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.
Exposing the biblically provable false doctrines of the LdS church does not fall within that definition.
If I was making things up out of whole cloth and trying to pass that off as fact to use in “persecuting” the ISM that is the LdS church, that would meet your definition. As has been shown numerous times, this is not the case.
And the credibility of Wiki is about as good as some who agree with insipid and repugnant comments directed at posters and revel in the same.
But I note, that which has been demonstrated many times, there are those who do not care about the truth. Only protecting those they feel are being “persecuted” in their quest for social justice (aka liberalism or Oprah christianity).
They offer nothing of substance to support their claims or efforts, only empty hands and forked tongues designed to attack the messengers of truth as opposed to rebutting the message.
So what do you have on the Hickory Grove/Harmony Penn. phase of J. Smith’s life?
Yep. It is truly sad.
I’ll see if I can find something. Haven’t heard anything before.
Well, you will have to enlighten me because I am unable to find anything I think you might be referencing.
For starters, from smith himself, his accounts of his first encounter widely vary, either having him being 14, 15 or 17; in the grove or in the bedroom; numbers of contradictory reasons for seeking 'god' or why 'god' revealed himself to smith, among many others. There are at least 9 different accounts including the 'official' one (which wasn't supervises by smith).
However, more to the point as well, other Christian revivalists of the era wrote/spoke about their experiences that are similar. Charles Finney spoke of an experience with God in a "Grove of Woods" ( Richard A. G. Dupuis and Garth M. Russell, eds., The Memoirs of Charles G. Finney (Grand Rapids: Acadamie Books, 1989), p. 18.) which he said occurred in October of 1821. Parallels include
1. Time frame - 1820 (smith) 1821 Finney
2. Occured in a grove of woods/trees
3. Prayers became 'paralyzed'
4. Being(s) in light appeared
5. Rejection of story by others.
Others reporting similar experiences in that time range include Norris Stearns (1815), Elias Smith (1816), Asa Wild (1823), Solomon Chamberlain (1816), and James G. Marsh (1828). These were in circulation with more than enough time for an imaginative smith to cull ideas and form his own story.
Fact is the 1st vision story wasn't promulgated until 22 years after the official date. Smith made no mention of it when he wrote the history of the church in 1835. More than ample time for the myth to be formed - and if you review the various and changing accounts, you can see that indeed it was sculpted and changed with time.
Pete; Do NOT look for logic in the chambers of the human heart...
Probably not; as they NEVER get into situations that one could GET AIDs.
Prove it!
When you talk to your LDS family members about your reasons why you think their religion is all false BS and they are condemned to hell, do they take it personally? Do they think you are anti-Mormon or anti-Mormonism?...magritte
He knew what he didn’t know, Ya know....
Where the POLYGAMY angle in THIS article?
I don’t talk to them about their false hoods I talk about the Love of Christ.
That is not what we are doing on FR, on FR we are talking theology.
Why is that so hard for some to understand?
There is a monument near Hickory Grove/Harmony that commemorates the baptism of J. Smith and Oliver Cowdry in the Susquehanna River.
Nearby Smith met Emma Hale, married and began his writings.
Hey Nana...hope your doing well...”dead dunking” to me is quaint and harmless...they obviously think that they are doing a good thing and trying to bring all “non-Mormons” into the fold so the dead will have a shot at Heaven. Although I’m not a believer in the NT, I know from my previous Catholic days that their belief in Baptism of the Dead has little if any Bible-base...how’s this...I sometimes pray that you will see the light and return to the Torah...does that offend you? ... magritte
What is an anti-Mormon? Anyone who disagrees with you?
This is a poorly defined term, but I would say that only the activists who attack the Church are anti-Mormon.
Notice, that there is no reference to theology, the question only refers to people who disagree with mormonISM as anti-mormon.
There is a monument near Hickory Grove/Harmony that commemorates the baptism of J. Smith and Oliver Cowdry in the Susquehanna River.
Nearby Smith met Emma Hale, married and began his writings.
Elsie ! There’s polygamy around every dark corner on these threads...you just wait !! :) ...magritte
In June 1828, TEN years after he claimed God told him not too, Joey Smith joined aq Chrsitn Chruch in Harmony PA..
The pastor of the methodist Church was Emma Hale Smith’s uncle and the Hale family and cousins knew that Joey Smith was not there as a good Chrsitian man but to do evil...
They knew that Joey Smith was a “peeper” (someone who claimed they could see money and treasure underground and “ a practicing necromancer, a dealer in enchantments and bleeding ghosts” so they asked him if he would stop doing those unChristian and occultic blasphemies..
Joey Smith refused to quit his lifestyle and chose to leave the Church instead...
This and the ex-communication of the Smith family from the Presbyterian Church in Palmyra NY in March, 1830 were probably some the excuse he used to denounce all Christianity and the Christian Churches...
He was not allowed to get his own pagan way and so he caused no end of trouble and strife for those his ego told him had “dissed” him...
Bleeding ghosts ???
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.