I really like the new direction BYU Studies is taking. They offer some wonderful resources, such as these:
They have some materials on the New Testament that are awesome.
https://byustudies.byu.edu/byu-new-testament-commentary/
The current issue introduces the Oracles of God collection from BYUI, which includes official declarations, proclamations, statements, etc. from the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve.
https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/oracles-of-god/
https://archives.byui.edu/s/public/page/oracles-of-god
_____
On the other hand, they have some legacy material that is, let’s say, less than wonderful, such as the old M2C-driven Book of Mormon Maps and Charts.
https://byustudies.byu.edu/further-study-sub-ca/the-book-of-mormon/
That collection includes Cumorah in southern Mexico.
https://byustudies.byu.edu/further-study-chart/159-plausible-locations-of-the-final-battles/
 |
| (click to enlarge) |
As well as the overall M2C model.
 |
| (click to enlarge) |
Maybe someday BYU Studies will rethink these charts, or decide to publish multiple working faithful hypotheses instead of insisting on M2C exlusively.
Source: About Central America
One thought on “BYU Studies, good and bad”
Amén.
Brother Joseph noted on different occasions that the BOM peoples were here in North America, predominantly here in the USA in the Midwest region. If he said so, and the archeological record concurs with what he said, like with that of Zelph’s mound, then that should convince people as to the true location of various BOM sites. More and more evidence is coming to light every year that supports this view, much more than the Central and South American views. One big one I like, is the fact that temples south of the USA, do NOT follow The Law of Moses. Whereas, the ones in North America attributed to the Adena and Hopewell peoples, do. There is much more evidence that supports this view, but only far stretches that support the south of the US border views.
Comments are closed.