Conference thoughts – April 2018

Here are the M2C arguments and how I saw them addressed in this Conference.

1. “It was their opinion, and they were wrong.” If you know BYU/CES employees who advocate M2C or the fantasy maps of the Book of Mormon, ask them about Letter VII. Many of them will claim they never heard of it. I’ve met long-time BYU/CES people who actually never had heard of Letter VII, thanks to the ongoing suppression efforts of the M2C intellectuals.

But if they have heard of Letter VII, they will tell you that Letter VII was merely President Cowdery’s opinion, and he was wrong. They will tell you that Joseph Smith passively accepted this false tradition when Letter VII was copied into his personal history and republished multiple times with Joseph’s permission/direction. 

They will tell you that when James E. Talmage wrote Articles of Faith (a book published by the Church itself), he was wrong, too. They will tell you that members of the First Presidency speaking in General Conference were wrong, along with the various Apostles who also taught that Cumorah was in New York. 

You should ask these M2C intellectuals why they teach that all these prophets and apostles were wrong. In response, they’ll tell you Cumorah cannot be in New York because it has to be in Mesoamerica. It’s purely circular reasoning. 

[Note: most CES/BYU/Church employees have been trained to repeat some stock answers such as Cumorah’s geology as a drumlin and why the text never mentions snow, all of which I’ve addressed on this blog and none of which have nothing to do with why the M2C intellectuals reject the prophets.] 

Bottom line: according to the M2C intellectuals, all these Church leaders were merely expressing their opinions, and the prophets and apostles were wrong because the M2C intellectuals know better than the prophets and apostles.

2. “We don’t go back more than 30 years.” If you wonder why you have never heard about Letter VII or the teachings of the prophets and apostles about the New York Cumorah, ask some BYU/CES employees. They will tell you they don’t go back more than 30 years to quote from General Authorities, except in the case of Presidents of the Church, and then only to quote what Presidents have said while President. This is because they know that the New York Cumorah was clearly and unambiguously declared from at least 1835 through General Conference in 1975 and 1978. (That was 40 years ago now, but they started this 30-year rule some years ago.)

What did we learn from this Conference about these twin pillars of M2C?

1. Opinion excuse. Elder Anderson specifically mentioned the “it’s just their opinion” rationale. He quoted President Nelson but didn’t quote President Benson in his remarks, although perhaps President Benson’s teaching may appear in the published footnotes.

2. 30 years excuse. The Brethren went back to the original revelations to explain the change in the Priesthood quorums. President Oaks quoted Joseph F. Smith, who published Letter VII in the Improvement Era when he was editor in 1899.  Other prophets and apostles from the past were also quoted. The arbitrary BYU/CES 30-year rule doesn’t apply to the Brethren speaking in General Conference because Church leaders want members of the Church to know what their predecessors taught, and they consider those teachings relevant and important today.

In my view, the rationalizations of the M2C intellectuals were repudiated in this General Conference. IOW, we saw the repudiation of the M2C intellectuals who repudiate the prophets.

_____

At the outset, I mentioned three elements. The third is the issue of ministering. 

Disbelief in the Book of Mormon is a major obstacle for activation and missionary work. Yet M2C puts faithful members (and missionaries) in the position of contradicting the prophets and apostles while explaining the Book of Mormon and all the M2C materials published through the Correlation Department (as well as the visitors centers). It’s an inherently contradictory approach.

Since M2C became established around 1980, the M2C intellectuals have largely succeeded in suppressing the teachings about the New York Cumorah. But days of suppression and censorship are over, thanks to the Internet (and the Joseph Smith Papers if you look hard enough).

Joseph Smith himself recognized the importance of actual evidence when he recounted “the history of the Book of Mormon” while passing through Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, which he said were “the plains of the Nephites.” He described “roving over the mounds of that once beloved people of the Lord, picking up their skulls & their bones, as a proof of its divine authenticity.”

If Joseph thought “proof of its divine authenticity” was important during his lifetime, why would it not be now? The answer is simple: because the M2C intellectuals have persuaded so many people that the “best evidence” of the Book of Mormon contradicts the teachings of the prophets. That’s why the Correlation Department diverts attention from the issue, as I’ll explain tomorrow.

Ironically, the best evidence supports the prophets, but the M2C intellectuals are too invested in their theory to recognize this evidence.

Naturally, the M2C intellectuals will observe that the topic of the New York Cumorah was not specifically addressed. But the New York Cumorah has been repeatedly taught by Church leaders, including in General Conference, and has never been modified, changed, or even questioned by any member of the Twelve or First Presidency. 

The Brethren don’t have to respond to every theory raised by the intellectuals, whether it is M2C or another topic. Instead, it is the M2C intellectuals who should be replacing the question marks they place after the words of the prophets with exclamation marks.

_____

Many people don’t realize that President Nelson and President Oaks were originally called to the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles at the same time in April 1984. President Spencer W. Kimball called them to fill vacancies caused by the deaths of Elders LeGrand Richards and Mark E. Petersen.

_____