Framing the debate as a “war” is hyperbole, of course. Most Church members are not angry or emotional about their differences of opinion. They seek to understand and are interested in exploring the facts and various interpretations.
True, some people who have invested heavily in M2C get angry, but their bias is transparent, which destroys their credibility anyway. We can’t expect employees of M2C advocacy groups to do anything but defend their employers. As Upton Sinclair said long ago, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
Some people want to see a cease-fire, which I’d be fine with if there were any casualties other than the egos of the M2C intellectuals and their followers. Instead, casualties from M2C continue to accumulate because it has become the de facto position of the Church. As such, people unfortunately attribute the logical and factual errors of M2C to the Church itself and lose their faith (or decline to continue with the missionaries).
Despite the bruised egos of the M2C intellectuals, I think it’s important to continue to create a record, in print and on the Internet, of evidence that supports the teachings of the prophets about the New York Cumorah.
In the future, when the prophecies are fulfilled, it will be important for the world to know that there have been faithful Latter-day Saints who accepted the teachings of the prophets all along.
The alternative is to remain silent as M2C further entrenches itself as the de facto position of the Church, only to be exposed as a hoax when the prophecies are fulfilled.
What prophecies, you might wonder?
Start with this one: http://www.lettervii.com/p/president-ivins-on-new-york-cumorah.html
_____
For new readers, here’s a quick summary. There are three basic positions on these questions:
1. The Hill Cumorah of Mormon 6:6 is in New York as taught by LDS prophets.
2. The Hill Cumorah of Mormon 6:6 is elsewhere (such as in southern Mexico as taught by M2C intellectuals and their followers).
3. The Hill Cumorah does not exist in the real world (as taught by anti-LDS critics and the CES/BYU maps of Book of Mormon geography).
I accept alternative #1 and write blogs and books to explain why I disagree with #2 and #3.
When I started this blog, I actually thought there was a possibility of reaching a consensus of some sort among active LDS about this issue. By now, it’s apparent that a consensus is unlikely, although I still discuss the possibility of consensus on the other blog:
http://bookofmormonconsensus.blogspot.com/
Source: Book of Mormon Wars
2 thoughts on “Why keep talking about the New York Cumorah?”
Would you also say your income now depends on teaching the Heartland movement and therefore have a bias and have lost all credibility according to your own definition? Asking for a friend.
It’s funny you bring this up. A well-known BYU professor once wrote to me accusing me of exactly that; i.e., making money off of “Heartland” materials.
First, I’m comfortably retired, with no need of additional income. Second, although my books do generate income, my involvement with these issues has been a net loss because of other expenses associated with these projects. Third, I’ve always been completely open about my biases: I’m biased toward finding and sharing extrinsic evidence that supports the teachings of the prophets. I’m biased towards making sense of Church history that supports faith rather than undermines it. And I’m biased toward sharing the joy of the Restoration in a way that is also factual and rational.
Comments are closed.