Church to disbelieve what Oliver Cowdery wrote about the Hill Cumorah being in New York.

Before I get to the objections, consider these aspects of Oliver’s letters. Part of Letter I is included in the Pearl of Great Price. Oliver’s letters give us the first quotations of what Moroni told Joseph. They give us the first account of John the Baptist conferring the Priesthood. They give us the first detailed accounts of most of what happened when Joseph found the plates. They were written with Joseph’s assistance and reproduced multiple times in Joseph’s day at his personal direction.

Until I started encouraging people to read Letter VII, the main objection to these letters was from anti-Mormons who said Joseph and Oliver made up everything so we shouldn’t believe these letters. Now, we have LDS scholars and educators telling us not to believe them, all because of the New York Cumorah statements in Letter VII.

The Objections to Letter VII.

1. The first objection is that Joseph and Oliver never had a revelation about the Hill Cumorah. This one relies on a couple of logical fallacies, but at its heart is the idea that Joseph and Oliver were merely speculating about the location of Cumorah, that they were wrong, and that they thereby misled the Church for a century, so much so that every one of their contemporaries, including all of Joseph’s successors as Presidents of the Church in the 19th century at least, were misled by Letter VII. I don’t find that persuasive in the least. But the logical fallacies show why the argument doesn’t hold up.

First is the self-evident fact that we don’t have records of everything Joseph and Oliver said and did. The most we can say is that we do not have a record of a specific revelation that the Cumorah of Mormon 6:6 (the site of the Nephite records repository) was in New York. But because we don’t have a record doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. We do have Letter VII; what we don’t have is a separate document specifically explaining the factual background for what Oliver wrote about Cumorah.

Second, even better than a revelation is personal experience. For example, Joseph didn’t dictate a revelation that God and Christ were two separate beings; he had a personal experience with them. Joseph and Oliver didn’t record a revelation about the restoration of the Aaronic priesthood by John the Baptist; they related a personal experience with him. In the same way, they didn’t record a revelation about the Nephite repository in the New York Hill Cumorah; they related personal experiences with that repository. (On this point, those who reject Letter VII say Brigham Young and the others who related this account are not trustworthy, or are reporting a vision of a hill somewhere in Mexico. Think of those two explanations a moment. Brigham Young is now making stuff up? Or Oliver related a vision of a hill in Mexico that he visited three times, with physical artifacts described in terms of how many men it would take to carry them or what kinds of wagons?)

2. The next objection is that it is impossible to have a cave or room in the New York Hill Cumorah because it is a glacial moraine; i.e., a pile of rocks. It may be unlikely to have a natural cave there, but when you read the accounts of the repository, several terms are used, not just “cave.” It was a space inside the hill that had a rock shelf, a table, and plates piled everywhere. There is no reason why a man-made room could not be built into the hill Cumorah. There is the one we have photos of, for one thing. Plus, when they dug the foundation for the Moroni monument, they broke into a room that they filled with cement. So again, reality trumps theory. [Even if you don’t want to believe these modern accounts, there is no physical reason why Mormon could not have built a room in the New York hill.]

3. Another objection is that Letter VII has not been quoted in General Conference. I haven’t taken the time to verify that, but I’ve pointed out on this blog that as recently as 1975, President Romney of the First Presidency, in General Conference, spoke about Cumorah (in New York) as the scene of the final battles. Three years later, Elder Petersen of the Quorum of the Twelve did likewise. So the follow-up objection is that none of the current members of the Twelve and none of the current First Presidency have quoted Letter VII in General Conference, and no Presidents of the Church have done so in General Conference while they were President. (Being President of the Quorum of the Twelve doesn’t count, if you’re Joseph Fielding Smith; you have to restate it a third time during the 18 months you are actually President of the Church for you to be credible and reliable, even though you quoted it specifically as a 20-year Apostle and Church Historian, and repeated it 20 years later as President of the Quorum of the Twelve, because those two times don’t count.) Therefore, we can’t rely on Letter VII or any prior statements about Cumorah being in New York. This is a fascinating objection. It would mean that we should not be reading, let alone relying on, anything said in General Conference prior to the current Q12 and 1P, except for talks given by Presidents of the Church. No more Neal A. Maxwell. No more J. Reuben Clark. No more… well, you get the idea. If people want to take that position, fine. But I can’t make sense of it. This is not a one-off oddball theory, but a frequently published and discussed teaching that originated with Oliver Cowdery, at least, and part of the set of letters specifically endorsed by Joseph Smith.

4. Another objection is that there was a typo in Letter III that Oliver corrected in Letter IV. In Letter III, Oliver had referred to Joseph’s age as being in the 15th year. In Letter IV, he wrote, “You will recollect that I mentioned the time of a religious excitement, in Palmyra and vicinity to have been in the 15th year of our brother J. Smith Jr’s, age-that was an error in the type-it should have been in the 17th.-“

It’s difficult to imagine how correcting a typo in one letter means we should disregard the letter that contained the typo, let alone all the rest of the letters. If anything, the correction of this typo shows Oliver’s attention to detail and his desire to be as accurate as possible.

Besides, when Winchester reprinted the letters in the Gospel Reflector, he corrected the obvious typo in Letter III and omitted Oliver’s reference to the correction in Letter IV. Don Carlos Smith, who republished the letters in the Times and Seasons in 1840-41, changed Letter III to read “the thirteenth year” but left the correction in Letter IV the same as I’ve shown above, an odd detail for sure. The Prophet followed the Winchester versions of both Letter III (June 1, 1844) and Letter IV (June 8, 1844).

Related to this objection is the alleged problem that Oliver seemed to be referring to the circumstances leading up to the First Vision when he was actually describing the circumstances of Moroni’s visit, and that Oliver gave a different reason for Martin Harris’ visit to New York with the so-called Anthon Transcript.

In the first place, Joseph’s well-known accounts of the circumstances leading up to the First Vision postdated these letters. (He did write a preliminary version in 1832 that barely touches on the circumstances.) IOW, this is the earliest account of those circumstances. In the second place, Oliver learned about these circumstances from Joseph; if there are mistakes, they can hardly be attributed to Oliver who expressly relied on what Joseph told him (and on other documents we don’t have today). Historians who claim the dating is wrong rely on an incomplete record anyway; Dr. Lamb may have made unrecorded visits to the area.

Oliver was aware of the difference between fact and conjecture, as he explained throughout the letters. He was also aware of the difficulty of relating details exactly.

In Letter VI, Oliver wrote, “I may have missed in arrangement in some instances, but the principle is preserved, and you will be able to bring forward abundance of corroborating scripture upon the subject of the gospel and of the gathering. You are aware of the fact, that to give a minute rehearsal of a lengthy interview with a heavenly messenger, is very difficult, unless one is assisted immediately with the gift of inspiration.” IOW, Oliver was relying on Joseph’s memory, or possibly documents we don’t have now (as Oliver claimed he did).

Some parts of these letters involve events that occurred before Oliver got involved, for which he had to rely on what Joseph told him. But the parts of the letters that relate Oliver’s own experiences he characterizes as fact. This includes the Letter VII descriptions of Cumorah, which Oliver knew from his own experience was in New York, as related by Brigham Young.

Another related observation involves Letters I and II. Historians note that Letter I seems to be introducing the First Vision, while Letter II skips that vision and goes right to the visit of Moroni. One author proposes that Joseph Smith asked Oliver not to discuss the First Vision, which seems reasonable to me. Here’s the link. The point is not that Oliver was loose with the facts, but that he changed course for an unexplained reason. I think this shows how closely Joseph and Oliver worked together, especially when Joseph’s eventual explanation of the First Vision adopted some of Oliver’s commentary.

5. Yet another objection is that you can’t resolve Book of Mormon geography by referring to a single anecdote in Church history. That is axiomatic, and no one I know of claims otherwise, certainly not me. However, an extensive, detailed discussion of the final battles at Cumorah is hardly an anecdote. This is an explicit statement, officially republished many times for nearly 100 years. Second, I don’t think Letter VII resolves anything because people are free to believe it or not. Third, Letter VII only establishes the New York location of Cumorah for those who trust Oliver (and Joseph, who helped write it and endorsed it multiple times). It says nothing about a limited or hemispheric geography. People are still free to believe whatever they want about geography.

6. Another objection is that Joseph let mistakes go without correcting them, such as the statement in the April 15, 1842 Times and Seasons that it was Nephi instead of Moroni who visited Joseph Smith. Maybe Joseph didn’t care about the error, or maybe he didn’t notice it. (I think this is evidence that Joseph wasn’t editing the Times and Seasons by this point, so it has nothing to do with his oversight.) There was another error in the Book of Commandments regarding a date on one of the revelations that Joseph supposedly reviewed but didn’t bother to change. Again, maybe he didn’t care about such details, or maybe he didn’t notice, or maybe he forgot the original date. But those one-word details hardly compare with Letter VII’s extensive and detailed description of the Hill Cumorah and the final battles, especially when Joseph specifically endorsed the letter multiple times and mentioned Cumorah in D&C 128 in connection with other events that took place in New York.

7. An objection related to the first one is that Joseph adopted a false tradition started by unknown persons at an early date. True, there were things that Joseph believed at one time that he later changed his mind about, such as phrenology. He didn’t object to smoking tobacco until he received the Word of Wisdom. He may have given bad medical advice. But these are peripheral matters compared with the location of Cumorah, and there are no accounts of him changing his views on Cumorah. Nor did any of his contemporaries, all the way through the 1879 footnotes in the Book of Mormon. In Feb. 1844, Oliver’s letters were published as a pamphlet in England. Later that year they were published in New York in The Prophet. There is no hint of opposition by Joseph to the contents of Letter VII or the other letters; instead, portions of Letter I were canonized in the Pearl of Great Price. It’s true that Letter VII was not canonized, but does that make it a false tradition? In my view, it does not. We have lesson manuals full of the teachings of Joseph Smith that were never canonized.

8. The final objection I’ll address here is the idea that maybe this was Oliver’s statement on his own, without input from Joseph. People forget that Oliver was the Assistant President of the Church when he wrote Letter VII. I’ve gone through his qualifications before. A few months after writing Letter VII, he and Joseph received the Priesthood keys from Moses, Elias and Elijah in the Kirtland temple, along with the visitation of the Lord Himself. Even assuming Joseph didn’t tell Oliver to write about Cumorah, Oliver is independently a credible, reliable and personal witness of these events, which is why Brigham Young and others relied on what he said about the repository. Not to mention, we all rely on Oliver’s credibility and reliability as one of the Three Witnesses (and the translation, and John the Baptist, Peter, James and John, and so much more). When people choose to single out Letter VII as Oliver’s one big falsehood, a statement of fact that was not actually a fact, and they do so purely because they disagree with Oliver, I don’t find that a persuasive argument.
__________

To review: there are two basic reasons to reject what Oliver Cowdery wrote about Cumorah in Letter VII.

First is the basic anti-Mormon reason, that Oliver made the whole thing up, conspiring with Joseph to deceive people, so everything in his letters is false.

Second is the position of those who object to Letter VII because they object to the New York Cumorah because they believe a theory of Book of Mormon geography that is inconsistent with the New York Cumorah; i.e., they disagree with what Oliver wrote, and isolate the Cumorah issue as the one falsehood he wrote because it contradicts what they prefer to believe about Cumorah.

Of course, people can believe whatever they want. I’m perfectly fine with that. I just want to clarify the issues for those who read Letter VII so people can make informed decisions about whether or not to accept what Oliver wrote.

When the only reason a person rejects Letter VII is because he/she disagrees with Oliver Cowdery’s statement about Cumorah, I find that puzzling to say the least.

For me, it’s an easy choice.

On one hand, we have people living in the 21st century who think they know more about Cumorah, the plates, and all the circumstances of the translation and interaction with angels in New York than Oliver did because of what they’ve read.

On the other hand, we have Oliver, who was there when Joseph translated, who handled the plates, who saw the angels, who had been in the repository of Nephite records in the hill in New York, and who collaborated with Joseph on these letters.  I think I’ll go with that guy.

This history is taken from History, 1838-1856, volume A-1, which you can see here: http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1838-1856-volume-a-1-23-december-1805-30-august-1834/6

I’ve always been curious why Moroni’s explanations of “many other passages of scripture” could not be mentioned in this history. Presumably Joseph and his scribes were short on time. Maybe they intended to provide a more complete explanation of what Moroni said.

But I think the main reason why Joseph did not tell us more about what Moroni told him is that Oliver Cowdery had already told us all about it.
___________________

In Letters IV, V and VI, Oliver gave us the most detailed explanation we have of what Moroni taught Joseph Smith.

In Letter IV, Oliver writes, “It is no easy task to describe the appearance of a messenger from the skies… But it may be well to relate the particulars as far as given.” Oliver then explains how Moroni quoted 1 Corinthians 1:27-28, portions of Isaiah 28 and 29, the “promises made to the fathers,” and more.

In Letter V, Oliver explains that “In my last I gave an imperfect description of the angel, and was obliged to do so, for the reason, that my pen would fail to describe an angel in his glory, or the glory of God. I also gave a few sentences which he uttered on the subject of the gathering of Israel, &c.” Then he explains that in his next letter, he “will give a further detail of the promises to Israel, hereafter, as rehearsed by the angel.”

In Letter VI, Oliver fulfills his promise by writing, “I have thought best to give a farther detail of the heavenly message, and if I do not give it in the precise words, shall strictly confine myself to the facts in substance.”

He then proceeds to quote and explain Isaiah 1, Deuteronomy 32, Psalms 107, Isaiah 2 and 4, Jeremiah 30 and 31, Isaiah 43, Jeremiah 50, Isaiah 11, Jeremiah 2, and more. Among other things, Oliver writes this interesting commentary. It’s not clear whether this came from Moroni or Oliver.

“And thus shall Israel come: not a dark corner of the earth shall remain unexplored, nor an island of the seas be left without being visited; for as the Lord has removed them into all corners of the earth, he will cause his mercy to be as abundantly manifested in their gathering as his wrath in their dispersion, until they are gathered according to the covenant.”

After quoting scriptures and commentary, Oliver writes, “I have now given you a rehearsal of what was communicated to our brother, when he was directed to go and obtain the record of the Nephites.”

In June 1839, when Joseph Smith and his scribes began working on History, 1838-1856, Oliver Cowdery’s letters were well known. They had been published in the Messenger and Advocate in 1834-1835. Joseph’s scribes had copied them into his own history–the same book that contained History, 1838-1856.

I think Joseph wrote his history with Oliver’s letters in mind. When he explained the scriptures Moroni quoted, including Malachi, I think he was supplementing Oliver’s letters, not supplanting or replacing them. Joseph’s history should be read together with Oliver’s letters.

In Letter VI, Oliver went on to explain his approach:

“I may have missed in arrangement in some instances, but the principle is preserved, and you [he was writing to W.W. Phelps] will be able to bring forward abundance of corroborating scripture upon the subject of the gospel and of the gathering.”

Once we recognize that Moroni taught Joseph about all the scriptures Oliver included, other aspects of Church history become clearer. Church writers including Phelps, Parley P. Pratt, and Benjamin Winchester were well known for elaborating on the Old Testament passages, but the foundation of their interpretations came from Moroni, who taught these things to Joseph Smith before Joseph even obtained the plates.

Oliver went on to explain an important point:

“You are aware of the fact, that to give a minute rehearsal of a lengthy interview with a heavenly messenger, is very difficult, unless one is assisted immediately with the gift of inspiration. There is another item I wish to notice on the subject of visions. The spirit you know, searches all things, even the deep things of God. When God manifests to his servants those things that are to come, or those which have been, he does it by unfolding them by the power of that Spirit which comprehends all things, always;  and so much may be shown and made perfectly plain to the understanding in a short time, that to the world, who are occupied all their life to learn a little, look at the relation of it, and are disposed to call  it false.”

I think Oliver was speaking from personal experience here. In his History 1:73-4, Joseph describes what happened when he and Oliver were baptized:

73 Immediately on our coming up out of the water after we had been baptized, we experienced great and glorious blessings from our Heavenly Father. No sooner had I baptized Oliver Cowdery, than the Holy Ghost fell upon him, and he stood up and prophesied many things which should shortly come to pass. And again, so soon as I had been baptized by him, I also had the spirit of prophecy, when, standing up, I prophesied concerning the rise of this Church, and many other things connected with the Church, and this generation of the children of men. We were filled with the Holy Ghost, and rejoiced in the God of our salvation.

 74 Our minds being now enlightened, we began to have the scriptures laid open to our understandings, and the true meaning and intention of their more mysterious passages revealed unto us in a manner which we never could attain to previously, nor ever before had thought of.

Back to Letter VI, Oliver explains another important point:

“You will understand then, by this, that while those glorious  things were being rehearsed, the vision was also opened, so that our  brother was permitted to see and understand much more full and  perfect than I am able to communicate in writing. I know much may be conveyed to the understanding in writing, and many marvellous truths set forth with the pen, but after all it is but a shadow, compared to an open vision of seeing, hearing and realizing eternal things. And if the fact was known, it would be found, that of all the heavenly communications to the ancients, we have no more in comparison than the alphabet to a quarto vocabulary.”
_____________________

I’ve noticed that some LDS scholars complain about Oliver Cowdery being too verbose and flowery. I disagree. I’m glad he gave us all this additional information about what Moroni told Joseph. There are some interesting details in here that I’ll write about when I get a chance.

As I’ve discussed throughout this blog, LDS scholars have largely ignored Letter VII because of the implications for Book of Mormon geography. Some of them still think Oliver didn’t know what he was talking about. I think we’ll find that as the Mesoamerican nonsense fades into history, more and more LDS scholars will take another look at Oliver’s letters. I think we’ll discover that it was Moroni who established the foundation for interpreting the Bible to explain the LDS view of the gathering of Israel and other topics.

First, it was the last leaf of the set of plates Joseph translated in Harmony. If the small plates of Nephi were in that set of plates, Joseph would have translated the small plates before leaving Harmony.

Second, the title page refers only to abridgments and Moroni’s sealing comments. No mention whatsoever of the original writings of Nephi and his successors.

Third, Joseph said the title page was part of the “original Book of Mormon,” meaning the plates that Moroni deposited in the stone-and-cement box. We don’t have the “original” Book of Mormon, partly because we don’t have the 116 pages (Book of Lehi) and partly because we do have the small plates of Nephi.

The two most extensive discussions of the Title Page I know of are Daniel Ludlow’s article here, and Alan Miner’s analysis here. Although they quote and analyze the Title Page extensively, neither one seems to have thought about the 3 points I mentioned above.

Here’s how Joseph’s explanation appears in History, 1838-1856:

“I wish also to mention here, that the Title Page of the Book of Mormon is a  literal translation, taken from the very last leaf, on the left hand side of the collection  or book of plates, which contained the record which has been translated; and not by any means  the language of the whole running same as all Hebrew writing in general; and that,  said Title Page is not by any means a modern composition either of mine or of any other  man’s who has lived or does live in this generation. 

Therefore, in order to correct an  error which generally exists concerning it, I give below that part of the Title Page  of the English Version of the Book of Mormon, which is a genuine and literal translation  of the Title Page of the Original Book of Mormon, as recorded on the plates.”

http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1838-1856-volume-a-1-23-december-1805-30-august-1834/40

Ludlow stops the quotation at “generation” so he never considers what Joseph meant by “the Original Book of Mormon.” Miner never considers that either. As far as I can tell, no one has analyzed that phrase before, although I’m sure someone has.

_________________

Elder Steven Snow wrote a useful background titled “Joseph Smith in Harmony.” It was published in the Ensign in September 2015 in connection with the Priesthood Restoration site. Here’s the link:

https://www.lds.org/ensign/2015/09/joseph-smith-in-harmony?lang=eng

It includes a good map and some useful illustrations.
____________________

Jack Welch wrote a useful article on how long it took Joseph Smith to translate the Book of Mormon. It was published in the Ensign in January 1988, here: https://www.lds.org/ensign/1988/01/i-have-a-question?lang=eng#footnote6-03222_000_017

Excerpts:

We are met, fellow citizens, to celebrate one of the most important events that ever embellished the pages of political history—an event of which every American heart is proud to boast, in whatever land or country he perchance may roam—I mean the bold, manly, and daring act of our fathers in the Declaration of the Independence and Sovereignty of these United States—an act worthy to be engraven in letters of living light upon the tablets of our memory, and to be transmitted to our children, with the sacred charge that they teach it to their children, and to their children’s children, till the “stripes and stars” float over every land, and are mirrored on the crest of every passing billow. They had not only the moral courage to sign the Declaration of our nation’s Independence, but hearts of iron and nerves of steel to defend it by force of arms against the fearful odds arrayed against them—the well-disciplined armies and mercenary allies of the foolish and tyrannical George the III, King of Great Britain…

Remember Lexington, and Bunker Hill, and lastly Yorktown, with all the intermediate scenes as narrated in the history of the American Revolution! Remember the immortal Washington, chosen to lead our infant armies through the perils and hardships of an unequal contest, to the climax of victory and the pinnacle of fame! His name, embalmed in the never-dying sympathies of his grateful countrymen, will be heralded in the melody of song, “while the earth bears a plant or the ocean rolls a wave.”…

In those early and perilous times, our men were few, and our resources limited. Poverty was among the most potent enemies we had to encounter; yet our arms were successful; and it may not be amiss to ask here, by whose power victory so often perched on our banner? 

It was by the agency of that same angel of God that appeared unto Joseph Smith, and revealed to him the history of the early inhabitants of this country, whose mounds, bones, and remains of towns, cities, and fortifications speak from the dust in the ears of the living with the voice of undeniable truth. 

This same angel presides over the destinies of America, and feels a lively interest in all our doings. He was in the camp of Washington; and, by an invisible hand, led on our fathers to conquest and victory; and all this to open and prepare the way for the Church and kingdom of God to be established on the western hemisphere, for the redemption of Israel and the salvation of the world…

The peculiar respect that high Heaven has for this country, on account of the promises made to the fathers, and on account of its being the land where the mustard seed of truth was planted and destined to grow in the last days, accounts for all this good fortune to our beloved America.

1. Joseph translated two sets of plates (see Whatever Happened to the Golden Plates?).

2. Joseph and Oliver specifically identified the location of the final battles of the Nephites and Jaredites (see Letter VII: Oliver Cowdery’s Message to the World about the Hill Cumorah).

3. Joseph Smith never once mentioned, wrote about, or endorsed anything having to do with Central America (see The Lost City of Zarahemla and Brought to Light).

4. The Book of Mormon describes North America, with Cumorah in New York (see Moroni’s America).

I’ll make some more comments about Church history once we release the book titled The Editors. Should be in about two weeks.