Posted on 05/27/2010 6:44:33 AM PDT by Colofornian
The discussion on Book of Mormon geography was getting heated. Scholars gathered in Provo, Utah, to discuss their theories about where the events described in the Book of Mormon took place. Some placed the Nephite capital city Zarahemla in Mesoamerica, others in South America. Others argued for a setting in the American heartland.
The president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints attended the two-day Book of Mormon convention. Although he found the discussion interesting, he was obviously concerned that people were getting a little too worked up about their geographic theories. He decided to intervene.
The Book of Mormon geography conference was held at Brigham Young Academy on May 23-24, 1903. But the advice President Joseph F. Smith gave at that conference 107 years ago could apply equally to current disputes over Book of Mormon geography.
"President Smith spoke briefly," the Deseret News account summarized, "and expressed the idea that the question of the city (of Zarahemla) was one of interest certainly, but if it could not be located the matter was not of vital importance, and if there were differences of opinion on the question it would not affect the salvation of the people; and he advised against students considering it of such vital importance as the principles of the Gospel."
More recently, the Encyclopedia of Mormonism described how "Church leadership officially and consistently distances itself from issues regarding Book of Mormon geography."
But the lack of an official position hasn't squelched interest. The subject attracts highly trained archaeologists and scholars and informed — and not-so-informed — amateurs and enthusiasts. Books, lectures and even Book of Mormon lands tours abound.
But something is rotten in Zarahemla — wherever it may be.
In the middle of what could be a fun and intellectually exciting pursuit similar to archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann's famous search for the lost city of Troy, there are accusations of disloyalty tantamount to apostasy.
In one corner is the more-established idea of a Mesoamerican setting for the Book of Mormon. This theory places the events of the book in a limited geographic setting that is about the same size as ancient Israel. The location is in southern Mexico and Guatemala. The person most often associated with this theory is John L. Sorenson, a retired professor of anthropology at BYU, and the author of "An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon" and a series of articles on Book of Mormon geography that ran in the Ensign magazine in September and October 1984. A new book, tentatively titled "Mormon's Codex," is in the process of being published.
In the other corner is the challenger, a new theory that places Book of Mormon events in a North American "heartland" setting. Like the Mesoamerican theory, it also is limited in area — but not quite as limited. Its symbolic head is Rod L. Meldrum and, more recently, Bruce H. Porter. Meldrum and Porter are the co-authors of the book "Prophecies and Promises," which promotes the heartland setting.
It wouldn't be hard to predict that some friction might come about from competing theories — that healthy sparring would occur with arguments and counter-arguments. But it has gone beyond that.
The source of the animosity comes from the heartland theory's mantra: "Joseph knew."
Joseph Smith made several statements that can be interpreted to have geographic implications. Proponents of a North American setting see these statements as authoritative and based in revelation. Mesoamerican theorists think that Joseph Smith's ideas about geography expanded over time and included approval of at least some connection to Central America.
To the heartlander, Joseph's knowledge about Book of Mormon locations is seen as proof of his divine calling and a testament to his being the chosen translator/expert of the book. Joseph didn't just know; he knew everything. This position, however, leaves little room for other opinions — or for charity.
"The way I look at Joseph Smith's statements is that he either knew or he didn't know. If he knew, he knew by revelation. And if he didn't know, you've got to ask yourself why he said the things that he said," Porter said. "If he didn't know, was he trying to show off? If he really didn't know, why was he telling people?
"My feeling is that Joseph Smith did not lie," Porter said.
If you don't agree with this line of reasoning, by implication, you think that Joseph lied.
"My authority is Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon," Porter said. "Most of your Mesoamerican theorists, their authority is John Sorenson and Matthew Roper. They picked those as their authority at the neglect of Joseph Smith."
Matthew P. Roper, a research scholar at the Neal A. Maxwell Institute Of Religious Scholarship, naturally doesn't like this characterization. "They seem to be trying to elevate a question of lesser importance, Book of Mormon geography, to the level of the doctrines of the church," Roper said. "And even though they give lip service to things like they know the church has not given an official position, they turn around and say, 'All these people are dismissing Joseph Smith.' "
It is somewhat ironic that believing that Joseph did not "know" also supports Joseph as a prophet. The more Joseph's assumptions about Book of Mormon geography prove to be wrong, the greater a testimony that he did not write the book himself. "We assume," Roper said, "that since Joseph Smith was the translator of the Book of Mormon, and that it was translated by the gift and power of God, that he would know everything about the book that an author would. I would submit that the two are not the same thing. I could translate the 'Wars of Caesar' and not know anything about ancient Gaul or the different tribes."
When Meldrum's theories first became popularized through firesides and a DVD he produced, the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR) took notice and responded with gusto.
"The way he said things, they attack that more than they attack the evidence that he presented," Porter said.
Scott Gordon, president of FAIR, would not disagree. "We view this as a steadying-of-the-ark issue. We really don't care where he picks for his theory on where the Book of Mormon can take place," Gordon said. "What we care about that he is implying that the church is not following the teachings of Joseph Smith. Which means the church leadership, the prophet — everything is not following. And we think that is a very, very dangerous position."
"They are getting really worried because they are seeing this is becoming a movement. That's their words," Meldrum said. "They are just saying it's a movement because they are getting a lot of flak from people who are seeing the DVD and the information and thinking, 'You know what, this makes a lot of sense.' "
But supporters also see the heartland theory as an inspired movement that will transform the LDS Church: "(V)ery few people out there fully grasp the magnitude of this movement and the powerful influence that it is having and the sweeping nature of its message," wrote one prominent supporter. "It will sweep the church and most LDS will not even understand what happened until it's past. … Time is our friend."
A movement — about geography?
Historian Ronald O. Barney has seen similar attitudes in some people supporting Mesoamerica. One person described a particular Mesoamerican book as "life-transforming" and that the book "changed the way I think about everything."
Life-transforming?
"People are hanging their faith on evidence of Book of Mormon peoples," Barney said.
"I just think that this way of thinking about our religion is such a waste of time," Barney said, "It almost suggests we don't trust the Holy Ghost. Not only are we worried that he won't reveal to people the truthfulness of the book, but we want to augment it — even if we have to bend and distort — so that there can be no mistake about its truthfulness."
Meldrum said he doesn't hang his testimony on the heartland theory.
"I don't know that this geography is true. I've said that many times and I want to make sure that that's clear. If President Monson was to tomorrow say, 'You know what? I've had a revelation and the Book of Mormon occurred in Indonesia,' you know what? I'm with him." Meldrum said with a laugh.
John L. Sorenson stands by the Mesoamerican theory, but also the Prophet.
"(Geography) wasn't very important to him and he didn't know much about it," Sorenson said. "Joseph knew what he knew — and what he knew was far more important than geography."
Joseph's nephew, President Joseph F. Smith, would probably agree.
You ANTI's never give it up; do you?
ANYone knows that to see them with SPIRITUAL eyes is MUCH better that using your ACTUAL eyes!
--MormonDude(I just LOVE my Church! We are BONA-FIDE!))
And you should be expecting a DIFFERENT Modus operandi?
After the ASPERSIONs that MORMONism cast on ALL of CHRISTIANITY???
JESUS: Hey Smith!
Remember that boast you made about doing more than even I had done to hold the 'church' together?
JOSEPH SMITH: Where am I?
JESUS: Don't you remember? A few seconds ago you were in that jail.
JOSEPH SMITH: Oh; yeah; but where am I NOW?
JESUS: Don't you remember? Does bang - bang ring a bell?
JOSEPH SMITH: Oh; yeah - that crummy gun I had was about USELESS!
JESUS: I hope you left instructions on how to hold your church together.
JOSEPH SMITH: Dang! I knew there was SOMETHING I was forgetting!
JESUS: Looks like there's a power struggle going on down there.
JOSEPH SMITH: Yeah; there was always SOMEone who wanted the power that I held - especially over the LADIES - wink wink.
JESUS: No need to worry about that now; remember what my friend Matthew wrote down?
JOSEPH SMITH: This? “At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven” (Matthew 22:30)
JESUS: That's it.
JOSEPH SMITH: I thought that was mistranslated.
JESUS: Nah - it was right.
JOSEPH SMITH: Oh well; it was fun while it lasted. My buds will still get it on with the girls.
JESUS: Uh; I'm sorry; in just a few more years; your followers will cavein to the United States government and abandon the 'Eternal Covenant' that you came up with.
JOSEPH SMITH: ME!? YOU are the one that told me to do that!
JESUS: Sorry; but you must have mistranslated what I told you. What part of Do NOT commit ADULTERY did you not understand?
JOSEPH SMITH: mumble....
JESUS: What did you say?
JOSEPH SMITH: Oh, nothing.
JESUS: Well; it was interesting talking to you; but now I must get back to perparing a place for those who believe in Me.
JOSEPH SMITH: Oh, yeah; the Celestial Kingdom.
JESUS: No...
JOSEPH SMITH: The Telestial one?
JESUS: Nope.
JOSEPH SMITH: SUREly not the TERRESTRIAL one!!
JESUS: Nope. Didn't you read that the mind of man had NOT conceived of it? Paul wrote it down in 1 Corinthians 2:9.
JOSEPH SMITH: I thought that was mistranslated.
JESUS: No; it wasn't.
JOSEPH SMITH: You SURE?
JESUS: Yes. Now I must be going: what did you say your name was again?
JOSEPH SMITH: Joseph Smith.
JESUS: Hmmmm. According to my Heavenly Faithbook, you didn't sign in as one of my friends - sorry, I never knew you.
JOSEPH SMITH: But....
Against this ignorant armchair assessment are the facts...
.
.
.
These plain facts...
Do you REALLY want to deal with FACTS???
Which edition would you recommend?
Darn...
(ouch)
(Or else the BIBLE is untrue.)
You are a confused man. And so are you.
But you are not alone. On this thread.
Keep $ending your $$ to Bakker and his ilk. The new Cadillacs will be out soon.
HEllo!!??
Anyone HOME??
NO ONE has!
What is it with Mormons trying to pull the “you are just like liberals” malarkey.
Besides, there are no "ignorant rants" here but substantive arguments against the falsehood that is Mormonism backed with citations and references unlike most LDS supplied arguments such as your "Archaeologist who met a immortal nephite" bit with no citation or links.
And most of us have read the BoM, cover to cover. It along with other LDS doctrine are the most effective of Anti-MormonISM material.
(snicker)
“At about the age of twelve years my mind became Seriously imprest with regard to the all importent concerns for the wellfare of my immortal Soul which led me to Searching the Scriptures believing as I was taught, that they contained the word of God thus applying myself to them ... I discovered that [men] did not ... adorn their profession by a holy walk and Godly conversation agreeable to what I found contained in that sacred depository ... thus from the age of twelve years to fifteen I pondered many things ... and by Searching the Scriptures I found that mankind did not come unto the Lord but that they had apostatised from the true and liveing faith and there was no society or denomination that built upon the Gospel of Jesus Christ as recorded in the new testament.”
3(Joseph Smith, Jr., A History of the Life of Joseph Smith, Jr., Church Archives, Church of Jesus Christ of Later-day Saints, Salt Lake City, Utah, pp. 1-2. Transcription published in Dean C. Jessee, Early Accounts of the First Vision)
From the above quote we see that the young Joseph was contemplative, and had sufficient reading skills to seek the Scriptures for answers to spiritual and moral questions. A very revealing quote from Joseph’s mother in her biography of her son and his ancestors further corroborates the fact of Joseph’s biblical astuteness. She mentions a man that was attempting to bring about a union of the warring denominations in their area and remarks:
“This seemed about right to me, and I felt much inclined to join with them; in fact, the most of the family appeared quite disposed to unite with their numbers; but Joseph, from the first, utterly refused even to attend their meetings, saying, ‘Mother, I do not wish to prevent your going to meeting, or any of the rest of the family’s; or your joining any church you please; but, do not ask me to join them. I can take my Bible, and go into the woods, and learn more in two hours, than you can learn at meeting in two years, if you should go all the time.’”
(Lucy Smith, Biographical Sketches of Joseph Smith the Prophet and His Progenitors for Many Generations. Liverpool, England, 1853, pg. 90. Reprint of the Original 1853 edition.)
Even though he did spend most of his formative years in rural farming communities in New England, that does not mean that he was isolated from the religious and historical ideas of his time. Just from the quotes above, it is easy to see that Joseph was intimately involved in theological issues. These issues that were being debated in the various churches around the area was what supposedly drove Joseph to go to the grove to pray and see what church to join which ultimately produced his “first vision.” Oddly enough these were the same issues that are supposedly answered by revelation from God in the Book of Mormon.
1830 edition of the Book of Mormon with all but the most recent changes marked. This volume is available to any one who wishes to compare the modern editions of the BOM with the original.11
Space prohibits a detailed examination of the many changes, but I think it important to include a few of the more serious doctrinal and historical changes. I do so without comment to show that the above condition is totally in error. (Words in bold type are the added words.)
1 Nephi 11:18 — “Behold, the virgin which thou seest, is the mother of God, after the manner of the flesh” (1830 ed., pg. 25).
1 Nephi 11:18 — “Behold, the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of the Son of God, after the manner of the flesh” (1989 ed.).
This mistake was made and rectified in two other places:
1 Nephi 11:21 — “And the angel said to me, behold the Lamb of God, yea, even the Eternal Father!” (1830 ed., pg. 25).
1 Nephi 11:21 — “And the angel said to me: Behold the Lamb of God, yea, even the Son of the Eternal Father!” (1989 ed.).
1 Nephi 13:40 — “These last records ... shall make known to all kindreds, tongues and people, that the Lamb of God is the Eternal Father and the Savior” (1830 ed., pg. 32).
1 Nephi 13:40 — “These last records ... shall make known to all kindreds, tongues and people, that the Lamb of God is the Son of Eternal Father, and the Savior” (1989 ed.).
And in Mosiah 21:28 (1830 ed. pg. 200), we read about king Benjamin having a gift from God, but since BOM chronology actually has Benjamin dead at that time, it was later changed to king Mosiah having a gift from God.
Again, the changes are too numerous to list here. The facts demonstrate that this condition is not accurate.
You mean the Mormons would lie?
But Joseph Smith was a profit!!!
Good question, reaganaut.
I guess I lost something in translation. My friend Harley only speaks Idiot! and I have to reply to him in Huh? so it may be as you say about the king.
And now I have to check the stock market to see whether I buy the dog a new collar or eat him.
Against this ignorant armchair assessment
_____________________________________________________
ROLFBMO
Mormons are such children...
Kid you talk about 2,000 year old men still living...
and talk about Joey Smith’s fictitious smutty book as though the events in it actually happened..
and you give credit to religious fantasy which plaguizes the Bible in parts while condemning the only Word of God in others..
and you demand that we imagine with you antiguities and remains of the participants of civilizations and wars that never existed and that Patten would slap you for lying about...
and then you tell Zilla he is ignorant ?????????????????
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.