Jonathan Neville

December 14, 2021Uncategorized

Sad news: John L. Sorenson passed away

There is a wonderful obituary of a great man, John L. Sorenson, here:

https://www.utahvalleyfuneral.com/obituaries/John-Sorenson-5/#!/Obituary

Brother Sorenson was awesome. I dedicated my book Moroni’s America to him (along with Jack Welch, Wayne May, and Rod Meldrum).

John did a tremendous service by researching and publishing on the topics of transoceanic influences and the historicity of the Book of Mormon. While I disagree with some of his assumptions and conclusions about the setting of the Book of Mormon, I deeply appreciate his focus on the text as an actual history.

He laid the groundwork for ongoing research on Book of Mormon anthropology, archaeology, geology, geography, etc.

My condolences to his family.

Source: About Central America

December 11, 2021Uncategorized

Original Manuscript – Joseph Smith Papers

Yesterday I purchased Volume 5 of the Revelations and Translations series of the Joseph Smith Papers. It focuses on the Original Manuscript of the Book of Mormon.

Apparently they have only printed around 1,400 copies. If you’re in Salt Lake City, they have them at the main Deseret Bookstore downtown.

It’s a beautiful book. When I wrote A Man that Can Translate, Infinite Goodness, and Between these Hills, I had to rely on Royal Skousen’s excellent transcript of the Original Manuscript. Now the same information is available for everyone to see right on the facsimiles of the extant pages of the Original Manuscript.

But there is a big problem with this book.

It is full-on M2C. [M2C = Mesoamerican/two-Cumorahs theory]

This is no surprise, given that the editors are Royal Skousen and Robin Scott Jensen, both of whom are devoted members of the M2C citation cartel, but how can a purportedly accurate and comprehensive volume on the Original Manuscript completely censor Cumorah from the story of the Book of Mormon?

Such revisionist history is inexcusable.

This is a huge disappointment that will continue to mislead faithful Latter-day Saints and serious scholars for generations.

While the JSP editors could correct the content for the web page, these printed volumes obviously cannot be changed. And, based on past experience, the JSP editors have not been inclined to correct such errors anyway. After all, they have deliberated about the content of these books for a long time.

_____

Here’s the first sentence in the Introduction:

In the earliest hours of 22 September 1827, Joseph Smith left his parents’ home in Manchester, New York, with his wife Emma and traveled a few miles to a nearby hill.1

Note 1. Lucy Mack Smith, History, 1845, 105.

You can see the cited page in Lucy’s History here: https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/lucy-mack-smith-history-1845/112.

The earlier version of Lucy’s history is here: https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/lucy-mack-smith-history-1844-1845/60

The passage says nothing about where Joseph and Emma went that night, let alone that they “traveled a few miles to a nearby hill.” An accurate footnote would be placed after “Emma” in this sentence. Instead, the editors misleadingly put it after “nearby hill.”

Why would careful editors commit such an obvious error? Perhaps the answer has to do with where we get the information about the “nearby hill” this sentence refers to.

The phrase “nearby hill” appears nowhere in Lucy’s histories, but she did explain the hill was 3 miles from their home and between their home and Manchester. Her explanation supports the idea that the “hill” was “nearby,” but the JSP editors never quote or cite these passages because in them, Lucy explicitly identified the hill as Cumorah.

Our M2C scholars cannot tolerate the idea that Latter-day Saints might read the actual history about Cumorah. The JSP editors collaborate with the M2C scholars to accommodate M2C by cleverly employing terminology that is not in the historical record and avoiding quotations of (or even citations to) the actual record.

Just as they censored the New York Cumorah from the Saints books, they’re censoring it even from the Joseph Smith Papers.

_____

Lucy described the proximity of the hill in the passage that the M2C scholars refuse to quote or cite, but we can all read it right in Lucy’s own history when she related what Moroni told Joseph during his first visit:

the record is on a side hill on the Hill of Cumorah 3 miles from this place remove the Grass and moss and you will find a large flat stone pry that up and you will find the record under it laying on 4 pillars <of cement>— then the angel left him

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/lucy-mack-smith-history-1844-1845/41

We see from Lucy’s account that Cumorah was only 3 miles from the Smith home, which can reasonably be described as “nearby.” But others might think “nearby” connotes a distance much less than 3 miles. Why use the ambiguous term “nearby” when we have an actual historical account of the distance? And why not cite Lucy’s specific statement instead of citing a passage that doesn’t even mention the hill?

If you go to that link, you’ll see that the JSP editors have lined this passage out of the transcript, even though we can all see it is not lined out on the original manuscript. An accurate transcript could show the blue marks that the editors apparently assumed were equivalent to a line-out. Instead, they imposed their editorial line-out.

Another passage from Lucy about the “hill” shows its proximity to the home, but the JSP editors never quote or cite this one, either.

Lucy related that one day in early 1827, Joseph went to Manchester on an errand. He was late coming home. He explained that he had received a severe chastisement. His father became angry and wanted to know which of the neighbors was involved. Joseph replied (and Lucy put this in quotations):

“Stop, father, Stop.” said Joseph, “it was the angel of the Lord— as I passed by the hill of Cumorah, where the plates are, the angel of the Lord met me and said, that I had not been engaged enough in the work of the Lord; that the time had come for the record to <be> brought forth…

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/lucy-mack-smith-history-1845/111

We see from Lucy’s account that Joseph and his family already knew the name of the hill before he even translated the plates, and that the hill was located between Manchester and the family home. This account corroborates what Moroni told Joseph; i.e., that the hill Cumorah was 3 miles from the Smith home.

Again, we have to ask the JSP editors omit these informative, relevant and authentic historical accounts instead of presenting their own theories as fact.

_____

The second sentence is just as disingenuous.

He later recounted that while at the hill, he unearthed a set of “plates of gold,” whose existence had been revealed to him four years earlier by an angel.

If you search the Joseph Smith Papers for the phrase “plates of gold,” you get 12 results.

Not one of these mentions a hill:

He told me also of a sacred record which was written on plates of gold. I saw in the vision the place where they were deposited.

After being warned several times, he went to the spot and found the record engraved on leaves or plates of gold fastened together by rings passing through one edge of all the leaves

he revealed unto me that in the Town of Manchester Ontario County N. Y. there was plates of gold upon which there was engravings which was engraven by Maroni his fathers the servants of the living God

he told me of a sacred record which was written on plates of gold, I saw in the vision the place where they were deposited, he said the indians, were the literal descendants of Abraham

He told me also of a sacred record which was written on plates of gold. I saw in the vision the place where they were deposited. He said to me the Indians were the literal decendants of Abraham.

To learn the plates were deposited in a hill, we have to go to Lucy Mack Smith, but the JSP editors won’t tell readers that because Lucy explained the hill was called Cumorah by Moroni himself. Instead, they refer to the hill and quote “plates of gold” as if the same source provided both elements.

To be sure, Lucy’s 1845 history includes an insertion from the 1842 Times and Seasons that refers to a hill of considerable size “Convenient to the village of Manchester…” But “convenient” does not mean “nearby.” We rely on Lucy’s accounts, as well as Letter VII, to learn that the hill was actually nearby. But the JSP editors won’t explain their sources to their readers.

Readers should also know that the 1842 Times and Seasons account was composed by Joseph’s scribes several years after Letter VII had already established that the Cumorah of Mormon 6:6 is the same hill where Joseph found the plates. Letter VII was republished in the 1841 Times and Seasons as well so that readers of the 1842 Times and Seasons already knew the hill that was “convenient to the village of Manchester” was named Cumorah anciently.

Because of this misdirection by the JSP editors, even “engaged learners” who read this volume 5 of the Joseph Smith Papers are kept in the dark about all of this actual history.

_____

Later on this same page, we read, “Within two and a half years of obtaining them, he had produced a manuscript and published the Book of Mormon an account of ancient inhabitants of the Western Hemisphere.”

This is outrageous revisionist history that should have no place in a historical volume. When the editors engage in editorializing instead of presenting accurate history, they should clearly explain what (and why) they are doing.

“Western hemisphere” is a modern construct. It has been applied to Church history to obfuscate the actual accounts and to accommodate the Mesoamerican/two-Cumorahs theory.

If you search the Joseph Smith Papers for the term “western hemisphere,” you’ll see that there are zero historical documents related to the Book of Mormon that use this term.

Instead, we find the JSP editors editorializing:

Moroni, Smith was to learn, was the last in a long line of prophets in the Western Hemisphere who had written their story, just as the prophets in Palestine had written the Bible.

In his description of the Book of Mormon, Orson Pratt superimposed his understanding of Book of Mormon geography onto the Western Hemisphere by placing the Nephites in South America and the Jaredites in North America.

The actual history, which the JSP editors never quote or cite out of deference to M2C, is far more specific:

I was also informed concerning the aboriginal inhabitants of this country, and shown who they were, and from whence they came… The remnant are the Indians that now inhabit this country.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/church-history-1-march-1842/2

He then proceeded and gave a general account of the promises made to the fathers, and also gave a history of the aborigenes of this country, and said they were literal descendants of Abraham…. He said this history was written and deposited not far from that place, and that it was our brother’s privilege, if obedient to the commandments of the Lord, to obtain and translate the same by the means of the Urim and Thummim, which were deposited for that purpose with the record.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1834-1836/68

As faithful Latter-day Saints, we should be able to rely on the JSP editors to give us accurate Church history, not their revisionist opinions dressed up as facts.

_____

There are additional examples of this historical revisionism in this volume 5, just as there have been in other volumes of the Joseph Smith Papers.

We have to wonder what it will take to root out M2C from Church history.

Source: Letter VII

December 10, 2021Uncategorized

Five popular posts

Here are five of the posts that have received the most views on this blog (not counting the views on moronisamerica.com, amazon.com, etc.):

http://www.bookofmormoncentralamerica.com/2020/09/book-of-mormon-geography-in-one-graphic.html

http://www.bookofmormoncentralamerica.com/2019/06/writing-off-next-generation.html

http://www.bookofmormoncentralamerica.com/2019/08/the-m2c-gauntlet.html

http://www.bookofmormoncentralamerica.com/2020/09/book-of-mormon-central-finally-explains.html

https://www.bookofmormoncentralamerica.com/2016/05/fun-with-john-e-clark-byu-studies-and.html

Source: About Central America

December 9, 2021Uncategorized

The name of Zarahemla

Many of the Latter-day Saints who still believe what the prophets have taught about the New York Cumorah also find it significant that the Lord named the site to be built across the Mississippi River from Nauvoo.

Let them build up a city unto my name upon the land opposite the city of Nauvoo, and let the name of Zarahemla be named upon it. (Doctrine and Covenants 125:3)

There are three key points here. First, it was to be a city. Second, it was to have the name of Zarahemla. Third, the name was given by the Lord through revelation. This was nothing like the situation in Utah, when settlers named their communities after Book of Mormon places (Lehi, Nephi, Bountiful, etc.).

No one says there is only correct interpretation of D&C 125:3, but the Iowa Zarahemla does fit within the overall geography, as well as extrinsic evidence.

_____

Naturally, the M2C scholars insist that Zarahemla cannot be in Iowa. When we read their justifications, though, they rely on their own interpretations of the text, not the text itself. While there is nothing inherently wrong with their interpretations, there is nothing inherently correct, either. Their M2C hypothesis is merely the logical result of their assumptions and interpretations. It’s axiomatic that if you believe the M2C interpretations, you’ll conclude that Zarahemla must be in Mesoamerica.

Next week I’ll propose a model that will clarify how we reach different hypotheses from the same facts, but for now, let’s just say that, even starting with the same facts, people reach different conclusions because of their different assumptions about the facts.

Ideally, we’d all recognize, respect and appreciate multiple working hypotheses. I emphasize repeatedly that I’m fine with people believing M2C. I understand it quite well having accepted it by default for decades. M2C thrives on ignorance, but even those who are well informed choose to believe M2C. That’s all great. Most readers of this blog understand that approach, but there are still a handful of critics that are so devoted to M2C they still cannot acknowledge alternative faithful interpretations, let alone understand or accurately explain them.

_____

A lot of people don’t realize that Joseph Smith purchased far more land on the western side of the Mississippi than on the eastern side. In the map from the Joseph Smith Papers, I circled Nauvoo with the red circle below.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/bc-jsp/content/jsp/images/content/library/pdf/J2_Map4_Land-Purchases-LeeCounty-IA_web.pdf

Some people wonder how Zarahemla on the Mississippi could fit within the geography described by the text of the Book of Mormon. It fits easily, as we’ll discuss below after reviewing the name Zarahemla.

_____

The phrase “name of Zarahemla” brings to mind a passage in Alma:

Now it was the custom of the people of Nephi to call their lands, and their cities, and their villages, yea, even all their small villages, after the name of him who first possessed them; and thus it was with the land of Ammonihah. (Alma 8:7)

Because the Lord instructed Joseph Smith to call the site across from Nauvoo by “the name of Zarahemla,” it’s logical to assume that site was first possessed by Zarahemla.

The scriptures don’t tell us much about Zarahemla, either as a person or as a title. When Mosiah and his people left the land of Nephi, they “they discovered a people, who were called the people of Zarahemla. Now, there was great rejoicing among the people of Zarahemla; and also Zarahemla did rejoice exceedingly, because the Lord had sent the people of Mosiah with the plates of brass which contained the record of the Jews.” (Omni 1:14)

We see that the leader of these people was named “Zarahemla,” but we don’t know if he was the first Zarahemla or one in a line of leaders. Maybe those people followed the same custom as the people of Nephi:

Wherefore, the people were desirous to retain in remembrance his name. And whoso should reign in his stead were called by the people, second Nephi, third Nephi, and so forth, according to the reigns of the kings; and thus they were called by the people, let them be of whatever name they would.

(Jacob 1:11)

Because they were called the people of Zarahemla, and they lived in the land of Zarahemla, it seems likely that Zarahemla was a honorific name, similar to the way the Nephites used the name Nephi for their kings. Otherwise, the people would have to change their name and the name of their lands every time they got a new king.

No “city of Zarahemla” is mentioned in the text until Alma 2:26. This could be because the city was founded after Mosiah showed up, because Mormon didn’t think to mention it, or any number of other reasons. However, the people did have a temple somewhere in the land of Zarahemla (Mosiah 2:1).

This is important to recognize because some people assume that when Mosiah traveled to Zarahemla, he arrived at the city of Zarahemla instead of the land of Zarahemla.

_____

The Book of Mormon Onomasticon offers these possibilities for the name Zarahemla. I don’t have an opinion about this speculation, but it deserves consideration because for Mulek to come to the New World, presumably it was some Phoenicians who built and navigated the ship(s).

https://onoma.lib.byu.edu/index.php/ZARAHEMLA

Etymology

Possibly hypothetical HEBREW *zerʿa-ḥemlâ “Seed of Compassion” (JH, JAT), or “Merciful scattering,” employing ḥemlâ “mercy, compassion, pity, commiseration” (Genesis 19:16), and the same Semitic root is a loanword (ḥml) in 20th Dynasty EGYPT as ḥa-ma-nra “Be merciful, Have Compassion!”[1] PYH argues that ḥemlâ looks like a feminine participle from the verb “to pity.” If so, the preceding element in the name would probably not be a verb, thus perhaps leaving us with the meaning “Merciful-scion.” This proposed name is structured somewhat like HEBREW zeraʿ hammělûkâ, zeraʿ hammamlākâ “royal descendant” (Jeremiah 41:1, 2; 2 Kings 11:1; 25:25; Ezekiel 17:13; Daniel 1:3),[2] and like HEBREW zeraʽ ʼĕlōhîm “progeny of God, godly offspring” (Malachi 2:15),[3] and the Neo-Babylonian PN Zer-babili,[4] the PN of the late biblical prince and governor Zerubbabel “Scion/Offspring of Babylon, Seed-of-Babylon, Born-in-Babylon” (1 Chronicles 3:19, Ezra 3:2 = Sheshbazzar, Ezra 1:8; NT Zorobabel Matthew 1:12-13).[5] Note also that each is a royal descendant of the House of DAVID. Word-play based on this etymology has been found by Pedro Olavarria and David Bokovoy at Mosiah 9:2, and 3 Nephi 8:24 (based on use of ḥml “spared” at 1 Samuel 15:9).[6]

Cf. also Semitic zhr, zrʿ “to sow” in Demotic ḏrʿ, ḏl3 “spread, scatter” (> Coptic ḏōōre, ḏar, ḏar=, ḏare=, ḏēr, čer=),[7] as the possible prefix of the name.

Alternatively, Jo Ann Hackett compared the King James Bible PNs Zarah (Genesis 38:30; 46:12), Zerah (Genesis 36:13, 17, 33; 1 Chronicles 1:37; Nehemiah 11:24), Zara (Matthew 1:3), all based on HEBREW Zaraḥ, Zeraḥ, “Shine foroth, Light up; Dawn; Risen-Like-the-Morning-Sun” (hypocoristic PN for KJV Zerahiah Zeraḥ-Yah “YHWH has Risen Like the Morning Sun”[8] HEBREW Zrḥy = LXX Zaraei, and that HEBREW Zryh = LXX Zaraia.[9] Cf. the ASSYRIAN practice of naming a land for its capital city.

Less likely is hypothetical HEBREW *zĕrōʿ-ḥemla “Arm of mercy,” an English phrase used three times in the Book of Mormon, including once by JESUS at 3 Nephi 9:14, which could be a play on words (pun) on the name of ZARAHEMLA (using a folk etymology), whose destruction he had just mentioned (JAT). Cf. for example, the reading zeraʽ in MT, which is not supported by LXX Greek omos “shoulder” and Vulgate brachium “forearm,” which means that the correct reading should be zĕrōʿa “arm.”[10]

Less likely is hypothetical HEBREW *Zārâ-ḥemlâ “Scattering of mercy,” employing piel HEBREW zrh “to scatter, spread,” i.e., the scattering of JUDAH among the nations (RFS).[11]

Margaret Barker combines several of these meanings into complex wordplay designed to communicate the deeper meaning of the Servant Songs of ISAIAH: “To whom has the arm [zĕrōʿa] of the LORD been revealed?” can also mean “To whom has the seed/son [zeraʿ] of the LORD been revealed?” (Isaiah 53:1 ||Mosiah 14:1; cf. Mosiah 15:31 “The Lord hath made bare his holy arm”) without changing the HEBREW consonantal text – especially since the next line reads “he grew up before him as a suckling child” (Isaiah 53:2 [ RSV “young plant”; LXX “little child”] ||Mosiah 14:2) – and this coheres with Isaiah 53:10||Mosiah 14:10 “he shall see his seed/offspring, ” which can also be read “he shall be revealed as the son.”[12] This is merely part of the much broader liturgical and esoteric content of First Temple Israelite religion jettisoned by Deuteronomistic revisionism – according to Barker – a revisionism which did not infect the Book of Mormon.

_____

How Zarahemla fits.

The text tells us little about the geography of Zarahemla, but we can tell the city was located along the river Sidon and that people would go “down” into the city and “up” out of the city. Thus we infer the city was lower in elevation than the land surrounding it.

Some claim the river Sidon must flow north because the “head of the river” was south of Zarahemla, but the text reads “head of the river,” not “headwaters of the river.” The phrase “head of the river” is somewhat ambiguous; we can find usage and definitions that include both a conjunction and a source.

I’ve discussed this issue several times.

For example, unfortunately some foreign language editions of the Book of Mormon have adopted the M2C interpretation, as I discussed here: http://www.bookofmormoncentralamerica.com/2017/05/more-on-sidon-flowing-north-and.html

I included a side-by-side table of assumptions here:

http://www.bookofmormoncentralamerica.com/2021/06/review-of-moronis-america.html

I’ve also discussed the issue of the “head of the river” with examples from Church history:

http://www.bookofmormoncentralamerica.com/2015/12/head-of-sidon-still.html

And, of course, Jonathan Edwards referred to Binghamton as the head of the river, as I discussed in Between these Hills.

We can’t revisit all of this here, but this map shows one interpretation of the text that shows how well the site in Iowa, named in D&C 125, fits the overall geography, specifically here where Mosiah left the Land of Nephi for the Land of Zarahemla.

Often, people ask “where is the narrow neck” because they’ve been conditioned to think of the “narrow neck” as an hourglass shape. That’s not an unreasonable interpretation, but it’s also not the only possible interpretation, or even the most probable.

Another approach is to assume the text uses different words for different things; i.e., the small neck is not the narrow neck, and the narrow neck is not the narrow neck of land. The term “land northward” is not a proper noun but a relative term.

This approach allows numerous possible real-world settings. The thousands of possible sites in ancient North America accommodate multiple working hypotheses.

But all in all, the Iowa Zarahemla fits well with the New York Cumorah.

Source: About Central America

December 9, 2021Uncategorized

Commonalities

1. Acknowledge commonalities

″We, as world citizens, have more in common than we might suppose. That is not only true for us as members of the Church but also as human beings — as children of our Heavenly Father. If all of us would focus more on the divine fact that we are all brothers and sisters and would acknowledge the many positive things that we have in common — including life experiences and dreams we share — it should not be too hard to get along as individuals, communities and nations, regardless of where we live and what our backgrounds or life’s circumstances may be.”

—Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf, Devotional for Latter-day Saints in Oklahoma and Kansas, Oct. 17, 2021

https://www.thechurchnews.com/leaders-and-ministry/2021-11-06/elder-uchtdorf-birthday-quotes-81-years-old-231955

Source: Book of Mormon Concensus

December 8, 2021Uncategorized

Signs of intelligence

Check these:

Prof. Feynman

@ProfFeynman

18h

Five great signs of intelligence: • You’re not afraid or ashamed to find errors in your understanding of things. • You take mistakes as lessons. • You don’t get offended with accepting the facts. • You are highly adaptable and very curious. • You know what you don’t know.

Source: Book of Mormon Concensus

December 7, 2021Uncategorized

M2C and coming clean

Yesterday the Wall St. Journal published an article titled “The Media Stonewalls on the Steele Dossier: News companies are even more reluctant than other businesses to come clean about their misbehavior.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-media-stonewalls-steele-dossier-disinformation-trump-nyt-washington-post-trump-11638718026?mod=trending_now_opn_3

The article pointed out how media people do not hold themselves to the same standard to which they hold others. Excerpt:

‘Why don’t they just fess up and say they’re sorry?” That is the question journalists have asked about the corporate and institutional clients of my crisis-management business. It’s a question media companies should be asking themselves amid the implosion of the Steele dossier. Here we are, a few weeks after the dossier was discredited, and no one has paid a price.

Having had media companies as clients, I’ve found that when they’re under fire, they behave no differently from chemical or drug companies. Why? Because they don’t see coming clean as being in their self-interest.

Among other things, the truth can tarnish the brand and jam them up in court. So they often deny, stonewall, close ranks, and attack their critics. Two things media companies have that other businesses don’t is the ability to deliver news instantly and the mantle of moral authority.

The crisis confronting the news media post-dossier is rooted in disinformation….

The reluctance to correct course is often justified with the logic: Well, our hearts were in the right place…

_____

We see a similar situation with the M2C citation cartel, consisting of Book of Mormon Central, the Interpreter, Meridian Magazine, FairLatterdaySaints, and, until recently, BYU Studies.

The people in the M2C citation cartel all know they have been promoting M2C while censoring and attacking alternative faithful interpretations of the Book of Mormon.

However, like the media companies that pushed the fake Steele dossier and the Russian collusion hoax for years, the M2C citation cartel does not see coming clean as being in their self-interest.

Also like the media companies, they know the truth can tarnish their brands. Imagine having taught and promoted M2C for decades and then having to confess that you had deliberately suppressed the truth about what the prophets had taught about the New York Cumorah? Their brand–their self-appointed expertise about the Book of Mormon–would be tarnished for a long, long time.

As the article said, the M2C citation cartel instead denies, stonewalls, closes ranks, and attacks their critics.

Because of their privileged positions at BYU, primarily, the M2C citation cartel controls LDS intellectual life and has the “mantle of moral authority.” They even claim they’ve been hired by the prophets to guide the Latter-day Saints, so that criticism of their theories constitutes criticism of Church leaders.

_____

Every Latter-day Saint seeks to be an “engaged learner” and not a “lazy learner.” We don’t want someone to tell us what to think. We want to study the scriptures ourselves, along with the teachings of the prophets.

Unless we’re lazy, we don’t allow the credentialed class to promote their own theories, especially when they tell us that the prophets are wrong.

Source: Letter VII

December 7, 2021Uncategorized

What matters most

Discussions of Book of Mormon historicity/geography and the manner of translation should never rise to the level of contention or disputation. People can believe whatever they want.

What matters most is staying on the covenant path, striving to follow and emulate Christ, and helping to build Zion by serving one another.

People have a variety of spiritual gifts. They have a variety of testimonies. They have a variety of beliefs, experiences, perspectives, etc. We seek unity in diversity, not unity in uniformity. We don’t have to memorize a catechism or pledge allegiance to a particular interpretation of history or the scriptures.

We’ve emphasized this repeatedly on this blog. I’m not trying to persuade anyone of anything, except that I want LDS intellectuals/scholars to stop misinforming Latter-day Saints. Instead, they should encourage people to consider all the facts, consider multiple working hypotheses, and then make informed decisions. On this blog, we trust people to make their own decisions.

I’ve used this image in my firesides and presentations:

The problem with the M2C citation cartel is that they don’t trust Latter-day Saints to make informed decisions. Instead, they tell them what to think. They censor information that contradicts M2C and SITH. They tell them the prophets were wrong, etc. They won’t allow their students, readers, donors, and followers to compare alternative working hypotheses.

This is a problem because too many sincere people are confused when they see LDS scholars explicitly repudiating the teachings of the prophets regarding historicity/geography and the translation of the plates.

Some people will accept the M2C and SITH and remain on the covenant path. Some won’t accept M2C and SITH, but they will stay on the path by adopting the BYU fantasy map, which teaches that the Book of Mormon is best understood in a fictional setting. Or they will put these issues on their “shelves” and avoid the cognitive dissonance that way. All of these can stay on the covenant path, no problem.

But many who reject M2C and SITH also reject the Restoration. Thanks to the M2C citation cartel, they have been taught that M2C and SITH are the only acceptable interpretations. They abandon the covenant path and reject the Restoration without ever learning there are alternative faithful interpretations that corroborate, instead of repudiate, the teachings of the prophets.

On this blog, we want to give people alternatives to M2C and SITH. We offer information that many people don’t know about or haven’t considered.

We’re confident and happy with the interpretations that corroborate the teachings of the prophets, but we don’t mind if others disagree. We just want them to make informed decisions.

We don’t contend, we don’t get angry, we don’t dislike anyone, we don’t get frustrated because someone else believes something different.

We’re fine with people who believe the New York Cumorah as well as the Mesoamerican or any other “Two-Cumorahs” theory, including Baja, Panama, Malaysia, or any other setting. We’re fine with people who believe the Book of Mormon is pious fiction. We’re fine with people who reject the Book of Mormon because of their own religious traditions, or because they don’t believe in God.

We’re fine with people who believe Joseph Smith translated the plates by means of the Urim and Thummim. We’re fine with people who believe he read words off a stone-in-the-hat (SITH). We’re fine with people who believe Joseph composed the text, memorized it, made it up as he went, or whatever else they want to believe.

Basically, 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.

(Articles of Faith 1:11)

We just hope that all people, whatever their beliefs, can work together to attain Christ-like lives as they seek to establish a Christ-like society.

We think the optimum way to do that is by following the guidance of the Spirit, however that is manifest according to a person’s spiritual gifts and personal situation. (Moroni 10)

Source: About Central America

December 6, 2021Uncategorized

Research and learning

Some thoughts on research, learning, and perspective.

Naval

@naval

12h

Researchers don’t like to research things that could criticize their colleagues.

Prof. Feynman

@ProfFeynman

22h

The Feynman-technique of learning: > Pick a topic you wanna understand and start studying it > Pretend to teach the topic to a classroom > Go back to the books when you get stuck > Simplify and use analogies! • If you wanna master something, teach it.

“Choose the non-emotional response to any given situation and see how much easier your life becomes.”

@naval
“The reality is life is a single-player game. You’re born alone. You’re going to die alone. All of your interpretations are alone. All your memories are alone. You’re gone in three generations and nobody cares. Before you showed up, nobody cared. It’s all single-player.” –

@naval

The modern devil is cheap dopamine.

@naval

“If your opinions line up neatly with those of your friends and colleagues, they’re not your opinions.”

@naval

“A contrarian isn’t one who always objects – that’s a conformist of a different sort. A contrarian reasons independently, from the ground up, and resists pressure to conform.”@naval

“You get rewarded for unique knowledge, not for effort. Effort is required to create unique knowledge.”

@naval
Bitcoin is an exit from the Fed. DeFi is an exit from Wall Street. Social media is an exit from mass media. Homeschooling is an exit from industrial education. Remote work is an exit from9-5 Creator economy is an exit from employment. Individuals are leaving institutions.

@naval
“Free people make free choices. Free choices mean you get unequal outcomes. You can have freedom, or you can have equal outcomes. You can’t have both.”

No matter how impressive and official your authority, rank, or credentials are, you *immediately* lose credibility when you rely on them to make your point.

Ed Latimore

@EdLatimore

You’re confused because you keep trying to apply logic to human behavior. Once you accept that most of us are illogical and are more motivated by fear of loss and maintenance of comfort, then you’ll get it. You’ll be able to predict the future as if you wrote it.

Source: Book of Mormon Concensus

December 6, 2021Uncategorized

"Latter day Saintism" and the problem with Book of Mormon Central

Book of Mormon Central (BMC) could be an awesome organization if it was intellectually honest enough to acknowledge that there are alternative faithful interpretations of the Book of Mormon that have nothing to do with Mesoamerica.

BMC looks too much like Methodism and not like Latter day Saintism.

Joseph Smith, Jr., once observed,

I never thought it was right to call up a man and try him because he erred in doctrine, it looks too much like methodism and not like Latter day Saintism. Methodists have creeds which a man must believe or be kicked out of their church. I want the liberty of believing as I please, it feels so good not to be tramelled.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/discourse-8-april-1843-as-reported-by-william-clayton-b/3

BMC spends millions of dollars annually to promote M2C and indoctrinate Latter-day Saints to think that M2C is the only permissible interpretation of the Book of Mormon. Somewhere around 85% of their internet views/interactions are with Latter-day Saints, mostly through their M2C-approved Come Follow Me presentations.

Potential donors correctly wonder what’s the point of giving money to an organization whose primary activities are

(i) asserting their academic credentials as authority to tell members of the Church what to think,

(ii) promoting M2C as the only possible setting for the Book of Mormon, and

(iii) supplanting individual Come Follow Me study and ward/branch Sunday School discussions by creating and presenting professional Come Follow Me videos.

_____

As a subsidiary of Book of Mormon Archaeological Forum (BMAF), BMC continues to present its Mesoamerican/two-Cumorahs theory (M2C) as the only acceptable interpretation of the text. To anyone familiar with the history of BMAF this is no surprise.

BMAF is a long-time advocate of M2C, as we can all see in its logo and the content on its site.

BMC, of course, has retained the notorious FARMS logo that tells the world the Book of Mormon is a Mayan codex.

Whenever we see BMC, we should think BMC/BMAF. An honest logo would look like this:

Now, BMC/BMAF is extending its M2C dogma beyond the the context of the Book of Mormon. They are indoctrinating Seminary students, Latter-day Saints who speak other languages, and everyone who watches their Come Follow Me podcasts.

BMC/BMAF raises millions of dollars to promote M2C. Look how its Come Follow Me lessons for the Doctrine and Covenants incorporate their M2C logo. The lessons themselves teach M2C and SITH (stone-in-the-hat), while disallowing alternative faithful interpretations.

Source: About Central America