Great news - revised Gospel Topics Essay

Note: This post was moved to this blog:

http://www.bookofmormoncentralamerica.com/2019/02/great-news-revised-gospel-topics-essay.html

Great news - revised Gospel Topics Essay

Yesterday an alert reader told me that the Gospel Topics Essay on Book of Mormon Geography had been revised. It's an important change that will improve the conversation because it discourages people from claiming prophetic and/or Church support for their personal opinions.

That means the M2C citation cartel can no longer claim prophetic and/or Church support for M2C.

Below I'll show the original and revised versions, compared side to side.
_____

The revised Gospel Topics Essay includes this big change.

Individuals may have their own opinions regarding Book of Mormon geography and other such matters about which the Lord has not spoken. However, the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles urge leaders and members not to advocate those personal theories in any setting or manner that would imply either prophetic or Church support for those theories.

M2C intellectuals have long claimed prophetic and Church support for their personal theories. Recently they've claimed that they're hired by the prophets, so they represent the prophets, so their ideas about Book of Mormon geography are immune from analysis and comparison.  

Claiming prophetic and Church support

That's the justification Book of Mormon Central uses for censoring other ideas, for example. 

Right on their web pages, the M2C promoters claim Church support because lds.org links to their organizations and General Authorities have encouraged members to donate to their organizations.

Just yesterday, a prominent M2C intellectual bragged that "My relationship with them ["the Brethren"] has never, I think, been better than it is right now." 

This comes just a couple of days after the same M2C intellectual mentioned me by name and provided a link to a web site that purports to attack my beliefs.

I hope this latest version of the essay puts an end to the M2C claims of prophetic and Church support for their theories.

_____

There's a big difference between these two things:

1. claiming one's ideas have prophetic and Church support, and 

2. seeking to support the prophets. 

Apart from the M2C intellectuals and the revisionist Church historians, I don't know of anyone who claims his/her ideas have prophetic or Church support. 

Most Church members seek to support the prophets, not the other way around. 

Like me, most Church members are not employed by the Church. We don't teach at BYU or CES, we don't prepare Church lesson manuals, we don't produce Church videos, and we don't create Church visitors center displays. 

We don't have "connections" with Church leaders. We don't meet with Church leaders, go to dinner with them, speak with them on the phone, etc. They don't ask us for our opinions.

Supporting the prophets

But we, the ordinary members of the Church, all know people, including friends and family members, who have left or are leaving the Church. A big reason is the teachings of intellectuals who claim the prophets are wrong.

We simply love the gospel and we support Church leaders. One way we do this is to find and share evidence that supports their teachings.

For example, before Joseph Smith even obtained the plates, he identified the hill in New York as Cumorah. Every Church leader who has spoken about that issue has affirmed that site. Some are shown in the graphic at the left.

Everything I've done since I entered this arena has been an effort to support the teachings of the prophets. I don't claim prophetic or Church support for my personal views.

By contrast, the M2C intellectuals claim both prophetic and Church support for their personal views, as mentioned above. 

Rather than seek to support the teachings of the prophets, they claim superiority over those teachings.

Rather than placing an exclamation mark after the words of the prophets, they place a question mark.

Maybe this essay will help change that course.

_____

The latest version of the essay says:

The Church does not take a position on the specific geographic locations of Book of Mormon events in the ancient Americas. 

From the beginning, Church leaders have always taught that, apart from Cumorah, we don't know for sure where the events of the Book of Mormon took place. The essay is consistent with that.

Presumably the Church still takes the position that Moroni, in ancient times, deposited the abridged plates on the hill in New York where the Cumorah Visitors Center is located. That would seem to conflict with the essay, unless the essay is not intended to apply to the teachings about Cumorah. 

It's possible that the essay is intended to reject the teachings of past prophets, including the ones shown in the graphic. Perhaps it is intended merely to cast doubt on those teachings. Or, perhaps it is intended to indicate that more research is needed to verify what past prophets have taught. 

Several past prophets have taught that we await more revelation regarding Book of Mormon geography. They said that in the context of also saying we know Cumorah is in New York, but we don't know where the other events took place. 

Unless the essay is further clarified, it seems to represent not a rejection of past prophets, but an openness to new information. As President Nelson has taught, "good inspiration is based upon good information. 

Accordingly, my objective is to continue to assemble and provide good information that supports the teachings of the prophets. Maybe that will also lead to more good information in the future.

_____

Comparison of essays. The original version is shown in the left column in blue. The revisions are in the right in black. My notes throughout are in red. A blank cell indicates the corresponding paragraph in the other version does not exist.

One of the noteworthy changes is the deletion of President Ivins' quotation. I offer my thoughts on that in the notes below.

My comments on the unchanged portions can be seen here: 

https://presidentnelsonspeaks.blogspot.com/2019/02/revisions-to-gospel-topics-essay-on.html

Original	Feb 27
Book of Mormon Geography Overview The Church takes no position on the specific geographic location of Book of Mormon events in the ancient Americas. Church members are asked not to teach theories about Book of Mormon geography in Church settings but to focus instead on the Book of Mormon’s teachings and testimony of Jesus Christ and His gospel. Comment. It’s not apparent why this overview was deleted, except that it duplicated a later statement in the essay. However, I did note in my comments before that “this policy appears to censor references to or discussion of” the teachings of past prophets and apostles regarding the Hill Cumorah.	Book of Mormon Geography Overview
The Book of Mormon includes a history of an ancient people who migrated from the Near East to the Americas. This history contains information about the places they lived, including descriptions of landforms, natural features, and the distances and cardinal directions between important points. The internal consistency of these descriptions is one of the striking features of the Book of Mormon.	The Book of Mormon includes a history of an ancient people who migrated from the Near East to the Americas. This history contains information about the places they lived, including descriptions of landforms, natural features, and the distances and cardinal directions between important points. The internal consistency of these descriptions is one of the striking features of the Book of Mormon.
Since the publication of the Book of Mormon in 1830, members and leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have expressed numerous opinions about the specific locations of the events discussed in the book. Some believe that the history depicted in the Book of Mormon occurred in North America, while others believe that it occurred in Central America or South America. Although Church members continue to discuss such theories today, the Church takes no position on the geography of the Book of Mormon except that the events it describes took place in the Americas.	Since the publication of the Book of Mormon in 1830, members and leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have expressed numerous opinions about the specific locations of the events discussed in the book. Some believe that the history depicted in the Book of Mormon —with the exception of the events in the Near East— occurred in North America, while others believe that it occurred in Central America or South America. Although Church members continue to discuss such theories today, the Church’s only position is that the events the Book of Mormon describes took place in the ancient Americas. This changes the former statement of “no position except” to “only position is.” The terms “Americas” is a recent development. The Church History Department uses it everywhere now to replace what the historical documents actually say. Moroni and Joseph Smith both referred to the aborigines in “this country,” but that causes problems for M2C, so instead we always see “Americas” instead. The same tactic was used in the Saints book to write Cumorah out of Church history.
The Prophet Joseph Smith himself accepted what he felt was evidence of Book of Mormon civilizations in both North America and Central America. While traveling with Zion’s Camp in 1834, Joseph wrote to his wife Emma that they were “wandering over the plains of the Nephites, recounting occasionally the history of the Book of Mormon, roving over the mounds of that once beloved people of the Lord, picking up their skulls and their bones, as a proof of its divine authenticity.”1 In 1842, the Church newspaper Times and Seasons published articles under Joseph Smith’s editorship that identified the ruins of ancient native civilizations in Mexico and Central America as further evidence of the Book of Mormon’s historicity.2	The Prophet Joseph Smith himself accepted what he felt was evidence of Book of Mormon civilizations in both North America and Central America. While traveling with Zion’s Camp in 1834, Joseph wrote to his wife Emma that they were “wandering over the plains of the Nephites, recounting occasionally the history of the Book of Mormon, roving over the mounds of that once beloved people of the Lord, picking up their skulls and their bones, as a proof of its divine authenticity.”1 In 1842, the Church newspaper Times and Seasons published articles under Joseph Smith’s editorship that identified the ruins of ancient native civilizations in Mexico and Central America as further evidence of the Book of Mormon’s historicity.2 It's unfortunate that the serious error in this paragraph was not corrected. The first sentence states as a fact what can only be at most an inference. This undermines the credibility of the essay and suggests it was driven by an agenda.
Anthony W. Ivins, a Counselor in the First Presidency, stated: “There has never been anything yet set forth that definitely settles that question [of Book of Mormon geography]. So the Church says we are just waiting until we discover the truth.”3 Comment. I pointed out that this quotation, a favorite of FairMormon and other M2C advocates, was taken out of context and modified with a misleading inserted bracket.  I also pointed out that President Ivins, just the year before in General Conference, gave an entire address about the New York Hill Cumorah, affirming that it is, in fact, the Cumorah of Mormon 6:6. Deleting President Ivins from this essay suggests that the authors did not want people researching President Ivins, who made the clear distinction between the two separate teachings of all the prophets: 1. Cumorah is in New York. 2. We don’t know where the other events took place.
The Church urges local leaders and members not to advocate theories of Book of Mormon geography in official Church settings. This statement applied to any theories, including the teachings of the prophets, but limited the ban to official Church settings. The revision expands the ban to “any setting or manner.”
	The Church does not take a position on the specific geographic locations of Book of Mormon events in the ancient Americas. President M. Russell Ballard, Acting President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, reminded members that “the Book of Mormon is not a textbook on topography. Speculation on the geography of the Book of Mormon may mislead instead of enlighten; such a study can be a distraction from its divine purpose.” This paragraph basically restates the paragraph above about “the Church’s only position.” Again, we see the term “Americas.”  President Ballard’s quotation replaces President Ivins’ but the authors forgot to provide a footnote. It’s undoubtedly true that speculation on geography can be a distraction, but isn’t it also a distraction to ignore or, worse, reject the teachings of past prophets? At least the previous version cited President Ivins, who took a firm stand that Cumorah is in New York.
	Individuals may have their own opinions regarding Book of Mormon geography and other such matters about which the Lord has not spoken. This new sentence raises the question, how do we know when the Lord has spoken? Most members think the Lord speaks through his prophets, every one of whom has affirmed the New York Cumorah (at least, every one who has ever addressed the topic). This includes members of the First Presidency speaking in General Conference. Accordingly, this sentence could be interpreted to mean individuals may have their own opinions about geography other than the New York Cumorah. If, on the other hand, the sentence is intended to repudiate the teachings of past prophets, that should be made clear. However, the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles urge leaders and members not to advocate those personal theories in any setting or manner that would imply either prophetic or Church support for those theories. This sentence is probably the most important in the essay because it should put an end to the practice of the M2C advocates of claiming prophetic or Church support for their theories. We’ll see if they respond on their web sites. But it also raises a question about Church curriculum, media, visitors centers, etc., which advocate M2C. Because the Church now officially has no position on the geography issues, we can expect to see M2C eradicated, or at least balanced with alternative theories. All parties should strive to avoid contention on these matters. This is also an important sentence. There’s no reason to contend about any of this, so long as people are enabled to make informed decisions as they choose. There’s no justification for using claims of prophetic or Church support to justify censorship, logical fallacies, etc. Ideally, everyone involved would simply offer facts and analysis for others to consider.
Speaking of the book’s history and geography, President Russell M. Nelson taught: “Interesting as these matters may be, study of the Book of Mormon is most rewarding when one focuses on its primary purpose—to testify of Jesus Christ. By comparison, all other issues are incidental.”4	Speaking of the book’s history and geography, President Russell M. Nelson taught: “Interesting as these matters may be, study of the Book of Mormon is most rewarding when one focuses on its primary purpose—to testify of Jesus Christ. By comparison, all other issues are incidental.”3
Note 1: Letter to Emma Smith, June 4, 1834, in The Joseph Smith Papers, Documents, Volume 4: April 1834–September 1835,ed. Matthew C. Godfrey and others (2016), 57; spelling standardized. Note 2: “Traits of the Mosaic History, Found among the Azteca Nation,” Times and Seasons, June 15, 1842, 818–20; see also “American Antiquities,” Times and Seasons, July 15, 1842, 858–60. Although it is not clear how involved Joseph Smith was in writing these editorials, he never refuted them. Note 3: Anthony W. Ivins, Conference Report (April 1929), 16. Note 4: Russell M. Nelson, “A Testimony of the Book of Mormon,” Ensign, Nov. 1999, 69.	Note 1: Letter to Emma Smith, June 4, 1834, in The Joseph Smith Papers, Documents, Volume 4: April 1834–September 1835,ed. Matthew C. Godfrey and others (2016), 57; spelling standardized. Note 2: “Traits of the Mosaic History, Found among the Azteca Nation,” Times and Seasons, June 15, 1842, 818–20; see also “American Antiquities,” Times and Seasons, July 15, 1842, 858–60. Although it is not clear how involved Joseph Smith was in writing these editorials, he never refuted them. Note 3: Russell M. Nelson, “A Testimony of the Book of Mormon,” Ensign, Nov. 1999, 69.