BOOK OF MORMON SETTING. Many Latter-day Saints still believe what the prophets have taught about the New York Cumorah/Ramah. President Nelson: "Good inspiration is based upon good information." Here, we share good information from original sources that corroborates the prophets. We support the Church policy of neutrality, which promotes unity by recognizing multiple working hypotheses. We encourage all interested parties to do the same, all in the pursuit of clarity, charity and understanding.
Next week we'll review the year, but today I'm sharing some AI images relating to Christmas.
https://www.amazon.com/Rational-Restoration-Reframes-pursuit-understanding-ebook/dp/B0CHXRY2ZJ/
_____
The AI images below suggest a variety of artistic interpretations--multiple working hypotheses.
Enjoy, and Merry Christmas!
Scripture Central is promoting SITH (the stone-in-the-hat narrative) to the max for 2024.
Their YouTube channel offers a series on "Book of Mormon Translation" featuring this ridiculously inappropriate artwork.
Here's the link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C21es0MBF2Y
We recognize there is a lot of good material in this presentation. For example, they mention Oliver Cowdery's eight essays on Church history from 1834-5.
Let me read a little bit of Oliver Cowdery. So he wrote a letter in 1835 to W. W. Phelps explaining a lot of the history of what happened—actually a few letters, and these letters are gold. They’re priceless. Because Oliver Cowdery was very involved with the translation of the Book of Mormon. He spent a lot of time with Joseph Smith in that 1829 year, in 1830, before his mission to the Lamanites, in the end of 1830.
Unfortunately, they forgot that in those same letters (Letter I), Oliver declared that "Day after day I continued, uninterrupted, to write from his mouth, as he translated with the Urim and Thummim, or, as the Nephites would have said, ‘Interpreters,’ the history or record called ‘The Book of Mormon.’"
(Joseph Smith—History, Note, 1)
In the meantime, this artwork is ridiculously inappropriate in a purportedly scholarly presentation because neither Joseph nor Oliver ever said or implied that Joseph produced the Book of Mormon by looking at a stone in a hat. No one claimed to observe the scene depicted in this image. It's purely a figment of the artist's imagination.
And it frames Joseph and Oliver as liars (or, as some SITH scholars euphemistically describe it, Joseph and Oliver merely "misled" everyone.)
Not that there's anything wrong with artistic license, which is invaluable. We welcome multiple working hypotheses. People can believe whatever they want.
And, to be sure, some people said Joseph used SITH to produce the Book of Mormon, but as we've discussed, the SITH sayers' statements have serious evidentiary problems. But even if people want to believe the SITH sayers instead of Joseph and Oliver, none of the SITH sayers were present when Joseph and Oliver were working in the upstairs room at the Whitmer home.
We'll discuss all of this in more detail next week when we discuss the "Book of Mormon Translation" Gospel Topics Essay in light of the newly articulated principles on the Topics and Questions page (such as Consult Reliable Sources).
In the meantime, you can read the transcript here:
Unfortunately, that page also uses the ridiculous SITH image...
Sigh.
An interview on the translation process went live today:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3zJiwwRM2g
"In this fascinating discussion, we delve into the inner workings of translating content and address some of the most thought-provoking questions.
Join us as we uncover the secrets behind the Urim and Thummim AND the translation of the Book of Mormon."
_____
On the subject of the translation of the Book of Mormon, the Church announced a new resource called "Topics and Questions" which replaces "Gospel Topics."
https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/guiding-principles-to-help-answer-gospel-questions
This is a significant improvement. I hope the concept and methodology permeates all Gospel instruction and study throughout the Church.
Topics and Questions "provides resources for those seeking answers and for helping others with their gospel questions."
The link is here:
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/life/church-and-gospel-questions?lang=eng
The new resource offers two categories of principles based on "Helping Others with Questions" and "Seeking Answers to Questions."
This resources is congruent with the Institute course "Answering Gospel Questions" that I've been teaching online.
One of the principles under "Seeking Answers to Questions" is "Consult Reliable Sources." Here's the link:
The following excerpt shows the aspirations of the new approach. When we compare this aspiration to the reality of the Gospel Topics Essay on Book of Mormon Translation, for example, we see that the essay needs a lot of work. The essay violates every one of the principles outlined in the following excerpt. Instead of quoting and citing what Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery said about the translation, the essay quotes and cites the speculative opinions of certain modern scholars.
We can hope that this essay, along with others we've discussed, will be revised according to the principles set out in "Seeking Answers."
Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf taught, “Never in the history of the world have we had easier access to more information—some of it true, some of it false, and much of it partially true.”1 In this environment of uncertainty, the Church urges members to “seek out and share only credible, reliable, and factual sources of information.”2 We should avoid sources that are founded on rumor or that promote contention or anger.
Learning to assess the quality of our sources of information involves both spiritual and intellectual work. Here are some tips for evaluating information:
Evaluate the reliability of sources. Not all sources are of equal value on all topics. The best sources will have direct knowledge of a topic instead of relying on hearsay, rumor, or innuendo. They will speak from a position of direct knowledge or expertise. They will refer to other reputable sources so you can check their claims. Reliable sources will not always affirm what you already think. They may challenge your views. If you have questions about official Church teachings, look first at what current Church leaders have and have not said. This will help you evaluate other, earlier statements.
Learn to recognize bias. Almost all sources have some bias. This does not automatically make them unreliable, but it is important to take the source creator’s perspective into account. Examine your source’s motives and background. Be wary of sources that claim to be unbiased or that express views in inflammatory ways.
Corroborate what you learn. It is significant when multiple reliable sources agree or speak with clarity on a topic. This is especially true when studying sources discussing Church history and teachings. Though it is not always possible to find this kind of agreement among sources, it is helpful to compare information from different sources so you can better assess their quality.
Distinguish facts from interpretation. Some pieces of information are facts. But much of what we encounter on the internet and in other publications consists of someone’s interpretation of the facts. The best interpretations try to account for all the facts. They consider specific details or facts in broader context and give them proper weight. They don’t simply dismiss information that doesn’t agree with a particular point of view. Check the sources used to make a particular interpretation to ensure they support the claims being made and are not taken out of context.
The
You can use your Amazon account to purchase Kindle books in bulk and distribute them to others.
To buy Kindle books for others:
You can specify recipient email addresses on the checkout page to send each recipient an email with the link to redeem the eBook. Any eBooks not sent are available, after completing your purchase, to be sent when you choose.
If you didn't provide a recipient email address, instructions on how to manage your books are emailed to you after the order is complete. Go to Send Kindle Books to Individual Recipients for more information.
The term Mesomania describes the obsession of many Mormon (LDS) scholars, educators and others with putting the Book of Mormon in a Mesoamerican setting. The book describes the history and development of this phenomenon and explores the psychology that enables it to persist. A must-read for anyone interested in Book of Mormon geography and historicity.
The book was a quick overview of the Cumorah issue, including the psychological aspects of bias confirmation.
Back in 2016, the acronym "M2C" was still in the future.
In the ensuing 7 years, plenty of things have happened. My critics have written numerous articles and blog posts. Book of Mormon Central has more than doubled down on M2C; they established a Spanish-language website that formally enshrined M2C as their official position. Apparently they are going to formalize M2C even on their English websites in connection with Come Follow Me 2024.
Some time ago I mentioned I was compiling a book about LDS apologists and critics. The tactics and rhetoric of these critics is itself a fascinating study, and they have provided abundant material in the last few years.
The M2C mentality that Joseph and Oliver were wrong about Cumorah has been extended to the translation; i.e., many LDS scholars now teach that Joseph and Oliver misled everyone about the translation when they said Joseph used the Urim and Thummim. Instead, according to these scholars, Joseph used the stone-in-the-hat (SITH).
Thus, we're expected to believe that Joseph and Oliver were wrong about the origin and setting of the Book of Mormon, because our modern scholars know better.
These considerations and more have led me to write a follow-up to Mesomania, to be titled something such as Mesomania 2: M2C, SITH, and Other Adventures with LDS Apologetics.
The book is written in a tone that promotes clarity, charity and understanding. We're happy for people to believe whatever they want. By "we" I mean me and others who, like me, share these values.
We seek clarity so everyone's perspectives are fairly represented and clear. We seek to dissolve misunderstandings so different ideas shine brightly, pursuant to the FAITH model, which makes comparisons easy and straightforward.
We seek charity because we assume everyone acts in good faith, and everyone is awesome. Unlike some critics, we're happy to meet with, have lunch with, and exchange views respectfully with everyone in a spirit of harmony and friendship, despite difference of opinion.
And we seek understanding instead of conformity, coercion, or compliance because we enjoy learning about alternative ways of viewing and understanding the world. We recognize multiple working hypotheses and encourage "unity through diversity."
_____
We don't have a publication date yet, but probably in the first quarter of 2024.
|
Joseph Smith on origin |
Mormonism Unvailed and Modern SITH scholars |
|
"How and
when did you obtain the Book of Mormon? Answer.
Moroni, the person who deposited the plates, from which the Book of Mormon
was translated, in a hill in Manchester, Ontario County, New York, being
dead, and raised again therefrom, appeared unto me, and told me where they
were; and gave me directions how to obtain them. I obtained them, and the
Urim and Thummim with them, by the means of which I translated the plates,
and thus came the Book of Mormon." |
Joseph didn't really translate the engravings, and he didn't use the Urim and Thummim that came with the plates. Instead, he read words that appeared supernaturally on a seer stone he put in a hat. Mormonism Unvailed: “We are informed that Smith used a stone in a hat, for the purpose of translating the plates. The spectacles and plates were found together, but were taken from him and hid up again before he had translated one word, and he has never seen them since—this is Smith's own story.”* |
|
Oliver Cowdery on setting |
Modern M2C scholars |
|
“I must now
give you some description of the place where, and the manner in which these
records were deposited. You are
acquainted with the mail road from Palmyra, Wayne Co. to Canandaigua, Ontario
Co. N.Y. and also, as you pass from the former to the latter place, before
arriving at the little village of Manchester, say from three to four, or
about four miles from Palmyra, you pass a large hill on the east side of the
road…. At about one
mile west rises another ridge of less height, running parallel with the
former, leaving a beautiful vale between. The soil is of the first quality
for the country, and under a state of cultivation, which gives a prospect at
once imposing, when one reflects on the fact, that here, between these
hills, the entire power and national strength of both the Jaredites and
Nephites were destroyed…. This hill, by the Jaredites, was called Ramah:
by it, or around it pitched the famous army of Coriantumr their tents.” |
Oliver Cowdery was wrong about Cumorah, but he didn’t lie when he said it was a fact. He was merely mistaken. (An audacious euphemism!) Brigham Young and other Church leaders were mistaken when they related what Oliver said about entering the repository of records in the Hill Cumorah. Orson Pratt was wrong when he said the repository was in another department of the same hill as Moroni’s stone box. Lucy Mack Smith was wrong when she said Moroni identified the hill as Cumorah the first time he met Joseph Smith. David Whitmer was wrong when he said the messenger who had the abridged plates was going to Cumorah before going to Fayette. Etc. |
Among other oddities, the same scholars who complain that Oliver and Joseph didn't publish the account about Cumorah until 1835 think it's fine that Joseph didn't publish an account of the First Vision until 1842 (even though that account varies considerably from earlier informal accounts).
They claim that Lucy Mack Smith's history, first recorded by scribes in 1844-5 although she had related it repeatedly before that, is credible for most things except regarding M2C and SITH.
They even claim that, in D&C 128:20 where Joseph Smith validated his mother's account of him learning the name of Cumorah from Moroni before getting the plates, Joseph himself was adopting a false tradition about Cumorah!
Like me, many people are astonished to see how M2C and SITH got started and how they are being perpetuated today.
_____
*this refers to the Hadley account, which is featured in the
books by MacKay and Dirkmaat, as discussed here:
In the latest podcast, we discussed the two sets of plates, the problems with groupthink among scholars, and more:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHtTnedUmXw
_____
Although I uploaded the nonbiblical intertextuality database to Kindle for everyone to have access, I continue to add to it from time to time. For those interested, I occasionally post some of the additions to the dailyJonathanEdwards blog, along with other comments.
Here's a recent post as an example.
https://dailyjonathanedwards.blogspot.com/2023/12/worth-of-souls-nonbiblical-terminology.html
In my view, the Edwards influence expands the text of the Book of Mormon much the same way that the KJV influence does. Seeing how Edwards used the nonbiblical terminology helps us understand the meaning of this terminology in the Book of Mormon.
An example is the law of Moses. The Book of Mormon refers to the "law of Moses" 43 times. (The Old Testament uses the phrase only 15 times, and the New Testament only 7 times.) Yet the Book of Mormon never explains the law of Moses. A reader unfamiliar with the Bible would have no idea what the law of Moses included. We need the Bible to understand what the Book of Mormon means by the phrase "law of Moses."
We have a similar situation with the nonbiblical terminology in the Book of Mormon.
Recently I saw a podcast that discussed the nature of "hell." The speaker didn't seem to realize that the Book of Mormon uses the term more frequently than the Bible (59 times vs OT (31x) and NT (23x).
We can gain lots of insights into the Book of Mormon by understanding how Edwards used the nonbiblical language.
_____
The Deseret News published an important article about the UN Declaration of Human Rights, here:
https://www.deseret.com/2023/12/9/23991303/conservative-case-universal-declaration-of-human-rights
Excerpt:
4. Resolution of conflicting rights. Although human rights specialists assert that we can’t pick and choose which rights to support and prioritize, all serious observers know that there are times when rights contradict each other and need to be reconciled. Again, political conservatives might want to have a voice in how these contradictions are to be resolved.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a living document, subject to continued interpretation. It is widely acknowledged on the international stage as a fair statement of humanity’s aspirations, even by regimes with opposing interests. Like it or not, the declaration is here to stay. And thankfully, the spirit of the document suggests that persons of every political persuasion should respectfully participate in the ongoing interpretation of what human rights mean for our societies.
