Question About Rod Meldrum Theories

[Kevin Christensen]

John Clark discusses a set of Great Lakes models here:

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=14&num=1&id=420

Sorenson and Clark have identified around 500 passages in the Book of Mormon with geographical information. And it all has to fit together like a jigaw puzzle.

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

[MormonMason]

I'm still reading the material you linked for me because I said that I would. However, having looked at Olive's map (recommended by the website and the book I now am reading) it's already finished.

That model is toast because of its layout of Manti in relation to the head of Sidon. Notice how she puts Manti south of the head of Sidon? The Book of Mormon is clear that, while Manti is near the head of the Sidon, the actual location of the head of Sidon is "away up beyond" the borders of the land of Manti in the South Wilderness. (See again Alma 16:6-7).

There would be no need to cross the river Sidon to get to Manti according to Olive's map, which is a clear contradiction to the Book of Mormons' description of the area and the intent of the Lamanites at the time in going there.

See Alma 50:29-34. According to Olive's map, there would have been no way to stop the people of Morianton from reaching their destination of the land of large bodies of water in the land northward. In the Book of Mormon, they were able to stop them by intercepting them at the narrow pass that leads to the land northward. On Olive's map, they could have gone several directions and completely avoided the soldiers sent to head them off, and still made their destination.

It is also too close to Cumorah and the nearby land of many waters. Worse for Olive's map, Cumorah is said by the Book of Mormon to be in the land northward on the other end of the narrow neck of land. In Olive's map, Cumorah is accessible without ever having to cross the narrow neck of land. Her map does not fit the description of the Book of Mormon lands as given by the Book of Mormon.

Any book and website that puts stock in this map is not going to be of much value on the location of the events of the Book of Mormon. I will still read the book, however, because I said I would. I'll be doing that over the next couple days or so.

And while on the subject of cement that you mentioned, there is a discussion of that on the website you linked. It tries to say something relative to the use of cement but identifies that with plaster on wood. Well, the Book of Mormon says that the reason they used cement is because wood was less plentiful in the regions where they used it. In the method that site discusses, it required the use of wood with the plaster.

In Mesoamerica, they used stone, earth and cement rather than using wood, in the places where they used cement to build houses and cities. In Mesoamerica they were so expert at it that they could make entire rooves of cement, with no wood, which would go along with the idea of houses made of cement. According to the Book of Mormon, the people of the Book of Mormon also became "exceedingly expert" in the use of cement. That is what you do when you don't have enough wood available. Making rooves of cement requires a degree of expertise. Smearing on plaster over sticks--not so much by comparison.

[blackstrap]

Another consideration is the plants and seeds which were taken from a middle eastern,mediterranean climate and planted in the Americas. They florished. The Great Lakes region might be a bit tough on some middle eastern seed plants.

[Anijen]

And population contemporaneous with the Book of Mormon around the Great Lakes is no where near the numbers that is needed.

Edited September 8, 2012 by Anijen

[teddyaware]

In my previous two posts on this thread I proposed two theoretical possibilities archaeological investigators might want to consider before getting too deeply involved in projects that attempt to pinpoint the geographical locations where the Book of Mormon civilizations once existed. I'll briefly recapitulate and add more thoughts to ponder:

Could it be that the only artifactual and/or archeological evidence the Lord has permitted modern men to see in support of the proposition that the Book of Mormon peoples and civilizations actually existed are the Book of Mormon's gold plates (their reality testified to by the eleven witnesses, and by Joseph Smith himself), the breastplate which contained the urim and thummim, and the sword of Laban? That makes for four artifacts in total, if the urim and thummim can be counted as a single item.

These ancient artifacts, held in trust by Joseph Smith, were actually physically present for a period of time upon the face of this earth as tangible, empirical evidence the Book of Mormon civilizations did in fact exist somewhere in the Americas. These same artifacts were revealed, uncovered, taken possession of and then viewed, scrutinized and handled by those whom the Lord permitted to participate in this wonderful, sacred privilege.

After the eleven witnesses and the Prophet himself knew for a surety the Book of Mormon plates did truly exist, the Lord withdrew them (as well as the other relics) from the view of the children of men, leaving only the written testimonies of the eleven witnesses found in the introductory portion of the Book of Mormon translation; these things alone to suffice as the only direct evidence that Joseph Smith's account of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon is accurate. Insofar as convincing artifactual and/or archaeological evidence are concerned, the singular experiences and solemn testimonies of these witnesses are, apparently, just as far as the Lord was willing to go to satisfy the intellectual curiosities of men. So for all the world's "doubting Thomases" and "sign seekers" out there, like it or not, the Book of Mormon itself teaches the eye witness accounts and testimonies of these twelve (total) witnesses must suffice.

If it had been his design, the Lord could have allowed the sacred artifacts to remain with the Prophet and his successors to display to all the world as tangible evidence the Book of Mormon peoples did in reality exist; but he didn't. Rather, he gave us Moroni's challenge; a challenge wherein we are promised that if properly and sincerely accepted and followed through with, will prove to be far more convincing and enlightening to the understanding of man than any mere empirical observations of mysterious relics engraved with strange, undecipherable script of 'dubious' provenance.

Rather than asking us to employ scientific investigations and methodologies to confirm the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon -- which as far as I can see are nowhere encouraged within its pages (am I wrong on this point?) -- the Lord's prescribed and approved way of coming to a sure knowledge of the truth of "these things" is epitomized in Moroni's challenge.

"Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts.
And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.
And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things (not scientific method) (Moroni 10:3-5)

In light of the foregoing, could it be that the only direct archaeological evidence that has ever been discovered and observed that the Book of Mormon civilizations ever actually existed are the gold plates, breastplate, urim and thummim and sword of Laban? Yet, by the Lord's own decree, these artifacts are no longer available to help "prove" the Book of Mormon is true? Perhaps virtually all the archaeological evidences of the Lehites, Mulekites and Jaredites are hidden from human view as well, allowing no other recourse for the perspective believer than to gain a testimony by faith (revelation) and not by sight.

Consider this, at the time of the Saviors passion, death, and resurrection in Jerusalem, the Lehite nation was wrought upon by unimaginable judgements of God executed by awesome convulsions of nature. Read carefully the following, especially the highlighted and underlined portions:

"And it came to pass that there was a voice heard among all the inhabitants of the earth, upon all the face of this land, crying:
Wo, wo, wo unto this people; wo unto the inhabitants of the whole earth except they shall repent; for the devil laugheth, and his angels rejoice, because of the slain of the fair sons and daughters of my people; and it is because of their iniquity and abominations that they are fallen!
Behold, that great city Zarahemla have I burned with fire, and the inhabitants thereof.
And behold, that great city Moroni have I caused to be sunk in the depths of the sea, and the inhabitants thereof to be drowned.
And behold, that great city Moronihah have I covered with earth, and the inhabitants thereof, to hide their iniquities and their abominations from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints shall not come any more unto me against them.
And behold, the city of Gilgal have I caused to be sunk, and the inhabitants thereof to be buried up in the depths of the earth;
Yea, and the city of Onihah and the inhabitants thereof, and the city of Mocum and the inhabitants thereof, and the city ofJerusalem and the inhabitants thereof; and waters have I caused to come up in the stead thereof, to hide their wickedness and abominations from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints shall not come up any more unto me against them.
And behold, the city of Gadiandi, and the city of Gadiomnah, and the city of Jacob, and the city of Gimgimno, all these have I caused to be sunk, and made hills and valleys in the places thereof; and the inhabitants thereof have I buried up in the depths of the earth, to hide their wickedness and abominations from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints should not come up any more unto me against them.
And behold, that great city Jacobugath, which was inhabited by the people of king Jacob, have I caused to be burned with fire because of their sins and their wickedness, which was above all the wickedness of the whole earth, because of their secret murders and combinations; for it was they that did destroy the peace of my people and the government of the land; therefore I did cause them to be burned, to destroy them from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints should not come up unto me any more against them.

So then, if in a matter of hours (not hundreds and thousands of years) the Lord was able to totally remove all traces of a once great, mighty and populous cities that had ripened in iniquity from off the face of the earth, so as to hide them before his face -- would it be too difficult for him to hide nearly all traces of a Nephite society that had totally ripened in iniquity some four hundred years later? After all he had a millennium and a half to accomplish this work, not hours.

Though I'm not married to these theories, I ask again as a point to ponder: Is there a possibility that those who are engaged in searching for the ruins of Book of Mormon civilizations are involved in futile archaeological wild goose chases?

As I stated previously on this thread, there seems to be little, if any, extant archaeological evidence the great nations of the Lost Tribes of Israel (these are clearly referred to and proclaimed in the Parable of the Olive Trees and in 2 Nephi 29) ever existed. Yet, the Lord, without ambiguity, declares these nations of the Lost Tribes did once exist, and even had their own prophets and scripture. So if these great nations disappeared with nary a trace, and the only way their former existence will be uncovered will be by new revealation, why could not the same circumstances exist for the ancient (lost?) civilizations of the Book of Mormon? Could it be that through that holy miracle of the Book of Mormon the voices of a people -- once beloved of the Lord but now fallen and extinct -- whisper from the dust under which their great cities are now buried, hidden from before the face of God and secreted from the knowledge of man?

Edited July 21, 2014 by teddyaware

[ERayR]

A pox on all your houses. The Book of Mormon took place in central Idaho and anybody that says different is an apostate. If you want to know the secret location send me 50 bucks and I'll send it to you by pony express.

[ANACO]

A pox on all your houses. The Book of Mormon took place in central Idaho and anybody that says different is an apostate. If you want to know the secret location send me 50 bucks and I'll send it to you by pony express.

Idaho does have a narrow neck of land. If you're able to panhandle 50 bucks from anyone, let us know. Edited September 9, 2012 by ANACO

[Mark Beesley]

I haven't paid too much attention to this issue. I've always believed the events of the Book of Mormon took place in Central America, but I never cared much about trying to pinpoint locations. The Heartland Theory suffers, from my vantage point, one major flaw. The journey from Jerusalem to the New World, though we don't know for sure I guess, ended on the west coast of the Americas. (I think ocean currents support a west coast landing.) The Heartland Theory requires a major trek then, by the new settlers, through vast unknown lands, before Lehi's family, including the rebellious brothers, found a place to call home. Seems like Nephi would have mentioned such a journey across North America. Doesn't it seem likely Laman and Lemuel would not have done something noteworthy during such a major trek? Nah. For me, the Heartland Theory makes no sense because it doesn't give a reasonable explanation, as far as I know, of how Lehi's family ended up there.

[ANACO]

And it came to pass that the Spirit said unto me: Look! And I looked and beheld a tree; and it was like unto the tree which my father had seen; and the beauty thereof was far beyond, yea, exceeding of all beauty; and the whiteness thereof did exceed the whiteness of the

driven snow

.

Nephi was writing his history in retrospect (of course). And of the whiteness of the tree he compared to driven snow. There isn't much "driven" snow in Israel, Arabia or Mesoamerica. For him to use such symbolism without being aware of it, would be odd.

[ERayR]

And it came to pass that the Spirit said unto me: Look! And I looked and beheld a tree; and it was like unto the tree which my father had seen; and the beauty thereof was far beyond, yea, exceeding of all beauty; and the whiteness thereof did exceed the whiteness of the

driven snow

.

Nephi was writing his history in retrospect (of course). And of the whiteness of the tree he compared to driven snow. There isn't much "driven" snow in Israel, Arabia or Mesoamerica. For him to use such symbolism without being aware of it, would be odd.

And Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, the son of a valiant man, of Kabzeel, who had done many acts, he slew two lion like men of Moab: he went down also and slew a lion in the middle of a pit in time of snow: 2 Samuel 23:20

[ANACO]

I haven't paid too much attention to this issue. I've always believed the events of the Book of Mormon took place in Central America, but I never cared much about trying to pinpoint locations. The Heartland Theory suffers, from my vantage point, one major flaw. The journey from Jerusalem to the New World, though we don't know for sure I guess, ended on the west coast of the Americas. (I think ocean currents support a west coast landing.) The Heartland Theory requires a major trek then, by the new settlers, through vast unknown lands, before Lehi's family, including the rebellious brothers, found a place to call home. Seems like Nephi would have mentioned such a journey across North America. Doesn't it seem likely Laman and Lemuel would not have done something noteworthy during such a major trek? Nah. For me, the Heartland Theory makes no sense because it doesn't give a reasonable explanation, as far as I know, of how Lehi's family ended up there.

There are more flaws impossible to enumerate with the Mesoamerica Theory.

One glaring flaw is that the Prophet Ether "hid" his gold plates out in the open. Why? Because there was no one around to disturb them. Contrast this with Moroni who hid his plates under a large stone and in a hill to protect them from the Lamanites. (Mormon 6:6)

But who found Ether's record? Nephites. Not the Maya.

Nephites sent from the Land of Nephi to search for the Land of Zarahemla. Ether "hid" his plates approx. 600 B.C. or just after the people of Mulek found Coriantumr. But when were the Prophet Ethers plates found? Per the timeline in the Book of Mormon they were found approx. 122 B.C. So for 400 years the plates of Ether were left undisturbed. That gave time for swords to be cankered with rust. But according to the Mesoamerica Theory, the Nephites "moved in" and lived among the Maya in a 500 x 200 mile area. So why didn't the Maya find the plates of Ether? The account says: Ether "hid them in a manner that the people of Limhi did find them" Ether 15:33.

What manner could Ether of hid his record that a Nephite could find them versus a Maya not finding them? And why didn't the people of Zarahemla find them versus some Nephites from the Land of Nephi the latter Land of Nephi being south of Zarahemla? This would indicate, at that time in the Book of Mormon timeline, a large empty uninhabited land - a wilderness; later populated and becoming well known to the Nephite Nation.

[cursor]

I would caution anyone who uses science, instead of the text of the Book of Mormon itself, to be very careful.

Here's a novel idea: Use a responsible combination of science AND the Book of Mormon content. That's precisely what my father has been doing these last 60 years of professional life (and what Meldrum has not). Even if you consider statements by Mormon (the principle contributor) alone, regarding the lands in question, Meldrum (and others similar) simply don't have a shred of credibility.

Regarding reasonable interpretation of the content of the Book of Mormon, read Mormon's Map, by John L. Sorenson.

[ANACO]

Here's a novel idea: Use a responsible combination of science AND the Book of Mormon content. That's precisely what my father has been doing these last 60 years of professional life (and what Meldrum has not). Even if you consider statements by Mormon (the principle contributor) alone, regarding the lands in question, Meldrum (and others similar) simply don't have a shred of credibility.

Regarding reasonable interpretation of the content of the Book of Mormon, read Mormon's Map, by John L. Sorenson.

That's a flawed argument. Especially since in the writings of your father, he shreds the credibility of the Prophet Joseph Smith:

"

What may startle some about this situation is that most of what Joseph Smith said or implied about geography indicates that he did not understand or was ambiguous about the fact, as it turns out, that Mesoamerica was the particular setting for Nephite history."

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=41&chapid=196

I know you love your Father, and I know your Father is a good man, but for someone to go around claiming the Prophet Joseph "did not understand what he was talking about" is...another flaw of the Mesoamerica Theory. But it had to be stated to remove, in the minds of his readers, statements by the Prophet which contradicted with the Mesoamerica Theory.

edited to add link above

Edited September 9, 2012 by ANACO

[cursor]

But if these great Christ-centered civilizations once existed on this earth as autonomous ecclesiastical entities, separated from the Holy Land by great distances, where is the evidence they ever existed. Remember, these "colonies of the Lord" are very much likened in the Book of Mormon to the Lehite civilizations (Nephites & Lamanites). So again I ask, where is the archaeological, literary, artistc, and theological evidence that these great Christian civilizations once existed.

Dr. Michael D. Coe said,

These things don’t disappear forever. They leave traces. If you had iron or steel, you would expect to find these things, even if they were all rusted … You’d find chemical remains.

My father answered:

Probably no more than 200 ancient Mesoamerican sites have been seriously excavated

, and those excavations have rarely dug into more than a small portion of the area of those sites.

It would be surprising if as much as one-ten-thousandth of the information potentially obtainable by studying the material remains has so far been obtained.

Sure, much of the rest would no doubt yield data mainly duplicative of what is already known, but some things could be new and even potentially revolutionary. Furthermore a large proportion of what has already been excavated has not been studied by contemporary methods or is not accessible for study.

reference

Edited September 9, 2012 by cursor

[cursor]

That's a flawed argument. Especially since in the writings of your father, he shreds the credibility of the Prophet Joseph Smith:

"

What may startle some about this situation is that most of what Joseph Smith said or implied about geography indicates that he did not understand or was ambiguous about the fact, as it turns out, that Mesoamerica was the particular setting for Nephite history."

http://maxwellinstit...d=41&chapid=196

Exactly at what point was Joseph Smith beyond learning new things? Did he know everything after his first vision? If not, might it have been after he was visited by Moroni? Wait ... maybe it was immediately after he retrieved the gold plates from the stone box. Then again, perhaps it wasn't until he translated the plates. Oh wait ... he later made changes to his translation.

To presume that Joseph Smith did not continuously learn new stuff throughout his relatively short life, is simply preposterous.

[ANACO]

Exactly at what point was Joseph Smith beyond learning new things? Did he know everything after his first vision? If not, might it have been after he was visited by Moroni? Wait ... maybe it was immediately after he retrieved the gold plates from the stone box. Then again, perhaps it wasn't until he translated the plates. Oh wait ... he later made changes to his translation.

To presume that Joseph Smith did not continuously learn new stuff throughout his relatively short life, is simply preposterous.

I'm not claiming the Prophet Joseph Smith didn't learn "new stuff."

But in your Father's writings, he's claiming that what the Prophet Joseph Smith said was incorrect. "most of what Joseph Smith said or implied about geography indicates that he did not understand or was ambiguous.."

Why would the Prophet go around making statements of that which was false? He was shot by those who believed that.

[livy111us]

At least he is accepting of the facts that you are not. You only accept the statements from Joseph Smith which agree with you while ignoring the rest that do not. You dismiss the Prophet when he says something that is inconvenient for you by attacking what you believe to be the source of the statements. Instead of looking at all of the evidence, as any honest man should do, you pick and choose what statements from the Prophet you choose to believe.

[cursor]

And that's because he clearly he didn't fully understand. Joseph Smith's ideas regarding the geography of Book of Mormon events evolved over time. That's clear. Why should the sureness of his BofM geography ideas be more sure than any other subject matter, where he might have still be learning?

[ANACO]

At least he is accepting of the facts that you are not. You only accept the statements from Joseph Smith which agree with you while ignoring the rest that do not. You dismiss the Prophet when he says something that is inconvenient for you by attacking what you believe to be the source of the statements. Instead of looking at all of the evidence, as any honest man should do, you pick and choose what statements from the Prophet you choose to believe.

That's an odd claim. Why is this about me? I'm quoting from Dr. Sorenson who claims "most of what Joseph Smith said or implied about geography indicates that he did not understand or was ambiguous.." until Joseph Smith received a travel book about the Maya written by John Lloyd Stephens.

Hey Livy. Do you know when the Prophet Joseph Smith received that travel book about the Maya? Two years before his death. So we have LDS Apologists for Mesoamerica claiming what Joseph Smith said or implied about geography during his entire lifetime, was wrong.

[ANACO]

And that's because he clearly he didn't fully understand. Joseph Smith's ideas regarding the geography of Book of Mormon events evolved over time. That's clear. Why should the sureness of his BofM geography ideas be more sure than any other subject matter, where he might have still be learning?

Says who? The claim that his ideas about BoM geography evolved is a claim made by Apologists for Mesoamerica.

Here's the dopiest claim of them all, about not only Joseph Smith, but about all Prophets:

"When a man becomes a prophet, God does not instantly answer all questions and concerns about all aspects of the gospel (especially peripheral aspects such as geography)."

http://www.fairlds.o..._Take_Place.pdf

Geography has to be dumbed down or "peripheral" - to make it not worth any Prophet's attention. "Especially geography"

Edited September 9, 2012 by ANACO

[livy111us]

It's about you because you are only are joining a discussion but are only accepting a portion of the evidence. If you would like to be an effective proponent of Meldrums theory, then you must at least be willing to look at and accept all evidence, no matter if it agrees with you or not. You are doing him a disservice by your actions and doubt anyone on this entire board takes you seriously because you have your answer before you even ask the question. You have your theory no matter what evidence is out there.

I've actually studied the issue quite thoroughly and do not just accept what someone is selling me whole heartedly without examining the evidence, so yes, I am familiar with the history. Since I do accept the evidence no matter what it says, I've adjusted my beliefs accordingly. My personal BOM geography accepts ALL of JS statements. But I think other theories are just as valid.

On that note, you as a Heartland apologist only accept what the Prophet said early in his calling while ignoring what he said as he learned line upon line, precept upon precept towards the end of his life. I've said this before, picking and choosing your evidence isn't going to get you anywhere.

[cursor]

I suppose that are totally free to determine for yourself what "dopey claims" might be. Hey, have at it.

[ERayR]

Says who? The claim that his ideas about BoM geography evolved is a claim made by Apologists for Mesoamerica.

Here's the dopiest claim of them all, about not only Joseph Smith, but about all Prophets:

"When a man becomes a prophet, God does not instantly answer all questions and concerns about all aspects of the gospel (especially peripheral aspects such as geography)."

http://www.fairlds.o..._Take_Place.pdf

Geography has to be dumbed down or "peripheral" - to make it not worth any Prophet's attention. "Especially geography"

It is so easy to see. It has to be Idaho because of that narrow neck of land right there between Washington and Montana. Don't you all think I should set up my website and start booking tours to the lake region of Idaho and booking speaking engagements.

Edited September 9, 2012 by ERayR

[livy111us]

Says who? The claim that his ideas about BoM geography evolved is a claim made by Apologists for Mesoamerica.

Here's the dopiest claim of them all, about not only Joseph Smith, but about all Prophets:

"When a man becomes a prophet, God does not instantly answer all questions and concerns about all aspects of the gospel (especially peripheral aspects such as geography)."

http://www.fairlds.o..._Take_Place.pdf

Geography has to be dumbed down or "peripheral" - to make it not worth any Prophet's attention. "Especially geography"

Are you really claiming that BOM geography is not a peripheral aspect of the Gospel!?!?! I would go out on a limb and say that if you ask any GA, or even your local nursery leader what is the central point of the Gospel that they would say things like the atonement, Jesus Christ, faith, the restoration, service, missionary work, love, charity, repentance, etc.... and that BOM geography would not even be mentioned. However, this may explain your zeal in the matter. Perhaps you should re-evaluate your priorities if this is the case.

[ANACO]

It's about you because you are only are joining a discussion but are only accepting a portion of the evidence. If you would like to be an effective proponent of Meldrums theory, then you must at least be willing to look at and accept all evidence, no matter if it agrees with you or not. You are doing him a disservice by your actions and doubt anyone on this entire board takes you seriously because you have your answer before you even ask the question. You have your theory no matter what evidence is out there.

I've actually studied the issue quite thoroughly and do not just accept what someone is selling me whole heartedly without examining the evidence, so yes, I am familiar with the history. Since I do accept the evidence no matter what it says, I've adjusted my beliefs accordingly. My personal BOM geography accepts ALL of JS statements. But I think other theories are just as valid.

On that note, you as a Heartland apologist only accept what the Prophet said early in his calling while ignoring what he said as he learned line upon line, precept upon precept towards the end of his life. I've said this before, picking and choosing your evidence isn't going to get you anywhere.

I'm a Heartland apologist because I believe the Prophet Joseph Smith knew what he was talking about? ha ha ha!

I too have studied up on your stuff. It's claimed Joseph Smith learned about the geography from the Book of Mormon from a travel book:

"Enthusiastic comments published at Nauvoo showed that the Church's leaders, including Joseph Smith, were immensely stimulated by the new information. Within a few weeks of the first notice, they announced they had just discovered, by reading Stephens's book, that the Nephites' prime homeland must have been in Central,"

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=41&chapid=196

Yet one can also read:

[Joseph Smith] also declared that "the best way to obtain truth and wisdom is not to ask it from books, but to go to God in prayer, and obtain divine teaching" (TPJS, p. 191).

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=51&chapid=454