Comparison of approaches to Book of Mormon historicity

Recently I found a copy of a book published in March 2015. It was a first edition of my book The Lost City of Zarahemla, which discusses the articles in the 1842 Times and Seasons that led to the development of the Mesoamerican/Two-Cumorahs theory (M2C). I'll discuss it more next week because those articles are apparently still fundamental for the M2C believers. 

When I wrote that book, I thought that a new perspective on those articles might lead to a reconsideration of the assumptions and inferences that led to the development of M2C. However, I underestimated the extent of the investment many M2C scholars had made in their M2C worldview.

I'm fine with people believing whatever they want to believe. I enjoy understanding different perspectives and interpretations. It's fun and interesting. Which makes it all the more disappointing when others, particularly LDS scholars and their followers, focus more on defending their own beliefs instead of understanding what other faithful LDS believe and why they believe it.

The insular, closed-minded psychology of both apologists and critics continues to amaze me.

That's why I prefer the pursuit of clarity, charity and understanding, as discussed on nomorecontention.com.

_____

The pursuit of clarity, charity, and understanding includes the use of comparison tables. At the risk of oversimplification and generalization, comparison tables can clarify differences for everyone to see. This helps people make informed decisions.

In my latest book, The Rational Restoration, I quoted Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker's observation about how to correct logical fallacies.

Under the right circumstances—the alternatives are available for comparison side by side, and the wording of the alternatives leaves nothing to the imagination—people can think their way out of the fallacy.

The ongoing discussions about the origin and setting of the Book of Mormon need much more clarity, charity and understanding. 

The FAITH model discussed in The Rational Restoration shows us how everyone can agree to the facts that are actually facts. From there, people diverge because of their assumptions, inferences, and theories. Clarity helps everyone distinguish between facts and the other elements, enabling people to make informed decisions.

The following comparison table offers an overview of the approaches taken by some of the people currently involved in the discussions. Although an oversimplification, it is a useful framework to understand some of the ongoing discussions and their various proponents. 

Relative acceptance of what Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery taught
	All	Some		None
Cumorah location	New York	Mexico		Fictional
Type of analysis	Rely on the text, historical and extrinsic evidence, rational thinking	Rely on the text, historical and extrinsic evidence, rational thinking	Rely on sarcasm, anger, taking offense, making ad hominem arguments, etc.	Rely on the text, historical and extrinsic evidence, rational thinking
Clarity:	Seeks clarity through specific comparisons and full disclosure	Avoids clarity by refusing specific comparisons and omitting contradictory evidence	Avoids clarity by refusing specific comparisons and omitting contradictory evidence	Avoids clarity by refusing specific comparisons and omitting contradictory evidence
Charity:	Assume everyone acts in good faith	Assume everyone acts in good faith	Assume fellow LDS who disagree are wrong, racist, nationalist, ignorant, etc.	Assume LDS are ignorant, deluded, dishonest, and/or abusive
Understanding:	Multiple working hypotheses: Fine with people believing whatever they want, no compulsion to convince, seek to understand, then to be understood	Compulsion to convince that only one conclusion is allowed: M2C.	Compulsion to convince that only one conclusion is allowed: M2C.	Compulsion to convince that only one conclusion is allowed: Book of Mormon is fiction.
Principal authors	Wayne May, Rod Meldrum, Jonathan Neville	Jack Welch, Kirk Magleby, BMC staff	Dan Peterson, Stephen O. Smoot, Mike Parker	Dan Vogel, John Dehlin, Jeremy Runnels