Author: Jonathan Neville

And, of course, the editors at Meridian Magazine, (which should be renamed Mesomania Magazine), reprint the KnoWhys to magnify the devastating impact Book of Mormon Central is having.

Yesterday Meridian published a KnoWhy on Cumorah. You have to see this to believe it. Here’s the link.

Before you read that, though, you should know two things.

First, the underlying context for this article is the two-Cumorahs theory; i.e., the Mesoamerican advocates have long said the hill in New York cannot be the scene of the final battles because it’s too small and insignificant. That’s what leads them to discredit Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith, who wrote and endorsed Letter VII.

Second, the text does not say that 230,000 people were killed at Cumorah. Read Mormon 6 here. Mormon says his ten thousand were hewn down, leaving 24 survivors. The next day, he and Moroni and the 22 others made it to the top of the hill Cumorah and looked out to see the ten thousand he, Mormon, had led.They also beheld the ten thousand who were led by Moroni.

But those are the only two groups of ten thousand Mormon said they saw from the top of the hill.

This is an important point. The other groups of ten thousand, starting in verse 13, “had fallen” but Mormon does not say he saw them from the top of the hill.

In Chapter 5, Mormon described the “scene of blood and carnage” that preceded the final battle at Cumorah. The Lamanites “did tread the people of the Nephites under their feet.” It was only “the remainder of our people” who gathered unto the land of Cumorah (Mormon 6:5).

When we realize that Mormon, from the top of Cumorah, only claimed to see 20,000 people slaughtered before him, the context is much different from the common assumption that he was looking at 230,000 people. It’s no wonder that his people awaited with “that awful fear of death” when they were merely 20,000 making a last stand against the Lamanite armies.

People reasonably infer that this final slaughter occurred on a single day because in Mormon 6:11, Mormon says they beheld the dead “on the morrow.” (I think this refers to the day after the battles finished and does not mean the final slaughter took only one day, but I’m fine with either interpretation.) The idea that 230,000 people were killed in one day is often cited as another rationale for questioning the reliability and credibility of the text. By contrast, as horrific as the slaughter of 20,000 people is, it’s not unrealistic to think it could happen in a single day.

I bring this up because the inference that 230,000 men (and more women and children) were killed on a single day around the hill Cumorah has led to all kinds of mischief in the analysis of the text. In my view, Mormon makes it clear he could see 20,000 dead from the top of Cumorah, while the rest were killed earlier. 20,000 is still tragic and horrible enough.

[BTW, in Letter VII, Oliver Cowdery wrote “In this vale lie commingled, in one mass of ruin, the ashes of thousands, and in this vale were destined to be consumed the fair forms and vigorous systems of tens of thousands of the human race—blood mixed with blood, flesh with flesh, bones with bones, and dust with dust!” Notice, he did not distinguish between Nephites and Lamanites; he included dead Lamanites as well as the dead Nephites. And yet, he does not write “hundreds of thousands.” So as early as 1835, it was well-known that it was tens of thousands, not hundreds of thousands, who died at Cumorah.]

I fully admit I might be missing something. If so, please advise and we’ll correct it.
___________________

Because I have a tee time coming up, I’m not going to go through the entire Meridian article, but you’ll get the flavor. My comments in red.

My short answer is Mesomania, as I discuss on that blog, here.

Despite widespread Mesomania, I think most members of the Church (LDS) believe the Hill Cumorah is in New York. When they discover that LDS scholars and educators actually think the Hill Cumorah is in Mexico, they are surprised, if not shocked.

In a highly regarded book on the Mesoamerican theory, a prominent LDS scholar and BYU faculty member wrote: “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.”

Knowing that most members would reject this condescending statement, LDS scholars and educators don’t emphasize this fundamental aspect of the Mesoamerican theory. Instead, they emphasize the authority of their expertise and expect people to accept their theories on that basis alone.

[As always, I emphasize that my discussion here focuses on LDS scholars and educators who promote the Mesoamerican theory, whether they are doing so intentionally and knowingly or simply by default (because it’s what they were taught). There are plenty of LDS scholars and educators from many disciplines who don’t accept that theory, but it’s impractical to write “LDS scholars and educators who promote the Mesoamerican theory” every time I refer to this group. I also refrain from identifying anyone by name because none of this is personal, and because people change their views anyway. Eventually, of course, I hope all LDS scholars and educators will unite around the New York Cumorah, but until that happens, we need to continue discussing what is happening in the real world and how to address the problems that naturally result from the two-Cumorahs theory.]
_________________

People think that messages are persuasive when they are factually correct, but psychology and actual experience show that is not always, or even usually, the case. At the extreme, absurd messages are not widely accepted, but correct messages are often ignored or even disbelieved.

The reason: there are other aspects of any message that can be more influential or persuasive than the merit of the message itself.

This concept has been summarized by three elements of influence or persuasion:

The merit is the message.
The medium is the message.
The messenger is the message. 

The merit of a message includes the quality, reliability, credibility and relevance of the evidence as well as the soundness of the reasoning and arguments. These can be compared and contrasted, but ultimately a decision about the merits is subjective for each individual. Experts can tell people what to think, but they can’t force people to agree with them.

In my view, of course, the merits of the various theories strongly favor the North American setting on every front, but the merits are not the most persuasive element when it comes to Book of Mormon geography.

Because the merit of a message is subjective, people consider the other elements.

The medium of a message is the channel through which it is communicated to people. In the case of Book of Mormon geography, we have an oligarchy of channels produced by what I have referred to as the citation cartel. Another term for it is groupthink. The channels consist of books, articles, blogs, and other web-based communications (Facebook, youtube, etc.) that are dominated by scholars, educators, and authors who promote the Mesoamerican theory. Because many of these channels are closely affiliated with BYU (e.g., most authors are BYU faculty or current or former students), there is an inference of official Church sanction or support. The inference is corroborated by officially approved artwork on lds.org that appears in manuals and on the walls of chapels and temples.

The fascinating thing about the medium is the implied sanction or support is actually a false implication, because officially, the Church takes no position on anything other than Cumorah, and has even hedged on its prior position on Cumorah.

Because the medium is, or should be, ambiguous despite its uniformity, people consider the final element: the messenger.

The messenger of a message can have the deepest impact of all. It has been said* that “When a legitimate expert on a topic speaks, people are usually persuaded. Indeed, sometimes information becomes persuasive only because an authority is its source. This is especially true when the recipient is uncertain of what to do.”

Scientists have shown by analyzing brain activity that people who receive expert advice follow that advice without even thinking about the merits of the message. The messenger becomes the most important factor.

In the context of the Book of Mormon, one might think LDS prophets and apostles would be the most persuasive authority, but that’s not the case. LDS scholars have successfully supplanted the prophets and apostles by questioning their reliability and credibility on the issue of Cumorah.

This is exactly what we expect, because when it comes to persuasion, it is not someone who is in authority who is most persuasive, but someone who is an authority. Most people prefer expertise over hierarchy.

Think about this. Which is more persuasive on the question of the Hill Cumorah? A “general” authority or a “specific” authority (meaning a PhD)?

Evidently, the specific authorities–the LDS scholars and educators–have become more persuasive than the general authorities–the prophets and apostles who have spoken on the issue.

With this in mind, let’s assess the credibility of the messengers.
________________

An authority is credible because of the combination of expertise and trustworthiness.

(In the case of Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery, no mortal was more expert than these two in terms of interacting with divine messengers (including the Lord Himself) and in terms of handling ancient artifacts, including not only the plates they translated but the plates in the repository in Cumorah. Both were highly valued for their trustworthiness as well because they related their shared personal experiences as clearly as words can be. Their detractors dispute both their expertise and their trustworthiness, but only because of disbelief; there is no actual evidence to support the arguments of the detractors.)

Expertise. We can stipulate to the expertise of the LDS scholars and educators, all of whom presumably have at least a college degree and a certain level of relevant training and experience. Among them are PhD archaeologists, anthropologists, linguists, etc. Some are lawyers, historians, or scientists.

Their academic qualifications are the primary persuasive tools used by the Mesoamerican advocates. They have PhDs, and they teach, or have taught, at BYU. On that basis alone, they expect LDS people to accept their theories.

Of course, it’s a serious mistake to automatically assume that one’s training makes one an expert, particularly where there are no degrees, let alone advanced degrees, in Book of Mormon studies. All we can reasonably assume is that the LDS scholars and educators have enough expertise to effectively communicate their conclusions; i.e., that they are competent enough to not be misunderstood.

Trustworthiness. To deserve deference, the messenger must be trustworthy. As recipients of the message, “we want to trust that a communicator is presenting information in an honest and impartial fashion–that is, attempting to depict reality accurately rather than to serve self-interest.”**

It is here that the Mesoamerican advocates fail, but the recipients of their message, by and large, don’t realize it because the scholars and educators have monopolized the medium of the message.

Through blogs and books, I’ve shown that every argument made by the Mesoamerican advocates regarding Cumorah is deeply flawed on the facts. I think the scholars and educators realize this, which is why they’ve suppressed Letter VII and the teachings of the prophets and apostles about Cumorah. They simply ignore them in their work, which means they are also ignored in Church manuals and media (since the departments that prepare those materials are staffed by former students of the LDS scholars and educators who promote the Mesoamerican theory exclusively).

Furthermore, the citation cartel refuses to publish articles that challenge their Mesoamerican theories and their hegemonistic position in LDS culture.

In my view, it is this refusal to present information in an honest and impartial fashion that deprives LDS scholars and educators of the legitimacy they have unduly seized in LDS culture.
________________

Working backward, if the messenger is the message, then the Mesoamerican message should not be believed because the messengers of that message have not been trustworthy; i.e., they have consistently refused to present information “in an honest and impartial fashion.”

If the medium is the message, then the Mesoamerican message should not be believed because the medium consists of a oligarchy of groupthink, which I call the citation cartel.

If the merit is the message, the Mesoamerican message should not be believed because the facts and reasoning used don’t hold up to scrutiny.
________________

The obvious remedy (short of intervention by senior Church authorities) is to have a forum that allows messages to be presented “in an honest and impartial fashion.”

The citation cartel has had decades to facilitate this, but they have steadfastly refused to do so. Perhaps a third party can intervene to provide such a forum, but LDS scholars and educators have already rendered themselves untrustworthy as messengers. We can expect that whatever they might present will be a continuation of their motive to serve their self-interest instead of a desire to depict reality accurately. At least, that’s a factor that should be considered in the process.

There is also the problem of inertia; i.e., the messengers have not been trustworthy, so the media they have dominated is equally untrustworthy. An honest and impartial forum would have to somehow undo the decades of influence from the citation cartel media. That’s possible, but would require focus and commitment on the part of the very people who established the citation cartel to begin with.

Finally, the merit of the message cannot be determined by the LDS scholars and educators as it has been in the past. Once finally presented in an honest and impartial forum, it must be left to each individual Latter-day Saint to decide which message has the most merit.

(My response to their approach is as much disclosure as possible. I think the more information people have on this topic, the less they are persuaded by the Mesoamerican theory, despite the appeals to authority by LDS scholars and educators and the domination of the media by the citation cartel. In other words, the merits will prevail when people are given honest and impartial information. As a start, I’ve offered a comparison chart for Book of Mormon geography here. I’ve tried to be honest and impartial and accurate. I’ve sought input from Mesoamerican scholars and educators. None has been offered, which suggests the chart represents both sides reasonably well. Suggestions for improvement are always welcome.)

________________
NOTES:
*Presuasion, kindle, location 2540.
** Ibid, location 2556. Some ask what possible self-interest LDS scholars could have in perpetuating a theory of geography that repudiates the prophets and apostles. Each individual has his/her own set of motivators, but at the risk of overgeneralizing, people fundamentally want to do the right thing. Remember, Mesomania did not originate with any current LDS scholars and educators. It was developed in the 1920s and imprinted on all of us at an early age. LDS scholars and educators have relied on 1) the historical mistake from the 1842 Times and Seasons and 2) a misreading of the text that conflates the narrow neck, the narrow neck of land, and the small neck and assumes this feature is in Central America. Consequently, they have spent decades and entire careers promoting the Mesoamerican theory. They are understandably reluctant to reverse course, having taught thousands and influenced millions of members of the Church. And, in fact, due to Mesomania, many of them can’t unsee Mesoamerica; their interpretations have become the text in their minds. It’s not a matter of assigning blame; none of these scholars and educators has bad intentions. We just have to work through the issue by reaffirming faith in the prophets and apostles to reach agreement on the New York Cumorah, and then working, step-by-step, through the evidence and the text.

I posted a comment on cognitive dissonance on the mesomania blog, here. Effort justification is an aspect of cognitive dissonance in the sense that when people spend a lot of time and effort on a project, they tend to justify the effort by believing this proposition:

“the subjective value of an outcome is directly related to the effort that went into obtaining it.”

In other words, people who invest in an activity think it is more valuable than those who haven’t invested the same amount of time and effort.

IMO, this explains a lot of the Mesomania we continue to see.

Imagine that you’ve grown up with the belief that the Book of Mormon took place in Mesoamerica. Maybe you’ve gotten a PhD in Mesoamerican archaeology. Or maybe you’ve written long, detailed books and/or journal articles on the topic. Or edited a journal that published such material. Or you’ve spent decades researching and writing on the topic, speaking at conferences, maintaining a blog, teaching students, etc. Or maybe you’ve raised a lot of money to promote the Mesoamerican setting.

Then you are confronted with evidence that completely contradicts your efforts. You develop serious cognitive dissonance.

What do you do?

According to effort justification theory, you will continue to believe your efforts turned out well, that you are still correct, that the evidence is unreliable and not credible, etc.

Effort justification explains why LDS scholars and educators continue to reject the prophets and apostles on the topic of the New York Cumorah.

Here’s one explanation, from this site:

Here’s another example, from an article on the effort heuristic:

“Consider the following: After receiving a low grade on a paper, a student approaches you after class and complains about his or her grade. Occasionally, such protests stem from errors in grading or strategic attempts by the student to ‘‘work’’ the system. But more often, the grade is correct, and the protest sincere. In such cases, it is not uncommon to hear some version of the following: ‘‘But I don t understand. I worked so hard…how could I get a D?’’ Apparently, the student believes that because he or she invested great effort, the outcome of that effort must be great as well. Indeed, we recently asked a group of Cornell University students to indicate (confidentially) how much effort they put into a term paper and the grade they expected to receive, and compared those estimates with the actual grades received. Although predicted and actual grades were positively correlated, that relationship was dwarfed by the relationship between the grade the students expected to receive and the effort they reported investing in the paper.”
________________

As we deal with the effects of Mesomania, I hope we all keep effort justification in mind because it helps us better understand the LDS scholars and educators who continue to promote the Mesoamerican theory.

My thanks to all of them.

I’d also like to recognize an awesome military veteran whose words reflect what I believe most members of the military think:

“Behold, I am Moroni, your chief captain. I seek not for power, but to pull it down. I seek not for honor of the world, but for the glory of my God, and the freedom and welfare of my country.”

Happy Veterans Day!

If you like Eritrea, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Chile, Peru, Panama, Guatemala, Yucatan, southern Mexico, Baja… Take your pick or add your own favorite.

No problem. No problem at all.

Of all the places I’ve visited, I’m thinking the south of France would be a fun place to put Cumorah. I could visit there often to do research. Another great place would be Rio de Janeiro. Or maybe the south island of New Zealand.

If you want to invent a Hill Cumorah in your favorite part of the world, you just need to:

1) ignore what the modern prophets and apostles have said* and

2) apply a flexible interpretation of the Book of Mormon text.

I put together a video that shows how to manufacture a Hill Cumorah in Mexico. It’s based on one of my favorite blogs to follow. You can use the same techniques described on that blog to put Cumorah wherever you want.

https://youtu.be/zUZbgyu6-AI

*Note: You’ll notice in the video how important it is to start with step #1. Don’t skip step #1. This is the key to manufacturing your own Cumorah. If you make a mistake and pay attention to what the modern prophets and apostles have said, you pretty much have to stick with the Cumorah in western New York, a couple of miles south of Palmyra. That’s not nearly as fun as inventing your own Cumorah in Mexico or wherever else you want.

I need to explain something along these lines. I often refer to “LDS scholars and educators.” It would be more accurate to write “some LDS scholars and educators.” I know of LDS scholars and educators who do follow the prophets and apostles and accept the New York Cumorah as the Mormon 6:6 Cumorah.

But either they don’t write and submit articles, or the citation cartel refuses to publish them.

I hope it’s clear that in the context of Book of Mormon geography, I’m referring to the LDS scholars and educators who teach and promote a non-New York Cumorah. There is a relatively small group of LDS scholars who have been teaching the “two-Cumorahs” theory for decades, but they’ve influenced generations of LDS educators, who in turn have taught generations of students.

There may be many LDS scholars and educators who don’t accept the non-New York Cumorah ideas. Countless LDS people have told me they never believed the Mesoamerican stuff, but they never spoke out because they either thought the Church had approved it or they didn’t know there were alternative ideas about a North American setting that accepted what the prophets and apostles have said about Cumorah in New York.

In some cases, teachers in the Church have felt compelled to teach the Mesoamerican stuff even when they didn’t personally believe it.

This is understandable because the citation cartel has been very effective at suppressing Letter VII.

If you’re an LDS scholar or educator, or a teacher in the Church at any level, and you choose to follow the prophets and apostles instead of the scholars who reject them, then I encourage you to speak out. 

Brexit.

Trump.

Next stop: LDS scholars who reject our prophets and apostles on the location of Cumorah.
______________

I’m kidding, a little. But there is an important point here.

I do think it’s time to Make Cumorah Great Again.

For too long, LDS scholars and educators have managed to cast doubt on our prophets and apostles, beginning with Joseph and Oliver, over this simple issue of the Hill Cumorah. Their influence, which I call Mesomania, has infiltrated Church art and media and education, to the point where, sadly, many LDS people can’t unsee Mesoamerica when they read and think about the Book of Mormon.

I’ve tried in as many ways as I can think of to explain this issue.

I’ve traced the intellectual history, showing that it was not irrational to move Cumorah from New York to southern Mexico. Except that to do so, the scholars had to repudiate the prophets.

I’ve addressed the specific arguments made by LDS scholars and educators who established and continue to promote the two-Cumorahs theory.

I’ve shown that Joseph and Oliver were consistent and persistent on the location of Cumorah (meaning the Mormon 6:6 Cumorah), as were every one of their contemporaries.

I’ve shown that the effort of scholars to link the New York Cumorah with the hemispheric model doesn’t hold up.

I’ve shown that the scholars’ rhetorical arguments based on the text are circular arguments designed solely to justify their predetermined conclusion that the Book of Mormon took place in a limited area of Mesoamerica.

I’ve shown that the articles and books purporting to cite archaeology were flawed and misrepresented the actual archaeological evidence.

I’ve shown how Joseph Fielding Smith’s prophetic warning about the two-Cumorahs theory has been vindicated by what’s happening right now.

If I’ve missed any arguments or evidence, I’d like to know about them.
______________

I remain optimistic that at least some LDS scholars and educators will change their views about Cumorah. In the meantime, every member of the Church should realize that any theory of geography that puts Cumorah somewhere other than New York is contradicting every prophet and apostle who has spoken on this issue.