This “theory” brings a whole new meaning to being “consumed by the spirit”...
Posted on 02/15/2010 3:25:45 PM PST by reaganaut
Before we can intelligently discuss supposed Book of Mormon anachronisms we need to explore the possible New World location for Book of Mormon events. A geographic model will help set the background for understanding many of the future articles in this series. First, however, some significant facts must be addressed to properly examine this topic.
1. There is no official Book of Mormon geography.
In the quasi-official Encyclopedia of Mormonism, the production of which was overseen by Elders Dallin H. Oaks and Neal A. Maxwell of the Quorum of the Twelve, we find the following: "The church has not taken an official position with regard to location of geographical places (in the Book of Mormon)."
In 1993, in response to a query from the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, the office of the First Presidency faxed a statement, which reads in part:
"The church emphasizes the doctrinal and historical value of the Book of Mormon, not its geography. While some Latter-day Saints have looked for possible locations ... there are no conclusive connections between the Book of Mormon text and any specific site."
George Q. Cannon, First Presidency counselor to Presidents Brigham Young, John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff and Lorenzo Snow, said:
"The First Presidency has often been asked to prepare some suggestive map illustrative of Nephite geography but have never consented to do so. Nor are we acquainted with any of the Twelve Apostles who would undertake such a task. The reason is, that without further information, they are not prepared even to suggest (a map). The word of the Lord or the translation of other ancient records is required to clear up many points now so obscure...."
Without revelation on the matter, we are left to our own intellects and theories. Why haven't we received revelation on this matter? Why haven't we received revelation as to the age of the Earth, the exact location of Jesus' birth, the precise location that the Israelites crossed the Red Sea, the eternal purpose of dinosaurs or a definitive answer about evolution? Do the pearly gates "swing" or "slide"?
Like Book of Mormon geography, such issues don't affect our salvation. Some members, however, may struggle with their testimonies if they believe the Book of Mormon cannot be correlated to any real-world geography. Conversely, a reasonable geographic model can bolster the faith of other members.
2. Joseph Smith's comments should not be construed as revelatory.
Although most members tacitly acknowledge that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has no official position on the location of Book of Mormon events, some members seem to believe that statements made by Joseph Smith implicitly represent revelation on the topic.
Some have even gone as far to suggest that those who disagree with Joseph Smith's geographical comments are guilty of rejecting the prophet or that they are out of harmony with the LDS Church. This is a strange accusation and implies that those church leaders who have said that there is no official Book of Mormon geography are also on the road to apostasy, which is obviously untrue.
Just because Joseph translated the Book of Mormon doesn't mean he received revelation as to whereabouts of those events. When we read his statements on the matter, it becomes apparent that he had some strong opinions but that his opinions changed with time and reflected his best intellectual efforts to discover answers -- just as any curious individual would do. Because he never claimed to know the geography from revelation, we shouldn't make this claim for him.
This also applies to statements by all modern prophets. No prophet has claimed revelation on Book of Mormon geography, and their comments should be tempered by our discussion in issues 10-16.
Critics like to quote Joseph's mother, Lucy, who said that while Lord prepared Joseph to acquire the plates, "God ... manifest(ed) to him" some of the "particulars" concerning the Book of Mormon. According to Lucy, Joseph described the "ancient inhabitants of this continent," as well as their dress, mode of traveling, their cities and more (History of Joseph Smith, 83).
According to the critics, this suggests that Joseph knew everything about the Book of Mormon, saw exactly what their lives were lik, and would know where the events took place.
Firstly, Lucy dictated her thoughts nearly two decades after they happened. Secondly, just because Joseph saw such things in vision doesn't mean that Joseph knew the location of the events. Seeing people and buildings is not the same as seeing a map or satellite image. There is no evidence that God revealed the location of Book of Mormon events to Joseph Smith.
Interesting.
There is no evidence that God revealed the location of Book of Mormon events to Joseph Smith.
Sheesh - Why don’t they come out and say, “There is no historical Book of Mormon Geography - it never happened.”
It would free them and make their lives much richer.
You know how these jerks are...
I DO agree with you!
(Hint to objectors: show me the golden tablets.)
There is no LDS geography...and there is no archaeological evidence either. The Bible has maps in many of its editions; the BOM has none. Curious!
This will be fun to watch.
Not trying to be argumentative, but that is a massive fundamental difference between The Bible and the Book of Mormon. We have endured hundreds of years of skeptics because they would say this couldn’t be, where’s this or that, only to later be proven wrong because we’d finally find whatever they were claiming made the Bible, false.
We have thousands of copies of the OT and NT writings that go back as early to a couple decades after Christ’s death. we can see how it’s been painstakingly preserved and carefully translated into other tongues.
On the other hand they’ve never found any of the sites Smith mentioned. Never found any topography that matches anything he’s described. The golden plates (the originals) that nobody else ever saw, vanished. Joseph Smith’s own accounts of finding the originals, given several times at various times of his life, vary greatly with major detail changes.
On one hand we have a book that we can see through the study of history and archeology to be accurate in terms of what’s been recorded. On the other we have another book that has a cloudy history, and no archaeologist has ever been able to verify anything that’s been written about the Nephites. And they have sent a lot of Mormon archaeologists out over the years to attempt to do so and haven’t been able to.
As a former Mormon, I wouldn’t have it any other way.
This “theory” brings a whole new meaning to being “consumed by the spirit”...
Well said. I agree completely.
I suppose it does. chuckle.
Good for you.
or “slain by the Spirit”.
Never met a Mormon I didn’t like, and never met one that would remotely address the issues of their religion. NO ELEPHANTS, NO IRON AGE IMPLEMENTS, NO NEPHITES, NO CURSED BLACK RACE...I could go on and on, but it’s a waste of time. Mormons are the nicest cult on earth and they’re unfortunately damned as a false religion. JEsus and Satan are NOT BROTHERS.
IF MORMONS can deny the Trinity and be considered Christian, then I must be able to believe in the Trinity and be a MORMON.
That’s Socratic deduction, but it won’t do for the cultists.
Did I mention how nice they are?
“Holy heartburn”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.