Author: Jonathan Neville

Uncategorized

Awesome trip–tours in general

Yesterday we completed the inaugural Book of Mormon Chronology Tour, from Florida (Lehi’s landing) to New York (Cumorah). My thanks and congratulations to everyone who participated, plus the guest speakers along the way.

It was an amazing trip for me, and I learned a lot from each of the participants. (We have our own separate pages for tour discussions, so I’m not going to talk about it on this blog.)

The trip was so awesome I want to say something about tours generally.
_________________

Church history tours. During the trip, we shared a hotel with a Church history tour group. They were being told nothing about the abundant Book of Mormon connections to Church history in Iowa, Illinois, Ohio, and New York.

Same with the visitors to Church history sites, including visitors centers. It’s extremely unfortunate, IMO. Can you imagine going all the way to Palmyra and standing on the Hill Cumorah and never even knowing what Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith said about what took place on and near that hill? About what Mormon observed when he was standing where you are?

We talked with a senior missionary who told us that just the day before, he was serving at the Hill Cumorah and he had some Mesoamerican advocate come up and insist this wasn’t the “real” Hill Cumorah. The senior missionary had served his first mission in Ohio, so he knew what was going on with the Book of Mormon, and he told the visitor, but he didn’t have Letter VII to use.

Now he does.

So if you’re planning to go on a Church history tour, make sure it includes the Book of Mormon elements. If your guides and/or tour company don’t even know about Letter VII, or if they reject it, don’t go with them. You’ll regret it otherwise because of all the things you’ll miss out on.
_________________

“Book of Mormon” tours to Central America. If you’re thinking of taking a “Book of Mormon” tour to Central America, be sure to read Letter VII first and ask your guides and travel company what they think about it.

You’ll get your answer real quick.

I’ve been to Central America several times and I enjoy visiting and learning about the ruins and modern cultures there. I enjoy the scuba diving and the beaches as well. So by all means, visit Central America. Just don’t think you’re going to be visiting any Book of Mormon sites when you’re there.

Source: Book of Mormon Wars

Uncategorized

The Mesoamerican memo on Letter VII: Oliver is a liar

I’m still hopeful that all LDS scholars and educators can reach consensus that the Hill Cumorah is in New York, but it hasn’t happened yet. The nanosecond these scholars and educators reach consensus on this point, I’ll stop blogging about it and move onto some other great stuff.

But from all indications, we’re a long ways from consensus that the Cumorah if Mormon 6:6 is in New York.

No one at BYU or in CES teaches about Letter VII. Most of the faculty has never heard of it. No lesson manuals mention it, etc.*

Consequently, Latter-Day Saints around the world are kept in the dark about what Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery wrote about the Hill Cumorah.

It’s unbelievable.

Fortunately, thousands of Latter-Day Saints are discovering and sharing Letter VII, and the momentum is just getting started.

It appears that the scholars are hoping no one notices, but they’ve come up with a new approach..
_______________________

Apparently a memo has gone out about Letter VII.

[Whether this is a literal or figurative memo doesn’t matter for this discussion.]

The way the Mesoamerican advocates (and other advocates of a non-New York Cumorah such as the Baja group) plan to deal with Letter VII is by characterizing it as a “secondary source.”

This is awesome, and here’s why.

The “secondary source” label seeks to undermine the credibility and reliability of Letter VII and its author, Oliver Cowdery.

Letter VII is obviously a huge problem for LDS scholars and educators who reject the New York setting. When they take the position that Oliver Cowdery was speculating about Cumorah, they are really calling him a liar because he wrote it was a fact that the final battles were here. Those are his words. “A fact.”

In other parts of his letters, Oliver made it clear that he was speculating, such as about how deep Moroni buried the stone box. But when it came to Cumorah in New York, he said it was a fact. If you’re speculating,and you’re honest, you don’t explicitly characterize your speculation as a fact. (You might make an argument by stating this or that happened as an assertion, but that’s different from specifically labeling your assertion as a fact.)

And if you’re Joseph Smith, you don’t have a false statement of fact republished multiple times so all the Saints can read it.

As I’ve pointed out before, there are two basic groups of people who claim Oliver Cowdery was a liar: anti-Mormons and Mesoamerican proponents.

So now, apparently, Mesoamerican proponents are trying to avoid this dilemma by calling Letter VII a “secondary source.” It’s not clear what they mean by this, but I’ll assume they mean that Letter VII was not signed by Joseph Smith (although they characterize him as a secondary source, too).

But if that’s their criteria, then they are in an even worse position because there is not a single document that can be directly attributed to Joseph that links the Book of Mormon to Central America.
_______________________

Let’s think about what a secondary source is. Here’s a standard definition:

“a secondary source of information is one that was created later by someone who did not experience first-hand or participate in the events or conditions you’re researching.”

Now, we could say that any source who was not present during the last battles of the Jaredites or Nephites is secondary. In that sense, Mormon and Moroni are secondary sources for the Jaredite wars. But they were primary sources for the Nephite wars, and Mormon said he buried the records in the Hill Cumorah (Mormon 6:6).

This analysis means there can be no modern primary sources, because the wars happened a long time ago. To have a primary source, we would have to have Moroni testifying in court or on television.

Or, we could consider that Joseph and Oliver experienced first-hand and participated in the events about which they wrote. This includes viewing the plates, their experiences with John the Baptist, Peter, James, and John, Moses, Elijah, Elias, and the Lord Himself.

Presumably, as faithful LDS we can all agree that Oliver wrote the truth about these events. I’ll assume we have a consensus on these points.

IOW, I think everyone can agree that Oliver’s letters are primary sources for these events, whether because he was actually present or because he was co-writing with Joseph on the events that Joseph experienced on his own.

Now, why do the Mesoamerican proponents characterize Letter VII as a “secondary source” on the question of Cumorah?

Because they insist Oliver Cowdery was a liar. Either that, or Brigham Young was a liar. Or both.

Brigham Young explained on multiple occasions that Oliver and Joseph visited the records repository in the Hill Cumorah. Obviously, Brigham wasn’t there; he hadn’t even joined the Church at that point. But he said Oliver told him about it.

The Mesoamerican proponents have insisted for years that either Oliver or Brigham were lying about this.

Think about that for a moment.

It should be obvious why they have to call Oliver and/or Brigham liars, because if Brigham was telling the truth, and Oliver was telling the truth, then that makes Oliver’s Letter VII a first-hand account; i.e., Oliver (and Joseph) experienced first-hand the records repository in the Hill Cumorah in New York.

So the only way to transform Letter VII into a second-hand account is to claim Oliver Cowdery is a liar, and they’re back to the same problem they had before they decided to reject Letter VII as a secondary account.

They’re calling Oliver a liar.
________________________

The secondary account argument is also problematic because Joseph embraced it as part of his own history and had it reprinted multiple times so all the Saints could read it.

Yes, you read that right. The Mesoamerican proponents have Joseph Smith directing his scribes to copy lies into his own history.

Now you see why Joseph Fielding Smith said this “two Cumorahs” theory would cause members to become confused and disturbed in their faith.

There are very few examples in Church history of specific writings that are republished multiple times.

Think of it this way. By 1844, Letter VII was printed in four separate Church-related publications, in addition to Joseph’s own history. By contrast, the Book of Abraham was published once in the Times and Seasons.  If you were a member of the Church in 1844, you were more likely to have read Letter VII than the Book of Abraham.
____________________

*If I’m wrong about that, I’d like a representative from BYU and/or CES to so indicate in a comment here, or email me. In fact, I have an open invitation for any BYU professor or CES educator to let me know if they have even heard of Letter VII before, or if they’ve read it, or if they teach it to their students. So far, I’ve had only people who have retired from those institutions tell me they embrace Letter VII.

Source: Book of Mormon Concensus

Uncategorized

Prepare for questions about Letter VII

Most of you who read this blog already know about Letter VII, but you might want to share Letter VII with your friends who teach at any capacity in the Church because I’m encouraging people to ask their teachers what they think about Letter VII.

I’m constantly amazed at how few people have even heard about Letter VII. This includes well-seasoned Church leaders (Mission Presidents, Temple Presidents, Relief Society Presidents at all levels, etc.). Even fewer have read it.

This is all the more surprising because Joseph Smith made every effort to make sure the Saints knew about it. It was published in three Church newspapers (Kirtland, Nauvoo, and Philadelphia), as well as in a special pamphlet published in Liverpool. He had his scribes copy it into his journal so it would not be lost.

Here is the post where I encouraged people to ask their teachers about Letter VII.

https://bookofmormonwars.blogspot.com/2016/10/do-your-teachers-accept-or-reject.html

Source: 2016 Gospel Doctrine Resource

Uncategorized

Do your teachers accept or reject Letter VII?

People wonder what I want. I’m writing this and other blogs (hundreds of posts so far), as well as the books (not to mention a lot of speaking, youtube videos, and other activities), because I have two basic goals.

1. I would like to see every member of the Church read Letter VII (hopefully in 2016, but 2017 is okay too) and decide whether to accept or reject it. 
2. I would like every student (and every parent of students) in the Church to know if their teachers accept or reject Letter VII.
Here’s why.
_____________________
1. Read Letter VII. When Joseph Smith was alive, every member of the Church knew (or should have known, if they could read English) about Letter VII, which unambiguously declares that the Hill Cumorah (the Mormon 6:6 Hill Cumorah) was in New York. The New York location of Cumorah was unambiguously declared in the footnotes of the official edition of the Book of Mormon from 1879 through 1920. It was only after all of Joseph’s contemporaries died off that RLDS scholars, and later LDS scholars, rejected the New York setting. 
I think every member of the Church should know this history and the importance that Joseph and Oliver placed on this fact. After all, Joseph included it in D&C 128. He instructed his scribes to copy it into his own history, as you can see for yourself if you go to the Joseph Smith papers and search for “Letter VII.” 
Think of this: we have entire books (and lesson manuals) full of what are purported to be the teachings of Joseph Smith, even though many of them are derived from a single mention in someone’s journal. Or, worse, they are derived from anonymous articles in the Times and Seasons!
On the other hand, Letter VII was written with Joseph’s assistance, included in his own history at his specific direction, republished with his express permission, and referenced in D&C 128, yet it appears nowhere in the books and manuals about the teachings of Joseph Smith. 
Ask yourself why.

2. What teachers think. Obviously, teachers have tremendous influence. Students deserve to know where their teachers are coming from. Let’s say you’re a student at any BYU campus. Do you know if your professor accepts or rejects Letter VII?
If not, you should ask.
Are you a student in Institute or Seminary? Do you attend a Gospel Doctrine class in your ward? Relief Society? Priesthood meeting? Primary? Young Women or Young Men? Do you know what your teachers think about Letter VII?
If not, you should ask.
The reason is directly related to the core beliefs of our religion. Oliver Cowdery was one of the three witnesses to the plates, but he was also the only witness other than Joseph to many of the most important events of the Restoration, including the restoration of the Priesthood, several revelations in the D&C, and the restoration of the keys in the Kirtland Temple. 
Detractors claim Oliver was not a reliable, credible witness; that’s one of their reasons for rejecting the existence of the plates. (They say the same about all the witnesses, of course, but Oliver was the Assistant President of the Church and a special witness as mentioned in the previous paragraphy.)
This is what makes rejection of Letter VII so problematic when it is our own people–our own educators–who are rejecting Letter VII.
___________________________
I’ll spell it out.
There are two groups of people who reject Letter VII on the grounds that Oliver Cowdery was merely speculating (or lying) when he said the final battles of the Jaredites and Nephites tool place in New York: 
1. Those who claim the final battles did not take place in New York (this includes Mesoamerican advocates, Baja advocates, and advocates of Panama, Peru, Chile, Malaysia, Eritrea, etc.).
and
2. Those who claim the final battles did not take place at all (anti-Mormons, former Mormons, and anyone else who rejects the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon). 
____________________________
As always, I emphasize that this is not some kind of catechism. No one has to accept Letter VII. It’s not a test of faithfulness or good standing, etc., and I don’t want to imply that it is.
However, it is a serious question about how we approach Church history and the historicity of the Book of Mormon. 
In Joseph’s day, everyone knew Cumorah was in New York. There is no ambiguity in Church history on this point, despite the attempts of modern LDS scholars to create some. 
You can believe the Book of Mormon took place somewhere else. But you should also recognize what the implications of your beliefs are, both for you and for those you teach. 
If you’re a teacher in the Church, you need to be aware that students may have difficulty reconciling your rejection of Oliver Cowdery’s Letter VII with your acceptance of everything else he wrote.
Just saying.

Source: Book of Mormon Wars

Uncategorized

Joseph Fielding Smith rejected the two-Cumorahs theory

One of my favorite arguments from the Mesoamerican scholars is their approach to Joseph Fielding Smith (JFS).

I mention Joseph Fielding Smith because he was the last President of the Quorum of the Twelve to specifically address Book of Mormon geography. He emphatically rejected the two-Cumorahs theory that most current LDS scholars embrace. 

JFS was clear, the LDS scholars rejected him–twice–and they continue to reject him today. 

This leaves us with a simple choice, as explained at the end of this post.

The two-Cumorahs theory is the premise behind the Mesoamerican geography that you have been taught your whole life by BYU/CES and Church media.

In my view, of course, that theory is false. It was developed by RLDS scholars in the 1920s and embraced by LDS scholars at BYU over the objection of Joseph Fielding Smith.

These scholars know Joseph Fielding Smith explicitly rejected their two-Cumorahs theory, as I’ve discussed on this blog many times.

But they don’t want ordinary members to know that.

So, for example, on FairMormon they don’t even tell readers what Joseph Fielding Smith actually had to say. Instead, they quote 30-year-old hearsay to justify their rejection of what he said.

For people who supposedly sustain the Prophets, Seers and Revelators of the Church, it’s an audacious argument.
______________________________________

Here’s a fun experiment you can try. 

Ask your BYU/CES teacher or your ward’s Mesoamerican advocate what he/she thinks of Joseph Fielding Smith.

If necessary, remind them that he was a President of the Church, a President of the Quorum of the Twelve, and an apostle for 60 years before becoming President. He was Church Historian and Recorder for 49 years (until he became President).

Remind them that he said the two-Cumorahs theory (the theory that the “real” Cumorah is in Southern Mexico) was false and would cause members to become confused and disturbed in their faith in the Book of Mormon.

(As an aside, that has proven to be a prophetic statement, as evidenced by any number of anti-Mormon or former Mormon blogs.)

If they have Mesomania, this is what your Mesoamerican advocate will tell you about Joseph Fielding Smith:

1) he didn’t know what he was talking about and/or
2) he once said man would not land on the moon.

They may not even know that President Smith met with the Apollo astronauts and said he was wrong for having said men would not land on the moon. JFS readily acknowledged mistakes he had made when giving his opinions on various topics.

But instead of saying he made a mistake about the two-Cumorahs theory, he reiterated his position when he became President of the Quorum of the Twelve.
______________________________________

Your BYU/CES teacher might refer you to FairMormon or one of the other so-called scholarly sites that promote Mesoamerica.

But don’t let them avoid the question.

It really boils down to a simple choice:

Or, to be even more clear:

It doesn’t get much more basic and clear than this.
_____________________________

You might come across a BYU/CES scholar, or ward Mesoamerican advocate, who adopts the FairMormon hearsay approach that consists of this:

JFS said people can believe whatever they want.
Therefore, JFS changed his mind on the topic.

You don’t have to go to law school to see the logical fallacy of that reasoning.

What is an Apostle supposed to do when he sets forth a clear, unambiguous position but the LDS scholars reject what he teaches? 

How about when he becomes President of the Quorum of the Twelve and reiterates his position, but the LDS scholars still reject what he teaches?

It’s really not a question of what the scholars think. It’s a question of what we think.

Our own Article of Faith 11 teaches:

11 We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

Joseph Fielding Smith couldn’t tell people what they have to think without violating this Article of Faith. He simply declared the truth and let people decide whether or not to accept it.

Just as Joseph and Oliver did with Letter VII.

Just because LDS scholars have chosen to reject Letter VII and Joseph Fielding Smith (and so much more) doesn’t mean you have to.

It’s your choice.

Just make sure it’s an informed choice.

Source: Book of Mormon Wars

Uncategorized

Foreign language versions

Because so much traffic to this and my other blogs comes from non-English speaking countries, I’ve added google translate buttons.

Now, no matter what language you speak, you can have the full content easily translated into your native language.

Google does a great job with automatic translation, but there are a few errors from time to time. To introduce foreign-language readers to the North American setting, I’ve had a couple of posts translated to be posted on language-specific blogs. I’m doing some testing now but next week I’ll post those links for anyone who would like to share them with people who speak Spanish, French, German, Portuguese, and other languages as we add them.
__________________

It has also occurred to me that Letter VII and other important Church history documents have never been translated outside of English.

The Joseph Smith Papers, for example, are available only in English. You can try to translate them online, but it’s very difficult and involves a lot of cutting and pasting. Basically, you have to know English to navigate the pages and do searches. You can cut and paste specific text to translate it, but if you don’t speak or read/write English, you can’t really use the website.

If you want to try it, Letter VII is here. You plug the url into google translate and it will translate only the headings, not the text itself.

As I’ve mentioned, Letter VII appears nowhere on lds.org (except a single citation in a footnote on a point not related to Cumorah). There’s an entire article on Cumorah that doesn’t mention Letter VII, here.

There’s another page in the media section that implies the Mormon 6:6 Cumorah is not the one in New York. Check it out here and see how carefully worded it is. Notice the distinction between the Book of Mormon “Cumorah” and the statement, “In our era, the Hill Cumorah is a drumlin-hill between the towns of Palmyra and Manchester, New York, where the gold plates… was unearthed.”
_________________

[While I’m on this topic, Cumorah isn’t even mentioned in the Institute Course titled Religion 275, Teachings and Doctrine of the Book of Mormon. The cover of the manual gives us a nice view of Mesoamerican palm trees, though. The manual tries to avoid geography altogether. For example, on p. 100 there’s a quotation by Ezra Taft Benson about “Christ’s coming to America.” Everywhere else, the manual refers to Christ’s visit “to the Americas,” plural. Well, except for the copyright page that states the manual was “Printed in the United States of America.”

Seminary: The Seminary manual includes the term once, in this fascinating paragraph on p. 475:

“When and where was it written?

“Mormon likely wrote chapters 1–7 of this book between A.D. 345 and A.D. 401 (see Mormon 2:15–17; 8:5–6). He finished his writings after the final battle between the Nephites and the Lamanites at Cumorah in A.D. 385 (see Mormon 6:10–15; 7:1). Moroni probably wrote the material in chapters 8–9 between the years A.D. 401 and A.D. 421, as he wandered “for the safety of [his] life” (see Mormon 8:4–6; Moroni 1:1–3).”

Notice that Mormon “finished” his writings after the final battle at Cumorah. Of course, this doesn’t answer the question of where Cumorah was. The manual doesn’t mention that Oliver Cowdery wrote that Moroni told Joseph the account was “written and deposited” not far from his house. That means it was written not far from the Smith home near Palmyra. (This makes sense, since the repository of Nephite records in the hill Shim until Mormon moved the records to the hill Cumorah, so he would have had to do the abridgment somewhere near Joseph’s home.)

Overall, the seminary manual does a good job covering some of the scriptures about Cumorah, but it still doesn’t mention Letter VII (or Letter VIII), which tell us a lot about Cumorah.

Sunday School. The Sunday School manual has the Arnold Friberg-inspired Mayan temple on the cover (the same motif that we’ve seen incorporated in the logos of the Meosamerican advocacy groups). Lesson 43 covers Cumorah, but of course says nothing about where Cumorah is and does not mention Letter VII.

Fortunately, the manual suggests teachers use Friberg’s painting “Mormon Bids Farewell to a Once Great Nation,” which depicts both Mormon and Moroni on the Hill Cumorah in New York, next to a huge oak tree in the autumn. That’s the solid, awesome painting that was removed from the missionary and foreign language editions of the Book of Mormon in 1981, replaced by the painting of Moroni, by himself, burying the plates at Cumorah in New York. The scholars approved that one because it is consistent with the two-Cumorahs theory, while the Friberg Cumorah painting repudiates the two-Cumorahs theory. If we’re going to keep republishing the Friberg paintings set in the New World, why can’t we republish his Cumorah painting, which is consistent with the text, instead of his jungle/pyramid paintings, which defy the text?
_________________

The point of all of this is that you can be a diligent LDS student in seminary, institute, and Sunday School your entire life and never once learn that Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith wrote and endorsed Letter VII, which contains the fundamental teaching that Cumorah was in New York. That “oversight” in the manuals leaves people vulnerable to the two-Cumorahs theory.
_________________

You can find Letter VII in various online sources, but again, you have to know English first.

And, of course, you can read it in context in my little book.

_________________

This is a long way of saying that even if you live in Utah and speak English, you have to exert some effort to learn about Letter VII. It was ubiquitous in Joseph’s day; it is unknown in ours.

We can fix that. 

Just tell everyone you know to read Letter VII when your Sunday School class gets to Lesson 43.

Meanwhile, though, if it’s that difficult to overcome the suppression of Letter VII by the scholars when you speak English, think of how difficult it would be to learn about it if you don’t speak English.

Consequently, one of my first posts in the foreign language blogs translates the key portions of Letter VII.

From everything I can tell, the foreign language versions of this blog are the first time Letter VII has been formally translated into these other languages. 

So next week, when I publish the links to those blogs, share them with everyone you know who speaks those languages.

🙂

Source: Book of Mormon Wars

Uncategorized

Ask Gramps has Mesomania

In the last post I noted that AskGramps forgot to mention Letter VII. That was an answer given in 2008. Back then, hardly anyone knew about Letter VII because LDS scholars have suppressed it. You can’t even find it mentioned on lds.org.*

Some people object when I say LDS scholars have suppressed Letter VII, but you can look at FairMormon and all the publications by BYU Studies, FARMS/Maxwell Institute, and the rest, and you won’t find it mentioned anywhere.

To their credit, BookofMormonCentral have put it in their archive, but then they repudiate it with their KnoWhys. Their affiliates uniformly reject Letter VII, although they do it so obliquely that no one seems to notice.

So it’s no wonder AskGramps never heard of it.

Whether ignorance is a defense is up to you, the reader, but in 2014, AskGramps pulled a full Mesomania and outright declared there are two Cumorahs!

The “two-Cumorahs” theory was developed by RLDS scholars in the 1920s. LDS scholars embraced the theory over the objection of Joseph Fielding Smith, and now AskGramps is relaying it to new generations. http://askgramps.org/hill-cumorah-really-new-york/

I bring this up because I still meet a lot of LDS members who have no idea that our LDS scholars are promoting the two-Cumorahs theory, thereby undermining the credibility and reliability of Oliver Cowdery, Joseph Smith, and David Whitmer.

IMO, AskGramps out to reconsider repeating the Mesomania-inspired theories of current LDS scholars. (Needless to say, I think the scholars should reconsider their theories, but that seems highly unlikely, given their years of allegiance to the two-Cumorahs theory. See the Mesomania book and blog for my thoughts on why this is.)

Check out what AskGramps has to say:

There are two Hill Cumorahs. Both of which were depositories of records of the Nephites. Unfortunately because the name and purpose are the same, it is very easy to confuse the two and assume that people are talking about one when they mean the other.
The first hill is the one which the Book of Mormon references and held the records that Mormon used to compile the Golden Plates near the end of the Nephite civilization. We don’t know exactly where this is, although somewhere in Mexico is a standard guess. The final war of the Nephites was fought near this Cumorah.
Moroni survived the war and had the charge to protect his father’s abridgment of the Nephite record (aka the Golden Plates). We don’t know how long Moroni lived afterwards. We do know from his record that Moroni was alone and hunted. He feared that if he was caught by the Lamanites he would be killed and the record destroyed. With that as a possible consequence, it seems very unlikely that he would risk returning to the lands ruled by the Lamanites.
Moroni did not record the length of his journey or where he traveled. He had limited space left on the plates and devoted that for things he thought would be more important to us.
The next record we have is Joseph Smith’s account of the angel Moroni’s visit. Joseph Smith was told by the angel Moroni that he had buried them in a nearby hill in New York. This means that the most likely way they got there was that Moroni traveled for years, alone and on the run, as the Lord guided him to the correct spot. Now how did this second hill get to be called Cumorah? I don’t know, but from what we see of the naming conventions in the Book of Mormon, it wouldn’t be all that hard to believe that Moroni would call the second hill in which the records were stored the same name as the first one, no matter the years and miles separating them.
______________
As long as we’re talking about two-Cumorahs, you won’t be surprised to learn that AskGramps has also signed on to the volcano nonsense.
_____________
*Letter VII is cited in a footnote in an article that discusses what Moroni told Joseph, but it says nothing about Cumorah. This is the sole reference to Letter VII on the entire lds.org. https://www.lds.org/ensign/1990/08/moronis-message-to-joseph-smith?lang=eng

Source: Book of Mormon Wars

Uncategorized

Apparently even Ask Gramps has never heard of Letter VII

I’m continually amazed at how few members of the Church are even aware of Letter VII. Oliver’s letters were ubiquitous during Joseph’s lifetime. Everyone knew about them; demand in England was so great that a special pamphlet was published that contained nothing but the letters.

Today, hardly any members of the Church have heard of Letter VII. Even fewer have read it.

The web page AskGramps didn’t mention Letter VII in response to this question:

Have you found any reference where Joseph Smith actually called the hill of the golden plates Cumorah?

Since Oliver wrote Letter VII with the assistance of Joseph, and Joseph endorsed the letter by instructing his scribes to copy it into his history as part of his story, AskGramps should have let readers know about it.
Maybe next time.
The answer was pretty good anyway, so I’ll copy it here for archive purposes:
Gramps,
Jerry Ainsworth has spent a lifetime on Book of Mormon archaeology. He supports the Central America theory and claims Joseph Smith never identified the place he got the records as Cumorah, even though later church leaders have. Have you found anywhere where Joseph actually called the hill of the golden plates Cumorah?
Gary, from Whitby. Ontario
Dear Gary,
Many others, in addition to Jerry Ainsworth, have spent their lives studying Book of Mormon archaeology, and they do not all agree with the Central America theory. That theory is indeed the most popular one, but it has a number of unresolved problems associated with it. Each of the other theories also have their own problems.
To the best of my knowledge, we have no first person record of Joseph Smith naming the hill from which he received the plates of the Book of Mormon. However, Only a small fraction of the words that Joseph Smith spoke were ever written down–and we can include in that fraction the scriptures that he revealed. There can be no other explanation for the Hill Cumorah being named what it was than that the name was given by Joseph Smith. All of his contemporaries used the name Cumorah for that hill, and there is no record of him refuting any of them. Had he done so, there no doubt would have been corrections made in the thinking and the writing of others. It is impossible to think that somebody else thought up that name and Joseph went along with it.
So I think that we can conclude with utmost confidence that Joseph received the name of that hill from the Angel Moroni. Therefore, the Hill Cumorah in New York State must stand as an a priori postulate for any reasonable archaeological theory relating to the Nephite culture. Here are just a few of the voluminous records that point to Joseph Smith as the originator of the name Cumorah—
“This angel delivered a message to Joseph Smith, and told him that in the Hill Cumorah there were buried golden plates containing a record of the forefathers of the American Indians” (Discourse of President Heber J. Grant, Conference Report, October 1919, Morning Session, p.21
“Joseph Smith visited by the angel Moroni and told of the Book of Mormon record. Joseph viewed the gold plates buried in a nearby hill” (Cumorah) (see Joseph Smith—History 1:27-54).
“The following is also taken from the history of the travels of the Kirtland Camp: ‘The camp passed through Huntsville, in Randolph County, which has been appointed as one of the stakes of Zion, and is the ancient site of the City of Manti, and pitched tents at Dark Creek, Salt Licks, seventeen miles” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, edited by Bruce R. McConkie, 3:, p.239)
Next we’ll find some archaeologist claiming that the Book of Mormon city, Manti, could not have been in Randolph County, Indiana.
Here’s a statement from our current prophet, President Gordon B. Hinckley—
“Among these was Mormon, who in his day kept the chronicles of the nation. From these extensive records he had compiled on plates of gold an abridged record. This he had given to his son, Moroni, who survived the destruction of the Nephite nation at the hands of the Lamanites. Moroni, prior to his death, buried the record in the Hill Cumorah, where Joseph Smith received it some fourteen centuries later” (Gordon B. Hinckley, What of the Mormons? , p.78)
And again from Brigham Young —
“Persecution did not commence in Kirtland, nor in Jackson County, but it commenced at the time Joseph the Prophet sought the plates in the hill Cumorah” (Journal of Discourses, 2:, p.5)
Where do you think that Brigham Young could have come up with that identification of the Hill Cumorah, if not from Joseph Smith?
Another quote from Brigham Young—
“I have conversed with several of those men who say they have seen the plates that Joseph Smith took out of the hill Cumorah; I have also conversed with Joseph Smith, who has told me of these things and many more that it would be unnecessary on the present occasion to relate” (Journal of Discourses, 10:, p.131).
Relative to the things that the Lord promised the Three Witnesses that they were entitled to see, we have this interesting account also preserved for us by Brigham Young—
“When Joseph got the plates, the angel instructed him to carry them back to the hill Cumorah, which he did” (Journal of Discourses, 19:38).
In this regard, those who refute the location of the Hill Cumorah as being in upper New York State are necessarily impugning the veracity of the Angel Moroni.
Gramps 

Source: Book of Mormon Wars

Uncategorized

Cumorah was once great

In previous generations, the Hill Cumorah in New York was considered great among Latter-day Saints. Now, our scholars relegate it to a nameless hill that is important only because Moroni buried the plates there after traveling 3400 miles from Central America.

But we don’t have to accept what modern scholars say.

We can Make Cumorah Great Again.

Here’s an example from The Latter-Day Saints’ Millennial Star from 1866.

The link.

The image:

The text (excerpt):

“Cumorah was the name by which the hill was designated in the days of the Prophet Moroni, who deposited the plates about four hundred and twenty years after the birth of Christ… And all the ancient plates, Mormon deposited in Cumorah, about three hundred and eighty-four years after Christ. When Moroni, about thirty-six years after, made the deposit of the book entrusted to him, he was, without doubt, inspired to select a department of the hill separate from the great sacred depository of the numerous volumes hid up by his father….”

Source: Letter VII