Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The fight over Book of Mormon geography
Mormon Times ^ | May 27, 2010 | Michael DeGroote

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.


TOPICS: History; Other Christian; Religion & Culture; Theology
KEYWORDS: beck; bookofmormon; geography; glennbeck; inman; lds; mormon
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340 ... 1,061-1,068 next last
To: ejonesie22

Well none have been on Larry King to tell us about the encounter...

Hey !!! Why havent the 3 NeeHigh childrfen been on Larry King ????

They could do the Talk Showe circuit ...

Plus...have they been paying their 10% tithe all these 2,000 years ???

Oh yeah ??? To whom ??? To where ???


301 posted on 05/28/2010 5:47:38 AM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 287 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

I thought some wag had posted that junk until he started abusing the locals...


302 posted on 05/28/2010 5:49:11 AM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 285 | View Replies]

To: ejonesie22

To trust in previous ignorant rants and simply renew them is on the same order as those who rant about the Arizona Immigration law without having read it.

What is it with Mormons trying to pull the “you are just like liberals” malarkey.
_____________________________________________

Well one things for sure...

The post was written by a liberal...

To post ignorant comments about 3 2,000 men who are still alive and demand that we swallow such fantasies is on the same order as Obama lying to us about the contents of the health care bill while demanding we accept it without having read it.


303 posted on 05/28/2010 5:57:24 AM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 293 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla

Have been working my way through the History of Susquehanna County by Emily Blackman. Much there re:Smith’s diggings. Too my knowledge the Spanish silver mine was never located.
However, much of that County is located in the Marcellus Shale. Natural gas aplenty. Many land owners now leasing/selling land for gas exploration. $$$.


304 posted on 05/28/2010 6:38:15 AM PDT by donozark (Joslyn Elders:"Weese all gonna die ahh sometin'. Sometime!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 265 | View Replies]

To: restornu
Full statement: Not only have they not apologized there are many who deny it even happened. (IE: here on FR)

"Many" does not mean all.

305 posted on 05/28/2010 6:39:21 AM PDT by svcw (Habakkuk 2:3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies]

To: svcw

I am finding interesting today the similar rant: you are a liberal (or some other similar phrase) if you don’t believe the BoM, why are you supporting people like Bakker, there is still never repose to quoting of lds words/videos/direct links. etc. Attack the poster with bogus charges. tsk
Oh, well another day, and the sun is shinning.


306 posted on 05/28/2010 6:48:37 AM PDT by svcw (Habakkuk 2:3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 305 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut
They still blame the Indians and John D. Lee (who was acting under orders by the Cedar City Bishop and possibly B. Young himself).

The Mormons I know would deny Brigham Young's involvement in the Mountain Meadows Massacre if Brigham Young himself came back to life and confessed.

Actually that is not a topic which we discuss much because I don't think there is any definitive evidence to prove Brigham Young's involvement or approval. I find it difficult to believe that given the iron rule Brigham Young exercised that something this big would have occurred without his knowledge and approval. Besides, it became apparent quickly that my Mormon friends wouldn't accept ANY evidence which implicated Brigham Young.

307 posted on 05/28/2010 6:56:01 AM PDT by CommerceComet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut; colorcountry

Hey Reaganaut/CC ... blood sacrifice went out when the Romans destroyed the Temple in 70 BC ... the Torah says that sacrifices are only allowed where G-d wants them, not just anywhere, and the Temple is the last place allowed...obviously, that’s why so many Orthodox Jews want to have the Temple rebuilt...magritte


308 posted on 05/28/2010 7:13:53 AM PDT by magritte ("There are moments, Jeeves, when one asks oneself "Do trousers matter?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]

To: restornu

This reminds me how today that thoes living today need to also make restitution to those blacks that were mistreated by their white ancestors over 200 years ago.
_______________________________________________

Yeah what do the mormons plan to do about their long history of racism ???

Briggy Young took black slaves to Utah with him...

Those mormons living today need to also make restitution to those blacks that were mistreated by the white mormon for over 180 years


309 posted on 05/28/2010 7:14:48 AM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies]

To: John McDonnell; Godzilla; reaganaut

WHOA! KoolAid Alert!

“The Book of Mormon describes advanced civilizations, and the ones in Mesoamerica correspond in dating to those described in the Book of Mormon.”

How about this...

Since there is no evidence in America for the mormonic verses, let’s shift the playing field to other countries! If you start with the premise that the mormonic verses are true, the only thing missing is anther country that may support what they say.

There is nothing in Mesoamerica that supports the mormonic verses. To say so uses the same eisogesis mormons apply to the Bible, but applied to archeology.

Why don’t you save time and go find some DNA from Mesoamerica and show us that the civilization was Jewish.

Otherwise, it’s all looking at clouds and telling us you see a bunny.

We know it’s a cloud, despite what you claim to see.

ampu


310 posted on 05/28/2010 7:23:18 AM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: John McDonnell

“Those who hate the Book of Mormon should at least read it, if for no other reason than to find exactly what, if anything, is wrong with it.”

That is a weak argument. I’ve also not read thousands of other false documents. To know the truth, you need only study what is true. Falsehood, like the mormonic verses, is evident when you know what is true.

It contradicts the Gospel of the Biblical Christ.


311 posted on 05/28/2010 7:28:12 AM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 272 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

But hey, AMPU...

They found the 3 Nephite bunnies...ah men...

Those 2,000 year old ones...

Thats got to count for something...


312 posted on 05/28/2010 7:29:47 AM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 310 | View Replies]

To: John McDonnell; Godzilla

They ‘hefted’ a box covered in cloth. They ‘saw’ with their ‘spiritual eyes’.

They never recanted THAT part. But most of them DID recant and say that Smith was either a ‘fallen prophet’ or not a prophet at all.

Finally, Richard LLoyd Anderson’s 1981 book Investigating the Book of Mormon Witnesses is typical LDS faith promoting history and not considered a serious scholarly work.

Come back and play when you have REAL scholarship to show me.

BTW, I have read the BoM cover to cover at least 15 times (more than most LDS I know).

What is wrong with it is it is a fanciful story (with WAAAAYYY to many ‘and it came to pass’es) that tries to pass itself off as a companion to the Bible and will lead many to Hell.

Let see, that makes me 2 for 2.

Next subject?


313 posted on 05/28/2010 7:48:54 AM PDT by reaganaut (Ex-mormon, now Christian - "I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 272 | View Replies]

To: John McDonnell; Godzilla

BTW, Godzilla has shown he knows more about Mormonism and has studied it in greater depth than most LDS.

But keep trying, you ARE entertaining.


314 posted on 05/28/2010 7:49:54 AM PDT by reaganaut (Ex-mormon, now Christian - "I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 272 | View Replies]

To: restornu; svcw

This reminds me how today that thoes living today need to also make restitution to those blacks that were mistreated by their white ancestors over 200 years ago.

- - - - -
No, what the need to apologize for is LYING about the LDS church’s (and leadership’s) role in the MMM, rather than just ‘passing the buck’.

Christians ‘fess up’ to the junk in their church history all the time, the LDS just whitewash it.


315 posted on 05/28/2010 7:51:39 AM PDT by reaganaut (Ex-mormon, now Christian - "I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies]

To: Elsie; svcw

WHY do you need a hairbrush, you don’t have any HAIR??


316 posted on 05/28/2010 7:52:57 AM PDT by reaganaut (Ex-mormon, now Christian - "I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies]

To: Elsie; greyfoxx39

Oh Snap!

I think that deserves a t-shirt.


317 posted on 05/28/2010 7:53:37 AM PDT by reaganaut (Ex-mormon, now Christian - "I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Good point, that.


318 posted on 05/28/2010 7:54:21 AM PDT by reaganaut (Ex-mormon, now Christian - "I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 282 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

I am hoping he does. (VERY VERY big grin).


319 posted on 05/28/2010 7:55:13 AM PDT by reaganaut (Ex-mormon, now Christian - "I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 285 | View Replies]

To: ejonesie22

You mean there have been no Archaeologist who have had encounters with immortal Nephites?

- - -
No, but I do know some archeologists who did LSD in the 1960’s. Does that count?


320 posted on 05/28/2010 7:57:08 AM PDT by reaganaut (Ex-mormon, now Christian - "I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 287 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340 ... 1,061-1,068 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson