Latest "Pure Mormonism" Blog: North Vs. Central American Bofm Model

[thesometimesaint]

And what of his "plains of the Nephites" statement? That seems in no way speculative. If he can point at a pile of rocks and say "this is Adam's altar," why can't he say "these are the plains where the Nephites walked?"

As I said I don't know what if anything to make of it. JS was known as a story teller. We have no way of knowing other than what is accepted as Scripture what he said when it pertained to the BoM. We don't have those incidences as Scripture.

"A prophet is only a prophet when acting as such". There is no indication either way that at those times whether JS was acting a Prophet or a just a good story teller.

I think the best we can do, until the Lord see's fit to tell us, is use our best logic and evidences we can find to make our own decisions. At the present time Central America best fits that criteria.

[Brant Gardner]

You make a fair point that there's apparent uncertainty about location. Joseph seems to have promoted the idea that the "...hill of considerable size, and the most elevated of any in the neighborhood" JSH 1:51. In an "epistle from Joseph Smith," he said "(128:20) And again, what do we hear? Glad tidings from Cumorah! Moroni, an angel from heaven, declaring the fulfilment of the prophets—the book to be revealed."

My opinions on several things that Joseph said have been influenced by watching the shifts in his vocabulary about the interpreters. The Book of Mormon calls them interpreters, but it wasn't too much later that someone other than Joseph began calling them urim and thummim. Joseph eventually followed that language and used those terms.

Joseph was a very sociable guy and knew that he was less educated than people around him. He was influenced by people around in many ways and vocabulary is a prime example. Cumorah is another just like urim and thummim. It appears that someone else began using that word for the hill and Joseph went along with it. That isn't prophetic declaration, it is human experience.

What happens with Joseph is that he becomes lionized quite early. That process makes all his statements canonical, even when he was only speculating. He tried to explain that he was only a prophet when speaking as a prophet--but people tended to ignore that qualification even then, and more so now.

Would it have been Elder McConkie who cross-referenced the word Cumorah in v20 above to v51 in JSH? Would limited geography proponents consider that a misreference?

It could have been any number of people. His father in law, Joseph Fielding Smith, was adamant that Cumorah was the hill in New York. It was a firm and unquestioned tradition by that time. I don't believe that everything a General Authority says all the time is revelation any more than Joseph did for himself.

I'm not trying to build a case for North American setting. I'm interested to know why the prophet is considered to be only speculating about Nephite plains etc. Why is Zelph/Adam's Altar identified specifically?

There is a lot that I would love to know about those incidents. Talmage looked at the altar and reported that it wasn't old enough to have been Adam's altar. Still, Joseph said it. We are back to trying to understand Joseph and his declarations. Because Joseph said it, there are many who assume that it must have been revelation. Personally, the more I see those stories and other indications of certain aspects of Joseph's character, it seems to me (and not that this is a minority opinion likely not shared by many at all) that Joseph was doing what he said of another incident and "showing the boys a good time." I think he liked stories and was telling some. I suspect Joseph speculated about Book of Mormon things at least as much as I do, and with less training in history or archaeology.

[Brant Gardner]

Out of interest, what reason, if any, do church leaders give for avoiding a BoM geography?

I haven't seen specific statements since the early 1900s when interest in Book of Mormon geography was flourishing and there were not only lots of models, but lots of completely different models. The brethren were concerned that since there was no agreement that discussions could be misleading and we should be concentrating on the message.

The tacit current stance is still that their interest is in the message and that they are content to let the scholars discuss things like geography. What they have effectively done (and correctly) is separate such speculation from the aegis of the church. Scholars are speculating, not the church. That divides the realms. If the scholars make a good enough case, the church is quite happy to tentatively, but not officially follow. If you look at articles in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism (which was highly correlated) you will find that there is a subtle acceptance of a geographical position that does not reflect the assumptions of the 1800s.

[Brant Gardner]

As I said I don't know what if anything to make of it. JS was known as a story teller. We have no way of knowing other than what is accepted as Scripture what he said when it pertained to the BoM. We don't have those incidences as Scripture.

Good to know I am not the only one to think this is the reason behind the stories told while traveling. Campfire stories!

[thesometimesaint]

Well that makes two. Now onto universal acceptance.

[canard78]

To be honest I'd considered Zelph, plains of Nephites and Adam's altar to be made up too. Being on zions camp, with all its troubles and being so far from their homes, I can well imagine Joseph spinning a few yarns to keep the spirits up.

I'll add myself as a third, but I'm not sure I feel as comfortable about the idea of Joseph making stuff up as he went along. Given the king follett line about 'babies on thrones' I'm not sure he ever gave it up. Lets hope the gold plates were real... And did he take it a bit far with Zelph, given he even claimed "(he) had enquired of the Lord and it was made known in a vision."?

Edited January 1, 2013 by canard78

[thesometimesaint]

To be honest I'd considered Zelph, plains of Nephites and Adam's altar to be made up too. Being on zions camp, with all its troubles and being so far from their homes, I can well imagine Joseph spinning a few yarns to keep the spirits up.

I'll add myself as a third, but I'm not sure I feel as comfortable about the idea of Joseph making stuff up as he went along. Given the king follett line about 'babies on thrones' I'm not sure he ever gave it up. Lets hope the gold plates were real... And did he take it a bit far with Zelph, given he even claimed "(he) had enquired of the Lord and it was made known in a vision."?

We have that problem with all Scripture. Indeed JS said; That if it hadn't happen to him he wouldn't have believed it either. So we're stuck with appealing to God for the answers and/or going on what limited evidences we do have and having faith that what we see through that glass darkly is real.

[rongo]

I heard the hemispheric model idea when I first became interested in the Church. It never made sense to me.

This was George A. Smith's (Joseph's cousin's) experience as well. Discerning people who read the Book of Mormon from the very beginning noticed things like this:

-------

Some time in August 1830, my uncle Joseph Smith and Don Carlos Smith came some two hundred and fifty miles from where the Prophet was residing in Ontario County, New York, and they brought a Book of Mormon with them. I had never seen them before, and I felt astonished at their sayings.

Uncle Joseph and Don Carlos were anxious to get to Stockholm to see grandfather. Accordingly they started, and my father went to carry them. I and my mother spent the whole of Saturday, all day Sunday, and Sunday night in reading the Book of Mormon; and I believe I read and studied it more then than I have done ever since. I studied it attentively and penned down what I considered to be serious objections. Although I was but thirteen years of age, yet I considered the objections I had discovered to be sufficient to overthrow it.

About five o'clock in the evening the neighbours came in and wanted to see the book. They took hold of the book, and some of them were professors of religion, and they began to raise their objections, to find fault with and ridicule the book, and there was no one to defend it; so I thought I would try. I commenced to argue in favour of the book, and answered one objection after another, until I came off victoriously and got the compliment of being a very smart boy. No one brought the objections to the book that I had: mine were geographical objections. (George A. Smith, August 2, 1857. Journal of Discourses 5:103)

[canard78]

This was George A. Smith's (Joseph's cousin's) experience as well. Discerning people who read the Book of Mormon from the very beginning noticed things like this:

-------

Some time in August 1830, my uncle Joseph Smith and Don Carlos Smith came some two hundred and fifty miles from where the Prophet was residing in Ontario County, New York, and they brought a Book of Mormon with them. I had never seen them before, and I felt astonished at their sayings.

Uncle Joseph and Don Carlos were anxious to get to Stockholm to see grandfather. Accordingly they started, and my father went to carry them. I and my mother spent the whole of Saturday, all day Sunday, and Sunday night in reading the Book of Mormon; and I believe I read and studied it more then than I have done ever since. I studied it attentively and penned down what I considered to be serious objections. Although I was but thirteen years of age, yet I considered the objections I had discovered to be sufficient to overthrow it.

About five o'clock in the evening the neighbours came in and wanted to see the book. They took hold of the book, and some of them were professors of religion, and they began to raise their objections, to find fault with and ridicule the book, and there was no one to defend it; so I thought I would try. I commenced to argue in favour of the book, and answered one objection after another, until I came off victoriously and got the compliment of being a very smart boy. No one brought the objections to the book that I had: mine were geographical objections. (George A. Smith, August 2, 1857. Journal of Discourses 5:103)

Is that all he said on it? I'm intrigued, but wouldn't say the above account suggests he rejected a hemespheric model.

[canard78]

We have that problem with all Scripture. Indeed JS said; That if it hadn't happen to him he wouldn't have believed it either. So we're stuck with appealing to God for the answers and/or going on what limited evidences we do have and having faith that what we see through that glass darkly is real.

Zelph, Nephite plains and Adam's altar are all outside of scripture and therefore outside of doctrine. I'm not sure we could say Zelph is remotely comparable to the scriptures he produced, at least I hope not! Given the former seems to me to be pretty clearly an old yarn to entertain the boys.

[ERayR]

To be honest I'd considered Zelph, plains of Nephites and Adam's altar to be made up too. Being on zions camp, with all its troubles and being so far from their homes, I can well imagine Joseph spinning a few yarns to keep the spirits up.

I'll add myself as a third, but I'm not sure I feel as comfortable about the idea of Joseph making stuff up as he went along. Given the king follett line about 'babies on thrones' I'm not sure he ever gave it up. Lets hope the gold plates were real... And did he take it a bit far with Zelph, given he even claimed "(he) had enquired of the Lord and it was made known in a vision."?

Even campfire stories have a grain of the true at teir center.

[Monster]

Would you consider the possibility that it is historical fiction? As for the Iliad. Or wholly fictional in the sense that we understand Tolkien's Hobbit?

Not totally sure. Most likely totally fiction. That is where most of the evidence points, but I am open to any new information that surfaces.

[thesometimesaint]

Here is just some of the evidences.

http://www.jefflindsay.com/BMEvidences.shtml

[Brant Gardner]

And did he take it a bit far with Zelph, given he even claimed "(he) had enquired of the Lord and it was made known in a vision."?

What we have are recollections of others of what he said. What is in his letter to Emma does not mention such an inquiry. Given the way people tended to think of Joseph, and after-the-fact assignment to revelation would hardly be surprising. Unfortunately, we too seldom ask the sources of the statements we quote. With respect to an entirely different issue, I have seen acceptance of statements as historical when the actual situation suggests that their author was telling stories. I suspect that the Zelph incident is one where the stories improved with the retelling (and I believe most were written well after the fact).

[Brant Gardner]

Not totally sure. Most likely totally fiction. That is where most of the evidence points, but I am open to any new information that surfaces.

I haven't seen much credible evidence supporting the idea that it is fiction, and quite a bit pointing to a historical document. I wonder why our experiences are so different? I suspect it isn't that I haven't read the evidence you have, but perhaps so.

[canard78]

Even campfire stories have a grain of the true at teir center.

Not if they have no truth in the grain. To say "this pile of rocks is the altar where Adam made his first sacrifice" could have no truth at all if they're simply the rocks from a tribal burial or a stash for tribal war or the rocks piled up from clearing a field.

If he made it up to seem prophetic it comes across as a bit inappropriate.

If he says "I'm only a prophet when speaking as a prophet," what happens when he's pretending to for effect, but can't be because what he says is hokum?

Having said that, I consider a global flood to be hokum but still see the value in teaching it as a fact for its symbology.

[canard78]

What we have are recollections of others of what he said. What is in his letter to Emma does not mention such an inquiry. Given the way people tended to think of Joseph, and after-the-fact assignment to revelation would hardly be surprising. Unfortunately, we too seldom ask the sources of the statements we quote. With respect to an entirely different issue, I have seen acceptance of statements as historical when the actual situation suggests that their author was telling stories. I suspect that the Zelph incident is one where the stories improved with the retelling (and I believe most were written well after the fact).

Thanks. I appreciate the reminder that the Zelph moment is not a simple matter.

http://en.fairmormon.org/Zelph

I'm grateful for the hint of at-the-time sceptism from Woodruff with his 'probably.' It gives me a bit more license to be the same. Given there are three different people saying Joseph had some kind of vision experience it would be tricky to say he said nothing at all about some sort of vision, but if some accounts were written later perhaps it was a case of 'copying each others homework.'

Out of interest, is there any indication that Joseph was alive/saw the version in MHC? Is there a way of dating when it was written?

http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperDetails/history-1838–1856-volume-a-1?p=489

Sorry if this is becoming a thread derail. I guess it's a small example of the challenge of using 1800s sources for laying claim to support for a theory.

[rongo]

I'm grateful for the hint of at-the-time sceptism from Woodruff with his 'probably.'

There's also Levi Hancock, who at the time the Zelph statement/story was told, remarked "I could not comprehend it but supposed it was alright" (quoted in "Rough Stone Rolling," p. 241). Even contemporaries of Joseph Smith who believed in him and did not leave the Church sometimes scratched their heads and said "Huh?" about certain things.

Hancock's reaction, and other people's, to the Zelph story is similar to Wilford Woodruff's regarding Brigham Young's insistence that the Salt Lake Temple would be built of adobe, not granite:

"Wilford Woodruff related an interesting example of an instance where he knew through revelation that an adamantly-held view of Brigham Young was wrong. President Young, although having seen the Salt Lake Temple in vision, insisted that the temple would be made of adobe instead of stone or “******* marble” [granite]. Elder Woodruff later noted that he knew by revelation that the temple would be made of the granite that it later was made out of:

When in the western country, many years ago, before we came to the Rocky Mountains, I had a dream. I dreamed of being in these mountains, and of seeing a large fine looking temple erected in one of these valleys which was built of cut granite stone, I saw that temple dedicated, and I attended the dedicatory services, and I saw a good many men that are living to-day in the midst of this people . . . When the foundation of that temple was laid I thought of my dream and a great many times since. And whenever President Young held a council of the brethren of the Twelve and talked of building the temple of adobe or brick, which was done I would say to myself, “No, you will never do it;” because I had seen it in my dream built of some other material. I mention these things to show you that things are manifested to the Latter-day Saints sometimes which we do not know anything about, only as they are given by the Spirit of God.

This shows that in this instance, despite President Young’s insistence to the contrary, Wilford Woodruff knew through personal revelation that Young was wrong about what the temple would be made of."

http://www.fairlds.org/authors/jones-mckay/well-nigh-as-dangerous (footnote 56; previous footnotes lay out President Young's insistence on adobe and his vision of the temple having six spires)

We actually talked about the importance of personal revelation being the "court of last resort" for us in youth Sunday School on Sunday. If we understand this principle and have our own spiritual witness, saying "Huh?" and scratching our heads about things from the prophets won't lead to us making shipwreck of our faith.

[Antoni]

If we understand this principle and have our own spiritual witness, saying "Huh?" and scratching our heads about things from the prophets won't lead to us making shipwreck of our faith.

I wholeheartedly agree.

[Robert F. Smith]

FWIW, to both of you. I recognise there's no official word from Joseph. Clearly all the church members and leaders were happy to jump on most new American antiquity discovery and cite it as BoM evidence.

But for Joseph to walk through Illinois and say "these are the fields where Nephites walked and died, these are the bones where Nephites died" is more than what came later which was "the latest old discovery is viable" (most not from JS) has a different tone. Why was the man who translates and published the record so certain he was standing on the "plains of the Nephites?"

And if the church today is so 'uncertain' of the geography, why is it so happy for its art and media to tacitly endorse a Central American theory? E.g. The (pretty awful) Testaments movie?

If you are intersted in true Mesoamerican culture, you might want to take a look at Mel Gibson's Apocalypto.

[Brant Gardner]

If you are intersted in true Mesoamerican culture, you might want to take a look at Mel Gibson's Apocalypto.

Didn't you forget the smiley face?

[canard78]

If you are intersted in true Mesoamerican culture, you might want to take a look at Mel Gibson's Apocalypto.

LOL, I prefer my Gibson to be served at his gun-toting, non-soap-boxing, 1980s best.

[cdowis]

But for Joseph to walk through Illinois and say "these are the fields where Nephites walked and died, these are the bones where Nephites died" is more than what came later which was "the latest old discovery is viable" (most not from JS) has a different tone. Why was the man who translates and published the record so certain he was standing on the "plains of the Nephites?"

I have pointed out the LGT does not preclude Nephites living, walking and dying in North America. It was called "the land northward", and the record of those inhabitants are not available to us.

Edited January 2, 2013 by cdowis

[Sevenbak]

I have pointed out the LGT does not preclude Nephites living, walking and dying in North America. It was called "the land northward", and the record of those inhabitants are not available to us.

I think most proponents of a LGT put "the land northward" within the confines of their accepted LGT model. So if someone has a mesoamerican LGT model that puts Cumorah in Mexico, then North America isn't the "land northward" for them. Perhaps one of you who hold to this model can correct me if I'm wrong.

[canard78]

I have pointed out the LGT does not preclude Nephites living, walking and dying in North America. It was called "the land northward", and the record of those inhabitants are not available to us.

I think JS's letter to Emma gives us three possible options:

- He was spinning a yarn to lift the spirits of a wife a long way away (and probaly the boys on Zion's camp as his letter suggests)

- He was speculating about the location for the Book of Mormon and felt that they 'could be' in the plains of the Nephites

- He had genuine revelation that Nephites, "that once beloved people of the Lord" whose history we find in the Book of Mormon, had lived in the land now called Illinois.

If one believes the third one can then draw an additional conclusion depending on your personal perspective. If it's an inspired geography I'd find it a little tenuous to suggest that Joseph was talking about an obscure group of Hagoth-esque migrants who went to the land northward. Especially as the BoM offers no "history" of their happenings, but Joseph in his letter to Emma says they were discussing the history of the Nephites in the Book of Mormon as they walked over their plains and picked up their bones.

Alma 63:5 also suggest that those in the land northward were close enough to maintain some contact with the main group. Or they at least knew where they were, to be able to send provisions to them.

10 And it came to pass in the thirty and ninth year of the reign of the judges, ^aShiblon died also, and Corianton had gone forth to the land northward in a ship, to carry forth provisions unto the people who had gone forth into that land.

If we take Joseph's letter as revelation, I'd find it hard to see it pointing to anything other than a hemespheric or North East/Great lakes theory. Neither of them sit particularly comfortably with me which is why I loop back round to option 1 and 2 in my list above.

The knock-on of that is that if Joseph was happily speaking with certainty when uncertain... it makes me in turn feel a little more uncertain about other things that were said at other times.