Oliver Cowdery and M2C

I'm repurposing the content of this blog to make it more accessible and more widely available. People have asked for this for a long time and we're finally getting around to it.

I'll announce the new format in April, the week after General Conference.

The next few posts will summarize my conclusions about the topics we've discussed on this blog.
_____

Separately, I've started my series on The Next Mormons on another other blog, here:

https://dearlatterdaysaints.blogspot.com/2019/03/tnm-issue-1-personal-values.html
_____

People continue to make comments on this blog, but as I explained a long time ago, as the blog got more popular I started getting a lot of spam, and I don't have time to sort through comments to approve/disapprove them. Readers can email me and I'll respond individually or in posts here. (Actually, a lot of these posts are prompted by questions/comments from readers.)
_____

Before discussing President Cowdery, we re-emphasize that we love all our brothers and sisters, regardless of what they think about Book of Mormon geography or any other issue. The discussion is friendly with no animosity.

Everyone involved in this discussion has the same purpose of helping others understand and appreciate the Book of Mormon so it can be more effective in bringing people to Christ.

There is no cause for contention. The Church's policy of neutrality allows everyone to think whatever they want, consistent with the Articles of Faith.

All we seek is full disclosure for every member of the Church and everyone else interested in the Book of Mormon.
_____

Today I'll summarize the Oliver Cowdery situation.

Yesterday's Come Follow Me lesson included a portion of Oliver Cowdery's blessing to the original Quorum of the Twelve.

A lot of people haven't read it, so I posted it on my Letter VII blog here:

http://www.lettervii.com/2019/03/olivers-apostolic-blessing.html

It's interesting to note that Oliver wrote Letter VII (the essay that declares it is a fact that the Hill Cumorah in New York is the scene of the final battles of the Jaredites and Nephites and the site of Mormon's depository of Nephite records) in his capacity as Assistant President of the Church.

He wrote Letter VII with the assistance of Joseph Smith.

He wrote Letter VII just a few months after ordaining the original Quorum of the Twelve and a few months before receiving the priesthood keys from Moses, Elias and Elijah in the Kirtland temple (together with Joseph Smith).

Joseph had his scribes copy Letter VII into his personal history, where you can read it in the Joseph Smith Papers, here. Joseph had Letter VII reprinted in all the Church newspapers during his lifetime. Both of his brothers who served as editors of newspapers, Don Carlos and William, republished Letter VII in their respective newspapers.

M2C: the Mesoamerican/
two-Cumorahs theory of
Book of Mormon
geography

Yet the M2C intellectuals in the Church, all of whom trace their Priesthood to Oliver Cowdery, continue to insist that Oliver misled the Church when he wrote Letter VII.

Everyone needs to realize how powerful the M2C hoax is.
_____

It is not contentious or argumentative to share and discuss relevant facts about the origins and rationale for M2C.

The M2C rationale for disbelieving President Cowdery is that there are no extant records that he ever claimed a revelation about the location of Cumorah.

This was one of the rationales used by the scholars from the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints when they developed the "two-Cumorahs" theory in the first place. (I'll show their work later this week.)

Those of us who still believe President Cowdery recognize that he and Joseph had lots of revelations they didn't record, such as the ones they mentioned here:

73 Immediately on our coming up out of the water after we had been baptized, we experienced great and glorious blessings from our Heavenly Father. No sooner had I baptized Oliver Cowdery, than the Holy Ghost fell upon him, and he stood up and prophesied many things which should shortly come to pass. And again, so soon as I had been baptized by him, I also had the spirit of prophecy, when, standing up, I prophesied concerning the rise of this Church, and many other things connected with the Church, and this generation of the children of men. We were filled with the Holy Ghost, and rejoiced in the God of our salvation.

74 Our minds being now enlightened, we began to have the scriptures laid open to our understandings, and the true meaning and intention of their more mysterious passages revealed unto us in a manner which we never could attain to previously, nor ever before had thought of. 

We don't presume to say what Joseph and Oliver did or did not have revelations about. It's simple: we accept what they taught. And they taught that the hill in New York is the Hill Cumorah of Mormon 6:6, in Letter VII and elsewhere.

Plus, we accept the statements of David Whitmer, Brigham Young, and others that Oliver told them about the times he and Joseph actually visited Mormon's depository of records in the Hill Cumorah. If true, Oliver would need no revelation on the matter. His personal experience there would more than justify his statement of fact about Cumorah.

Plus, we accept the statement of Joseph's mother Lucy that Joseph referred to the hill as Cumorah even before he got the plates.

Plus, we accept the statement of Parley P. Pratt, quoting Oliver Cowdery, that Moroni called the hill Cumorah anciently.

Plus, we accept the statements of every prophet and apostle who has ever formally addressed the issue, including members of the First Presidency speaking in General Conference.

Plus, we think the relevant sciences - archaeology, anthropology, geology, geography - support the teachings of the prophets as well as the text of the Book of Mormon (although not the M2C interpretation of the text).

We don't claim prophetic or Church support for any theory of Book of Mormon geography. Instead, we support what the prophets have taught.
_____

No one has to accept President Cowdery's statement or anyone else's. We're all free to believe whatever we want. We have no problem with people believing M2C or any other theory of Book of Mormon geography, including the BYU/CES fantasy/mythology approach.

We just want everyone in the Church to be fully informed of the facts so they can make informed decisions for themselves.

While we have no problem with people believing whatever they want, we think that M2C survives mainly because the M2C citation cartel continues to censor and reject the teachings of the prophets about Cumorah, while also claiming both prophetic and Church support for M2C.
_____

Next: the M2C hoax.

Writing to President Nelson - Correlation Department response

A lot of Church members write letters to President Nelson. He receives probably thousands of letters every day. As in any large organization, staffers open his mail and distribute it to appropriate departments for responses.

If you write to him about Book of Mormon geography issues, your letter is routed to the Correlation Department. I discussed this last year in a blog post, here.

I'm sure the anonymous employees at the Correlation Department want to do the right thing. Their form letter includes a personal section that acknowledges any specific circumstances people include in their letter. It's impressive how the Church works so diligently to serve the needs of the members throughout the world, even to the point of answering thousands of letters.

However, an attachment to the form letter lists statements by Church leaders about Book of Mormon geography. It appears that the Correlation Department employees got their information from the M2C citation cartel, mostly likely from FairlyMormon which uses the same quotations on its web page, also out of context and incomplete.

Consequently, the form letter is yet another exercise in censorship and misdirection, thanks to the M2C citation cartel.

If your only source of information is material approved by the Correlation Department, you will never learn what the prophets have taught about the Hill Cumorah. 

President Nelson has declared that "Good inspiration comes from good information." 

When the Correlation Department is not sending out good information, what results can we expect?

As always, I urge the well-meaning but apparently uninformed employees in the Church Office Building (COB), at CES, and at BYU to reject the censorship and misdirection foisted on them by the M2C citation cartel. 
_____

It is far better to give members of the Church all the relevant information so they can make informed decisions on their own. That's the only way to implement the official Church policy of neutrality.

Here is a table that compares what the Correlation Department sends out with what they should send out if they want to exemplify the neutrality position of the Church.

Anonymous Form Letter from the Correlation Department (original in blue)	Suggested additions/revisions (comments in black, suggestions in red)
Dear [Brother/Sister X]	Keep unchanged.
We have been asked to respond to your letter to [President Nelson, the First Presidency, the Quorum of the Twelve, individual members of that quorum, etc.]	Keep unchanged.
As you are aware, much has been said and written about Book of Mormon geography over the past 180 plus years. Many have invested much time in trying to determine the precise location of sites noted throughout the Book of Mormon.	Keep unchanged.
As part of their research efforts, some have proposed their understanding of specific geography which they feel best matches the Book of Mormon record. However, to date, there is no official Church position as to the precise locations of the noted geography.	Here’s where the problem starts. The letter is confusing two separate, clear teachings of Church leaders. To be accurate, the letter should be revised along these line: As part of their research efforts, some have proposed their understanding of specific geography which they feel best matches the Book of Mormon record. However, to date, there is no official Church position beyond the clear, consistent teachings of the prophets and apostles that: 1. The Hill Cumorah is in New York. 2. We don’t know for sure where the rest of the events took place.
During your research you may have also discovered that while several have made suggestions as to geographic specificity, neither the First Presidency, nor the Lord, Himself, have definitively revealed the precise locations of the geography and events under consideration.	During your research you may have also discovered that while several have made suggestions as to geographic specificity, neither the First Presidency, nor the Lord, Himself, have definitively revealed the precise locations of the geography and events under consideration, apart from the Hill Cumorah in New York. In 1980, the entire First Presidency individually and personally endorsed a letter sent from their office which read, “The Church has long maintained, as attested to by references in the writings of General Authorities, that the Hill Cumorah in western New York State is the same as referenced in the Book of Mormon.” The location of Cumorah was established by Moroni even before Joseph obtained the plates. It was formally published in Letter VII, written by President Oliver Cowdery in 1835 and republished in every official Church newspaper, often at Joseph Smith’s direction, through the Improvement Era. The New York Cumorah is also consistent with D&C 128:20.
The following statement from President George Q. Cannon seems representative. He said: “The First Presidency have often been asked to prepare some suggestive map illustrative of Nephite geography but have never consented to do so” (Gospel Truth, 476-477).	The following statement from President George Q. Cannon seems representative regarding locations other than Cumorah. He said: “The First Presidency have often been asked to prepare some suggestive map illustrative of Nephite geography but have never consented to do so” (Gospel Truth, 476-477).
Additionally, President Russell M. Nelson spoke about the Book of Mormon saying: “Since President Monson’s challenge six months ago, I have tried to follow his counsel. Among other things, I’ve made lists of what the Book of Mormon is, what it affirms, what it refutes, what it fulfills, what it clarifies, and what it reveals. Looking at the Book of Mormon through these lenses has been an insightful and inspiring exercise! I recommend it to each of you” (Ensign, November 2017).	Keep unchanged.
President Nelson has also said, “I would like to add my testimony of the divinity of this book. I have read it many times. I have also read much that has been written about it. Some authors have focused upon its stories, its people, or its vignettes of history. Others have been intrigued by its language structure or its records of weapons, geography, animal life, techniques of building, or systems of weights and measures. 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” (Ensign, November 1999, 69).	Keep unchanged.
We hope that this emphasis, noted by the prophet, will be a blessing to you as you continue your study of the Book of Mormon. We also hope that the attached document will prove to be helpful as you continue that study.	Keep unchanged.
[inserted note addressing specific personal concerns]	Keep unchanged.
We have copied your stake president on this response and invite you to visit with him further if you have additional questions regarding this or any other matter.	Keep unchanged.
May the Lord bless you in your lives. [unsigned]	Keep unchanged.
Attached document	Attached document
Prophetic Statements on BOM Geography President Russell M. Nelson "I would like to add my testimony of the divinity of this book. I have read it many times. I have also read much that has been written about it. Some authors have focused upon its stories, its people, or its vignettes of history. Others have been intrigued by its language structure or its records of weapons, geography, animal life, techniques of building, or systems of weights and measures. 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."  [Ensign, November 1999, 69.]	Keep unchanged.
President Gordon B. Hinckley The evidence for its [Book of Mormon] truth, for its validity in a world that is prone to demand evidence, lies not in archaeology or anthropology, though these may be helpful to some. It lies not in word research or historical analysis, though these may be confirmatory. The evidence for its truth and validity lies within the covers of the book itself. The test of its truth lies in reading it. It is a book of God. Reasonable men may sincerely question its origin; but those who have read it prayerfully have come to know by a power beyond their natural senses that it is true, that it contains the word of God, that it outlines saving truths of the everlasting gospel, that it came forth by the gift and power of God “to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ.” (Book of Mormon title page.) (Ensign, November 1984, 52)	Keep unchanged.
President Harold B. Lee Some say the Hill Cumorah was in southern Mexico (and someone pushed it down still farther) and not in western New York. Well, if the Lord wanted us to know where it was or where Zarahemla was, He’d have given us latitude and longitude, don’t you think? And why bother our heads trying to discover with archaeological certainty the geographical locations of the cities of the Book of Mormon like Zarahemla? The witness of the Book of Mormon is not found in the ruins of Central and South America. They may be outward evidences of a people long since disappeared. The real witness is that which is found in the Book of Mormon itself. [The Teachings of Harold B. Lee, 155- 156.]	This is a favorite quotation from the M2C citation cartel, so it’s not surprising the Correlation Department includes it here. I'm told that this statement is the guiding principle for screening material before it gets to the First Presidency; i.e., anything that involves Book of Mormon geography is diverted before it reaches the First Presidency.  But as written, the quotation is misleading because it is taken out of context. This was an informal comment to Church educators, warning them against teaching false doctrine. I’ve discussed that here. Providing the entire context may not be feasible in a short summary; if that's the case, the passage should be deleted. But if the Department wants to include this obscure passage anyway, and continue to omit the context, they should at least supplement it with another statement by President Lee that summaries the rest of the context of his informal statement to Church educators: “Hugh Nibley apparently has no patience with the doubters as to the N.Y. Cumorah.”
President Howard W. Hunter Faith is required for a divine reason. Faith is the assurance of the existence of a truth even though it is not evident or cannot be proved by positive evidence. Suppose that all things could be proven by demonstrative evidence. What then would become of the element of faith? There would be no need for faith and it would be eliminated, giving rise then to this query: If faith is the first step or principle of the gospel and is eliminated, what happens to the gospel plan? The very foundation will crumble. I submit that there is a divine reason why all things cannot be proven by concrete evidence. [Ensign, May 1975, 38.]	Keep unchanged.
President George Q. Cannon  There is a tendency, strongly manifested . . . among some of the brethren, to study the geography of the Book of Mormon. . . . We are greatly pleased to notice the . . . interest taken by the Saints in this holy book. . . . But valuable as is the Book of Mormon both in doctrine and history, yet it is possible to put this sacred volume to uses for which it was never intended, uses which are detrimental rather than advantageous to the cause of truth, and consequently to the work of the Lord. . . .    The brethren who lecture on the lands of the Nephites or the geography of the Book of Mormon are not united in their conclusions. No two of them, so far as we have learned, are agreed on all points, and in many cases the variations amount to tens of thousands of miles. These differences of views lead to discussion, contention and perplexity; and we believe more confusion is caused by these divergences than good is done by the truths elicited.      How is it that there is such a variety of ideas of this subject? Simply because the Book of Mormon is not a geographical primer. It was not written to teach geographical truths. What is told us of the situation of the various lands or cities of the ancient Jaredites, Nephites and Lamanites is usually simply an incidental remark connected with the doctrinal or historical portions of the work and almost invariably only extends to a statement of the relative position of some land or city to contiguous or surrounding places and nowhere gives us the exact situation or boundaries so that it can be definitely located without fear of error.      It must be remembered that geography as a science, like chronology and other branches of education, was not understood or taught after the manner or by the methods of the moderns. It could not be amongst those peoples who were not acquainted with the size and form of the earth, as was the case with most of the nations of antiquity, though not with the Nephites. Their Seers and Prophets appear to have received divine light on this subject.      The First Presidency have often been asked to prepare some suggestive map illustrative of Nephite geography but have never consented to do so. Nor are we acquainted with any of the Twelve Apostles who would undertake such a task. The reason is that without further information they are not prepared even to suggest. The word of the Lord or the translation of other ancient records is required to clear up many points now so obscure that, as we have said, no two original investigators agree with regard to them. . . .     For these reasons we have strong objections to the introduction of maps and their circulation among our people which profess to give the location of the Nephite cities and settlements. As we have said, they have a tendency to mislead instead of enlighten, and they give rise to discussions which will lead to division of sentiment and be very unprofitable. We see no necessity for maps of this character, because, at least, much would be left to the imagination of those who prepare them; and we hope that there will be no attempt made to introduce them or give them general circulation.    Of course, there can be no harm result from the study of the geography of this continent at the time it was settled by the Nephites, drawing all the information possible from the record which has been translated for our benefit. But beyond this we do not think it necessary, at the present time, to go, because it is plain to be seen, we think, that evils may result therefrom. (Jan. 1, 1890, JI 18-19) (Gospel Truth, 476-477)	Keep unchanged, except include the full quotation, which I posted here. In the portions omitted by the Correlation Department, President Cannon gave specific examples of the problems. None of them involved Cumorah. Informed readers can tell that President Cannon was clearly referring to speculation about geography beyond the New York Cumorah. This is evident from his statement that ”The First Presidency have often been asked to prepare some suggestive map illustrative of Nephite geography but have never consented to do so. Nor are we acquainted with any of the Twelve Apostles who would undertake such a task.” Of course, Letter VII originated with the First Presidency in 1835 and ever since, members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve have affirmed the New York Cumorah in writing and in General Conference addresses. President Cannon notes accurately that none of the Brethren who have reaffirmed the New York Cumorah have undertaken the task of preparing a map of Nephite geography. That’s because they are two separate issues. The passage should be introduced with an explanation. President Cannon was aware that members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve had consistently taught that the Hill Cumorah of Mormon 6:6 is the hill in New York from which Joseph obtained the plates. No members of those quorums has ever questioned or repudiated that teaching. However, members of those quorums, as well as other members of the Church, have entertained different ideas about other aspects of Book of Mormon geography. President Cannon addressed this separate issue with these comments. There is a tendency, strongly manifested... [etc.]
President Joseph F. Smith A Book of Mormon geography conference was held at Brigham Young Academy on May 23-24, 1903 President Joseph F. Smith gave the following counsel regarding the discussion on the location of Zarahemla: "President Smith spoke briefly, and expressed the idea that the situation [location] 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." (Deseret Evening News, May 25, 1903, 7) Note: The present associate editor of The Instructor was one day in the office of the late President Joseph F. Smith when some brethren were asking him to approve a map showing the exact landing place of Lehi and his company. President Smith declined to officially approve the map, saying that the Lord had not yet revealed it, and that if it were officially approved and afterwards found to be in error, it would affect the faith of the people. (George D. Pyper, Associate Editor) [The Instructor, Vol. 73, April, 1938, #4, 160.]	This is another example of the difference between the New York Cumorah and the rest of the geography. In 1899, nine years after President Cannon published his comment about Book of Mormon geography, President Joseph F. Smith published Letter VII in the Improvement Era. This demonstrates that, from the perspective of the First Presidency, teaching that Cumorah is in New York is consistent with neutrality on the rest of Book of Mormon geography. That position has also been explained by other prophets. This dichotomy between the New York Cumorah and the rest of Book of Mormon geography has been so well established by so many of the prophets that it is inexcusable to continue to conflate the two separate issues. While serving as editor of the Improvement Era in 1899, President Joseph F. Smith republished Letter VII in the newspaper, reaffirming that it is a fact that the Hill Cumorah of Mormon 6:6 is in western New York. He later reiterated the distinction between Cumorah and other Book of Mormon sites. A Book of Mormon geography conference was held at Brigham Young Academy on May 23-24, 1903 President Joseph F. Smith gave the following counsel regarding the discussion on the location of Zarahemla: "President Smith spoke briefly, and expressed the idea that the situation [location] 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." (Deseret Evening News, May 25, 1903, 7) Note: The present associate editor of The Instructor was one day in the office of the late President Joseph F. Smith when some brethren were asking him to approve a map showing the exact landing place of Lehi and his company. President Smith declined to officially approve the map, saying that the Lord had not yet revealed it, and that if it were officially approved and afterwards found to be in error, it would affect the faith of the people. (George D. Pyper, Associate Editor) [The Instructor, Vol. 73, April, 1938, #4, 160.]
President Anthony W. Ivins There is a great deal of talk about the geography of the Book of Mormon. Where was the land of Zarahemla? Where was the City of Zarahemla? and other geographic matters. It does not make any difference to us. There has never been anything yet set forth that definitely settles that question. So, the Church says we are just waiting until we discover the truth. All kinds of theories have been advanced. I have talked with at least half a dozen men that have found the very place where the City of Zarahemla stood, and notwithstanding the fact that they profess to be Book of Mormon students, they vary a thousand miles apart in the places they have located. We do not offer any definite solution. As you study the Book of Mormon keep these things in mind and do not make definite statements concerning things that have not been proven in advance to be true. [Conference Report, April 1929, 15-16.]	This is yet another example of a member of the First Presidency who made a clear delineation between the New York Cumorah and the rest of the geography. To provide this quotation without also providing President Ivins’ conference address about the New York Cumorah is misleading at best. President Anthony W. Ivins Reference has been made by the president to the acquisition by the Church of the spot of ground in the state of New York known as the Hill Cumorah…. The passages which I have quoted from the Book of Mormon and the more extended discussion of this subject by Elder B. H. Roberts which was published in The Deseret News of March 3 definitely established the following facts: That the hill Cumorah, and the hill Ramah are identical. That it was around this hill that the armies of both the Jaredites and Nephites fought their great last battles. That it was in this hill that Mormon deposited all of the sacred records which had been entrusted to his care by Ammaron, except the abridgment which he had made from the plates of Nephi, which were delivered into the hands of his son, Moroni. We know positively that it was in this hill that Moroni deposited the abridgment made by his father, and his own abridgment of the record of the Jaredites, and that it was from this hill that Joseph Smith obtained possession of them. This sealed portion of the record which came into the hands of Joseph Smith but was not translated by him so far as we are aware, with the abridgment made by Mormon, the record of Ether, and the other sacred records which were deposited in the hill Cumorah still lie in their repository, awaiting the time when the Lord shall see fit to bring them forth, that they may be published to the world. Whether they have been removed from the spot where Mormon deposited them we cannot tell, but this we know, that they are safe under the guardianship of the Lord, and that they will be brought forth at the proper time, as the Lord has declared they should be, for the benefit and blessing of the people of the world, for his word never fails. All of these incidents to which I have referred, my brethren and sisters, are very closely associated with this particular spot in the state of New York. Therefore I feel, as I said in the beginning of my remarks, that the acquisition of that spot of ground is more than an incident in the history of the Church; it is an epoch—an epoch which in my opinion is fraught with that which may become of greater interest to the Latter-day Saints than that which has already occurred. We know that all of these records, all the sacred records of the Nephite people, were deposited by Mormon in that hill. That incident alone is sufficient to make it the sacred and hallowed spot that it is to us. I thank God that, in a way which seems to have been providential, it has come into the possession of the Church. I bear witness to you that the words which I have read here, quoted from the Book of Mormon, which refer to the future will be fulfilled. Those additional records will come forth, they will be published to the world, that the children of our Father may be converted to faith in Christ, our Lord and Redeemer, through obedience to the doctrines which he taught. May God our Father hasten that day, is my humble prayer, and I ask it through Jesus Christ. Amen. (Conference Report, April 1928, 10-15) There is a great deal of talk about the geography of the Book of Mormon. Where was the land of Zarahemla? Where was the City of Zarahemla? and other geographic matters. It does not make any difference to us. There has never been anything yet set forth that definitely settles that question. So, the Church says we are just waiting until we discover the truth. All kinds of theories have been advanced. I have talked with at least half a dozen men that have found the very place where the City of Zarahemla stood, and notwithstanding the fact that they profess to be Book of Mormon students, they vary a thousand miles apart in the places they have located. We do not offer any definite solution. As you study the Book of Mormon keep these things in mind and do not make definite statements concerning things that have not been proven in advance to be true. [Conference Report, April 1929, 15-16.]
Matthew Cowley I would like to bear my testimony to you about the book which you are studying in the Relief Society, The Book of Mormon. I know nothing about archaeology. I have not studied the maps which apparently relate to The Book of Mormon, the travels of the Lehites, the Lamanites, and so forth. I know very little about the outside evidences of The Book of Mormon, but I have a testimony of the divinity of this book, and that testimony has come to me from within the two covers of the book itself.       To me, archaeology, and all that archaeologists discover, which may in a way prove the genuineness of the book-these discoveries are lost in the spirit of the book itself, and if you can't find a testimony within the covers of this book, there is no need to look elsewhere. (Matthew Cowley Speaks, 110)	Keep unchanged, although it’s not clear why this quotation was chosen, when other quotations about the New York Cumorah are available in books written by Apostles that, unlike Matthew Cowley’s book, were actually published by the Church. These include Articles of Faith by James E. Talmage and A Marvelous Work and a Wonder by LeGrand Richards.
Mark E. Petersen We have had speculation, for instance, on the part of some with respect to Book of Mormon geography, and it is plain, unadulterated speculation and not doctrine. And if a General Authority has speculated on Book of Mormon geography he did not represent the view of the Church while doing so. [“Revelation,” address to religious educators, 24 August 1954. (in charge to religious educators, 2nd ed. 1982, 137]	Elder Petersen specifically taught the New York Cumorah in General Conference in 1978, but the form letter uses this obscure quotation from 1954 against Elder Petersen himself. Instead of the obscure 1954 quotation, the letter should use this quotation from Elder Petersen made in General Conference: " Mark E. Petersen Moroni's father was commander of the armies of this ancient people, known as Nephites. His name was Mormon. The war of which we speak took place here in America some four hundred years after Christ. As the fighting neared its end, Mormon gathered the remnant of his forces about a hill which they called Cumorah, located in what is now the western part of the state of New York... When finished with his record, Moroni was to hide it up in that same Hill Cumorah which was their battlefield. It would come forth in modern times as the Book of Mormon, named after Moroni's father, the historian who compiled it. (“The Last Words of Moroni,” Conference Reports, October 1978) The quotation from a 1954 private meeting, unless accompanied by Elder Petersen’s General Conference address, leads members of the Church to believe that Elder Petersen himself was engaged in "unadulterated speculation" when he spoke about the New York Cumorah in General Conference in 1978. That is inexcusable. Elder Petersen’s conference address, combined with the 1954 statement, reiterate the persistent, consistent teachings of the prophets that: 1. The Hill Cumorah of Mormon 6:6 is in New York. 2. We don’t know for sure where the other events in the Book of Mormon took place.
	Any list of prophetic statements on Book of Mormon geography should include President Marion G. Romney’s 1975 General Conference address titled “America’s Destiny.” President Marion G. Romney In the western part of the state of New York near Palmyra is a prominent hill known as the “hill Cumorah.” (Morm. 6:6.) On July twenty-fifth of this year, as I stood on the crest of that hill admiring with awe the breathtaking panorama which stretched out before me on every hand, my mind reverted to the events which occurred in that vicinity some twenty-five centuries ago—events which brought to an end the great Jaredite nation. You who are acquainted with the Book of Mormon will recall that during the final campaign of the fratricidal war between the armies led by Shiz and those led by Coriantumr “nearly two millions” of Coriantumr’s people had been slain by the sword; “two millions of mighty men, and also their wives and their children.” (Ether 15:2.) As the conflict intensified, all the people who had not been slain—men “with their wives and their children” (Ether 15:15)—gathered about that hill Cumorah (see Ether 15:11).... Thus perished at the foot of Cumorah the remnant of the once mighty Jaredite nation, of whom the Lord had said, “There shall be none greater … upon all the face of the earth.” (Ether 1:43.) As I contemplated this tragic scene from the crest of Cumorah and viewed the beautiful land of the Restoration as it appears today, I cried in my soul, “How could it have happened?”... The tragic fate of the Jaredite and the Nephite civilizations is proof positive that the Lord meant it when he said that this “is a land of promise; and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall serve God, or they shall be swept off when the fulness of his wrath shall come upon them. And the fulness of his wrath cometh upon them when they are ripened in iniquity.” (Ether 2:9.)"… I bear you my personal witness that I know that the things I have presented to you today are true—both those pertaining to past events and those pertaining to events yet to come. (“America’s Destiny,” Conference Reports, October 1975)

I hope this table is useful for the employees at the Correlation Department as well as every member of the Church who wants to make informed decisions about this topic.

Creation of false traditions

We are seeing, right before our eyes, how false traditions arise and spread throughout the Church.

The Gospel Topics Essay on Book of Mormon Geography made a statement of fact that I immediately pointed out was actually nothing more than editorial opinion. This is a common drafting error, but it should have been caught by whoever edited the document.

Unless the editorial opinion is agenda-driven, which we all hope is not the case.

Here is the statement:

The Prophet Joseph Smith himself accepted what he felt was evidence of Book of Mormon civilizations in both North America and Central America. 

The statement would have been accurate had it said "It is possible that Joseph..." or "Some believe that Joseph..." Or even, "there is evidence that Joseph..."

But to declare what Joseph accepted and felt is not factual because there is no known document written or dictated by Joseph Smith, nor any recorded statement by Joseph, that supports this statement.*

It is pure mind-reading.

Look at the language in the essay. "Joseph Smith himself accepted." That is not only mind-reading (no one can say what he accepted when he never articulated such acceptance), but the insertion of "himself" is a rhetorical device used to convey authority for the specific proposition he allegedly "accepted."

The next mind-reading is here: "what he felt was evidence."

The footnote at the end of this post discusses the evidence from 1841 and 1842 that M2C intellectuals usually cite for this claim, but as you'll see, it is merely conjecture, not fact. And that evidence was not cited in the essay anyway.

BTW, I proposed changes to the essay to correct factual errors. Most of my proposals were ignored. Consequently, this and other errors remain in the current version.
_____

Of course, the statement in the Gospel Topics Essay is now being quoted everywhere as the official Church position on what Joseph thought and taught.

But it's a false tradition. It teaches the youth of the Church (and everyone in the world) that Joseph learned Book of Mormon geography from a popular travel book.

This false tradition exalts academic inquiry (only by those trained in the ministry field) over the teachings of the prophets.

Joseph explicitly claimed that he was informed by Moroni "concerning the aboriginal inhabitants of this country and shown who they were, and from whence they came; a brief sketch of their origin, progress, civilization, laws, governments, of their righteousness and iniquity, and the blessings of God being finally withdrawn from them as a people, was made known unto me."

[Source: the Wentworth letter, available here: https://www.lds.org/study/ensign/2002/07/the-wentworth-letter?lang=eng. Remember, don't read the Wentworth letter in the Joseph Smith lesson manual because critical passages were censored by the Correlation Department to accommodate M2C.]

Note that the Wentworth letter was published in the Times and Seasons on March 1, 1842, well after the supposed evidence that he learned the geography from a popular travel book. The M2C intellectuals (and the Gospel Topics Essay) want us to believe that Joseph was more persuaded by the popular travel book than by what Moroni taught him.
_____

Aside from the inherent problem of creating and spreading a false tradition, the application in this case is especially tragic.

The Gospel Topics Essay uses the statement to cast doubt on what the prophets and apostles have always taught about the New York Cumorah.

Let's say, for sake of argument, that Joseph Smith did actually learn Book of Mormon geography from a travel book in 1841-1842. Let's even say he thought ruins in Central America were built by the Nephites, despite what Moroni taught him.

That still has nothing to do with what he taught about the New York Cumorah.

Both before and after 1842, Joseph's own brothers republished Letter VII in official Church newspapers. Don Carlos, at Joseph's direction, republished Letter VII in early 1841 in the Times and Seasons. Joseph's brother William, one of the Twelve Apostles, republished Letter VII in 1844 in the Church newspaper in New York City titled The Prophet. Letter VII appeared two days after Joseph was martyred in Carthage.

And, of course, Joseph specifically referred to Cumorah in his September 1842 letter, originally published in the Times and Seasons and now canonized as D&C 128:20.

Consequently, the false tradition established in the Gospel Topics essay still has nothing to say about what Joseph, Oliver, and all the other prophets and apostles have consistently taught about the New York Cumorah.

Nevertheless, M2C intellectuals continue to claim that because Joseph learned Book of Mormon geography from a travel book, he must have also changed his mind about the New York Cumorah. That's the fundamental premise of M2C.
_____

In the Preface to the second edition of my book Brought to Light, I wrote this observation about what we can say about history:

A friend of mine recently made the point that there is a difference between testifying about the truthfulness of the Gospel and testifying about the truthfulness of historical events. Any individual can experience the Gospel in his/her own life and can then testify about that experience. By contrast, no one can personally experience a historical event that occurred in another time and place. How can anyone living today testify about events that took place in the 1800s? The best we can do is assemble evidence and decide what we think happened, considering all the evidence as well as our own knowledge of human nature.

For that reason, I’m not seeking to convince you of anything. I can’t say I know what happened in 1842—no one can. In my books on Church history and Book of Mormon historicity, I simply present evidence I’ve found and offer explanations that make sense to me. Often the explanations contradict what I’ve been taught and what I’ve read in commentaries, but I suspect we all know that an opinion is not correct just because it has been held for a long time by a lot of people. If that was the case, Joseph never would have gone into the grove.

_____

BTW, I have a new book coming out in about a month (hopefully). Based on early responses, I think it will definitely challenge more false traditions that have arisen over the years. I'm excited about it more than anything else I've done because of the insights these discoveries have given me, and I hope you'll like it, too.

_____

* The Gospel Topics Essay on Book of Mormon Geography cited an anonymous editorial published in the Times and Seasons during 1842 when Joseph Smith was the nominal editor of the newspaper. That year, several such articles that discussed ruins in Central America were published in the paper. People have long assumed that Joseph wrote, edited, or approved of these articles solely because his name was listed on the boilerplate at the end of each issue of the paper. The boilerplate stated that the paper was "edited, published, and printed" by Joseph Smith. (There were two different boilerplates during this era, but both said essentially the same thing.)

The fallacy of attributing everything in the paper to Joseph Smith is obvious: no one believes Joseph Smith personally set type or operated the printing press, even though the boilerplate claimed he "printed" the paper. There is no more reason to assume he personally wrote, edited, or even approved of everything published in the paper.

There are far more detailed reasons, based on historical evidence, to conclude that Joseph had little if anything to do with the paper. For those interested, I wrote three long, detailed books about all of this. (The Lost City of Zarahemla, Brought to Light, and The Editors: Joseph, Don Carlos, and William Smith.)

The other piece of evidence M2C intellectuals rely upon, which fortunately was not cited in the Gospel Topics Essay, is a thank-you letter written to John Bernhisel, the man in New York who gave a copy of the two-volume travel books to Wilford Woodruff to give to Joseph Smith. 

You can see the letter here: https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/letter-to-johnm-bernhisel-16november-1841/1

At first glance, the letter looks convincing. It's understandable why historians long assumed it reflects Joseph's beliefs (although the letter doesn't make the specific claim in the Gospel Topics Essay, which may be why it wasn't cited). It's even more understandable why the M2C intellectuals rely so heavily on the letter.

But there are factual problems with the assumption.

The letter purports to have been written by Joseph Smith, but it is not in his handwriting and there is no extrinsic evidence that he dictated the letter (or even knew about it). I wrote an article (now an entire chapter in The Lost City of Zarahemla) about this letter, explaining that the historical evidence points to Woodruff as its originator. For example, in his journal, Woodruff mentions he wrote a letter to Bernhisel. The first time he records seeing Joseph was just a few days before the letter was written, which makes it virtually impossible for Joseph to have read the two thick volumes. 

All of this is to say that the evidence is, at best (for M2C intellectuals), ambiguous. By no standard of objective analysis is the evidence strong enough to state, as a fact, that "The Prophet Joseph Smith himself accepted what he felt was evidence of Book of Mormon civilizations in both North America and Central America." 

More on The Next Mormons - reasons for leaving

The Next Mormons book includes the results of surveys of both active and former members of the Church. The table below (11.3) ranks the top 10 "reasons for leaving."

_____

#1 is the reason why people have rejected the Church (and every religion or philosophy) since the beginning of time. There's a caveat, though, that I'll address in my other blog (mentioned below).

Notice that "lack of historical evidence for the Book of Mormon" ranks all the way down to #8. That seems to be a function of how the survey was worded, because reason #2 ("I stopped believing there was one true church") ultimately represents disbelief in the keystone of our religion--the Book of Mormon.

BYU fantasy/mythology
map of the Book of Mormon

That makes sense, in a way. One can disbelieve the Book of Mormon for reasons other than a lack of historical evidence. (It's not clear whether, in survey question #8 or in the minds of the respondents, "historical evidence" includes "geographical plausibility." It's also unclear whether it was the question or the tabulation that combined the Book of Mormon with the Book of Abraham, which are two separate issues.)

In fact, IMO, the fantasy/mythological maps that CES and BYU are using to teach the Book of Mormon to the youth in the Church around the world will inevitably lead those youth to disbelieve in the divine authenticity of the book, regardless of what one expects from "historical evidence."
_____

There's another key point in this survey. Reason #3 is "I did not trust the Church leadership to tell the truth surrounding controversial or historical issues."

I assume the Gospel Topics Essays were intended to address reason #3. The Saints book was also intended to address this concern by discussing controversial topics such as polygamy. 

But both the Gospel Topics Essays and the Saints book have aggravated the problem instead.
_____

Let's assume that the keystone of our religion is the Book of Mormon, as the prophets have taught. When the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon was questioned in 1834, how did Joseph and Oliver respond?

They refuted the claim that the Book of Mormon was fiction by declaring it was a fact that the Hill Cumorah of Mormon 6:6 was in western New York. That teaching has been reaffirmed by every prophet/apostle who has ever publicly and formally addressed the issue.

Now, both the Gospel Topics Essays and the Saints book reject that teaching.

We're told that the Church has "no position" regarding Cumorah. "No position" on the explicit teachings of the past prophets and apostles about Cumorah can only mean that they were not telling the truth, that they were wrong, or, maybe worst of all, that we cannot rely on what they taught.

Which is exactly what reason #3 represents.
_____

There's another key point to consider.

Another table (11.4 below) breaks out the reasons by the respective generations of the respondents. Among Millennials, two reasons tied for #1:

"Felt judged or misunderstood"
"Did not trust the church leadership"

What are millennials to think when the Gospel Topics Essays and the Saints book teach them not to believe what past prophets and apostles have taught about the New York Cumorah?

The New York Cumorah was the one definite touchstone between the Book of Mormon and the real world.

Now, that one touchstone has apparently been jettisoned in favor of a contorted "Mesoamerican/two-Cumorahs" (M2C) theory that was developed by scholars who rejected Brigham Young as the successor to Joseph Smith and still relies on illusory correspondences to a Mayan culture that has nothing to do with the teachings in the Book of Mormon.

To be sure, the Gospel Topics Essay and the Saints book don't tell us we must reject what the prophets and apostles have taught about the New York Cumorah.

But they do tell us not to trust the teachings of past prophets and apostles, even when these teachings originated with the First Presidency, were affirmed by every apostle at the time who addressed the topic, and were related for over 140 years in General Conference by members of the First Presidency.

And, in many cases, it is LDS millennials themselves who are promoting M2C (albeit many of them are employed by Book of Mormon Central Censor, which requires them to promote M2C.)
_____

All this said, the Gospel Topics Essay recognizes that there are different views on this topic, and members of the Church are free to believe whatever they want. We're allowed to support the prophets, so long as we don't claim our views have prophetic and/or Church support.

That's the approach we take on this blog.

We're saying that two of the top ten reasons people give for leaving the Church are understandable when we're being told we can't rely on what past prophets and apostles have taught about the New York Cumorah.
_____

All this said, the answer of Joseph and Oliver to the critics of the Book of Mormon remains the best answer to critics today.
_____

Each of the top 10 reasons in the survey deserves attention.

I have another blog where I am discussing these things. In coming weeks, I'll discuss each of these "top ten" reasons.

I started with the translation issue.

https://dearlatterdaysaints.blogspot.com/
_____