Lewis and Clark and geographical areas

Yesterday was the 200th anniversary of the mysterious death of Meriwether Clark of the famous Lewis and Clark expedition. Some years ago I did some research on this topic so I was glad to see a nice article in the Deseret News about it:

https://www.deseret.com/opinion/2020/10/10/21508216/2-centuries-have-passed-since-meriwether-lewis-premature-death-we-still-dont-know-the-details

The National Park Service has a great web page that features historical sites you can visit. I've been to several of them. Fort Clatsop is not far from where I live.

https://www.nps.gov/places/fort-clatsop-or.htm

https://www.nps.gov/subjects/travellewisandclark/visit.htm

Lewis had a boat built in Pittsburgh that he sailed down the Ohio River to the confluence of the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers. That took about four weeks. 

They wintered in the St. Louis area, then embarked in May 1804.

During 1804-6, in two years, four months and 10 days, Lewis and Clark made a round-trip journey from St. Louis to Oregon and back, about 8,000 miles.  

_____

I mention all of this because it's not plausible to me to think that in 1,000 years, the Nephite civilization was confined to a "limited geography" in Mesoamerica. The idea that the Jaredites were confined to such a small area is even less plausible. 

Compared with the M2C theory, I think the Book of Mormon was both larger and smaller; i.e., larger in territory and smaller in population. 

Here is a rough comparison of the areas covered by M2C, the Bible, and my interpretation of the Book of Mormon as discussed in Moroni's America. Click images to enlarge.

M2C area: 175,000 square miles

Bible area: 1,121,000 square miles

Moroni's America area: 900,000 square miles

The academic cycle: Jakeman and the Source Book

The Source Book we discussed yesterday has a helpful history of Book of Mormon geography that I encourage everyone to read. 

One of the most influential scholars in this field was M. Wells Jakeman, who began teaching at BYU in 1946. The Source Book suggests that Jakeman was probably influenced by RLDS scholar L.E. Hills, whose 1917 map showed Cumorah in Mexico.

From page 27: 

Jakeman's most significant contribution was through his students. Over a period of three decades he furnished stimulation to many hundreds of young people who passed through his courses at BYU. As they spread throughout the Church, they carried with them assurance that Mesoamerica was the scene of Book of Mormon events and that traditions from that area strikingly confirmed scripture.

One of Jakeman's students was John L. Sorenson, author of the Source Book. As I've mentioned before, Sorenson is an excellent scholar and a great guy. I completely disagree with his conclusions, but I also completely respect his scholarly focus on a real-world setting for the Book of Mormon. My own interest in the historicity of the Book of Mormon was prompted partly by a class I took from Sorenson at BYU, and I expressed my respect for him in the opening pages of Moroni's America.

Brother Sorenson's explanation of Jakeman's contributions on page 28 shows how deeply he was influenced by Jakeman:

Jakeman's primary contributions were two: 

(1) the settling, for many people, of the basic "where?" of the geography of Book of Mormon events; those who studied systematically with him ended up with no question but that the entire story took place in Mesoamerica and related significantly to what can be learned from the native Mesoamerican traditions; and, 

[This is the tell for indoctrination, brainwashing, imprinting, or whatever else you want to call it: students ended up with "no question" that M2C was the answer and then spent their careers confirming that bias. Ordinarily, we expect more educated people to have more open minds, but as we've been discussing lately on this blog, studies and experience show us that often more educated people have more closed minds. Members and employees of the M2C citation cartel are one of the best examples of closed minds we'll ever see.] 

(2) the idea that the ultimate "test" for correlating the Book of Mormon in space and time with one particular set of Mesoamerican sites and localities would involve comprehensive study of the ancient world, not just geography; ultimately traditions, archaeology, physical anthropology and linguistics had to combine. 

[Notice again that the outcome is a given: Jakeman's students focused on "correlating" the text with Mesoamerica, the only question being which "particular set of Mesoamerican sites and localities" has the closest fit. This process involves the relevant sciences, but the predetermined outcome also requires revision of the text through the process of reinterpreting terms to "fit" Mesoamerica. That's how M2C ended up with horse = tapir, tower = massive stone pyramid, etc.]

He [Jakeman] was the first student of the geography of Book of Mormon events to gain professional standing as an "archaeologist" (though he did virtually no digging personally) and to see that geography must connect with cultural contexts through meticulous scholarship.

This was the tipping point in the scholars vs. prophets dialectic. "Meticulous scholarship" replaced consideration of the teachings of the prophets. As you read the Source Book, you see a persistent conflation of the New York Cumorah with the "hemispheric model," as if they are the same. Because the "hemispheric model" was inconsistent with the text, the thinking goes, the New York Cumorah must also be inconsistent. In my view, that's not a rational argument. 

The Source Book proceeds to explain how the intellectuals rationalized narrowing the possible locations for the Book of Mormon. Continuing on page 28.

By the sixties the increasing number of people working with the geography question had settled on Mesoamerica as the only plausible candidate area in the New World. There were rare exceptions with anomalous models located in Peru, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, "Central America," and so on, but certain basic issues appeared to be settled for those who had paid close attention: 

[There it is: "basic issues appeared to be settled" means the academic minds were completely closed. They still are.]

(1) the area in which the story took place was far smaller than a continent, 

[Note that neither Joseph nor Oliver every said otherwise. The hemispheric model was set out by Orson and Parley Pratt. For example, the 1842 Wentworth letter was based on a prior missionary pamphlet written by Orson Pratt. Pratt had written at length about the indigenous inhabitants of Central America. Joseph deleted all of that and replaced it with the statement that "The remnant are the Indians that now inhabit this country."

As we've discussed before, if you look up the Wentworth letter, don't refer to the lesson manual Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith. The M2C-influenced Curriculum Committee edited the Wentworth letter to omit what Joseph taught about the "Indians that now inhabit this country." 

It's worth looking at the manual to see the ellipses where they omitted Joseph's teachings. This is ironic because Joseph began the letter by asking Mr. Wentworth "that he publish the account entire, ungarnished, and without misrepresentation." Joseph should have been more concerned about the future Curriculum Committee and its M2C orientation.

Instead, to see the actual Wentworth letter, refer directly to the Joseph Smith Papers or an older article in the Ensign that published the letter in full before the M2C cartel could get to it: 

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2002/07/the-wentworth-letter?lang=eng 

I spent some time discussing this because once you see this deliberate editing of the Wentworth letter, you can understand what I've been saying about the Saints book and other materials that have been revising Church history to accommodate M2C. It's a pervasive problem, not confined to the M2C citation cartel. Because these M2C intellectuals have been convinced that M2C is the only plausible explanation for the Book of Mormon, young and new LDS members will never learn what the prophets have taught about the New York Cumorah.]

(2) the hill in New York could not be the scene of the final battle because of statements in the text itself, and 

[This is a prime example of interpreting the text to fit M2C. Anyone can read the text and see that it does not exclude the New York Cumorah. To interpret the text this way, the M2C citation cartel has to outright reject the direct, unambiguous statements from Joseph Smith (quoted by his mother), Oliver Cowdery, Martin Harris, David Whitmer, and all of Joseph's contemporaries and successors in Church leadership who have ever addressed the question.] 

(3) only some place within the high civilization area called Mesoamerica could qualify.

[M2C advocates have concocted the "high civilization" framing because it is necessary to justify M2C. Ironically, it's exactly the same mistake that the Pratt brothers made when they developed their hemispheric model.]

And finally for today, we see the results of the academic cycle:

Meanwhile the Church membership in general still held a vague idea of a hemispheric model, although they thought little about it under a virtual ban on discussion of the topic in Church manuals and in the education system. Yet thousands of readers and people who had studied under Jakeman or his students scattered throughout the Church actually held the Mesoamerican view.

These M2C students are in positions of influence throughout the Church. That's why everything you see or read promotes M2C implicitly or explicitly.

Example of academic process-- The "Source Book"

Yesterday we looked at the academic process of bias confirmation in a generic sense, then applied it to the LDS academic process.

Today, let's look at an example of how that LDS academic process operates to perpetuate M2C.

To follow along, go to this site and download the .pdf.

https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/sites/default/files/archive-files/pdf/sorenson/2020-01-24/john_l._sorenson_the_geography_of_book_of_mormon_events_a_source_book_1990.pdf

This is an important reference book, not only for the content, but even more for the implicit M2C bias throughout. 

Here's a classic quotation, from page 10. Notice how this paragraph could be describing today's M2C citation cartel. 

Original in blue, my comments in red.

_____

Another factor clearly was the sheer smallness of the number of minds at work studying the Book of Mormon in any degree. 

[There are fewer than 10 intellectuals who drive the entire M2C enterprise. They've hired fine young scholars to promote M2C on the Internet, but the hirelings contribute nothing original.]

For at least the first 50 years of the Church's existence, [just like the last 50 years] virtually everyone who thought in detail about and then put their thoughts in print on any gospel topic were few in number. 

They were almost all known personally to each other and were concerned with unity, not alternative views. [The M2C citation cartel in a nutshell.]

There was no source of nor room for variant points of view, let alone criticism. 

[The M2C citation cartel is notorious for censoring "variant" points of view, especially those that corroborate the teachings of the prophets about the New York Cumorah.]

No one would have thought of questioning Joseph Smith or whoever it was who indicated that "the ancient City of Manti" had once been located in Missouri (see Appendix A). 

Today: The M2C citation cartel does nothing but question Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery. Except they don't merely question them; they expressly repudiate them. 

This sentence rephrased for the current reality:

No one would think of questioning L.E. Hills or whoever it was who first indicated that "the real Hill Cumorah of Mormon 6:6" is located in Mexico. 

(It is obvious enough nowadays ["obvious" is classic M2C closed-minded thinking] to Book of Mormon students [thanks to the academic cycle they're all brainwashed to accept the M2C interpretation of the text] that since Book of Mormon Manti was in the land southward and near the head of north-flowing river Sidon, [the M2C revision of the text] a location in Missouri is out of the question.)

More to come...

How the academic process works

Pretty much every day someone asks how M2C persists. 

Answer: the same way every other theory and philosophy persists. Bias confirmation is a psychological superpower. 

The academic process is usually a formal exercise in bias confirmation. It's a ruse designed to obscure the reality that academics spend their entire careers confirming their own biases. When they claim they're "following the evidence" they usually only follow evidence that supports their own theories.

In the case of M2C, the bias being confirmed is that the prophets are wrong.

Here's an animation that explains the typical academic process, and then compares it to the LDS academic process, with the predictable outcomes.

Click on the image to see it bigger.

The pandemic potential

The worldwide COVID-19 pandemic has lasted longer than many people assumed, and looks like it will continue much longer. People everywhere wonder what the future holds. Many of the speakers at General Conference discussed the pandemic.

One theme was the way to Zion.

Another was the lessons we can learn by going through the pandemic.

Professor Andrew Latham, who teaches "Plagues, Pandemics and Politics" at Macalester College, offers "some clues about the way COVID-19 might bend the arc of history." 

 https://theconversation.com/how-3-prior-pandemics-triggered-massive-societal-shifts-146467

He points out that Christianity became the dominant religion in the Roman Empire as a result of the Antonine and Cyprian plagues.

On the eve of the Antonine plague, the empire was pagan. The vast majority of the population worshipped multiple gods and spirits and believed that rivers, trees, fields and buildings each had their own spirit.

Christianity, a monotheistic religion that had little in common with paganism, had only 40,000 adherents, no more than 0.07% of the empire’s population.

Yet within a generation of the end of the Cyprian plague, Christianity had become the dominant religion in the empire.

I've been thinking about the pandemic in terms of the fulfillment of the prophecies about taking the Gospel to the world. Professor Latham suggests the pandemics "made Christianity a much more attractive belief system" than the prevailing paganism.

Could that happen in our day?

_____

One result of the current pandemic is that Christians, and adherents of other religions, are coming to realize they have been overly dependent on their religious leaders. A church or religion that relies on a professional clergy has an inherent weakness that the pandemic exposed.

Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are not dependent on a professional clergy. We have been able to participate fully in the Sacrament and worship in our homes. We serve one another and watch over one another just as carefully as we did before the pandemic. Maybe more so.

Christian friends of mine have observed over the years that they admire the LDS system of home teaching (ministering). They admire the youth programs, the welfare system, the location-based ward organization, etc. But now, they see the importance of the "lay" Priesthood.

Years ago, Elder Bruce R. McConkie gave an address titled "Only an Elder." You can read it here:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1975/06/only-an-elder?lang=eng

He pointed out "Only an elder! Every elder in the Church holds as much priesthood as the President of the Church. No apostle can or will rise higher in eternity than the faithful elder who lives the fullness of the gospel law."

This is one of the most revolutionary religious principles that, if people understood, would cause them to reflect on their own religious traditions.

That's just one example, but it's the type of opportunity the pandemic presents to us today. 

____

But then there is the ongoing problem with M2C, SITH, etc. 

What sense does it make to tell the world we have prophets, only to mutter under our breath that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery misled the Church on such basic topics?

These are not the biggest issues, for sure, but they are fundamental. They have arisen in plenty of missionary and reactivation situations I've been involved with. They are an ongoing source of confusion for new, young, and even seasoned members of the Church.

They're an unforced error, easy to correct. 

How to Zion

Yesterday I mentioned my pivot to my favorite topic: the establishment of Zion.

Readers here know that I've lived and worked and traveled all over the world. I've worked with and lived among people of many religions, languages, cultures, ethnicities, etc. Among them are all sorts of members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

People everywhere (not just Americans or Latter-day Saints) yearn for the fulfillment of the powerful words, 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, 

that all men are created equal, 

that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, 

that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

The U.S. Constitution was a major step toward the realization of that aspiration, but it is inadequate. Other countries have developed systems for their respective cultures that also work, more or less, but all are inadequate. Societies everywhere have serious problems, and while in many respects live keeps getting better around the world, the same human weaknesses lead to the same social, economic, and moral failures.

What people everywhere seek is what Zion promises. But, as Joseph Smith taught, "they know not where to find it." (Doctrine and Covenants 123:12)

_____

Most Latter-day Saints seek to establish Zion, one way or another. The Church has set up an awesome process that leads toward perfecting the Saints, but the concept of Zion seems a little vague. 

What Zion is and how it can be achieved is not vague at all in the scriptures and in the teachings of the prophets. Maybe we all know what we should do but just don't know how to do it. Or we don't have enough faith to do it.

That will be the focus on my new blog, https://howtozion.blogspot.com/ 

I decided to name the blog "How to Zion" because while Zion is both a place and a people, it ought to be a verb. "How to" books are a major category in the publishing field for a good reason. People want to know "how to" do lots of things.

A lot of people want to know how to establish Zion. By making it a verb, I hope to focus on action instead of theory.

_____

It seems obvious to me that one of the impediments to the establishment of Zion is disunity among the Latter-day Saints on certain topics. There are some LDS who accept what the prophets have taught, some who reject what the prophets have taught, and some who don't care or know what the prophets have taught. (And some who claim the prophets never taught what they actually taught.)

As readers here know, I have spent a lot of time in the last few years on topics of Book of Mormon geography and Church history. This was partly a result of my long-term interest in these topics, and partly an experiment to understand the psychology of LDS apologists.

After years of following the debates, I got involved publicly because of what I saw as abuse by the credentialed class of other faithful Latter-day Saints. 

LDS apologetics have a well-deserved reputation for abrasiveness and counterproductivity. One survey of former LDS pointed to these apologetics backfiring as one of the reasons they left. For years I watched the type of rhetoric and tactics employed by well-known LDS apologists and I was curious how they would respond to a faithful alternative to their theories. 

The results are now obvious to everyone. (My book on LDS apologetics will come out early next year.) 

My overall objective was to see if it was possible to develop an approach that corroborates and supports the teachings of the prophets. I think the answer is yes. Many Church members find this approach useful.

In some cases, my approach challenges or contradicts the scholarly consensus. As I've explained in recent posts, much of what passes for "evidence based" scholarly study and publication in these areas is merely bias confirmation. That's why, to many Latter-day Saints and to people throughout the world,  it is both unpersuasive and unattractive.

An alternative to the illusory "evidence based" approached borrowed from academia, a faithful approach starts with the teachings of the prophets and finds evidence to support and corroborate those teachings. 

In my view, the only "way to Zion" is to accept the teachings of the prophets and unify behind them. 

Others disagree, and that's fine. We all make our own decisions and believe whatever we want. To me, none of this is personal. I sincerely like and respect everyone involved with these topics, regardless of what they think. 

_____

As I pivot toward a focus on how to Zion, I invite readers to subscribe to the new web page and engage in the topics. 

https://howtozion.blogspot.com/

Perspective and pivoting

In recent presentations I have discussed the importance of keeping things in perspective. The topic of Book of Mormon geography is more interesting and important to some people than it is to others. 

If it's important to you, great. If it's not, that's great, also.

People can be faithful, dedicated members of the Church regardless of what they believe.  

I showed this graphic:

_____

Some people (particularly M2C advocates) are so insecure about their belief in M2C that they are obsessed with running around on the Internet trying to prove why the prophets have been wrong about the New York Cumorah.  

They're like Maitre Hauchecorne in Guy de Maupassant's short story, "A Piece of String."

Readers of this blog know that all we care about is helping people make informed decisions. Unlike the M2C citation cartel and their employees, we don't censor information. We encourage people to read the publications of the M2C citation cartel and see for themselves. We think the more information a person has, the better informed that person's decisions.

We want everyone to know there is a legitimate, evidence-supported interpretation of the Book of Mormon that corroborates the teachings of the prophets about the New York Cumorah. 

The M2C philosophy instead promotes M2C or bust. That's why Book of Mormon Central censors anything that contradicts or even questions M2C. We don't want those who find M2C implausible to reject the Book of Mormon just because a particular group of LDS scholars insist M2C is the only plausible explanation.

_____

We'll continue to discuss issues related to Book of Mormon geography on this blog. I noticed recently that I have 98 unpublished posts on this blog alone. I could schedule them at the rate of 2 per week and take most of the year. 

By now, most readers here realize that we all make decisions about what to believe and then use bias confirmation to support those decisions. That's how we end up with the two basic categories of belief about Book of Mormon geography.

(i) Some people accept what the prophets have taught about Cumorah and seek to support those teachings.

(ii) Other people reject what the prophets have taught about Cumorah and seek to repudiate those teachings with alternative theories. M2C is the best-known of these theories, but there are several others.

Either way is fine with me. Obviously, I prefer (i), but for many years I believed (ii). I've been a faithful Latter-day Saint throughout. 

Those who know me well know that I've long been much more interested in what Joseph Smith called our "greatest object." I'm pivoting more to that topic.

Tomorrow I'll explain in more detail.