FAIR Blog » Book of Mormon

Mormon FAIR-Cast 70: The Gift and Power: Translating the Book of Mormon

SteveDensleyJr — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 16:34:09 +0000

Brant Gardner is interviewed on KTKK Radio and on KSL Radio regarding his new book, The Gift and Power: Translating the Book of Mormon (available for purchase at the FAIR Bookstore) He talks about seer stones, the Spaulding manuscript, stylometrics, various theories on Book of Mormon translation and the Book of Mormon in the context of Mesoamerican culture.

Brant Gardner’s academic background includes work towards a Ph.D. in Mesoamerican Ethnohistory at the State University of New York, Albany. His published works on Mesoamerica include an analysis of classical Nahuatl kinship terminology, an ethnohistoric investigation into the identification of the use of Coxoh to designate a people and language in Southern Mexico, and an examination of the Aztec Legend of the Suns. He has written articles that have appeared in the FARMS Review, and his widely acclaimed six-volume commentary on the Book of Mormon, Second Witness: Analytical and Contextual Commentary on the Book of Mormon, is published by Kofford Books and available for purchase at the FAIR Bookstore.

These interviews are posted here by permission of KTKK Radio and KSL Radio. The views expressed in these interviews do not necessarily represent the views of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or of FAIR.

FAIR Study Aids for the Book of Mormon

SteveDensleyJr — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 22:42:10 +0000

With the upcoming year of Book of Mormon study in Gospel Doctrine classes, FAIR has decided to put together a new study resource. We are calling it “FAIR Study Aids,” and it can be accessed on our wiki at http://en.fairmormon.org/FAIR_Study_Aids.

Similar efforts have been made in the past, and the fruits of those labors have also been collected on that page for easy access. This information is a resource for class members and also a preparatory resource for gospel doctrine teachers to help them formulate answers to questions that might arise during their class. It is, of course, not in any way a substitute for the Gospel Doctrine manual, nor should instructors make these topics the focus of class instruction. This information is provided with the understanding that it is an additional resource only.

Each week, FAIR volunteers will look at the Sunday School lesson and identify relevant apologetic issues and other related insights, and then compile them into a single, easy to use quick-reference guide with links to additional information. Organization will follow the same structure found in Gospel Doctrine manual, with main headings that correspond with the main sections on the lesson. This should make it easy to identify how any particular item relates to the lesson material. Additional information related to the chapters in the Book of Mormon being covered by the lesson, but which do not fit neatly into the lesson’s structure, will be placed at the bottom of the page. Main sections will be broken down into three sub-sections:

Helpful Insights: These include various tidbits of information that might be helpful or interesting to discuss as a part of your lesson. They will come from scholarly studies and other sources.
Potential Criticisms and Faithful Information: These include potential criticisms that may arise during the lesson, or that are relevant to the topics and themes being discussed, along with information on how to respond with faith supporting information. These are made available so that teachers and students can gain some familiarity with these issues and be prepared should these or similar concerns arise in class.
Faith Affirmations: Here we will make note of various items of evidence for the Book of Mormon along with other information that supports the authenticity of the Book of Mormon and promotes faith in its teachings.

The first lesson is already available, and serves as an example. It can be found here: http://en.fairmormon.org/FAIR_study_aids/Book_of_Mormon/lesson_one

Dan Peterson has, in the past, discussed the need for both positive and negative apologetics, and we hope that by providing information in each of these categories we will successfully balance between the necessary task of responding to criticism (“negative apologetics”) with the more enjoyable and uplifting endeavor of building faith (“positive apologetics”).

FAIR Issues 30: Joseph’s translation shows remarkable consistency

Mike Ash — Sat, 26 Nov 2011 04:05:58 +0000

The entire Book of Mormon was translated in a span of 65 to 75 days. As Joseph translated, he did not have any manuscripts or books from which to read. After spending hours dictating the translation, Joseph would take a break for a meal or other interruption, then pick up the translation where he had left off, without either seeing the manuscript or having any portion of it read to him. If Joseph was dictating fiction and never had past portions read back to him, how did he keep things straight and consistent for nearly six hundred pages without forgetting at least some of the details?

We stand in awe at how this relatively uneducated young man could produce a work that not only teaches eternal doctrinal principles but also weaves many tales of war, politics, migrations, and geography. Not only are the records of these events consistent, but they often match what we now know about ancient societies in the Near East and early Americas.

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

Brother Ash is author of the book Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt, as well as the book, of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith. Both books are available for purchase online through the FAIR Bookstore.

Tell your friends about the Mormon FAIR-Cast. Share a link on your Facebook page and help increase the popularity of the Mormon FAIR-Cast by subscribing to this podcast in iTunes, and by rating it and writing a review.

FAIR Issues 29: Some Mormons may not understand Joseph’s translation process

Mike Ash — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 04:05:04 +0000

In reviewing the history of the Book of Mormon translation, some members may be troubled that the process doesn’t match their conceptions of how they thought the process worked. For members who were unaware of the seer stone in the hat, at least two questions or concerns may arise: 1) Is it strange that Joseph used a stone in a hat? 2) Why have we have always been told that Joseph used the Urim and Thummim? 3) Why isn’t the seer stone used today? Mike Ash addresses these questions in this episode.

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

FAIR Issues 28: How a seer stone helped in the Book of Mormon translation

Mike Ash — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 02:59:21 +0000

Before starting the translation of the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith was familiar with the concept of using stones to “see” things. Like some others of his time, he actually engaged in the practice of using stones in an effort to find things. His familiarity with seer stones may have prepared him for the concept of using the Nephite interpreters to translate once he received them along with the golden plates from the angel Moroni. After the Nephite interpreters were taken from him, he was able to continue the translation process with a seer stone that he owned. Some of the history surrounding these events is discussed in this article.

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

The Book of Mormon, The Doctrine and Covenants, and the Archaeology Question

Stephen Smoot — Wed, 02 Nov 2011 15:38:37 +0000

The authenticity of the Book of Mormon has been repeatedly assailed by critics of the LDS Church on the grounds that is lacks any confirmatory archaeological evidence that supports its claimed historicity as an ancient record. Countless books, articles, DVDs and internet websites have ceaselessly repeated the following cacophonous refrain:

There is not a single piece of archaeological evidence that confirms the ancient authenticity of the Book of Mormon.

Sectarian critics of Mormonism usually throw in the following addendum to the aforementioned claim:

There is not a single piece of archaeological evidence that confirms the ancient authenticity of the Book of Mormon. The Bible, on the other hand, has been repeatedly proven by archaeological evidence. Because the Bible has been proven archaeologically, we can accept it as the word of God. Because the Book of Mormon has no archaeological evidence, we should reject it as scripture that can be relied on as a reliable source of God’s truth.

Joel Kramer of Living Hope Ministries has created a popular anti-Mormon DVD that makes this claim titled The Bible vs. The Book of Mormon. In it, Kramer attempts to validate the authenticity of the Bible on archaeological grounds, whilst simultaneously attempting to disprove the Book of Mormon on archaeological grounds. Because, according to Kramer, the Bible has been verified archaeologically we can turn to it as the infallible word of God, unlike the Book of Mormon. The same line of argumentation is also brought up by the producers of the 2007 video Jesus Christ vs. Joseph Smith. Many additional examples could be multiplied, but the above should be enough to convey the general argument of sectarian critics.

Besides the highly debatable claim that the Book of Mormon has no archaeological evidence to support its authenticity,[1] the sectarian reasoning that the Bible can be accepted as the word of God because of archaeological verification is highly suspect. In two reviews of Kramer’s DVD, David Bokovoy and Brant Gardner repeatedly demonstrate the fallacious reasoning behind this critical claim.[2] And it is not only the Latter-day Saints who are aware of this fallacy. Alfred Hoerth and John McRay, two non-Mormon biblical scholars, for example, have urged caution amongst believers of the Bible who try and use archaeology to prove biblical theology.[3] As William J. Hamblin effectively summarized:

Even if every historical event in the Bible were to be archaeologically verified, it still would not prove that God exists or that Jesus is the Christ any more than the discovery of archaeological sites mentioned by Homer in the Iliad has proven that Zeus is the King of Heaven.[4]

Unfortunately, this is compelling point of Hamblin’s is routinely overlooked or ignored by sectarian critics.

Furthermore, it has recently occurred to me that this argument used by sectarians is severely undermined by a wonderful book of Latter-day Saint scripture entitled the Doctrine and Covenants. Permit me, if you will, a few moments to explain how, following the logic of sectarian critics of Mormonism, archaeology proves beyond any doubt that the Book of Mormon is an ancient record and the word of God.

The D&C contains several references to the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. Take, for instance, this declaration of the Lord in D&C 17:6:

And he [Joseph Smith] has translated the book [the Book of Mormon], even that part which I have commanded him, and as your Lord and your God liveth it is true.

Consider also D&C 42:12, which reads:

And again, the elders, priests and teachers of this church shall teach the principles of my gospel, which are in the Bible and the Book of Mormon, in the which is the fulness of the gospel.

And finally, here is D&C 1:29:

And after having received the record of the Nephites, yea, even my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., might have power to translate through the mercy of God, by the power of God, the Book of Mormon.

Here are only three examples of many throughout the D&C that affirm the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon. The Latter-day Saints believe these declarations to be the will and word of the Lord. They accept on faith the theological claims made in the D&C regarding the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.

One may be wondering how this archaeologically proves that the Book of Mormon is ancient scripture and the word of God. It is simple, really. The Doctrine and Covenants has been overwhelming verified by archaeological evidence as an authentic text of the 19th century. Consider the following:

The D&C mentions American place-names such as Harmony, New York City, Albany, Boston, Kirtland, Independence, Nauvoo, Fayette, Manchester, Hiram, Salem, Far West, Ramus, and Salt Lake City. Every single one of these locations has been indisputably verified archaeologically. You can locate any of these places on a map of the United States.
The D&C details the geography of states such as New York, Missouri, Ohio, Illinois, and Massachusetts. Other portions of the D&C were received in Nebraska and Utah. Each of these states is still in existence today, and there is no question from the archaeological evidence that they existed in the 19th century. Thus, altogether, the geography of the D&C is 100% archaeologically verified. Contrast this with the Bible, which still has ambiguous geography that is open for debate amongst scholars and archaeologists. Some of the geography of the Bible, i.e. the Garden of Eden, is doubted by many scholars to have even existed, and is increasingly being deemed mythological. Not so with any of the geography of the D&C.
The D&C names individuals such as Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, Martin Harris, David Whitmer, Emma Smith, Orson Pratt, Orson Hyde, John Taylor, Brigham Young, David Patten, Joseph Smith, Sr., and countless others. Every single individual mentioned in the D&C has been proven archaeologically to have actually existed in the 19th century. We have their journals, their personal belongings, photographs, eyewitness descriptions, census records, birth-date and death-date records, living descendants that can be verified through DNA evidence, etc., all confirming without any question that these were real people. And unlike many of the biblical prophets, there is no debate amongst scholars whether Joseph Smith was a real person or merely an idealized personification of the archetypal prophet. Unlike the biblical figures Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, and Moses, among others, scholars are not debating whether Joseph Smith or Brigham Young or John Taylor actually existed. There is no debate amongst scholars whether Brigham Young actually led thousands of Mormons across the American frontier. Wish that were so with Moses and the reported Exodus of the Israelites out of Egypt, as the historicity of the Exodus story is hotly contested by scholars.
Unlike any of the biblical books, we have the original autographs for many of the revelations contained in the D&C. And, we have multiple extant copies of manuscripts of the D&C that date to years, or even months, after the original, unlike the extant copies of the biblical texts which date decades or even centuries after the autographs were written.
Today, in Salt Lake City, artifacts belonging to the people mentioned in the D&C and manuscripts of the D&C can be found in the Church History Library and the Museum of Church History and Art. What’s more, we know these artifacts actually belonged to individuals named in the D&C. That includes books, clothing, utensils, tools, and other trinkets. Thanks to names inscribed on the artifact (how many examples of handwriting do we have from any biblical figure?) and other evidence we can be absolutely positive than certain artifacts once belonged to certain individuals mentioned in the D&C.

By now the point should be obvious. The Doctrine and Covenants has been overwhelming proven archaeologically. The events of the past that it reports, and the people, places, and things is describes have been proven archaeologically. If we follow the argument of sectarian critics, then the theological claims of the D&C have also been proven because its historicity has been proven. And because its theological claims have been proven, the Book of Mormon therefore has been proven to be ancient scripture since one of the theological claims of the D&C is that the Book of Mormon is authentic.

If the critics are going to be consistent, and not trap themselves in a double standard, then they must concede that the Book of Mormon is authentic. The D&C has been proven archaeologically. The D&C testifies that the Book of Mormon is authentic. Ergo, the Book of Mormon is authentic.

Now, of course, I am not seriously arguing that the question of the Book of Mormon’s historicity is settled because the D&C has been proven archaeologically. That debate is still very much open to differing opinions and arguments. Nor am I seriously arguing that the theological claims of the Doctrine and Covenants have been proven true because of archaeology. (Likewise, I will mention in anticipation to possible future objections by any Evangelical critics that I am not attempting to attack the Bible. It is not my goal in this post to try and disprove the Bible.) My point is to show the double standard used by sectarian critics. If we follow the logic of the critics, viz., archaeology proves the theology of the Bible, then it follows that archaeology also proves the theology of the Doctrine and Covenants, which in turn proves the Book of Mormon is scripture.

Therefore, the sectarian argument that archaeological verification = theological verification needs to be put to rest.

[Kerry Shirts, the lovable Backyard Professor, has produced a video putting forth an identical argument that I have put forth here. See his YouTube video "The Power of Archaeology for the D&C", online here.]

Notes:

[1]: For starters, see here, here, here, here, here, and here. Many more samples could be provided; on such, see here.

[2]: David Bokovoy, “The Bible vs. The Book of Mormon: Still Loosing the Battle,” FARMS Review 18/1 (2006), 3-19, online here; Brant Gardner, “Behind the Mask, Behind the Curtain: Uncovering the Illusion,” FARMS Review 17/2 (2005), 145-195, online here. See also the FAIR produced video “The Bible vs. The Book of Mormon: A Close Examination”, online here.

[3]: Alfred Hoerth and John McRay, Bible Archaeology: An Exploration of the History and Culture of Early Civilizations (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2005), 11-12.

[4]: William J. Hamblin, “Basic Methodological Problems with the Anti-Mormon Approach to the Geography and Archaeology of the Book of Mormon,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 2/1 (Spring 1993), 186. The entire article, which can be accessed online here, is worth reading with special attention.

FAIR Issues 26: Seer stone, Nephite interpreters are religion, not magic

Mike Ash — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 01:40:13 +0000

In Joseph Smith’s day, the term Urim and Thummim applied to two different translating tools: the Nephite interpreters, as well as what is called a “seer stone.” In order to understand what a seer stone is and why Joseph Smith would use it to translate the Book of Mormon, it is important first to understand the cultural context of Joseph Smith’s time, and practices in which people were engaged that today we may refer to as “magic.”

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

FAIR Issues 25: What exactly were the Nephite interpreters?

Mike Ash — Thu, 06 Oct 2011 02:14:47 +0000

When Joseph Smith received the golden plates, he also received interpreters that are sometimes referred to as “the Urim and Thummim.” Where did the interpreters come from? Is this the only Urim and Thummim, or are there others? And what about that curtain we hear about? Was there actually a curtain between Joseph Smith and Martin Harris as the translation took place? In this episode, Michael Ash begins a discussion of the way in which the Book of Mormon translation occurred and the role played by the Urim and Thummim.

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

FAIR Issues 24: The cure for an intellectual apostasy

Mike Ash — Thu, 22 Sep 2011 02:11:39 +0000

“The cure for an intellectual apostasy is enlarging both one’s spiritual and intellectual knowledge.” One important thing to know is the way in which God works through prophets. “[T]he Lord doesn’t typically drop revelation into the minds of prophets. More often than not, the Lord grants revelation according to petitions for help or understanding.” Some examples of this are given in this article.

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

FAIR Issues 23: “Reformed Egyptian” an evidence for Book of Mormon

SteveDensleyJr — Sun, 11 Sep 2011 02:12:10 +0000

Did Joseph Smith make up the idea of “reformed Egyptian?” Would devout Israelites have written in the language of pagans such as the Egyptians? Do modern archeological discoveries provide parallels for such a concept? If the Nephites spoke Hebrew, why is there no evidence for the Hebrew Language in Ancient America?

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

FAIR Issues 22: Analyzing the best historical Book of Mormon evidence

SteveDensleyJr — Sun, 21 Aug 2011 02:41:30 +0000

Michael Ash begins a series of episodes that examine the best historical evidence relating to the Book of Mormon. In this first episode, he concludes that Joseph Smith did, in fact, have actual plates.

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

FAIR Issues 21: Book of Mormon in ancient setting, not 19th century work

SteveDensleyJr — Thu, 18 Aug 2011 01:00:47 +0000

Mike Ash discusses the importance of understanding use of language and ancient context when analyzing the Book of Mormon. He writes: “If we try to understand the Book of Mormon as a real ancient document, written by real ancient people who lived and thought just like other ancient people and interacted with their environment, and recorded their doings in ways that are similar to other ancient people, then the arguments of the critics lose any power they might have had.”

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

FAIR Issues 20: Book of Mormon geography may be smaller than you think

SteveDensleyJr — Sun, 31 Jul 2011 01:06:40 +0000

Where did the events of the Book of Mormon take place? Is it possible that ancient writers of the scriptures exaggerated their populations and the geographic scope of certain events? How might this possibility help us to better understand the events of scripture? Listen to this episode for some surprising insights.

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

FAIR Issues 18: Can imperfect scriptures lead to God?

SteveDensleyJr — Sun, 24 Jul 2011 02:24:34 +0000

Mormons believe the Bible to be the work of God, so far as it is translated correctly. We therefore readily accept the possibility of error within the Bible on the basis that there may have been mistranslations. But what about the Book of Mormon? As it was translated by a prophet of God, should we consider it to be inerrant? What effect can language have on the transmission of prophesy or in the translation of scriptures? If it is possible for even the Book of Mormon to contain errors, how are we supposed to know what is true in the scriptures? These issues are discussed in this episode.

Mormon Times is in a state of transition at this time. Therefore, the full text of this article is not currently available online.

Best of FAIR 8: DNA and the Book of Mormon

SteveDensleyJr — Thu, 21 Jul 2011 02:52:38 +0000

Dr. David Stewart examines the issues surrounding DNA studies used to condemn the Book of Mormon. He concludes: “The recent explosion of molecular DNA data has led to a considerable increase in knowledge about our roots. However, some individuals have drawn and widely publicized conclusions far beyond those validated by existing data. The claims of critics that DNA evidence disproves traditional LDS teachings about Native American ancestry are based in a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of science and ignorance of history and scripture. There is still much we do not know about the genetics of ancient and modern populations, but careful study demonstrates that the teachings of LDS prophets are fully consistent with existing DNA data.”

The full text of this address can be found at FAIR LDS.

David Stewart, M.D., was raised in Massachusetts and Maryland. He was a presidential scholar at Brigham Young University, graduating with summa cum laude honors in molecular biology in just two years. He received his medical degree from the University of Colorado School of Medicine in 1999. He completed surgical internship and orthopedic surgery residency at the University of Texas Medical Branch and completed fellowship training in pediatric orthopedic and scoliosis surgery at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles. Dr. Stewart is a member of the Alpha Omega Alpha medical honor society and has received numerous awards for excellence in clinical practice and medical research and for his contributions to international health. He is fluent in several Eastern European languages and is active in international medical charity and education work in Eastern Europe and Asia. He served a full-time LDS mission in Russia and has written on LDS topics including church growth, missionary work, and DNA and the Book of Mormon. He lives in Las Vegas with his wife and young children.

The Book of Mormon Musical: Practical Religion for Modern Times?

SteveDensleyJr — Mon, 13 Jun 2011 04:35:33 +0000

One of my favorite things to do when I visit New York or London is to see the shows. We get an occasional traveling production in Salt Lake City, but for sheer quantity, there are no places in the world like New York and London. However, there hasn’t been anything on Broadway that I’ve been very interested in for some time now. So recently, it has been with great interest that I’ve read reviews of the Book of Mormon musical. Of course, I have been interested not only because it has been called the “savior” of Broadway, or because of all the awards it has won. I have also been interested to see reports that a number of Mormons have seen and enjoyed the show. Some Mormons have been quoted as saying that that there is enough to be offended at, but that the message is “sweet.” This might lead one to believe that, despite its offensive presentation, the core message is a positive one. However, as I have heard the show described, it has not seemed to warrant the glowing admiration that it has been receiving. I have been willing to admit that it might have good music with funny jokes. But in my judgment, not only is the show shockingly profane, but the ultimate message of the show is less-than-redeeming.

I have not felt that I could speak with authority against the message of the musical without first-hand information. So now I have listened to (although not seen) the musical. Having done so, I wonder if there is anything so profane and vulgar that has ever played on Broadway. Critics seem to acknowledge the highly offensive nature of the musical, but dismiss it on the basis that it was written by the creators of South Park, Trey Parker and Matt Stone. Since we should expect them to be vulgar and profane, it’s no big deal.

Putting aside the sheer offensiveness of the lyrics, I found the music itself to be unimaginative and cliché. Some may say that its cliché feel is just part of the satire; that partly, the point of the show is to make fun of Broadway musicals. Fair enough. However, that’s been done before, and much more effectively, in Spamalot. In short, there was very little in the way of unique artistry that can be found here. I’ll admit that it has some catchy tunes. So does Lady GaGa. Both may be long remembered, not for their catchy tunes or even for their messages, but for the way in which they offended modern sensibilities, which is what I think Parker and Stone were going for.

What that leaves is the story. The main thrust of its claims about Mormonism is that Joseph Smith made it all up, and that his message does not apply to the modern world. It portrays Mormons as naïve and simplistic. Of course, Mormons are also a cheerful, polite, and well-meaning bunch, and as such, are basically harmless. But the only way for them to truly do good in the modern world is to change their story so it applies to current problems, which should be fine since their scriptures were made up in the first place. This is all very appealing to the audience and to theater critics. They are made to feel superior to the delusional Mormons, while at the same time, feel good about themselves for acknowledging that it is important to help relieve suffering in the world. They don’t have to feel bad about lampooning the Mormons since the show acknowledges that Mormons are nice people, and since it is just satire, after all.

Many Mormon reviews of the show tend to whitewash the truly disgusting aspects and try to find a positive spin, perhaps to demonstrate how open-minded and hip we Mormons are. Mormons who have given positive reviews argue that the show preaches a positive message of practical religion. However, putting aside the discussions of raping babies, raping frogs, and raping God himself (or herself?), the central theme of the musical is not about service to the poor and downtrodden. It is about how making up a wacky religion can be great so long as it accomplishes humanitarian ends, like reducing incidences of AIDS and female circumcision.

At the end of the show, it is not the Book of Mormon that is being preached and changing the lives of the Ugandans, it is the Book of Arnold, the new scripture made up by one of the show’s Mormon missionaries, Elder Arnold Cunningham. The new church members do not provide clean drinking water, vaccinations, and wheelchairs to Africans, as Mormons have done in real life. They do not testify of the eternal saving power of the atonement of Jesus Christ. Instead, they go door to door passing out the Book of Arnold. The practical advice that changes lives comes from a story about how Joseph Smith was about to rape a baby to cure his AIDS, when God appeared to him and told him to rape a frog instead. He later meets Brigham Young, who was cursed by God for circumcising his daughter. The curse was that his nose was turned into a clitoris. Joseph Smith heals Brigham by rubbing the frog on his nose. We are supposed to believe that this message is more crucial and more pertinent to the lives of the Ugandans than the messages that are actually in the Book of Mormon.

When you push past the vulgarity and lampooning of the sacred, the message is that even if you manufacture a religion, and even if that religion has preposterous foundational stories, so long as it addresses modern problems and motivates people to be nice to each other, religion is A-okay. Stone and Parker obviously don’t believe that a fable about raping frogs really has the power to change lives, but what does? While they profess to like Mormons and think that Mormons are really nice people, what makes Mormons that way? Is the real Book of Mormon actually irrelevant to modern day problems?

It is true that the Book of Mormon says nothing about vaccinations, clean drinking water and wheelchairs. Yet, somehow Mormons feel motivated to give of their time, talents, money, and even risk their lives, to go to such places as Africa to serve people whom they have never met. What Stone and Parker apparently fail to grasp is that this motivation actually comes from what is in the Book of Mormon. There is no need for a modern-day revision. The primary reason that Mormons are the way they are is that they have accepted the central messages of the Book of Mormon, that Jesus Christ is our savior and that His church is on the Earth today. The atonement of Jesus Christ has the power to change people’s hearts. The Book of Mormon contains little, if any, practical advice on dealing with modern problems. Yet, as people accept the message of the Book of Mormon, they gain power that helps them to patiently and even cheerfully cope with the trials of life.

Matt Stone and Trey Parker make an effort, and rightly so, to highlight the power that comes from the fact that Mormons believe strongly in their religion. However, they seem oblivious to the fact that this power comes from strong beliefs in things that are true. And despite what the Book of Mormon Musical may lead people to believe, the messages that are actually in the Book of Mormon are a powerful source of good in the world today. That power comes from being based in timeless facts not timely fantasies.

The Hopewell culture (in the Great Lakes area) and The Book of Mormon: Do they match?

Tyler Livingston — Sat, 12 Feb 2011 22:11:09 +0000

The Book of Mormon narrative begins with a small group of people who arrived in the Americas around 600 b.c. and numbered less than 30 people. Yet, within 1,000 years, grew to a civilization of hundreds of thousands of people. While the dynamics of such a population growth seems astronomical, it has been dealt with by previous scholars. 1 What is important to realize is the vast amount of people that compose the Nephites and Lamanites in The Book of Mormon. For example, after the Nephites fled the land of Nephi and joined the Mulekites in the city of Zarahemla, it is said that the group was “exceedingly numerous” (Omni 1:17). Although, there were many people located in Zarahemla it was not even “half so numerous” (Mosiah 20:11) as the Lamanites, meaning the Lamanites were at least double the population of the Nephites.

Throughout The Book of Mormon, we begin to see hints of what “exceedingly numerous” actually means. Throughout this sacred text we see repeated mentioning of thousands 2, and tens of thousands 3 of Lehites in regard to lives lost in war, conversions, or armies. In the last battles between the Nephites and the Lamanites around 400 b.c., these numbers increase to hundreds of thousands people 4. James E. Smith, one of the creators of the Cambridge model for estimating historical populations noted that “With a moderately positive population growth rate of .1 percent per year, a population of 300,000 in Zarahemla in 87 B.C. would produce 450,000 in Mormon’s day.” 5

Any candidate for consideration to be Book of Mormon people must have a large civilization with tens and hundreds of thousands of people. If the population was not there to match these numbers, then they could not be Nephites and Lamanites.

Some groups who promote a Great Lakes setting (or Heartland Model) for The Book of Mormon, claim that the ancient Hopewell culture centered in Ohio and Illinois is the civilization explained in The Book of Mormon. I would like to examine this claim using a few requirements that any civilization must possess to be Book of Mormon populace. It is important to examine the Hopewell *during* the period of time when the majority of The Book of Mormon took place (600 BC-400 AD). Some advocates of a Great Lakes setting for The Book of Mormon use structures, events, war, etc… of later cultures that existed centuries, sometime millennia after The Book of Mormon ended, as evidence for their claim. This is nothing short of dishonest on their part. Much of the evidence they provide does not remotely come close to the time periods when they should have happened. I will be pulling evidence from the Middle Woodland period (between 1 and 500 AD), which is the same time period of the Nephites when they are most advanced, and have the largest population. This would be the best time period to find the evidences we are looking for, if the Hopewell qualify as a candidate to be the Nephites and Lamanites.

The first requirement The Book of Mormon people should have is a very large population. Do the Hopewell meet this requirement with thousands, tens of thousands, and even hundreds of thousands of people? The answer is a resounding, no.

The Hopewell lived from “around 100 BC and lasting to AD 500.” 6 (compared to the Lehites who lived between 600 BC and 400 AD), and centered in the river valleys of Ohio and Illinois. 7 They were an advanced civilization that is known for building large and elaborate mounds, and their long-distance trade. It has been said that they were the most advanced ancient North American society. As advanced as they were, no Hopewell group increased a population enough to fill a small village, which had no more than a few hundred people residing in it during Book of Mormon times. This is even the case in the communities in the heart, and origin of the Hopewell culture.

Timothy R Pauketat, a North-Eastern archaeologist and expert on the Hopewell states:
“Middle Woodland populations were not large by modern standards. For example, estimates based on human remains and settlements in the lower Illinois River valley are in the range of 1,290 to 4,500 individuals for a 140-mile stretch of river (and a region of 2,800 square miles), a population density of between .46 and 1.6 persons per square mile. A similar estimate has been derived for Southern Ohio (Pacheco and Dancey n.d.)….population density was probably the highest along the major waterways and the overland trails that probably crisscrossed to the east.” 8

Additional research gives a similar population density:
“the maximum density range of 0.22 to 0.33 persons per square kilometer was reasonable (Asch, 1976:59)..it is interesting to note that this estimate for the Illinois Valley population density during the interval from 150 B.C. to A.D 400 is comparable to levels reported in the Southeast during historical times.” 9

In the nucleus of the Hopewell culture, we find that the Hopewell not only lack the population to match the numbers throughout The Book of Mormon, but they did not even have enough people to have fought one major battle mentioned in The Book of Mormon.

Cities-

The Book of Mormon speaks of many cities throughout the text, and rarely mentions what could be considered smaller villages. These cities are very large, and hold thousands and tens of thousands of people. Did the Hopewell build permanent large cities that hold many thousands of people? Again, the answer is no.

During The Book of Mormon period, the Ohio “Hopewell settlements were small villages or hamlets of a few rectangular homes made of posts with wattle and daub walls and thatched roofs” 10

These small villages were generally made up of immediate and extended families that would either be sedentary, or be a seasonal camp, always moving to a new location. 11

While some of these ancient Indians would congregate into a small village, there were many households that were “dispersed over the landscape rather than concentrated within villages.” 12

“Overall, the Ohio Hopewell appear to be compiled of small groups most likely extended families, who practiced early horticulture and lived in small dispersed communities.” 13

In the Illinois Valley, which many scholars believe to be the origin of the Hopewell, we find a similar situation. Their “villages could not have held more than a hundred people.” And their living quarters were “rectangular or oval shaped;” and “were built of wooden posts and were probably covered with mats or with sheets of bark, like the wigwams of contact period Indians.” 14

They also lived in “small, sedentary, one to three-household hamlets, rather than large villages” just as in Ohio and elsewhere. 15

Therefore, what are we to think of the great earthen works that this culture built? Wouldn’t there have to be a city of people to work on these massive mounds? Scholars had originally thought that the “Ohio Hopewell resided in large complex villages adjacent to, or within, the monumental earthwork/mound centers. After extensive site survey and limited excavation in the central Scioto Valley, Prufer rejected the existence of such villages. Instead, he characterized the Ohio Hopewell settlement pattern as an example of what he termed the Vacant Ceremonial Center-Dispersed Agricultural Hamlet pattern. By this he meant that the earthwork/mound complexes were isolated ceremonial centers surrounded by interacting networks of small farming settlements. The members of these dispersed ‘earthwork societies’ interacted at the centers but did not live there on a permanent basis.” 16

In other words, some of these small villages and hamlets “During the summer months when food sources were at their highest, the Ohio Hopewell would gather at the ceremonial areas to work on the mounds.” 17

This is verified in an area with the biggest and most elaborate groups of mounds called Mound City, located in Chillicothe, Ohio, was excavated and archaeologists expected to find evidence of a large permanent city nearby. Instead, they “found low-density clusters of Hopewellian artifacts but no nucleated village debris…Similarly, a survey of the Hopewell site and environs by Seeman (1981) produced no evidence of nucleated sedentary village debris.” These archaeologists also stated that the lack of sites found was not due to “modern land use”, but only that they simply did not exist. This was also the case in several other mound sites.” 18

WAR-

War is a common theme in The Book of Mormon. Commencing soon after the arrival of the Lehites into the New World until it caused the destruction of the entire Nephite population. Book of Mormon wars lasted for years, sometimes decades at a time, with casualties that reached over a quarter-million people. If you are looking for Book of Mormon people in a certain group of ancient inhabitants of the Americas, extensive war is something that you should find.

The Hopewell do not match this Book of Mormon description. As mentioned earlier, they did not have the population that The Book of Mormon requires for battles or civilizations, but they also did not have wars. They were generally a peaceful people, and since they lived in such small groups, no large wars or battles are even recorded during Book of Mormon times.

In Ohio, it may be that there were no battles because “Most [clans] were roughly similar in size and wealth, and had fairly equal access to the social roles of importance of one kind or another… because there is no evidence of interpersonal or intercommunity violence, which social competition might produce.” 19

If your neighbor did not have something you wanted, and you were equal with them pertaining to goods, then what would be the reason to go to war against him which you would lose some of the very few, valuable men in your small village?

Proponents of the Heartland geography theory that centers around the Great Lakes area claim that enclosure mounds among the Hopewell were used as military fortification against raiding Lamanites. While The Book of Mormon does speak about the Nephites casting up dirt walls to protect a city 20 , this rudimentary look at the Hopewell mounds does not align with the evidence that trained archaeologists have found. They are learning that many of these Hopewell mounds were not built in a hurry to thwart off invading enemies, but were slowly built over several centuries, and used for worship purposes. Archaeologists have come to the conclusion that “it is unlikely than any of them would have been effective militarily.” 21 especially since these enclosures were not complete, but had several large gaps in them, which would expose the defenders to the enemy. 22

In relation to war, the Nephites and Lamanites used the bow and arrow as a major weapon in their battles. One should be able to find evidence of this common weapon, in the right time period, among Book of Mormon peoples. But again, the Hopewell do not pass this test. While the bow and arrow were used by later civilizations, the Hopewell did not have a knowledge of the weapon until after Book of Mormon time period. 23

Scholars have noted that “The invention of the bow and arrow was too late in time to be relevant to the end of the Scioto Hopewellian lifeways. Moreover, signs of violence and death by bow and arrow are missing from the Scioto Hopewell record.” 24

This major weapon of war that is mentioned throughout The Book of Mormon, wasn’t adopted by Great Lake cultures until after the disappearance of the Hopewell Indians.

Finally, the end of the Nephite civilization came because of years of bloodshed and war, ending the Nephite civilization desolate abruptly within a few years. What we find among the Hopewell is a very different story. “The great Hopewell culture thrived for 600 years. Then, around 500 AD., the culture disappeared with no signs of violence.” 25 and seems to have “dissolved” rather “than collapsed.” 26

The Hopewell have been shown to fail the test as a qualifying society for The Book of Mormon by lack of population, lack of cities, no large wars, destruction not coming from war, mounds not used for military functions, and no knowledge of weapons of war mentioned in The Book of Mormon. The list could go on, but just one of these points disqualifies the Hopewell culture.

The question must be asked, if the Hopewell do not line up with the description of The Book of Mormon civilization, then who does? If we take this same list of qualifiers and apply them to the Mayan people, who most LDS scholars believe to be, or at least be part of, Book of Mormon people, we find that they parallel each other in many ways.
Mesoamerican cities during Book of Mormon times were large enough to hold hundreds of thousands of people. “The region politically controlled by Teotihuacan extended beyond the Basin of Mexico, but it’s core area was probably only 25,000 to 50,000 square kilometers, with a population perhaps around one-half million to one million…there is strong Teotihuacan presence in the Tula region, and a major center at Chingu. Control may have been strong in the Valley of Toluca, but it probably did not extend much farther north or west.” 27

Contrasted with the .22-.33 people per square kilometer among the Hopewell, Mayan cities like El Mirador had “548-570 persons per square kilometers.” 28 These kinds of numbers would are consistent with the numbers mentioned in The Book of Mormon.

Many of the Maya lived in these large cities which sometimes spanned up to 8-square miles, but controlled smaller cities hundreds of miles away. War among the Maya seems to have been a constant problem for them. There were wars for power, goods, trade, and sometimes just to get captives to use as sacrifice. To prevent invading armies from overtaking their city, some Mayan cities would cast up a dirt wall around their city and would even place a timber palisade on top of the mound. 29 “Southern lowland sites with defensive walls include Tikal, Calakmul, Becan, El Mirador, Dos Pilas, Aguateca, and Punta de Chimino, among others. Dahlin describes a defensive wall around Chunchucmil in relation to walls around nine other sites in the northern Maya lowlands.” 30

Erecting defensive fortifications of dirt is exactly what Moroni was doing while preparing for war. He caused that the Nephites “should commence in digging up heaps of earth round about all the cities…And upon the top of these ridges of earth he caused that there should be timbers, yea, works of timbers built up to the height of a man, round about the cities.” (Alma 50:1-2)

Some of these defensive mounds completed the task of warding off the arrows that were shot by the Lamanites (Alma 49:2). So, candidate civilization must have a knowledge of the bow and arrow during the right time periods. This is exactly what we find . “Paul Tolstoy, claims that there is evidence for “the limited use of the bow and arrow in central Mexico” during Book of Mormon times. In fact recent archaeological findings confirm that the bow was used in parts of Mesoamerica as early as the time of Christ.” 31

In summary, the Hopewell were a well advanced culture in North America, but cannot be Book of Mormon peoples for many reasons, a few of which have been shown here. While we do not know exactly what ancient groups were the Nephites and Lamanites or where they lived, we can look for parallels between The Book of Mormon and ancient cultures. Thus far, the evidence seems to be in favor of the Mayan civilization.

———————————————

1. The logistics of this kind of population growth will not be dealt with here, http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=6&num=1&id=141. However, it wasn’t uncommon to find large population growths in Mesoamerica. “A considerable population increase (350%) is suggested from the Middle to Late Preclassic periods in northern Belize…”Ancient Mesoamerica: a comparison of change in three regions By Richard E. Blanton pg 170

2. Words of Mormon 1:14, Mos. 9:18, Alma 4:5, Alma 23:5, Alma 24:22, Alma 26:13, Alma 28:10-11, Alma 37:9, Alma 37:19, Alma 49:23, Alma 50:22, Alma 51:11,19, 56:27, 57:6, 57:14, 60:7, 62:5,12, 17, 63:4, Hel. 3:24, 5:19, 11:6, 3 Nephi 4:27, 17:25, Mormon 2:9, 4:9

3. Alma 2:19, Alma 3:26, Alma 28:2, 60:22, Hel. 3:26, 3 Nephi 3:24, 4:21, Mormon 1:11, 2:25

4. Mormon 6:11-14, 220,000

5. Nephi’s Descendants? Historical Demography and the Book of Mormon, James E. Smith, FARMS Review vol. 6.1 pg 255-296

6. Encyclopedic dictionary of archaeology By Barbara Ann Kipfer Springer; 1 edition (April 1, 2000), pg 242

7. Societies, Networks, and Transitions: A Global History, Volume I: To 1500, Craig A. Lockard, Wadsworth Publishing; 1 edition (January 10, 2007)pg 245

8. North American archaeology, Timothy R Pauketat, Diana DiPaolo Loren, Wiley-Blackwell (January 4, 2005) pg 113 emphasis mine

9. Late-Quaternary Environments of the United States, ed. Herbert Edgar Wright, Prentice Hall Press (June 1984) 2:258, emphasis mine

10. http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/hopewell/who_were_hopewell.html

11. Mitochondrial DNA analysis of the Ohio Hopewell of the Hopewell Mound Group. PhD Dissertation by Lisa A. Mills, Department of Anthropology, Ohio State University, 2003. Pg 13

12. The Scioto Hopewell and their neighbors: bioarchaeological documentation and Cultural Understanding (Interdisciplinary Contributions to Archaeology)
By D. Troy Case, Christopher Carr, Springer; 1st Edition. edition (July 24, 2008) pg 8

13. Mitochondrial DNA analysis of the Ohio Hopewell of the Hopewell Mound Group. PhD Dissertation by Lisa A. Mills, Department of Anthropology, Ohio State University, 2003. Pg 30

14. Prehistory of the Americas By Stuart J. Fiedel, Cambridge University Press; 2 edition (May 29, 1992) pg 242

15. Hamlets “are characteristic of Middle Woodland/Hopewell settlement systems in Ohio, the lower Illinois river valley, the American Bottom of the Mississippi river valley, and the Duck river valley of central Tennessee.” Gathering Hopewell: Society, Ritual and Ritual Interaction (Interdisciplinary Contributions to Archaeology), Community Organizations in the Scioto, Mann, and Havana Hopewellian Regions, by Bret J. Ruby, Christopher Carr, and Douglas K. Charles. Edited by Christopher Carr and D. Troy Case, pg 132

16. Ohio Hopewell Community Organization, William S. Dancey, Paul J. Pacheco, Kent State University Press (January 1997) pg 42

17. Mitochondrial DNA analysis of the Ohio Hopewell of the Hopewell Mound Group. PhD Dissertation by Lisa A. Mills, Department of Anthropology, Ohio State University, 2003. Pg 13

18. Ohio Hopewell Community Organization, William S. Dancey, Paul J. Pacheco, Kent State University Press (January 1997) pg 16

19. The Scioto Hopewell and their neighbors: bioarchaeological documentation and Cultural Understanding (Interdisciplinary Contributions to Archaeology) By D. Troy Case, Christopher Carr, Springer; 1st Edition. edition (July 24, 2008) pg 25

20. Alma 49:2, 53:4

21. North American archaeology, Timothy R. Pauketat, Diana DiPaolo Loren Wiley-Blackwell (January 4, 2005) pg 123

22. ibid

23. “In most of eastern North America, a shift from notched or stemmed to triangular bifaces occurred between 1500 and 1200 B.P. This shift is commonly linked to the introduction of the bow and arrow to the region (Blitz 1988:131; Christenson 1986a; Griffin 1978:254; Hall 1980; Justice 1987: 224-229; Kelly et al. 1984; Morse and Morse 1990; Muller 1986). That is, small triangular bifaces are considered prima facie evidence for the adoption of the bow and arrow. This adoption is believed to involve a corresponding abandonment of, or at least a drastic reduction in the use of, earlier device.”
Spears, darts, and arrows: late woodland hunting techniques in the upper Ohio Valley. Article from: American Antiquity | July 1, 1993 | Shott, Michael J

24. The Scioto Hopewell and Their Neighbors: Bioarchaeological Documentation and Cultural Understanding (Interdisciplinary Contributions to Archaeology, by Daniel Troy Case, Christopher Carr, C.A. Johnston, and B. Goldstein Springer; 1st Edition. edition (July 24, 2008), pg 319

25. Archaeological Society of Ohio By Archaeological Society of Ohio, Ohio Archaeological Society, Ohio Indian Relic Collectors Society, Volumes 44-45, pg 17

26. North American archaeology, Timothy R. Pauketat, Diana DiPaolo Loren Wiley-Blackwell (January 4, 2005) pg 131

27. Archaeology of Ancient Mexico and Central America: An Encyclopedia , by Susan Toby Evans, Routledge; annotated edition edition (November 27, 2000), pg 729. While Teotihuacan spanned over a half of a century in Book of Mormon times, it should be noted that the end of its society post-date The Book of Mormon. The population would no doubt be very large, but may not be as high as the figures stated.

28. Past and Present in the Americas: A Compendium of Recent Studies, edited by John Lynch, Manchester University Press (September 1984), pg 132

29. “Bruce Owen discusses such fortifications at Becan in central Yucatan (5 meter deep moat, a 12 meter high earth embankment, with a timber palisade on top), and at other settlements” http://bruceowen.com/worldprehist/3250s18.htm Ross Hassig, War and Society in Ancient Mesoamerica (1992), 219 n. 34

30. The Ancient Maya: new perspectives, By Heather Irene McKillop, ABC-CLIO (August 19, 2004), pg 189

31. Archaeology of Northern Mesoamerica, Pt. 1, 282-283, quoted in William J. Hamblin, “The Bow and Arrow in the Book of Mormon,” Warfare in the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company and FARMS, 1990), 379.

Review: The Joseph Smith Papers: Television Documentary Series, Season 2 (DVD Set)

Trevor Holyoak — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 17:34:38 +0000

Season 2 of The Joseph Smith Papers Television Documentary Series contains 42 episodes on 6 DVDs. It takes a closer look at some of the areas covered in Season 1, such as the First Vision. It contains episodes devoted to things like the production of modern scripture, a tour of church history sites, a look at Joseph’s family, the early music of Mormonism, and brief biographies of other early members, such as Hyrum Smith, the Pratt brothers, the Snows, and others. There are also some episodes devoted to the books published so far as part of the Project. The final episode is a tribute to Larry H. Miller, who provided financial support for the Joseph Smith Papers Project.

Viewers who use closed captioning will be happy to learn that it’s been employed for Season 2 (although it’s a little rough in places). And I’m very happy to see that the list of episodes also says which disc they’re on this time. (Both of these things were missing for Season 1.)

There are 2 episodes about the manual containing the teachings of Joseph Smith that was used recently in priesthood and Relief Society. It begins by recounting a history of publications of his teachings, and then spends the rest of the time talking about the preparation of the new manual. It was intended not to be a comprehensive source of known teachings, but rather to be selected teachings that apply to our day. They were very careful in what was included, and the standards for determining such, which depended on the sources, were explained.

The Word of Wisdom episode was particularly interesting to me, since this topic can often be a stumbling block for people who assume that it has always been followed and enforced the way it is today. It is pointed out that the first 3 verses of D&C Section 89 were not actually part of the revelation, but were originally a preface. It is explained what the restrictions on hot drinks, alcohol, and meat meant at the time it was given. A history of the Word of Wisdom from moderation to abstinence is recounted. Unfortunately, here I feel the episode falls short. The groundwork is laid to mention that not just church members but also church leaders had difficulty with it at first, but then it doesn’t quite go that far. It can be confusing for someone that was taught that Joseph refused alcohol for his leg operation to learn that he did not always abstain (see, for instance, History of the Church, vol. 7, page 101), and I thought this episode could have done a little better towards inoculating against that.

Another interesting episode is about D&C section 76, which outlines the different degrees of glory available after this life. It was referred to originally as “The Vision,” since it was the first vision to be published (accounts of the “First Vision” were not published until later). It was one of just a few visions that had a witness – Sidney Rigdon participated in it along with Joseph Smith. Until then, the understanding of the afterlife was black and white. Those who didn’t like it considered it to be universalist. It was written down immediately by Smith and Rigdon, and because they were commanded to write it down, copies were allowed to be made freely. Joseph was probably tarred and feathered for it.

This DVD series should be of interest to anyone that enjoys church history or is interested in learning about it. There is some that is glossed over – such is the nature of the medium – but this is the most in-depth and accurate treatment of Joseph Smith and the early history of the church that has been made available for viewing, and it could even lead those that don’t particularly like non-fiction reading to do further research.

Geology and The Book of Mormon

Tyler Livingston — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 23:04:36 +0000

In John Lunds book “Mesoamerica and The Book of Mormon: Is This the Place?”, he discusses Geology and The Book of Mormon. He notes that gold, silver and copper are mentioned several times in The Book of Mormon being found in abundance in the land. 1 If there are proposed Book of Mormon geographical theories that do not have all of these in abundance, then they would fail the test of being a possible site. Lund explains “Four separate mining areas possessing gold, silver and copper are required in order to qualify as the lands of the primary events in The Book of Mormon. Where are those criteria met? The answer is Mesoamerica, Southwestern United States, the Northern Rockies, and Western Canada. However, there is no single place east of the Mississippi River, including all twenty-six states, where one can find gold, silver, and copper together in one locale in abundance, much less four separate locations. This single fact alone is a nail in the coffin of Great Lakes advocates.” 2

Mesoamerica is known for its “abundance” in precious ores 3, which is why it was an area of such focus of the conquistadors. They raided and conquered entire civilizations in order to get gold and silver. “When Cortes reached Mexico with his army in March, the gold and silver he saw led him to conclude that ‘it is entirely possible that this country has everything which existed in that land from which Solomon is said to have brought gold for the Temple.’” 4

David, in preparing the Temple of the Lord, gathered 100,000 talents of gold, and a million talents of silver among many other valuable metals 5. A talent is roughly 75 lbs, which would make about 7.5 million pounds of gold and 75 million pounds of silver. I doubt that Cortes did the math, but he did know that he was finding A LOT of gold and silver.

Mesoamerican Indians also used a gold and copper (and sometimes silver) alloy called “tumbaga”. This mixture makes a strong product, but is still malleable, and is a much lighter weight than pure gold. Some scholars believe this is what the Gold plates were made out of 6. This was a common metal alloy that Mesoamericans used. When the conquistadors stole gold items from the natives, they would melt them down into bars and ship them back to their homeland. One of these ships was sunk in the Bahamas, and 200, 5.66 lb. tumbaga bars were found in the sunken ship 7. In order to make large amounts of tumbaga, there must be an abundance of both gold and copper in the area.

What about the Great Lakes? Well, it does not stand up to the test as well as Mesoamerica does. Lund writes “An exhaustive search of all twenty-six states east of the Mississippi found copper in Michigan, Wisconsin and one unproductive copper mine in New Jersey. Gold was found in South Carolina, Georgia and Maryland, and only trace amounts of gold in the Adirondacks and trace quantities of silver in the Appalachians. This hardly qualifies as abundance. Furthermore, these areas are separated by distances so great as to exclude the possibility of being in the five hundred to six hundred and fifty mile limitation imposed by the internal restrictions of The Book of Mormon.” 8

Mesoamerica also fits The Book of Mormon description of having Precious stones 9. The Maya had turquoise, emeralds, obsidian 10, and a quality of jade 11 that surpassed that of the Chinese jade 12. Earthquakes 13 are also mentioned several times within the text, so one would expect to find seismic activity in Book of Mormon lands. This is exactly what we find in Mesoamerica. The Motagua fault line runs through several Central American countries and has been active since the Mayan times, as well as the Chixoy-Polochic fault line. Volcanoes, a result of seismic activity, are also found throughout Mesoamerica. Lund finds that “There are sixteen active volcanoes in Mesoamerica and none east of the Rocky Mountains in the United States. Current scientific evidence for the past three thousand years has not found in the Great Lakes area the kind of seismic activity reported in The Book of Mormon.”14. He also notes that the Book of Mormon peoples would have a written language 15, and vultures 16 to fit the description in The Book of Mormon. Both of which, are found in Mesoamerica.

———————————————

1. Nephi 18:25, 2 Nephi 5:15, Jacob 2:12, Jarom 1:8, Helaman 6:9-11, Ether :17, Ether 10:23
2 . John L. Lund, Mesoamerica and The Book of Mormon: Is This the Place?, (The Communication Company 2007), pg 128
3 . Elizabeth H. Paris, Metallurgy, Mayapan, and the Postclassic Mesoamerican World System, Ancient Mesoamerica, 19 (Cambridge University Press , 2008), 43–66
4. Jayne A. Sokolow, The Great Encounter: Native Peoples and European Settlers in the Americas, 1492-1800, (M.E. Sharpe, December 2002), pg 74
5. 1 Chronicles 22:14
6. “Of What Material Were the Plates?” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies: Volume – 10, Issue – 1, (Provo, Utah: Maxwell Institute, 2001) pg. 21
7. Warren Tucker, HWCA World NY Coin Auction 425 Catalog Vol. 2 (New York, New York, RSM Press, 2006) pg 251
8. John L. Lund, Mesoamerica and The Book of Mormon: Is This the Place?, (The Communication Company 2007), pg. 132
9. Alma 17:14
10. Sharer, The Ancient Maya, pgs. 454-455, 730
11. John L. Lund, Mesoamerica and The Book of Mormon: Is This the Place?, (The Communication Company 2007), pg 132
12. Mosiah 27:11, Helaman 5:27-31, 3 Nephi 8:6-19
13. Mosiah 27:11, Helaman 5:27-31, 3 Nephi 8:6-19
14. John L. Lund, Mesoamerica and The Book of Mormon: Is This the Place?, (The Communication Company 2007), pg 135
15. The Book of Mormon people had a written hieroglyphic language (Mormon 9:32) as well did the Mayan. The Hopewell culture had no written language.
16. Alma 2:37-38, The Turkey vulture, a native to the Americas lives year round in Mesoamerica, but only in the Great Lakes area between May and August. Odds are the vultures mentioned were in Mesoamerica, John L. Lund, Mesoamerica and The Book of Mormon: Is This the Place?, (The Communication Company 2007), pg. 135-136

Land of Promise in The Book of Mormon

Tyler Livingston — Fri, 17 Sep 2010 04:53:40 +0000

A popular argument among Great Lake theorists, is the Promised Land theory. The Book of Mormon states several times that the land which they were led to, was the “promised land”, or a “choice land”. According to The Book of Mormon, the Promised Land shall be a land of liberty, with no kings upon the land [1], and be discovered by a Gentile whom the Spirit of God wrought, to cross “many waters” [2] in order to find, among many others.

The “Gentile” who discovered the Americas is generally thought to be Christopher Columbus. In the 1879 Book of Mormon, Orson Pratt added the footnote to 1 Nephi 13:12 which named this “gentile” as Christopher Columbus. Columbus began writing a book called “Book of Prophecies” and in this book

“set forth views on himself as the fulfiller of biblical prophecies! Columbus saw himself as fulfilling the ‘islands of the sea’ passages from Isaiah and another group of verses concerning the conversion of the heathen. Watts reports that Columbus was preoccupied with ‘the final conversion of all races on the eve of the end of the world,’ paying particular attention to John 10:16: ‘And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold’ (see also 3 Nephi 16:3). He took his mission of spreading the gospel of Christ seriously. ‘made me the messenger of the new heaven and the new earth. . . . He showed me the spot where to find it,’ Columbus wrote in 1500.” [3]

As the scripture says, the Spirit led the gentile to the Promised land, the Spirit also led Columbus to the Americas.

The prevailing opinion is that Columbus discovered America, or the United States. But in all actuality, Christopher Columbus discovered islands in the Caribbean, and Central and South America. He never stepped foot on what we now know as the United States. His first two voyages were only to the Bahamas, his third to the Bahamas and the Northern portion of South America, and his fourth to the Bahamas and Central America. If 1 Nephi 13:12 is referring to Christopher Columbus, that would mean the land he discovered was part of the “promised land”.

But would Central America pass the test of being a “land of liberty, with no kings upon the land”? In FAIR’s article reviewing the work of a popular Great Lakes theorist, they answer this question by saying:

“As we have already seen, ‘this land’ cannot be read as [Great Lakes Theorists] relatively small area in the United States. It is interesting to read what Orson Hyde would have said in answer to [his] question, ‘Anyone want to guess what land we’re talking about?’

‘THERE SHALL NO KING BE RAISED UP ON THIS LAND; AND WHOSOEVER SEEKETH TO RAISE UP A KING ON THIS LAND SHALL PERISH.’ [Quoting 2 Nephi 10:11] ‘This land,’ means both North and South America, and also the families of islands that geographically and naturally belong and adhere to the same.

Were he not more than a century too early, Orson Hyde could have expanded on the answer to [his] question:

There are promises and decrees of God in relation to ‘land’ of an extraordinary character. No other land can boast of the same. How beautifully does the spirit of the above prophetic sentiment chime in with the great American principle, ‘that no foreign prince, potentate, or sovereign will be allowed to interfere in the affairs of this Continent!’ Spain must give up Cuba; England, Canada and the United States of America must hold, as her dependencies, every country on the Western Continent, with the islands along its borders.” [4]

A “land of promise” can be different places to different people, because it is land that the Lord has covenanted to his people. [5] To the Israelites, it was Israel, [6] to Enos and his people, it was the land of Cainan. [7] It is possible that it will be promised for “a little season,” [8] or it can be a heavenly promised land we all wish to obtain. [9] It is not a definite term that is used for places of earth, but has a spiritual meaning of what God covenants to give you.

“The operative word in the Land of Promise is not ‘Land.’ It is ‘Promise.’ A promise is a covenant involving two parties. It is a divine contract…with God. The land is given to the covenant people only as long as they continue faithful.” [10]

One writer correctly defines the Nephite “promised land” as “all of the North and South America.” He continues “Some have tried to narrowly apply the concept of the Promised Land to the United States…” which is a “significant part of the Land of Promise…. So also is Canada, Mexico, South America, and Mesoamerica part of the Promised Lands.” [11]

The History of the Church states “…these two American continents [North and South]. These continents are a promised land.” [12]

Joseph Smith stated “…speaking of the Land of Zion, It consists of all N[orth] & S[outh] America but that any place where the Saints gather is Zion which every righteous man will build up for a place of safety for his children…The redemption of Zion is the redemption of all N[orth] & S[outh] America.” [13]

A North and South America Promised Land was also taught by several modern Prophets and leaders like Wilford Woodruff , [14] Ezra Taft Benson, [15] and many others. [16] It cannot be placed in one area only, or nation, and still be compatible with the scriptures.

____________________

2 Nephi 10:11.
1 Nephi 13:12.
Ed. John W. Welch, Re-Exploring The Book of Mormon, Columbus: By Faith or Reason?, chapter 9.
http://www.fairlds.org/DNA_Evidence_for_Book_of_Mormon_Geography/DEBMG04F.html#en37, accessed May 16, 2009
2 Nephi 1:5; D&C 51:16.
1 Nephi 17:33, D&C 124:38, Hebrews 11:9.
Moses 6:17.
D&C 51:16–17.
Alma 37:45.
John L. Lund, Mesoamerica and The Book of Mormon: Is This the Place? (The Communication Company 2007), p. 46.
Ibid., p. 45.
B.H. Roberts, History of the Church, p. 552fn.
Martha Jane Knowlton Coray, edited by Dean C. Jessee, “Joseph Smith’s July 19, 1840 Discourse,” Brigham Young University Studies 19:3 (Spring 1979), p. 392.
“This land, North and South America, is the land of Zion; it is a choice land—the land that was given by promise from old father Jacob to his grandson and his descendants, the land on which the Zion of God should be established in the latter days.” Journal of Discourses (12 January 1873), 15:279.
“This is our need today—to plant the standard of liberty among our people throughout the Americas… the struggle for liberty is a continuing one—it is with us in a very real sense today right here on this choice land of the Americas.” Conference Report (October 1962), pp. 14–15; “To the peoples who should inhabit this blessed land of the Americas, the Western Hemisphere, an ancient prophet uttered this significant promise and solemn warning.” Conference Report (October 1944), p. 128.
Milton R. Hunter: “This is one of the most important days of my life, and in the history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints…. We came in full view of the valley of the Great Salt Lake; the land of promise, held in reserve by God, as a resting place for his Saints.” Conference Report (April 1947), p. 67.
Orson Pratt: “And the Lord gave unto them the whole continent, for a land of promise….” Interesting Account of Several Remarkable Visions and of the Late Discovery of Ancient American Records (Edinburgh: Ballantyne and Hughes, 1840); cited in David J. Whittaker, The Essential Orson Pratt (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1991), p. 11.
Orson Pratt: “We are not in possession of our land of promise particularly, only as we obtain it by a renewed promise; but we are inheriting a land that was given to the remnant of Joseph, and God has said that we must be remembered with them in the possession of this land.” Journal of Discourses (1 November 1868), 12:322.

2010 FAIR Conference Review

Trevor Holyoak — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 04:27:16 +0000

We had another great conference this year, with 350 people attending in person, and about 50 listening online. We were treated to 15 presentations and also had the opportunity to socialize, browse the bookstore, and bid in a silent auction. Tanya Spackman received the John Taylor Defender of the Faith award for her work on Mormon Scholars Testify. You can view photos of the conference at the FAIR Facebook page.

William Schryver’s presentation on the Kirtland Egyptian Papers received some press before the conference, and did not disappoint. You can view it here. (A browser plug-in may be required.)

There have been articles about many of the presentations published in Mormon Times, Deseret News, and LDS Church News:

Transcripts will be posted at http://www.fairlds.org when they are ready. MP3s and DVDs will be made available for purchase at the FAIR bookstore.

FAIR Podcast, Episode 2: Terryl L. Givens

bhodges — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 15:45:25 +0000

Terryl L. Givens

Dr. Terryl L. Givens sat down with host Blair Hodges during the Mormon Scholars Foundation Summer Seminar at Brigham Young University. Blair uses selections from Givens’s books as jumping off points for further discussion on a wide array of subjects, including: nineteenth-century anti-Mormon literature, the Book of Mormon, prisca theologia, the paradox of searching and certainty, recent developments in Mormon studies, Parley P. Pratt, the preexistence, globalization, thoughtful faith, and dealing with difficult historical and theological puzzles.

Questions about this episode and ideas for future episodes can be added to the comments section here, or emailed to podcast@fairlds.org.

Dr. Terrl L. Givens is Professor of Literature and Religion at the University of Richmond. He has authored several books, including The Viper on the Hearth: Mormons, Myths, and the Construction of Heresy (Oxford 1997); By the Hand of Mormon: The American Scripture that Launched a New World Religion (Oxford 2003); People of Paradox: A History of Mormon Culture (Oxford 2007); The Book of Mormon: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford 2009); and When Souls had Wings: Pre-Mortal Life in Western Thought (2010). His current projects include a biography of Parley P. Pratt (with Matt Grow, to be published by Oxford in 2011), a sourcebook of Mormonism in America (with Reid Neilson, to be published by Columbia in 2011), a history of Mormon theology (with Steven Harper), and a study of the idea of human perfectibility in the Western tradition. He lives in Montpelier, Virginia.

(Image and info from http://terrylgivens.com/)

Download:

To download, right click this link and select “Save link as…” or download in iTunes here.

Runtime:

55:26

Support FAIR:

FAIR relies on contributions from readers and listeners. To help support FAIR, make a donation today.

Review: The Joseph Smith Papers Television Documentary Series, Season 1 (DVD Set)

Trevor Holyoak — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 03:49:41 +0000

Those of us in Utah were treated, beginning near the end of 2007, to a TV series created by and aired on Larry H. Miller-owned KJZZ TV about the Joseph Smith Papers Project. It began with a pilot episode (“A Television Forward”), followed by a regular weekly schedule that started in early 2008, showing a new episode each Sunday night followed by a repeat of the previous week’s episode.

People outside of Utah, upon hearing about it, immediately began wondering when (or even if) they would have a chance to see the series. It was quickly ascertained that KJZZ would not be providing it for viewing on their web site as some hoped, but eventually BYUTV picked it up. Today, season 1 can be watched on BYUTV and Utah viewers can see season 2 (now in reruns) on KJZZ. And now (as of 2009), season 1 is available on a 7 disc DVD set from Deseret Book.

The set contains 52 episodes, numbered from 0 to 51, which are about one half hour each, except for number 0 which was the longer pilot that was aired ahead of time. A booklet is included that gives a brief summary of each episode and lists the contributing scholars, along with an index. Unfortunately, it does not state which DVDs contain which episodes, so I ended up noting that myself in my copy. Each DVD contains a message at the beginning apologizing that the sound and video quality are not always perfect, but the one big drawback of this set is a total lack of closed captions. Anyone that can’t hear will not be able to watch it, and even for those of us who are able to hear, it would have been nice to be able to read what is being said at times, particularly when trying to take notes.

Season 1 is filmed at historic sites as well as in a studio, using visual aids ranging from photographs, to paintings, to the actual writings of Joseph Smith and others. It includes interviews with scholars such as Ronald Barney, Richard Bushman, Steven Harper, Richard Turley, Richard Anderson, Larry Porter, Milton Backman, Robin Jensen, Jeffrey Walker, Jill Derr, Royal Skousen, Mark Staker, Dean Jessee, Carol Madsen, and many others.

In the pilot episode, Ronald Esplin (managing editor of The Joseph Smith Papers) said, “I think in today’s world, every Latter-day Saint will encounter things about Joseph Smith they didn’t know before. We have an informational overload – informational access – that has never been available before, and to the degree that Latter-day Saints are left only with what they learn at Pioneer Day, they are going to be vulnerable, because there is so much more to learn. And I think it’s very important that we come to a true understanding of our history, and of our people, that involves dealing with all the issues, and dealing with all the personalities, and doing it broadly so that we understand our own heritage, and then we will not be overturned by some new little fact that we didn’t have room for in our scheme, because we prepared ourselves to look at the whole picture.”

Many of the other episodes in the series are spent giving us this understanding, beginning with familiarizing us with early 19th century America and Joseph Smith’s heritage and local environment, and then going through many of the events in Joseph’s life and the history of the church, and then his death and the aftermath. A good job was done in many areas where the church has been accused by critics of hiding information. For example, the different versions of the First Vision are discussed, and there is a very good history and explanation given of the Book of Abraham and associated papyri.

However, one weakness that stuck out to me was that the discussion of plural marriage was not as thorough as it might have been. The host, Glenn Rawson, was kind enough to answer my question about that: “Our discussion of Plural marriage was limited of necessity. We could only say what we could prove by reliable documentation and only a small portion of that. It was the first in-depth broadcast statement on the subject of plural marriage that had been done under Church auspices. We tried to be careful and circumspect.” Indeed, it is significant that plural marriage was discussed to the depth that it was.

There are a couple of episodes devoted to a roundtable discussion featuring members of the Papers staff explaining what the project is all about, and the significance for members and nonmembers alike. There is an episode about the medical aspects of Joseph’s leg operation. Separate episodes are devoted to the revelations and sermons of Joseph Smith, respectively. There are also episodes covering Joseph’s encounters with the law.

To give an example of some interesting points covered in a typical episode, in episode 7 (“The Coming Forth of the Book of Mormon”) we are told that in the early 20th century, a farmer filled in the depression on the hill where the plates had been stored, because he was tired of people coming on his land to see it. It is pointed out that those who knew Joseph best believed him the most. And we are told that Joseph said he could see anything through seer stones.

There is much to learn about the history of the Church up through the 1840s, and this DVD set does a good job of helping to provide a foundation for more in-depth learning, and “to look at the whole picture.” It also helps the viewer have a better understanding of some of what is being published as part of the Joseph Smith Papers. This set would be excellent for use in Family Home Evening, as well as for personal study. Season 2 will also be out on DVD shortly, which Rawson told me covers some of the potentially troubling issues more thoroughly, and he also mentioned that season 3, entitled “History of the Saints: Gathering to the West” will begin airing on KSL and KIDK (Idaho Falls) TV the weekend of General Conference in October.

Gospel Principles Chapter 11: The Life of Christ

Trevor Holyoak — Thu, 10 Jun 2010 20:23:09 +0000

This week’s priesthood and Relief Society lesson is on The Life of Christ. Listed below are links to related issues from the FAIR web sites, organized according to the sections of the lesson.

The Life of Christ Was Predicted Long before His Birth
Book of Mormon/Textual changes/”the Son of”
Alma 7:10 – Jerusalem vs Bethlehem

He Was the Only Begotten of the Father
The “Mormon” vs. the “Christian” Jesus
Worship different Jesus
Jesus Christ/Brother of Satan
Jesus Christ/Conception

He Led a Perfect Life
Gordon B. Hinckley states that Latter-day Saints don’t believe in the “traditional” Christ
Baptism essential

He Organized the Only True Church
Apostasy

He Redeemed Us from Our Sins and Saved Us from Death
Jesus Christ/Atonement
Jesus Christ/Crucified on a cross
Sweat and skin pores

His Sacrifice Showed His Love for His Father and for Us
Grace and works

A fictional Book of Mormon and Moroni’s visit

Mike Parker — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 15:25:04 +0000

I’ve guest-posted over on Millennial Star about reconciling the Book of Mormon as “inspired fiction” with Joseph Smith’s account of Moroni’s visits in September 1823.

Your thoughts on this issue are welcome and invited. Please comment at M*.

Gospel Principles Chapter 10: Scriptures

Trevor Holyoak — Wed, 12 May 2010 04:00:36 +0000

This week’s lesson is on the scriptures. As you can imagine, there are numerous articles available from FAIR that relate to this chapter. In most cases, rather than providing links to individual articles, I will simply make reference within each part to relevant pages from the FAIR Topical Guide on our main web site, as well as the Topical Guide on our wiki site. This week I will also take the opportunity to highlight presentations from past FAIR conferences that go along with each topic. (And if you enjoy reading the conference presentations, you are invited to join us this year on August 5 and 6.)

As a reminder, “If you have been called to teach a quorum or class using [the Gospel Principles] book, do not substitute outside materials, however interesting they may be. Stay true to the scriptures and the words in the book. As appropriate, use personal experiences and articles from Church magazines to supplement the lessons.” (“Introduction,” Gospel Principles, (2009), pg. 3.) The resources provided here are not meant to replace or supplement the prescribed lesson material, but are for use in personal study and to help provide background knowledge for answering any issues that may arise in class.

The Scriptures Are Available to Us Today
Open canon vs. closed canon
Supposed contradictions in the scriptures
The Mistakes of Men: Can the Scriptures be Error-Free?

The Bible
The Corruption of Scripture in the Second Century
As Far as it is Translated Correctly: The Problem of Tampering with the Word of God in the Transmission and Translation of the New Testament
FAIR wiki
FAIR Topical Guide

The Book of Mormon
Joseph the Seer—or Why Did He Translate With a Rock in His Hat?
Science and the Book of Mormon
Mormon’s Editorial Method and Meta-Message
A Real People, Time, and Place: Contextualizing the Book of Mormon
A Social History of the Early Nephites
The Gadianton Robbers in Mormon’s Theological History: Their Structural Role and Plausible Identification
Changes in the Book of Mormon
Nephi’s Neighbors: Book of Mormon Peoples and Pre-Columbian Populations
The Children of Lehi: DNA and the Book of Mormon
DNA and the Book of Mormon
Monotheism, Messiah, and Mormon’s Book
The Case for Historicity: Discerning the Book of Mormon’s Production Culture
Explaining Away the Book of Mormon Witnesses
Debating the Foundations of Mormonism: The Book of Mormon and Archaeology
The Protean Joseph Smith
Arabia and the Book of Mormon
FAIR wiki
FAIR Topical Guide

The Doctrine and Covenants
I Don’t Have a Testimony of the History of the Church
Dispelling the Black Myth
Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Plural Marriage* (*but were afraid to ask)
The Reliability of Mormon History Produced by the LDS Church
FAIR Topical Guide – Blacks and the Priesthood
FAIR wiki – Blacks and the Priesthood
FAIR wiki – Polygamy
FAIR Topical Guide – Polygamy
FAIR wiki – Doctrine and Covenants
FAIR Topical Guide – Doctrine and Covenants

The Pearl of Great Price
Revised or Unaltered? Joseph Smith’s Foundational Stories
Book of Abraham 201: Papyri, Revelation, and Modern Egyptology
The Larger Issue
The Message of the Joseph Smith Translation: A Walk in the Garden
Adam in Ancient Texts and the Restoration
FAIR wiki – First Vision
FAIR Topical Guide – First Vision
FAIR wiki – Pearl of Great Price
FAIR Topical Guide – Pearl of Great Price

Words of Our Living Prophets
Statements by Church leaders
Revelation after Joseph Smith
Journal of Discourses
FAIR Topical Guide

Studying the Scriptures
The Impact of Mormon Critics on LDS Scholarship
The Fallacy of Fundamentalist Assumptions
“Uh oh!” to “Ah ha!” in Apologetics: 20/20 Foresight for a Faithful Future in Defending the Church
Spiritual Experiences as the Basis for Belief and Commitment
“Believest thou…?”: Faith, Cognitive Dissonance, and the Psychology of Religious Experience
What I Learned about Life, the Church, and the Cosmos from Hugh Nibley

The Book of Mormon and the X haplogroup….again

Tyler Livingston — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 21:41:15 +0000

Although this point has been hit on quite a bit, I’d like to add a few points to the discussion of the X haplogroup as evidence for The Book of Mormon. I am not a geneticist, but Ugo Perego, a leading geneticist who has published on the X haplogroup, assisted with the article, and had the final say of it’s content. I’d also like to add that this is not meant to attack anyone, but to just present the facts.

Contrary to nearly all the haplogroups in the mtDNA tree, haplogroup X is not geographic specific being found at low frequencies in several places around the world. 1 It is now also is commonly accepted that the ancient origin of this lineage is the Middle East. 2 In a recent study, the Native American specific branch of haplogroup X (called X2a) was estimated to arrive to North America approximately 14-17,000 B.C. 3 Because X2a entered into the Americas long before Lehi and his party did, it cannot be used as an evidence for any of The Book of Mormon peoples. However, if it is possible that there was an ancient migration originating from the Middle East, would it also be just as possible for a migration to have come from Israel and enter the Americas around 600 BC.?

How haplogroup (X2) arrived in North America, is still a matter of debate that currently cannot be absolutely determined. As stated before, the ancient X root seems to have originated in the Middle East, but by the time it arrived in the Western Hemisphere, it had accumulated enough mutations to differentiate substantially from the other X lineages. As of today, two X2 lineages are found exclusively in North America and nowhere else (X2a and the recently discovered X2g). 4 One recent study placed X2 as being a founding lineage along with the pan American A2, B2, C1, and D1 haplogroups, thousands of years before the Nephites and Jaredites existed:

“Native American populations exhibit almost exclusively five mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) haplogroups (A-D and X). Haplogroups A-D are also frequent in Asia, suggesting a northeastern Asian origin of these lineages. However, the differential pattern of distribution and frequency of haplogroup X led some to suggest that it may represent an independent migration to the Americas. Here we show, by using 86 complete mitochondrial genomes, that all Native American haplogroups, including haplogroup X, were part of a single founding population, thereby refuting multiple-migration models. Our results strongly support the hypothesis that haplogroup X, together with the other four main mtDNA haplogroups, was part of the gene pool of a single Native American founding population; therefore they do not support models that propose haplogroup-independent migrations, such as the migration from Europe posed by the Solutrean hypothesis.” 5

Therefore, haplogroup X2 in America is also believed to have come from Asia across Beringia with the other haplogroups. Ugo Perego, a scientist specialized in Native American mtDNA studies, explains why X2 is found only in the Great Lakes area. He writes “haplogroup X2a might have arrived from Beringia through a path that was different from that followed by the pan-American haplogroups. According to environmental and paleoecological data, such a path existed and was represented by the ice-free corridor between the Laurentide and Cordilleran ice sheets, which opened approximately 15 kya or possibly was never completely closed. Through such a corridor, where some glacial-refuge areas have been recently identified, X2a could have moved from Beringia directly into the North American regions located east of the Rocky Mountains. This latter scenario would imply that the X2a expansion in America occurred in the Great Plains region, where the terminal part of the glacial corridor ended, and is in complete agreement with both the extent of diversity and distribution of X2a observed in modern Native American populations.” 6

Since X2a is not found anywhere else in the world, it makes it difficult to trace. A close Asian counterpart to X2a–called X2e–found among the Altai people of Siberia, is thought by some to be the link demonstrating a passage through Asia of the ancestors of Paleo-Indians that eventually brought X2a to the Americas. However, this Asian branch of the X tree is actually a younger “sister” to the American clade, with less genetic variation than the lineages found in North America. In other words, the Asian X2e cannot be considered ancestral to X2a as it has a younger age than the latter. Additionally, X2e is also found among the Druze of the Middle East, thus implying its presence among the Altai as the result of a more recent migratory event. 7

Although it is obvious that the Asian X2e is not ancestral to Native American X2a haplogroup, there is no reason to assume that the ancestor of X2a came also from Asia, through Beringia and then into North America. This could be possible, as geneticist Ugo Perego points out, if “the Asian ancestor of X2a disappeared due to genetic drift (it basically went extinct for not known reasons simply because all the female lineages belonging to the ancestral haplogroup died out – a phenomenon to keep into consideration when studying ancient populations using DNA samples from individuals living today). Genetic drift (a naturally occurring event) and bottleneck (caused mainly by the non-random extermination of millions of Native Americans after the arrival of the Europeans) took over the millennia since the first expansion of the Paleo-Indians to the Americas and greatly shaped the genetic landscape of today’s Native American populations.” 8

He also theorizes that the reason why X2a harbors a unique mutational motif that distinguish it from the other non-American X2 branches is the long period of forced isolation experienced by the ancestors of Paleo-Indians belonging to this haplogroup (as well as to the other Native American lineages) during the time they were “trapped” in Beringia as a consequence of the last Ice Age (20-37,000 years ago). The truly continental in size landmass of Beringia offered a natural refuge for thousands of years. As the water was trapped in ice during that period, the level of the sea was much lower, exposing a natural land bridge connecting Siberia to Alaska. Strong winds and other factors kept ice from forming on the ground, thus providing an ecosystem that would have allowed the survival of small groups of anatomically modern humans. This area was most likely all steppe and tundra and resources were scarce. As such, population growth was not experienced during this time. MtDNA lineages continued to experience accumulation of mutations, which are now observed in the haplogroups that survived and later colonized America’s double-continent. When climate conditions improved, the ice began to melt opening the way into the Americas, for Paleo-Indians belonging to X2a as well as to the other pan-American haplogroups to expand into the inhabited New World. 9

Some North American theorists attempt to show the X haplogroup introduction into the Americas at a more recent time, in an attempt to make it look like it could be from Lehi. While the dating of mtDNA is controversial at best, the dates that are produced by this dating system are generally within an accepted time range. In order for the theory of “Lehi’s X haplogroup” to work, these clocks would have to be off by tens of thousands of years, something that would not be feasible when the evidence is weighed. Ugo Perego wrote “We know few things about [the mutation rate of mtDNA], we assume few things about it- and, as a scientific community, we hope to continue to develop studies that will provide an ever more accurate calculation. However, I seriously doubt that it will move from thousands to hundreds of years ago.” 10

We also have evidence of a late(r) arrival of homo sapiens to the Americas in other dating systems, namely archaeological and geological, which place the populating of the Americas by the founding groups (the X haplogroup being one of them) in the same time period as the mtDNA clocks. Many archaeological sites have been found in the Americas which carbon date to around 12,000 years BP, a date that is not disputed among scholars. Several sites have later dates, but are controversial in one way or another and I do not feel it necessary to enter the debate of arguing for pre-clovis cultures, or whether there was one wave, or three waves of migration into the Americas.

The Clovis culture, a founding population in the Americas, “is considered to be the oldest unequivocal evidence of humans in the Americas, dating between 11,500 and 10,900 radiocarbon years before the present (14C yr B.P.). Adjusted 14C dates and a reevaluation of the existing Clovis date record revise the Clovis time range to 11,050 to 10,800 14C yr B.P.” 11 The melting of the glaciers and the improvement of climate conditions around the same time period allowed for expansion from Beringia.

It has also been claimed that certain cultures in the Great Lakes area, namely the Hopewellian culture, date back to the same time period as The Book of Mormon and therefore, seems to strengthen their case of the geography of The Book of Mormon taking place in North America. In answer to this, one LDS scholar noted “The same principles that scientists use to date the phylogenetic change are used in other processes. Rates of change are indicated and assumed to create a “clock.” That is how archaeological sites are dated, not through phylogenetic changes, but through atomic changes. Same science, different clock.

If you don’t accept any timeframe deeper than 7,000 years, then you must also reject the C-14 clock and assume that all dates that it gives are much earlier. If that is really your position, how do you accept the dates for the Hopewell. According to the logic of the way you use science, we shouldn’t trust them and therefore they must be much younger than Nephite society.

How does the C-14 clock get it right only when you want it to, but get it wrong at all other times? Why can you believe that there were people along the Mississippi from AD 200-400 if you believe that all scientific clocks are too fast? They should be much younger than that.” 12

If you accept one form of dating system, you must not reject another when the same principles are used in both. Archaeology and Genetic clocks compliment each other and fit within similar time periods.

——————————————

1. A 2007 paper reported finding haplogroup X in Mexico: “Characterization of mtDNA Haplogroups in 14 Mexican Indigenous Populations, Rosenda I. Peñaloza-Espinosa et al., Human Biology, June 2007, v. 79, no. 3, pp. 313–320. However, when the samples were retested by a second laboratory, it turned out that they harbored the mutations for haplogroup A2 (a common lineage in Mexico) and therefore they were not X2 as originally reported.

2. Reidla et al. Origin and Diffusion of mtDNA Haplogroup X, American Journal of Human Genetics 73:1178–1190, 2003; Liran I. Shlush et al., The Druze: A Population Genetic Refugium of the Near East, PLoS ONE 3(5): e2105. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002105

3. Ugo Perego et. Al. Distinctive Paleo-Indian Migration Routes from Beringia Marked by Two Rare mtDNA Haplogroups, Current Biology 19, 1–8, January 13, 2009

4. Ugo Perego et. Al. Distinctive Paleo-Indian Migration Routes from Beringia Marked by Two Rare mtDNA Haplogroups, Current Biology 19, 1–8, January 13, 2009

5. Nelson J.R. Fagundes, Ricardo Kanitz, et al., “Mitochondrial Population Genomics Supports a Single Pre-Clovis Origin with a Coastal Route for the Peopling of the Americas,” The American Journal of Human Genetics 82/3 (28 February 2008): 583-592

6. Ugo Perego et. Al. Distinctive Paleo-Indian Migration Routes from Beringia Marked by Two Rare mtDNA Haplogroups, Current Biology 19, 1–8, January 13, 2009, pgs. 4-5

7. Liran I. Shlush et. Al., The Druze: A Population Genetic Refugium of the Near East, PLoS ONE 3(5): e2105. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002105

8. Personal correspondence with Ugo Perego 3-30-09

9. Ibid, this theory is also supported in a 2007 study “These archaeological dates suggest two likely scenarios. First, the ancestors of Native Americans peopled Beringia before the Last Glacial Maximum, but remained locally isolated (likely due to ecological barriers) until entering the Americas at 15,000 ybp (Beringian incubation model, BIM). Second, the ancestors of Native Americans did not reach Beringia until just before 15,000 ybp, and then moved continuously on into the Americas, being recently derived from a larger parent Asian population (direct colonization model, DCM… The finding that humans were present at the Yana Rhinoceros Horn Site dated to 30,000 ybp suggests that the isolation in Beringia might have lasted up to 15,000 years. Following this isolation, the initial founders of the Americas began rapidly populating the New World from North to South America.” ´ Erika Tamm et. Al. Beringian Standstill and Spread of Native American Founders, PLoS ONE 2(9): e829 2007) This would give the X plenty of time for mutation.

10. Personal correspondence with Ugo Perego 3-30-09

11. Michael R. Waters et. Al. Redefining the Age of Clovis: Implications for the Peopling of the Americas, Science 23 February 2007:Vol. 315. no. 5815, pp. 1122 – 1126, http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/315/5815/1122 hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&FIRSTINDEX=0&maxtoshow=&minscore=5000&HITS=10&searchid=1&resourcetype=HWCIT

12. Brant Gardner, September 6, 2008, in a blog post at: http://bookofmormonevidenceblog.wordpress.com/2008/09/04/initial-response-to-fairs-reviews-of-this-research/#comments

Thank you to Ugo Perego in his great assistance with this article.

Another look at Barley in The Book of Mormon

Tyler Livingston — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 01:24:20 +0000

Since the discovery among the Hohokam archaeological sites in Arizona in 1983, it has been discovered that little barley (Hordeum pussilum) is native to the Americas. It was first discovered in the “Midwest during the Middle Archaic period, at two locationally close sites. The earliest record came from the Koster North site in central west Illinois, dating to 7,300 B.P. Hordeum pusillum also occurred at the Napoleon Hollow site, beginning at 6,800 B.P.” 1

Archaeologists are now finding barley in several sites all over North America. Barley has now been discovered in archaeological sites in the following places: Arkansas 2, Iowa 3, Illinois 4, Missouri 5, North Carolina 6, Oklahoma 7, Wisconsin 8, and Mexico 9

Since most scholars place Book of Mormon events in Central America, many of these sites and cultures would show that barley was native to the Americas, but outside of Book of Mormon parameters. However, since it is now being found in Mexico and the Southwest, it is becoming more likely that Book of Mormon cultures were in contact with cultures from the North, and may have possessed barley. The Hohokam who lived in Arizona, where domesticated barley was first found in 1983, are thought to have been in trade with those in “middle America”.

“As evidenced by an abundance of ball courts and platform mounds, cultures reigning far to the south clearly influenced the Hohokam. Thus it comes as no surprise to learn that middle America was the source for their principal crops: several varieties of corn, two kinds of squash, bottle gourds, and cotton…All these cultigens originally had worked their way north over time from places like the Valley of Mexico to the peoples of the Sonoran Desert, as had two kinds of grain amaranths and probably cultivated tobacco…they [the Hohokam] may have been the only culture to have cultivated little barley…Hohokam, like virtually all prehistoric dwellers of northern Mexico…” 10

While the connection between Mesoamerica and Barley is not made 11, it would seem odd that trade of “principal crops” would take place without the trade of barley. Whether the trade came from Mesoamerica to Arizona, or the other way around, it would make sense that barley was part of the crop trade between the cultures. Why make a trade of major crops and not trade barley? They very well may have. But, because of the moisture content and acidity of the soil in Mesoamerica, it may be difficult to find “little barley” in archaeological digs in Central America.

However, the trade did not stop in Arizona. We have evidence of trade from Mesoamerica all the way up the Mississippi River. The Smithsonian states:

“The Maya forged strong political and commercial alliances with the civilizations of central Mexico. Through long-distance trade, luxury goods as well as pan-Mesoamerican beliefs eventually reached the Anasazi people of the American Southwest and Native American tribes living east of the Mississippi River…For a thousand years, Mesoamerican merchants traded ritual objects like macaw feathers and copper bells for precious turquoise mined by the Anasazi and Hohokam of the American Southwest…Social and religious ideas from Mesoamerica eventually reached Native American cultures east of the Mississippi River.” 12

As shown previously, most of the cultures of the Midwest eventually cultivated little barley for food. And we now know that food was part of the trade between Mesoamerica and “Eastern North America”. A recent study tells us that

“Maize (Zea mays), the first Mesoamerican domesticate to reach ENA (Eastern North America), did not arrive [until] ≈200 B.C.” 13

Again, how could there have been trade of crops between Mesoamerica and so many other cultures who used barley as a staple in their diet, and not have barley part of that trade, at least temporarily, among those people? 14

——————————————————————-

1. Hunter, Andrea A. dissertation “Utilization of Hordeum pusillum (little barley) in the Midwest United States: Applying Rindos’ co-evolutionary model of domestication” University of Missouri-Columbia 1992, pg 138.

2. Ibid, pg 141

3. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology , “Terminal Archaic and Early Woodland plant use at the Gast Spring site (13LA152), southeast Iowa” Spring 1998 by Dunne, Michael T, Green, William, pg. 8

4. Nancy B. Asch and David L. Asch, “Archeobotany,” in Deer Track: A Late Woodland Village in the Mississippi Valley, ed. Charles R. McGimsey and Michael D. Conner (Kampsville, Ill.: Center for American Archeology, 1985), 44; see p. 78

5. Hunter, Andrea A. dissertation “Utilization of Hordeum pusillum (little barley) in the Midwest United States: Applying Rindos’ co-evolutionary model of domestication” University of Missouri-Columbia 1992, pg 173,

6. Scarry, John F. and C. Margaret Scarry 1997 Subsistence Remains from Prehistoric North Carolina Archaeological Sites. Research Laboratories of Archaeology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Electronic document last accessed May 15, 2009 at: http://www.arch.dcr.state.nc.us/subsist/subsis.htm

7. Nancy B. Asch and David L. Asch, “Archeobotany,” in Deer Track: A Late Woodland Village in the Mississippi Valley, ed. Charles R. McGimsey and Michael D. Conner (Kampsville, Ill.: Center for American Archeology, 1985), 44; see p. 78,

8. Hunter, Andrea A. dissertation “Utilization of Hordeum pusillum (little barley) in the Midwest United States: Applying Rindos’ co-evolutionary model of domestication” University of Missouri-Columbia 1992, pg 142]]]

9. “…extensive archaeological evidence also points to the cultivation of little barley in the Southwest and parts of Mexico.” Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology , “Terminal Archaic and Early Woodland plant use at the Gast Spring site (13LA152), southeast Iowa” Spring 1998 by Dunne, Michael T, Green, William, pg. 8,

10. William W. Dunmire, Gardens of New Spain: how Mediterranean plants and foods changed America, , (University of Texas Press, 2004 )pg. 62-63

11. This author is not accurate in saying the Hohokam is the only culture to have cultivated barley. See previous references.

12. “Unmasking the Maya: The Story of Sna Jtz’ibajom,” Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of Natural History, Department of Anthropology. On-line at http://anthropology.si.edu/maya/mayaprint.html (last accessed 30 May 2008).

13. Bruce D. Smith et. Al., Initial formation of an indigenous crop complex in eastern North America at 3800 B.P PNAS 2009 106:6561-6566

14. See also John L. Sorenson, “Mesoamericans in Pre-Columbian North America” in John W. Welch, Reexploring the Book ofMormon: The F.A.R.M.S. Updates (Salt Lake City and Provo, Utah: Deseret Book Company and the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1992), 218-220.

Gospel Principles Chapter 8: Praying to Our Heavenly Father

Trevor Holyoak — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 19:37:10 +0000

This week’s lesson is on prayer. Below is a list of links taken from the main FAIR web site and the FAIR Wiki, which may help in discussing possible questions or issues that could potentially come up while studying this topic. Again, please note that by providing these resources we are not suggesting that they be included in any lessons taught. Rather, they are intended to be used as helps by the instructor or participating class members in case the issues do come up during class or personal study.

Beth T. Spackman, “In 3 Nephi 19, we read that some Nephites prayed to Jesus. Is it proper to pray to him?,” Ensign, June 1988.

Are we allowed to pray to our “Heavenly Mother?”

Praise in Prayer and Song

Moroni’s promise

Gaylen Hinton, “I need help in praying for and receiving guidance and personal revelation.,” Ensign, October 1993, 60.

Burning in the bosom

Blake T. Ostler, “Spiritual Experiences as the Basis for Belief and Commitment,” 2007 FAIR Conference.

Zelph in relation to Book of Mormon geography

Tyler Livingston — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 02:34:53 +0000

In June of 1834 during Zions Camp march to Missouri, human bones were discovered in a mound by a few of the members of the march about a foot underneath the surface. Joseph Smith stated that these were the bones of Zelph, a white Lamanite. Seven members of the camp recorded the experience that day, each one differing from the rest. Dr. Lund quotes from Kenneth Godfrey that all the accounts agree on the following points:
“(1)…members of Zion’s camp, traveling through Illinois, unearthed skeletal remains of a man, 2 June 1834 near the top of a large burial mound; (2) Joseph Smith learned what he knew about the skeletal remains by way of a vision after the discovery; (3) the man was a white Lamanite named Zelph, a man of God, and a great warrior who served under known leader named Onandagus; (4) Zelph was killed by the arrow found with his remains in a battle with the Lamanites” 1

Some have argued the original version of Zelph which was recorded was actually corrected by Joseph Smith, and it was the flawed account that made it into the History of the Church, thereby casting doubt of it’s accuracy. While there were changes in the Zelph story2, they do not change the basis of the claims of the incident that there were Lamanites and Prophets in North America.

John A. Widstoe believed Zelph to have no bearing on Book of Mormon geography. He stated:

“This is not of much value in Book of Mormon geographical studies, since Zelph probably dated from a later time when Nephites and Lamanites had been somewhat dispersed and wandered over the country.” 3

I find it interesting that Joseph Smith never specifically mentioned the Zelph incident to anyone. He may have been referencing the incident when he wrote Emma the following day about wandering the “plains of the Nephites” 4 and picking up skulls as an authenticity of The Book of Mormon, but never mentions an ancient warrior named Zelph and a previously unknown prophet Onandagus. This private letter from Joseph Smith is the closest we have of Joseph Smith recording the event.

“The longest and most detailed near-contemporaneous account of Zelph’s discovery was written by Levi Hancock” 5 In his version, he makes mention that Joseph Smith stated, while under inspiration, that “This land was called the Land of Desolation” 6. If Joseph Smith was speaking about the same “Desolation” mentioned in The Book of Mormon, this would place Zarahemla, Bountiful, Manti, and most other Book of Mormon cities south of this area (this would be about where Valley City, Illinois now is), and would place The Book of Mormon to far south for a Great Lakes geography. If one accepts the Zelph accounts as fact, they must also accept the implications of the story as well. By placing the land Desolation in Illinois, you automatically place most of The Book of Mormon events South of there, thereby eliminating many North American as plausible theories.

So what are we to think of Zelph? There are a few options. Either those events mentioned by Joseph Smith transpired from the last battles as the Nephites were being pushed Northward by the Lamanites, or, there were Nephites and dissenters of those who took on the name Lamanites, who had migrated North from Nephite lands. Fletcher Hammond argued that “it is possible and quite probable, that sometime during the Book of Mormon history, some adventurous Nephites and Lamanites settled in what is now the western plains of the United States, the Mississippi Valley, and as far north as the Great Lakes region. But, no account of what they did was important enough for Mormon to include it in the abridgment of the Large Plates of Nephi.”7

Another scholar asks: “Why were the prominent chieftain Zelph and the great Prophet Onandagus, who was known from the eastern sea to the Rocky Mountains, not mentioned at all in the Book of Mormon? Surely a prophet of such prominence would have received some notice had he been known to the historians of the Book of Mormon. The answer is very obvious:—Because the Book of Mormon historians who were down in Central America, knew nothing at all of either the Prophet Onandagus or [of] the Chieftain Zelph. It was more than 400 years before Mormon’s time that Hagoth sailed north, and we only have a report of the first ship returning. . . . Naturally, both Mormon and Moroni were too far removed from Onandagus and Zelph to report them.” 8

This would seem to make more sense. The Book of Mormon speaks about several migrations to the North. Alma 63:4-9 recounts the migration of “five-thousand and four hundred men, with their wives and their children” from Zarahemla to the land which was “northward”. That same year, Hagoth built a “large ship” and sailed “into the land northward”. That ship returned and was filled again, as well as many “other” ships that were built and again sailed “northward”. In the thirty-ninth year, another ship sailed northward carrying provisions to those who had previously left, and it did not return.

So where were these tens of thousands of these people going? It is possible that they migrated to areas which Joseph Smith was claiming as Nephites existed. There is evidence of contact and migrations between Mesoamerica and what is now known as the United States dating to Book of Mormon time periods. There was trade between Mesoamerica and Eastern U.S. possibly as early as 200 B.C. 9 Perhaps rumor came back to the Nephites from these traders about a land with good soil, and milder summers to cause these mass migrations northward. It would also seem fitting that many people would want to find a new land to live in after years of bloodshed in war with the Lamanites. They may have wanted to escape the continuous warring and move to a new land to find peace. Whatever the reason may have been, thousands of Nephites departed out of the land of Zarahemla, and moved northward. It is also interesting that there was a major influence of Mesoamerican social ideas, building structures 10, “And there are similarities between certain religious beliefs, legends, origin of stories, and symbols of the eastern Woodlands and Mesoamerica.” 11

One scholar “wondered if Mississippian culture spread up the Mississippi floodplain carried on the backs of “southern traders” who moved along a riverine “highway” that might even have seen some travelers from Mesoamerica. Certainly there are many known instances in other parts of the world of dramatic political events and the founding of dynasties associated with the arrival of foreign lords or “stranger-kings” who immigrated to new lands and super-imposed their wills and sense of order over those already there.”12 While the Mississippian culture post-dates Book of Mormon times, the knowledge of these routes may have been well known in Book of Mormon times. Trade had been happening between Mesoamerica and North America for centuries before the Lehites even entered the Americas. There is evidence of similar migrations of traders from Mexico who settled in North-Eastern Louisiana at a place called “Poverty Point” (1650-700 B.C.), pre-dating The Book of Mormon by at least one-hundred years.

“Archaeologist James A. Ford contends that the site (Poverty Point) flourished during a pivotal era, when hunting and dispersed small camps were giving way to farming and settled towns. Ford also suggests that Poverty Point was settled by Mexican Indian Traders who crossed over by way of the Gulf of Mexico.”13

We also have Mesoamerican influence in North American cultures that are contemporary with The Book of Mormon. These same cultures (namely the Hopewell) have been thought by some North American Theorists, to be Book of Mormon peoples.

“the early appearance of Mesoamerican cultigens in eastern North America raises the question of whether the emergence of ranked societies, first in the Ohio valley (Adena and Hopewell), then in the Mississippi Valley, would have occurred if there had not been significant influences from the south. At Present, the paucity of maize finds in Ohio and Illinois Hopewell sites suggests that cultivation of Mesoamerican crops was a minor part of Hopewellian subsistence base. Few other traits of Hopewell culture appear to be specifically Mexican; copper ear spools and panpipes might be markers of southern influence.”14

It should also be noted that the Zelph Mound had some archaeological excavations in the 1870’s and 1880’s and many relics were found, as well as finding “some connection with other geographic areas such as Michigan and Mexico.”15 If this is the case, and there were Mesoamerican migrations and influence up the Mississippi to the Hopewell and other cultures, then Joseph Smith would have been 100% correct in his assertions of Book of Mormon peoples living in North America. These people would have been satellite groups of the Nephites/Lamanites and not necessarily have been the same groups recorded in The Book of Mormon. 16

—————————— .
1. Zelph,” Book of Mormon Referenece Companion, ed. Dennis L. Largey, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2007), pg. 801-802

2. Kenneth W. Godfrey, “What is the Significance of Zelph In The Study Of Book of Mormon Geography?,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 8/2 (1999): 70–79.
3. John A. Widstoe, The Improvement Era, July 1950, pg 547
4. Dean C. Jessee, The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book, 1984) pg 324
5. Kenneth W. Godfrey, What is the Significance of Zelph in the Study of Book of Mormon Geography? Journal of Book of Mormon Studies: Volume – 8, Issue – 2, Pages: Provo, Utah: Maxwell Institute, 1999, 70-79
6. Levi Hancock Journal, LDS Church Archives.
7. Fletcher B. Hammond, Geography of the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Utah Printing, 1959), 151—52.
8. Norman C. Pierce, Another Cumorah: Another Joseph (n.p.: Pierce, 1954), 35–36.
9. “Maize (Zea mays), the first Mesoamerican domesticate to reach ENA (Eastern North America), did not arrive for another 1,500 years, at ≈200 B.C.” (Bruce D. Smith et. Al., “Initial formation of an indigenous crop complex in eastern North America at 3800 B.P” PNAS 2009 106:6561-6566
10. Unmasking the Maya: The Story of Sna Jtz’ibajom, Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of Natural History, Department of Anthropology. On-line at http://anthropology.si.edu/maya/mayaprint.html (last accessed 30 May 2008).
11. Timothy R. Pauketat, Ancient Cahokia and the Mississippians, Cambridge University press, pg 72. It should be noted that the Cahokia post-date Book of Mormon peoples, but it does not negate an earlier Mesoamerican influence. It would take hundreds of years to influence a large culture with new beliefs.
12. Ibid.
13. Peter Nabokov, Native American Architecture, (Oxford University Press US, 1989) pg. 97
14. Stuart J. Fiedel, Prehistory of the Americas, (Cambridge University Press, 1992) pg. 353
15. Donald Q. Cannon, Church History Regional Studies, BYU Department of Church History and Doctrine, Regional Studies, Illinois,-Zelph Revisited, 97-109
16. see also Donald Q. Cannon, Church History Regional Studies, BYU Department of Church History and Doctrine, Regional Studies, Illinois,-Zelph Revisited, 97-109, FAIRs review of “DNA Evidence for Book of Mormon Geography” http://www.fairlds.org/DNA_Evidence_for_Book_of_Mormon_Geography/DEBMG03F.pdf accessed May 21, 2009, Kenneth W. Godfrey, “The Zelph Story,” BYU Studies (Spr 1989): 31-56

Book of Mormon geography in Joseph Smith’s day

Tyler Livingston — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 21:06:09 +0000

Joseph Smith made several comments concerning Book of Mormon geography throughout his life which support both a North American setting1, and Central American setting. Not only this, but he allowed several opinions of North, South, Central, and Hemispheric geography of The Book of Mormon to be published, taught, and re-published without any correction. I believe this can be explained that Joseph did not *know* exactly where The Book of Mormon took place, so as he and others read about and learned traditions of any Indians that resembled anything in The Book of Mormon, they assumed that they were part of Book of Mormon people. It seems they believed that The Book of Mormon took place over all of the Western continent so any and all Indian cultures in North and South America (the Hemispheric geography theory), were Book of Mormon peoples. I believe this because the statements made in Joseph Smiths lifetime are consistently all over the Western Hemisphere, and not secluded to one area over the other.

I have made note of several statements made in Joseph Smiths lifetime on geography of The Book of Mormon, from Joseph Smith, Apostles and other leaders, those whom he allowed to publish in the Times and Seasons, and other Church publications, statements Joseph Smith made to others, and some newspapers which recorded what early missionaries were teaching about it. I have not included quotes that use terms like “this continent”2, “this country”3, and “This land”4, as the only designation to geography of The Book of Mormon, because these terms were used sometimes to denote North America, and other times Central America. Cumorah statements were left out because of the controversial matter and the possibility of two Cumorahs.

This also is not an exhaustive summary of early statements, but there is enough information to answer the question of what the early beliefs and teachings of the saints in Joseph Smiths time were.

       Mesoamerica.......N. America.......S. America........Hemispheric
1830	   0-------------------0----------------0----------------1
1831	   0-------------------1----------------0----------------0
1832	   1-------------------1----------------0----------------2
1833	   1-------------------1----------------0----------------0
1834 	   0-------------------2----------------0----------------0
1835	   0-------------------3----------------0----------------1
1838	   0-------------------2----------------0----------------0
1840	   1-------------------0----------------1----------------1
1841	   5-------------------1----------------0----------------0
1842	   5-------------------1----------------0----------------2
1843	   1-------------------0----------------0----------------1
1844	   0-------------------0----------------0----------------2
Total	  14------------------12----------------1---------------10

1830 Nov., taught by Missionaries, Hemispheric setting*** The Lehites “landed on the coast of Chili [sic] 600” B.C.,and from them descended all the Indians of America.” 5

1831 Feb. taught by Missionaries, North American setting *** “An early account mentioned that the missionaries asked the ‘brethren of the reformation…to receive their mission and book as from heaven, which they said chiefly concerned the western Indians, as being an account of their origin, and a prophecy of their final conversion to [C]hristianity, and made them a white and delightsome people, and be reinstated in the possessing of their lands of which they have been despoiled by the whites’”6

1832 March, taught by Missionaries Hemispheric setting *** This article mentions Lehi landing in South America, and the final battles between the Nephites and Lamanites were “fought nigh to the straits of Darien, and the last at a hill called Comoro” 7

1832 April, taught by Orson Pratt, Hemispheric setting *** “Six hundred years before Christ a certain prophet called Lehi went out to declare and promulgate the prophecies to come; he came across the water into South America.” He continues” The last battle that was fought among these parties was on the very ground where the plates were found, but it had been a running battle, for they commenced at the Isthmus of Darien and ended at Manchester.” 8

1832 Oct., taught by W.W. Phelps, Central and North American setting *** “from the Mississippi to the Rocky Mountains…Jaredites were in their glory upon this choice land above all others…This place may be called the centre of America: It being about an equal distance
from Maine, to Nootka sound; and from the gulf of St. Lawrence to the gulf of California; yes,
and about the middle of the continent from cape Horn, south, to the head land at Barra’s Bay,
north. The world will never value the land of Desolation, as it is called in the book of Mormon,
for any thing more than hunting ground, for want of lumber and mill-seats: The Lord to the
contrary notwithstanding, declares it to be the land Zion which is the land of Joseph, blessed by
him.”9

1833 Feb., taught by W.W. Phelps, Central American setting
*** From the article “DISCOVERY OF ANCIENT RUINS IN CENTRAL AMERICA”
“We are glad to see the proof begin to come, of the original or ancient inhabitants of this continent. It is good testimony in favor of the book of Mormon, and the book of Mormon is good testimony that such things as cities and civilization, ‘prior to the fourteenth century,’ existed in America”10

1833 Feb., taught by Joseph Smith, North American setting*** “By it, we learn, that our western tribes of Indians, are descendants from that Joseph that was sold into Egypt, and that the land of America is a promised land unto them, and unto it, all the tribes of Israel will come, with as many of the gentiles as shall comply with the requisitions of the new covenant.”11

1834 June, taught by Joseph Smith, North American setting*** “wandering over the plains of the Nephites, recounting occasionally the history of the Book of Mormon, roving over the mounds of that once beloved people of the Lord, picking up their skulls & their bones, as proof of its divine authenticity.”12

1834 June, taught by Joseph Smith, North American setting*** The Zelph incident: During Zions march, several members discovered the skeleton of a man, Joseph Smith stated “His name was Zelph. He was a warrior and chieftain under the great prophet Onandagus, who was known from the Hill Cumorah, or eastern sea to the Rocky mountains.”13

1835 Nov., taught by W.W. Phelps, North America setting*** “Around that mount [Cumorah] died millions of the Jaredites; yea, there ended one of the greatest nations of this earth. In that day, her inhabitants spread from sea to sea, and enjoyed national greatness and glory, nearly fifteen hundred years.-That people forsook the Lord and died in wickedness. There, too, fell the Nephites, after they had forgotten the Lord that bought them.” 14

1835 Oct., taught by W.W. Phelps, Hemispheric setting*** “My last letter was mainly confined to the book of Mormon, which rarely fails to bring to my mind something about the Indians, whose history and doings, upon this western continent, it unfolds as plainly, as the bible does those of the Israelites on the eastern continent….
When I read the book of Mormon and reflect upon the mercy and goodness of God, in sparing some of the seed of Joseph upon this choice land of America: and consider his wisdom and love in preserving a record of the progenitors or fathers of this now smitten and dejected people, I cannot find the requisite terms to convey my thanks to such an all wise Being!…[there are] “thirty tribes, containing a population of 156,310, have held treaties with the United States, and that there is an Indian population east of the Mississippi, of 92,676,”—making a total of 405,286. Now allowing the same number west of the Mountains, and suppose 800,000, in the northern regions of the Canadas, and 500,000 in South America, there will be 2,110,562 of the sons of Joseph, and of the remnants of the Jews” 15

1835 Nov., taught by Joseph Smith, North America setting *** “The Book of Mormon is a record of the forefathers of our western tribes of Indians…By it [The Book of Mormon] we learn that our western tribes of Indians are descendants of Joseph that was sold into Egypt…” 16

1835 July, taught by Oliver Cowdery, North American setting *** Regarding Cumorah in New York, “At about one mile west rises another ridge of less height, running parallel with the former…between these hills, the entire power and national strength of both the Jaredites and Nephites were destroyed”17

1838 Sept., taught by Joseph Smith North American setting *** The camp passed through Huntsville, in Randolph County [Missouri], which has been appointed as one of the Stakes of Zion, and is the ancient site of the City of Manti….” 18

1838, taught by Joseph Smith, North American setting *** “He [Lyman Wight] lives at the foot of Tower Hill (a name I gave the place in consequence of the remains of an old Nephite altar or tower that stood there)…” 19

1840, taught by Orson Pratt, South American setting/landing *** “Mentions ‘the western coast of South America’ as the site of Lehis landing” 20

1840 Sept., taught by Parley P. Pratt, Hemispheric setting *** Asks if anyone would like proof of The Book of Mormon, just look at “the ruins of cities, towns, military roads, forts, fortifications, mounds, artificial caves, temples, statues, monuments, obelisks, hieroglyphics, sculptured altars, aqueducts, and an endless variety of articles of husbandry, cooking utensils, &c. &c. which are the product of some ancient race, who inhabited that land, and who had risen to a high state of refinement in the arts and sciences, as the relics of their labours prove-as they now lie scattered over a vast extent of North and South America, either on the surface, or buried beneath by the convulsions of nature, or the visitations of the Most High, as recorded in the fore-going extract; and which are frequently discovered and brought to light by antiquarian travellers.” (emphasis added) 21

1840 Sept., Edited by Parley P. Pratt, Central American setting *** “We learn from the New York Express, that Mr. Stephens, United States Charge to Guatemala, and Mr. Catherwood, of the Panorama, have met with most encouraging success at the outset of their researches for antiquities in Central America. At Quiragua they made the following discoveries: [quotes from article about discoveries] For further testimony and proof positive of the Book of Mormon, we copy the following [Testimony of Three Witnesses].” 22

1841, taught by Orson Spencer, Central American setting ***John Lloyd Stephens “Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan” influenced Orson Spencers decision to be baptized into the Church, and describes it as an “external evidence” of The Book of Mormon. Orson Spencer served for twelve years in the Baptist Church before his conversion and William Mulder used Orson as one of the examples of a highly educated person who joined the Church in Joseph Smiths time 23. In a letter to a former clergy member William Crowell, dated November 17, 1842, Spencer relates what aided in his conversion to the faith. He relates about his baptism in 1841 “As you enquire [inquire] after the reasons that operated to change my mind to the present faith, I only remark that Stevens’ Travels had some influence, as an external evidence of the truth of the Book of Mormon.” 24

1841 May, taught by Charles Thompson, North American setting ***“I will next introduce the descriptions of some of these ancient fortifications and military works [in Eastern United States] of defence, as recorded in the American Antiquities, by Josiah Priest, and also introduce a history of the building of these fortifications and works of defence, as recorded in the Book of Mormon;” 25

1841 June, Editor of Times and Seasons, Central American setting ***In June 1841, the article “American Antiquities—More Proofs of the Book of Mormon” was published in the Times and Seasons, reading “We feel great pleasure in laying before our readers the following interesting account of the Antiquities of Central America, which have been discovered by two eminent travelers who have spent considerable labor, to bring to light the remains of ancient buildings, architecture &c., which prove beyond controversy that, on this vast continent once flourished a mighty people, skilled in the arts and sciences, and whose splendor would not be eclipsed by any of the nations of Antiquity—a people once high and exalted in the scale of intelligence, but now like their ancient buildings, fallen into ruins” and then quotes an article from the New York Herald on a two part lecture Catherwood and Stephens on their travels and discovery in Mesoamerica. 26

1841 Sept., taught by Wilford Woodruff, Central American setting *** “I felt truly interested in this work for it brought to light a flood of testimony in proof of the book of mormon in the discovery & survey of the city Copan in Central America…” 27

1841 Sept., taught by Charles Wandell, Central American setting ***In a letter by Charles W. Wandell published in the Times and Seasons, he draws the comparison of the “glyphs of Otolum,” (Palenque) to the characters on the Anthon manuscript. 28

1841 Nov., taught by Joseph Smith, Central American setting *** “Dear Sir, I received your kind present by the hand of Er Woodruff & feel myself under many obligations for this mark of your esteem & friendship which to me is the more interesting as it unfolds & developes many things that are of great importance to this generation & corresponds with & supports the testimony of the Book of Mormon; I have read the volumes with the greatest interest & pleasure & must say that of all histories that have been written pertaining to the antiquities of this country it is the most correct luminous & comprihensive.-…” 29

1842 Feb., taught by Parley P. Pratt, Central American setting *** –After an article titled “Ruins in Central America. Ancient Monument at Copan”, quoting many parts of, and reviewing Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan, Parley P. Pratt added:
“We publish the foregoing for the purpose of giving our readers some ideas of the antiquities of the Nephites–of their ancient cities, temples, monuments, towers, fortifications, and inscriptions now in ruin amid the solitude of an almost impenetrable forest; but fourteen hundred years since, in the days of Mormon, they were the abodes of thousands and millions of human beings, and the centre of civil and military operations unsurpassed in any age or country.
It is a striking and extraordinary coincidence, that, in the Book of Mormon, commencing page 563, there is an account of many cities as existing among the Nephites on the “narrow neck of land which connected the north country with the south country;” and Mormon names a number of them, which were strongly fortified, and were the theatres of tremendous battles, and that finally the Nephites were destroyed or driven to the northward, from year to year, and their towns and country made most desolate, until the remnant became extinct on the memorable heights of Cumorah (now western New York),–I say it is remarkable that Mr. Smith, in translating the Book of Mormon from 1827 to 1830, should mention the names and circumstances of those towns and fortifications in this very section of country, where a Mr Stephens, ten years afterwards, penetrated a dense forest, till then unexplored by modern travellers, and actually fines the ruins of those very cities mentioned by Mormon.
The nameless nation of which he speaks were the Nephites.
The lost record for which he mourns is the Book of Mormon.
The architects, orators, statesmen, and generals, whose works and monuments he admires, are, Alma, Moroni, Helaman, Nephi, Mormon, and their cotemporaries.
The very cities whose ruins are in his estimation without a name, are called in the Book of Mormon, “Teancum, Boaz, Jordan, Desolation,” &c.” 30

May 1842, taught by Joseph Smith, North American setting
*** In the editorial “A Catacomb of Mummies Found in Kentucky”, Joseph Smith said “Had Mr. Ash in his researches consulted the Book of Mormon his problem would have been solved, and he would have found no difficulty in accounting for the mummies being found in the above mentioned case…This art was no doubt transmitted from Jerusalem to this continent, by the before mentioned emigrants, which accounts for the finding of the mummies, and at the same time is another strong evidence of the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.—Ed.” 31

1842 June, taught by Joseph Smith, Hemispheric setting *** “the Mexican records agree so well with the words of the book of Ether (found by the people of Limhi, which is contained in the Book of Mormon) in relation to the confounding of languages” “In regard to the confusion of languages it is said of the above nations, that there were “fifteen heads, or chiefs of families, that were permitted to speak the same language.” The Book of Mormon, concerning the same event, says: “And it came to pass that the brother of Jared did cry unto the Lord; and the Lord had compassion on Jared, therefore he did not confound the language of Jared”-and it further states that Jared’s brother’s language was not confounded; and they then prayed for their families and friends also, and the Lord heard them in their behalf; and their language was not confounded. These accounts, then, precisely agree, one of which was found in Ontario county, N. Y., and the other in Mexico.
Again, those nations, of families, embodied themselves together and traveled they know not where, but at length arrived in the country of Aztalan, of the lake country of America. The Book of Mormon says, that the brother of Jared cried unto the Lord, that he would give them another land; the Lord heard him, and told him to go to a certain place, “and there I will meet thee and go before thee into a land which is choice above all the land of the earth.” This it further speaks is the land of America. The coincidence is so striking that further comment is unnecessary.-ED.” 32

1842 July, taught by John Page, Central American setting ***John Page believed several of the cities in 3 Nephi 8–9 were the same as found in Stephens and Catherwoods book. “And how was you destroyed? was the inquiry of those efficient antiquarians Messrs. Catherwood and Stephens, the charge d’affairs of these United States, as they sit on the wondrous walls of “Copan,” situated near the western extremity of the Bay of Honduras, in the narrowest neck of land between the waters of the Atlantic ocean and the Pacific ocean, the very place where the Book of Mormon located a great city, on the narrow neck of land between the two seas. . . . How was this city, with seven or eight others, which Stephens gives us an account of, destroyed? Read the Book of Mormon, and that will tell the story of their sad disasters” 33

1842 July, taught by Joseph Smith, Hemispheric setting ***Joseph Smith quotes Josiah Priest on his work in Indians in America and Canada in a comparison with BOM tools/metals/cities, etc… “Weapons of brass have been found in many parts of America, as in the Canadas, Florida, &c. with curiously sculptured stones, all of which go to prove that this country was once peopled with civilized, industrious nations…If men, in their researches into the history of this country, in noticing the mounds, fortifications, statues, architecture, implements of war, of husbandry, and ornaments of silver, brass, &c.-were to examine the Book of Mormon, their conjectures would be removed, and their opinions altered; uncertainty and doubt would be changed into certainty and facts; and they would find that those things that they are anxiously prying into were matters of history, unfolded in that book. They would find their conjectures were more than realized-that a great and a mighty people had inhabited this continent-that the arts sciences and religion, had prevailed to a very great extent, and that there was as great and mighty cities on this continent as on the continent of Asia. Babylon, Ninevah, nor any of the ruins of the Levant could boast of more perfect sculpture, better architectural designs, and more imperishable ruins, than what are found on this continent. Stephens and Catherwood’s researches in Central America abundantly testify of this thing. The stupendous ruins, the elegant sculpture, and the magnificence of the ruins of Guatamala, and other cities, corroborate this statement, and show that a great and mighty people-men of great minds, clear intellect, bright genius, and comprehensive designs inhabited this continent. Their ruins speak of their greatness; the Book of Mormen [Mormon} unfolds their history.-ED.”34

1842 July, taught by John Page, Central American *** "Let it be distinctly understood," John Page wrote, "that the Prophet Alma uttered this prophecy, not far from Guatemala or Central America, some 82 years before the birth of Christ." 35

1842 Sept., Joseph Smith or John Taylor, Central American setting *** “Mr Stephens' great developments of antiquities are made bare to the eyes of all the people by reading the history of the Nephites in the Book of Mormon. They lived about the narrow neck of land, which now embraces Central America, with all the cities that can be found. Read the destruction of cities at the crucifixion of Christ...Let us turn our subject, however, to the Book of Mormon, where these wonderful ruins of Palenque are among the mighty works of the Nephites:—and the mystery is solved...Mr. Stephens' great developments of antiquities are made bare to the eyes of all the people by reading the history of the Nephites in the Book of Mormon. They lived about the narrow neck of land, which now embraces Central America, with all the cities that can be found. Read the destruction of cities at the crucifixion of Christ, pages 459-60. Who could have dreamed that twelve years would have developed such incontrovertible testimony to the Book of Mormon?... Lehi went down by the Red Sea to the great Southern Ocean, and crossed over to this land and landed a little south of the Isthmus of Darien," 36

1842 Oct., Joseph Smith or John Taylor, Central American setting ***[W]e have found another important fact relating to the truth of the Book of Mormon. Central America, or Guatimala [Guatemala], is situated north of the Isthmus of Darien and once embraced several hundred miles of territory from north to south.-The city of Zarahemla, burnt at the crucifixion of the Savior, and rebuilt afterwards, stood upon this land as will be seen from the following words in the book of Alma…It is certainly a good thing for the excellency and veracity, of the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon, that the ruins of Zarahemla have been found where the Nephites left them: and that a large stone with engravings upon it as Mosiah said; and a ‘large round stone, with the sides sculptured in hieroglyphics,’ as Mr. Stephens has published, is also among the left remembrances of the, (to him,) lost and unknown. We are not going to declare positively that the ruins of Quirigua are those of Zarahemla, but when the land and the stones, and the books tell the story so plain, we are of opinion, that it would require more proof than the Jews could bring to prove the disciples stole the body of Jesus from the tomb, to prove that the ruins of the city in question, are not one of those referred to in the Book of Mormon…It will not be a bad plan to compare Mr. Stephens’ ruined cities with those in the Book of Mormon: light cleaves to light, and facts are supported by facts.” 37

1843 Aug., taught by Orson Pratt, Hemispheric setting ***Wilford Woodruff recorded Orson Pratt words on Book of Mormon geography: “[Orson Pratt] spoke in an edifying manner concerning the Book of Mormon its history what it was &c. That it was a History of nearly one half of the globe & the people that inhabited it, that it gave a history of all those cities that have been of late discovered by Catherwood & Stephens, that it named those cities.”38

1843 Oct., taught by Joseph Smith, Central American setting
*** “This is a work [Stephens and Catherwoods book] that ought to be in the hands of every Latter Day Saint; corroborating, as it does the history of the Book of Mormon. There is no stronger circumstancial evidence of the authenticity of the latter book, can be given, than that contained in Mr. Stephens’ works.” 39

1844 Jan., Editor of Times and Seasons (John Taylor) Hemispheric setting *** “ANCIENT RUINS: Every day adds fresh testimony to the already accumulated evidence on the authenticity of the “Book of Mormon.” At the time that book was translated there was very little known about ruined cities and dilapidated buildings. The general presumption was, that no people possessing more intelligence than our present race of Indians had ever inhabited this continent, and the accounts given in the Book of Mormon concerning large cities and civilized people having inhabited this land, was generally disbelieved and pronounced a humbug. Priest, since then has thrown some light on this interesting subject. Stephens in his “Incidents of Travels in Central America,” has thrown in a flood of testimony, and from the following statements it is evident that the Book of Mormon does not give a more extensive account of large and populous cities than those discoveries now demonstrate to be even in existence.-Ed” 40

1844 June, taught by Joseph Smith Hemispheric setting **** — “The next day the Prophet came to our home and stopped in our carpenter shop and stood by the turning lathe. I went and got my map for him. “Now”, he said, “I will show you the travels of this people”….you will have to go to where the Nephites lost their power…Placing his finger on the map, I should think about where Snowflake, Arizona is situated, or it could have been Mexico…” 41

You will notice that a North American theory was the most popular in the first decade of the Church. I believe this is because of the works of Josiah Priests 42 and Ethan Smith 43, as well the access they had to information on local Indian cultures. But as information from Mesoamerica began to come forth from John Lloyd Stephens and Fredrick Catherwoods book “Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas and Yucatan”, which began to make its presence known in America in 1841, with their elaborate drawings of ruined cities, detailed explanations of advanced cultures, more and more statements were being made about a Mesoamerican setting for The Book of Mormon. Again, if it was a black and white issue with The Book of Mormon happening either in North or Central America, and Joseph Smith *knew* and taught one or the other, the opinions would not have been swayed so easily as we see they were when new information arose. Either they would have stuck with a North American setting, or corrected past statements as conjecture and embraced the new Mesoamerican setting. But we do not see that. What we do see is an acceptance of a Mesoamerican setting becoming popular in 1841, while statements are continually being published advocating a North American setting, as well as a Hemispheric setting for The Book of Mormon. Joseph Smith even used what he saw as evidence of The Book of Mormon for both a North American setting, and a Central American setting in the very same article!44 For those who attempt to say that Joseph Smith only espoused a Great Lakes setting, or a Mesoamerican setting, is not being honest with, or ignoring the facts.

Conclusion,
We do not see any limited geography theory taught consistently in Joseph Smiths time, either by Joseph Smith, Apostles, or the average saint. This would be expected if there were no revealed geography, and Joseph Smith and the Saints were left to speculate on the whereabouts of Book of Mormon events. If there was a true knowledge of Book of Mormon locations in the early days of the Church (assuming a LGT), then Joseph Smith went against any revelation given him by continuing to teach Book of Mormon settings all over the entire Western Continent throughout his whole lifetime. If there were a revealed location, then it was not taught to the 12 Apostles and other Saints, for they continued to teach and publish on BOM lands in North, Central, and South America, without any correction. Even when Joseph Smith was Editor of Church publications, and had the power to deny anything he saw as a false teaching from being published, he allowed several opinions to be taught.
I believe the evidence points in the direction that Joseph Smith did not know the exact area of The Book of Mormon. And just like today, both the Prophet , and the Saints were allowed to speculate on these locations without any correction.

————————————————————
1. I do not say Great Lakes setting, because his statements place Book of Mormon events in Kentucky, Texas, Florida, and the Western U.S., which would be outside most Great Lakes theorists geography
2. In the article “Discovery of Ancient Ruins in Central America”, W.W. Phelps places Mesoamerican in “this continent”. “We are glad to see the proof begin to come, of the original or ancient inhabitants of this continent. It is good testimony in favor of the book of Mormon, and the book of Mormon is good testimony that such things as cities and civilization, ‘prior to the fourteenth century,’ existed in America” Evening and Morning Star 1/9 (February 1833). He uses “Central America” and “this continent” synonymously.
3. Joseph Smith equated “this country” with Mesoamerica in his letter to John Bernhisel, thanking him for Stephens and Catherwood’s book on their travels through Mesoamerican ruins called Incidents in Travel in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan. He wrote “Dear Sir, I received your kind present by the hand of Er Woodruff & feel myself under many obligations for this mark of your esteem & friendship which to me is the more interesting as it unfolds & developes many things that are of great importance to this generation & corresponds with & supports the testimony of the Book of Mormon; I have read the volumes with the greatest interest & pleasure & must say that of all histories that have been written pertaining to the antiquities of this country it is the most correct luminous & comprihensive.-“(emphasis added) Joseph Smith, The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, compiled and edited by Dean C. Jessee [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1984], 501 – 502.

4. “Since our ‘Extract’ was published from Mr. Stephens’ ‘Incidents of Travel,’ &c., we have found another important fact relating to the truth of the Book of Mormon. Central America, or Guatimala [Guatemala], is situated north of the Isthmus of Darien and once embraced several hundred miles of territory from north to south.-The city of Zarahemla, burnt at the crucifixion of the Savior, and rebuilt afterwards, stood upon this land…” (emphasis added) ” Zarahemla,” Times and Seasons 3/23 (1 October 1842): 927
5. Observer and Telegraph. Religious, Political, and Literary, Hudson, Ohio (18 November 1830): 3.
6 . Mormonism, Telegraph 2 (Feb. 15, 1831), Painsville, Ohio as quoted in H. Michael Marquardt The Rise of Mormonism: 1816-1814, (Xulon Press, Longwood, Florida, 2005) pg. 302
7. The Fredonia Censor 11 [7 March 1832]:[4], Fredonia, New York

8. Orson Pratt, “The Orators of Mormonism,” Catholic Telegraph, 14 April 1832

9. Evening and Morning Star, October 1832, Vol. I, No. 5 “The Far West” By placing the Northern lands of the Nephites, the land of Desolation, in the center of America, it requires that most Book of Mormon events take place south of that area. This would make most North American geography models incompatible with Book of Mormon geography.

10. Evening and Morning Star 1/9 (February 1833), pg 71.
11. Joseph Smith to N. C. Saxton, 4 January 1833, American Revivalist, 2 February 1833

12. Joseph Smith to Emma Smith, 4 June 1834, in Dean Jessee, Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, rev. ed. (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book and Brigham Young University Press, 2002), 345—46.
13. Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 volumes, edited by Brigham H. Roberts, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1957), 2:79–80;
14. Messenger and Advocate, Nov. 1835, Vol. 2 No. 14, “Letter #12”

15. W. W. Phelps to Oliver Cowdery, “Letter No. 11,” Latter Day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate 2:1 (October 1835): 193–95.
16. B.H. Roberts, History of the Church (Nov 16, 1835), 1:315
17. Messenger and Advocate, July 1835, pg. 158, re-printed Times and Seasons 2 (15 Apr 1841): 378.
18. [Sept. 1838] The Latter-day Saints’ Millennial Star, “History of Joseph Smith,” Vol. 16, page 296, May 13, 1854; In answer to this, John Sorenson writes: “No origin of the statement about Manti is credited in either record. It has been inferred, plausibly, to have come from Joseph Smith. According to The Book of Mormon, of course, the Nephite city of Manti was south of the city of Zarahemla and obviously south of the narrow neck of land; its location was not far from the headwaters of the north-flowing Sidon River. It is obvious that no place in Missouri, nor in North America, could qualify in these terms, hence there had to be an error in the original assertion or in its transmission.” John L. Sorenson, The Geography of Book of Mormon Events: A Source Book, FARMS, pg 373)
19. Joseph Smith, Discourses of the Prophet Joseph Smith, compiled by Alma P. Burton, p. 208

20. Orson Pratt, An Interesting account of Several Remarkable Visions, and of the Late Discovery of Ancient Records, 1840. Third American edition, New York, 1842, pg 18, as quoted in John L. Sorensons The Geography of Book of Mormon Events: A Source Book FARMS, pg 373)

21. Millenial Star, September 1840, Vol. 1 No. 4 “Book of Mormon”

22. Millenial Star, September 1840, Vol. 1, No. 4 “Antiquities of America”. Parley P. Pratt makes direct ties between The Book of Mormon and Mesoamerican cities, but in the same article (and previous quote), mentions if you want proof of The Book of Mormon, just look at the relics, ruins, etc… which “now lie scattered over a vast extent of North and South America.” This is a recurring theme among the early saints. They fully believed Book of Mormon cities were in Mesoamerica, but also had a conflicting belief that all the inhabitants of the Americas, North and South, were descended from Book of Mormon peoples.

23. Mulder, William. “Mormonism and Literature” in Cracroft, Richard H. and Neal E. Lambert, ed. A Believing People: Literature of the Latter-day Saints. (Provo: Brigham Young University Press, 1974) p. 208
24. Orson Spencer, Times and Seasons, January 2nd 1843, Vol. IV. No. 4.] CITY OF NAUVOO, ILL., pg 51
25.Charles B. Thompson, Evidences in The Proof of The Book of Mormon, BATAVIA, N. Y.
P U B L I S H E D B Y D. D. W A I T E. pg 97-98, re-published in Times and Seasons, 1 Jan. 1842, pgs. 640-644

26. Times and Seasons, June 15, 1841, vol.2 No. 16, pg 440-442
27. Wilford Woodruff, Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, 9 vols., ed., Scott G. Kenny (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1985), 2:126; journal entry dated 13 Sept 1841

28. Times and Seasons, Sept 15 1841, vol. 2 No. 22 pg. 544-545
29. Joseph Smith, The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, compiled and edited by Dean C. Jessee (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1984), 501 – 502.

30. Parley P. Pratt, “Ruins in Central America,” Millennial Star 2/11 (March 1842): 165.

31. Joseph Smith, ed., “A Catacomb of Mummies Found in Kentucky,” Times and Seasons, 3:781-782 (May 2, 1842).

32. Traits of the Mosaic History, Found Among the Aztaeca Nations, Times and Seasons, vol. III no. 16 Pg 820

33. John E. Page, reply to “‘A Disciple,’” Morning Chronicle, Pittsburgh, 1 July 1842, as quoted in Limited Geography and the Book of Mormon: Historical Antecedents and Early Interpretations, Matthew Roper, FARMS Review: Volume – 16, Issue – 2, Pages: 225-76 Provo, Utah: Maxwell Institute, 2004

34. Joseph Smith (editor),” American Antiquities,” Times and Seasons 3/18 (15 July 1842): 860

35. John E. Page, “Mormonism Concluded: To ‘A Disciple,’” Morning Chronicle, Pittsburgh, 20 July 1842
36. Extract from Stephens’ ‘Incidents of Travel in Central America’,” Times and Seasons 3/22 (15 September 1842): 915, 922; It is unknown who exactly authored this article, but the term “we” is used throughout it, implying there was at least 2 people who helped write it. Some have argued that Joseph Smith, even though acting editor, had nothing to do with the articles in Sept. and Oct. of 1842 because he was in hiding. While this was a time he was hiding from those who wished to do him harm, he did not seclude himself from his family or duties. Joseph Smith was at his house on September 2nd, 11th -14th, 16th-20th, 22nd-24th, 27th-30th, October 3rd-6th and the 20th. That does not include short visits, but only visits that were “all day”. During the time Joseph Smith was in “hiding” he continued on with his duties which he previously had. He held meetings with members of the Twelve Apostles, received revelation now found in the Doctrine and Covenants, wrote and received letters, and met with John Taylor, the assistant editor of Times and Seasons on at least two separate occasions. One of those occasions Joseph Smith specifically “counseled Elder Taylor concerning the printing office.” The Prophet also kept up on local news. We have account of him reading from the newspapers The Wasp, The Quincy Whig, and the New York Herald. It would seem improbable that he read from many periodicals and newspapers, yet neglect to read or edit his own. Dean C. Jessee, The Papers of Joseph Smith, (Deseret Book, Salt Lake City, Utah, 1992) pgs. 452-489

37. See previous footnote ” Zarahemla,” Times and Seasons 3/23 (1 October 1842): 927
38. Wilford Woodruff, Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, 9 vols., ed., Scott G. Kenny (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1985), 2:282; journal entry dated 27 August 1843. History of the Church pg 552
39. Times and Seasons Oct. 1, 1843, Vol. 4 No. 22, pg 346-347 “Stephens’ Works on Central America”

40 . Times and Seasons, January 1st 1844, 5:390
41 . Mosiah Hancock, Autobiography, BYU Special Collections, Writings of Early Latter-day Saints 28.) The Journal of Mosiah Lyman Hancock, p. 19-20; Autobiography of Mosiah Hancock, typescript, BYU Library Special Collections, p. 29. Compiled by Amy E. Baird, Victoria H. Jackson, and Laura L. Wassell (daughters of Mosiah Hancock).
42 . American Antiquities and Discoveries in the West, (Albany, Hoffman and White, 1835)
43. View of the Hebrews, (Smith and Shute, Poultney, Vt, 1823
44. “Traits of the Mosaic History, Found Among the Azteca Nations,” Times and Seasons 3/16 (15 June 1842): 818–820

Plain and Precious Things

John Lynch — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 02:52:47 +0000

A vision given to Nephi in chapter thirteen of the first book that bears his name contains a statement that has raised the eyebrows of critics. It reads in verse 28:

“Wherefore, thou seest that after the book hath gone forth through the hands of the great and abominable church, that there are many plain and ^aprecious things taken away from the book, which is the book of the Lamb of God.”

Critics challenge Latter-day Saints to itemize those plain and precious items that are found missing in the Bible and that are unique to the Book of Mormon. Believing that this challenge will be impossible to meet, these critics seek to undermine the confidence of Mormon’s in this keystone book of scripture. Such an approach becomes a “catch 22″ trap. Whatever doctrine that is mentioned in the Book of Mormon that is unique is used against us to prove that we do not believe in Biblical teachings. Whatever is pointed to as evidence in the Book of Mormon that is also in the Bible is dismissed, because it proves the same plain and precious truths are also in the Bible, undermining this passage.

For example, try and think of teachings that are core to LDS teachings which are unique to the Book of Mormon but that are not in the Bible. It is difficult to actually amass such a list. Some of the teachings we believe are precious and plain are found in the Doctrine and Covenants, such as proxy work for the dead, eternal families, and three degrees of glory, but they are not spelled out in the Book of Mormon. So, how do we answer our critics?

As I read this chapter, I was struck by verse 40 which reads:

“And the angel spake unto me, saying: These ^alast records [meaning the Book of Mormon], which thou hast seen among the Gentiles, shall ^bestablish the truth of the ^cfirst, which are of the ^dtwelve apostles of the Lamb [meaning the Bible], and shall make known the plain and precious things which have been taken away from them; and shall make known to all kindreds, tongues, and people, that the Lamb of God is the Son of the Eternal Father, and the ^eSavior of the world; and that all men must come unto him, or they cannot be saved.”

I was particularly impressed with the notion that the purpose of the Book of Mormon is to establish the truthfulness of the Bible. How can the Book of Mormon establish the truth of the Bible if the Bible does not contain the same teachings as the Book of Mormon? On considering this notion, it occurred to me that what is missing from the Bible in many instances is not the kernal of truth, but the plainness and preciousness of the simple truths that we take for granted as Latter-day Saints.

For example, the Book of Mormon has clear and concise teachings regarding the covenant status of Israel as the earthly lineage through whom Heavenly Father adopts us into his eternal family such that we become heirs to all that the Father has. Consider Jacob 5 and the parable of the olive branches, grafted into the wild plants and restored later to the original roots, all that the Lord of the Vinyard might store up fruit unto himself. Taught in a parable, it is still a plain and precious truth that seems so much more clear to me compared to what is in the Bible on the subject.

Consider the plain and precious teaching of priesthood responsibility in Chapters 1 & 2 of Jacob, specifically Jacob 1:19. Is there an equal to this teaching in the Bible?

Consider the precise and precious teachings of the role of faith building to knowledge, as is taught in the parable of the seed in Alma 32. Consider how plainly it teaches us to care for and nurture what we know as we build our knowledge and confidence in things we hope for and believe.

Consider the supernally plain and precious teachings of King Benjamin relative to our responsibility to care for and serve those who struggle, and our personal need to view ourselves in proper light at beggars before God, as taught in Mosiah 2 – 4. I cannot recall any other place in scripture that so fully and completely teaches me the kindness I should show my fellow man so that I might become a Son of Christ.

Consider the teachings of the supreme role of Christ in fulfilling the Mosaic law, and the simplicity of our need to simply look to Christ to find our salvation, as taught in 2 Nephi 25 & 26.

Consider the firm establishment of Christ’s doctrine as the principles of faith, repentance, baptism, and reception of the Holy Ghost as the means of salvation, as taught in 2 Nephi 31, and 3 Nephi 11.

It is in Moroni 6 that the qualifications for baptism are plainly taught.

It is in the Book of Mormon that the plain and precious instructions concerning the manner of administering the Lord’s supper is taught, as in Moroni 4 & 5.

Consider the simple instruction by Moroni in Chapter 7 of the book that bears his name on how to know truth from God?

These examples constitute a small sampling of things which are introduced in the Bible, but are made more plain and precious by the teaching in the Book of Mormon. As you read these, consider what other teachings have become plain and precious to your understanding because of the teachings in the Book of Mormon. Can any of us read these things and not be compelled to admit that, while many of these things can be found in the Bible, they become so much more clearly understood and placed more firmly in the proper eternal perspective precisely because of the teachings in the Book of Mormon?

What are the teachings in the Bible that have become more plain and precious to your understanding because of how it is taught in the Book of Mormon?

Current Biology, SMGF, and Lamanites

Ugo Perego — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 14:05:27 +0000

On January 28, 2009 Simon Southerton posted the following comments on the discussion board at exmormon.org about my recent scientific publication on Native American origins. He also took the opportunity to criticize Dr. Scott Woodward, former molecular biologist at Brigham Young University and current director of the Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation (SMGF).

Having great familiarity and being personally involved with the subjects mentioned in Southerton’s remarks, I deemed it necessary to provide an alternative and more accurate version of the facts. This is simply a rebuttal to Southerton’s specific posting and it is not meant to be another treatise on the Book of Mormon vs. DNA issue, since there is already a great abundance of LDS scholarship addressing the topic.

Southerton’s posting, each section of which appears below, was retrieved from exmormon.org. Below is each section of his posting, along with my comments.

When I resigned in 1998 after discovering DNA evidence that American Indians were essentially all descended from Asian ancestors, I was counseled by the Area Presidency to get in touch with Professor Scott Woodward, a “world-renowned DNA expert” at BYU. In a handful of email exchanges that I had with Woodward, in amongst his lengthy molecular apologetics, he admitted that he had found it difficult to talk to other people about the DNA work and that after a few years of struggling he had reconciled most of the issues it raised.

The use of the word “discovering” is interesting in the opening sentence of Southerton’s remarks. It appears that Southerton deliberately wants to give the impression to those who are unfamiliar with studies in population genetics that he is the one to first discover a genetic link between Native Americans and Asian populations. Dr. Antonio Torroni and Dr. Theodore Schurr were the first two researchers to make public such discoveries in the early nineties (references available upon request) when population genetic studies based on mitochondrial DNA variation were still in their infancy. When Dr. Woodward began his correspondence with Southerton in 1998, he wrote that he was aware of the papers mentioned and was surprised that Southerton thought it was a new problem. In his book Losing a Lost Tribe (Signature Books, 2004), Southerton provides proper citations to these earlier scientific works, but I noticed that in his informal communications he tends to be a bit vague about who did the actual DNA work on Native American populations.

During the communication exchange between Southerton and Woodward in 1998, Woodward expressed how difficult it was for him to explain DNA related concepts to people (Southerton included) who did not want to understand or put serious effort into understanding the concepts involved. Woodward’s “difficulty” was not in reconciling Book of Mormon issues, but in dealing with people that refused to listen.

Woodward’s emails from 1998 were eventually edited by Southerton and forwarded to LDS Church leaders in Utah, with the objective of hurting Woodward’s teaching position at BYU. This event greatly upset Woodward. When in 2004 Southerton visited Woodward at SMGF, he admitted his earlier intentions and apologized for what he did in 1998. I was present at that meeting.

I met Woodward when I visited the Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation (SMGF) in Salt Lake City a few years ago. At the time he angrily defended the Book of Mormon and hinted that SMGF scientists were finding exciting new evidence that supported the Book of Mormon (must be still finding it).

There were four people present at that more than three hour long meeting in 2004: Woodward, Southerton, Luke Hutchison (currently at MIT completing his doctorate studies), and myself. I did not speak much, but I remember vividly the meeting and listened carefully to the conversation that took place.

During that occasion, Woodward did not “angrily defend” the Book of Mormon, but there was definitely some tension in the room due to what Southerton attempted to do to him in 1998. As I already stated, Southerton admitted to sending communications to LDS leaders in an attempt to purposely hurt Woodward’s academic position at BYU, and said he was sorry for what he did. However, we had a hard time believing that he was sincere in his apologies since his recent book Losing a Lost Tribe contained several innuendos about the nature of Woodward’s work with SMGF, insisting on possible connections with the search for Lamanite DNA evidence.

Woodward and Hutchison explained to Southerton the complexity surrounding the issue of identifying unknown Israelite DNA among modern Native American populations, the limited data available at the time, the limitations in building or interpreting phylogenetic trees, and other basic population genetic principles as they pertain to the arrival of a small family group in an already largely populated continent. It was emphasized over and over that DNA may or may not yield in the future any evidence about a non-Asian contribution to the modern Native American gene-pool, but the bottom line is that any attempt of using genetic data to support or attack the Book of Mormon is highly complicated and fails to put this matter to rest. Eventually Southerton admitted that he did not know much about population genetics (he is a plant geneticist) and that he did not understand phylogenies but, nonetheless, he was still “very proud of his book.” That pretty much ended that long debate…

No one at that meeting (except, apparently, Southerton) recalls any mention of “finding exciting new evidence that supported the Book of Mormon,” particularly with regards to the work done at SMGF, as DNA and family history data collected in the first few years of the project were mainly of Anglo-Saxon extraction. However, references were made about the work of researchers from other universities publishing data that did not fit with the classic “Asian” markers as found among the majority of pre-Columbian groups. In some cases, the hypotheses surrounding their possible presence in the Western Hemisphere are still a matter of dispute (these arguments have already been discussed elsewhere and basically they have been promptly dismissed by those criticizing the historicity of the Book of Mormon).

This month in the scientific journal Current Biology, Woodward co-authors a research paper that clearly demonstrates that the ancestors the American Indians arrived in North America over 15,000 years ago via two routes from Asia (http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822(08)01618-7). The founders brought 5 major maternal DNA lineages with them, named A, B, C, D and X. One group of founders brought the X lineage to the region adjacent to the Great Lakes as they migrated between ice sheets across what is now central Canada. The other group followed the Pacific coast, probably bringing the other four DNA lineages (A, B, C and D).

An international team of 16 scientists worked on this research for the past 18 months. Dr. Achilli and I were the leading authors on this project, which was conducted under the mentorship of the corresponding author, Dr. Antonio Torroni. All the other authors contributed to some degree to the developing of the project, the analysis of the data, and the writing of the manuscript. I find it interesting how Woodward was singled out by Southerton for his contribution to this research paper. (By the way, the link provided in Southerton’s post does not work. A summary is available at this address. For a copy of the full article, please contact me directly at ugo@smgf.org).

Geneticists in the past emphasized a single arrival for the first Paleo-Indians and this was in clear opposition with scientists from other fields (linguists, anthropologists, archaeologists, etc.), as they were convinced that there is enough evidence to support a multi-origin of all the modern Native Americans. Our paper shifts the position of population geneticists to be more in line with researchers from other fields.

There are currently eleven recognized mitochondrial DNA lineages among modern Native American populations: A2, B2, C1b, C1c, C1d, D1, C4c, D2, D3, D4h3, and X2a. Approximately 95% of modern Native American maternal lineages belong to one of the first six in this list. The others are considered rare lineages. The paper discusses two of these less common mtDNA haplogroups (D4h3 and X2a). D4h3 was identified as a new Native American lineage for the first time in 2007, when DNA extracted from the remains of a 10,300 year old skeleton found in Alaska yielded a genetic sequence that did not match any of the known Native American mtDNA haplogroups. A careful survey of DNA databases identified a significant number of previously unclassified DNA sequences in modern Native American populations belonging to this new haplogroup, which was eventually called D4h3. Although D4h3 is also of probable Asian origin, this important discovery underlines the problematic issue with genetic sequences that were initially ignored simply because they did not fit with the classic “Asian” haplogroups. It is possible that in the years to come, additional rare lineages will be identified both in modern and ancient samples.

The migratory routes followed by the ancestors of these two rare lineages were drawn based on the available data, as it was inferred by the distribution of mtDNAs collected and analyzed in the modern population. These conclusions may be adjusted at future times based on new data both from DNA and/or from other fields. In fact, the paper starts with this clear statement: “When and from where did the first Americans arrive, and what migratory routes did they follow? Scientists from several disciplines continue to search for answers to these questions, but, despite new important evidence, the debate concerning the peopling of the Americas is far from resolved.” Southerton, on the other hand, thinks that this matter is clearly already resolved.

In this paper Woodward helps bury a pile of apologetic trash from both the Mesoamerican (church approved) and Heartland (church still watching) Geographists who have variously claimed in the past that the X lineage came from Israel. The X lineage is conclusively shown to have arrived in the New World thousands of years before the Book of Mormon period.

None of these studies on Native Americans, including the current one published in January 2009 in Current Biology were designed to address the Lamanite/Book of Mormon issue. Data for this study were collected and analyzed with the objective of shedding new light about the origins of Paleo-Indians; not to identify additional migratory events in the following millennia and the role they may have played in re-shaping the genetic pool already existing in America’s double continent. Therefore, I don’t see how “Woodward” is helping in burying anything here, particularly with regards to Southerton’s personal interpretation of what is considered “church approved.”

Some LDS scholars suggest that haplogroup X2a—found exclusively in northern North America—could be a proof of Lehi’s genetic legacy, but at this time there is not enough data to support these conclusions. Reidla and colleagues in 2003 began exploring the origin and distribution of haplogroup X among the world populations and they concluded that “phylogeography of the subclades of haplogroup X suggests that the Near East is the likely geographical source for the spread of subhaplogroup X2.” Regarding the presence of a few sequences belonging to haplogroup X found in the Altai population of central Asia, the authors commented that “under the assumption that these sequences are a random sample of the Altaian haplogroup X [they provide a] a time depth of <6700 years, and it would suggest that Altaians have acquired haplogroup X2 only relatively recently.” In other words, haplogroup X2 in modern Asian populations is NOT ancestral to haplogroup X2 found in Native Americans. Reidla and colleagues concluded that “the few Altaian and Siberian haplogroup X lineages are not related to the Native American cluster, and they are more likely explained by recent gene flow from Europe or from West Asia.”

Much can still be said about haplogroup X2 in the Americas. In our paper, two sub-branches of the Native American haplogroup X2a have been classified as X2a1 with an estimated age of 9200-9400 years and as X2a2 with an estimated age of 2300-3800 years. A possible third X2a sub-branch (X2a3?) was identified among the indigenous groups of British Columbia in Canada, but there is not sufficient data at this time to confirm this hypothesis. Furthermore, we reported in this paper the discovery of a previously unidentified X2 lineage in an Ojibwa sample – which we named X2g – that has never been previously observed in Native American populations or elsewhere.

Lastly, a paper published on PLoS One in 2008 (Shlush et al.) provides important clues about the possible origin of haplogroup X: “No population or geographic region has been identified to date, in which haplogroup X and its major subhaplogroups are found at both high frequency and high diversity, which could provide a potential clue as to their geographic origin. Here we suggest that the Druze population of northern Israel may represent just such a population.”

Our paper in Current Biology does not discuss (and does not dismiss) a potential ancient origin for haplogroup X in the ancient Near East, as proposed by Shlush and Reidla (and their co-authors, including important names in population genetics such as Michael Hammer, Doron Behar, Toomas Kivisild, Richard Villems, Antonio Torroni, Alessandro Achilli, etc.), but we emphasize how this haplogroup marked a separate migratory event that characterized the history of Native American populations. Apart from anyone who believes haplogroup X to be the ultimate proof marking the arrival of Lehi’s group to the Americas (something that neither Woodward, nor myself advocate), the bottom line is that there is still much to research about the origin and dispersal of this and the other pre-Columbian lineages.

But Woodward is not always so open with his research. Back in 1998 Woodward told me that his group had DNA tested 6500 American Indians from Peru. I could hardly believe it. All other research groups combined at the time had only DNA tested about 2000 American Indians across the entire New World! There can be little doubt that Woodward had been hunting for Lamanite DNA but apologists of course would deny this. Woodward clearly found none because those Peruvian DNA lineages remain unpublished over a decade later.

So, if Woodward participates in a research project using his data, he is criticized for doing so, and if he doesn’t, he is criticized anyway. This seems to be the common theme linking the last two sections presented by Southerton. First he praises Woodward for “burying piles of apologetic trash,” then he criticizes him for hunting Lamanite DNA and not publishing the data he has available! Could there be room for a third explanation? Could it be that Woodward and his colleagues at SMGF are not searching for a genetic fingerprint of Lehi’s descendants in the Americas? Could it be that LDS scholars can actually participate in genuine scientific research without being biased by their personal beliefs? Apparently to some people this last option is mere fantasy!

So, what about the samples described by Woodward in 1998 to Southerton? These are 6500 samples from Peru collected by the late Joel Myres over a period of eight years (Joel passed away in 2001). Most of the samples were typed for a small segment of the mtDNA control region in Woodward’s lab at BYU (which was standard procedure given the cost and technology of 1998) and meticulously recorded in several files. These data were partially published in two research papers and in a scientific poster (references available upon request). Joel was working on four additional manuscripts at the time of his premature death. The files and the 6500 biological specimen are currently in my office and have been shown and shared with a number of researchers that have demonstrated interest in them. This was indeed a remarkable collection of Native American data from a very fascinating geographic area, particularly for 1998, and for sure a greater number of interesting population, medical, and anthropological papers would have been published if Joel was still living. Southerton’s obsession with Lamanite DNA, stands in clear opposition with the anthropological passion Joel had for Peru.

Woodward is now leading an organization (SMGF) that has much more DNA data on American Indians than any other group in the world. His group has undoubtedly DNA tested thousands of individuals from Central America including Mesoamerica. Woodward knows that Mayans, Mesoamericans, Central Americans etc don’t have Israelite ancestors. How long he will hold on to this truth is anyone’s guess.

Woodward has been leading the Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation (SMGF) since 2001. That is where Southerton met him in 2004. To date, SMGF has collected DNA samples and genealogical data from approximately 105,000 volunteer participants representing more than 170 countries. These samples have been sequenced and linked to corresponding family history records and regularly uploaded in a public database on the project website at www.smgf.org. Additionally, these data have been used to produce a number of scientific publications with researchers from both the US and internationally (see a partial list online). Our dataset includes thousands of samples from Africa, Europe, Asia and the Americas. Southerton insists that all these data, the years of work, the resources employed, the collaborations with scientists from other institutions and universities, the publications, etc. have as an ultimate purpose the discovery of Israelite DNA in the Americas and we are failing at it. Further, in Southerton’s viewpoint not only are we failing at what he erroneously insists is our goal, but we are suffering the failure without admitting it.

The ‘truth’ that Israelite DNA (whatever that might be) has not been found in Mesoamerica is public knowledge, a concept that finds Woodward and me with peace of mind. But Southerton is obsessed with the hopeless idea that Woodward and others at SMGF are still searching restlessly for this genetic link so that we can finally reconcile our LDS beliefs and be done with our work!

Perhaps the time has come for Southerton to recognize the considerable contribution that Woodward and the SMGF team have brought both to the scientific and the genealogical community, continuing to pursue the initial mission of building a genetic database to be used as a valuable research and humanitarian tool. This database was voted as one of the best genealogical resources available on the internet (for the years 2007 and 2008) out of more than 300,000 genealogical websites by the popular Family Tree Magazine.

Thankfully there is a public effort in progress that will be looking at large numbers of American Indians from all across the Americas. https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/lan/en/about.html
We can expect that data to be published in a timely manner over the next couple of years.

Southerton concludes his remarks with a reference to the National Geographic’s Genographic Project that has been also collecting thousands of DNA samples worldwide with the objective of reconstructing the history of mankind as it developed thousands of years ago. The Genographic Project is definitely praiseworthy and Woodward and colleagues have met in the past with some of its key researchers. As with other groups, we have been exploring opportunities to collaborate and share our data to further scientific knowledge in the field of anthropology, genealogy, and history. The Genographic Project, just like SMGF, has already published a number of important scientific papers on different populations. Contrary to SMGF, they have not yet published a single paper on Native American populations, but we are exploring the possibility to share our data with them as they had some difficulties collecting the necessary samples among indigenous groups from the Western Hemisphere (see for example an article published in the New York Times).

Despite Southerton’s continued efforts to discredit the professional integrity of institutions and/or individuals affiliated with the LDS faith, the debate about the origin of Native American populations is still wide open as demonstrated by the great amount of scholarship that scientists from different fields are still producing today. Rather than pick and choose from the scientific literature what fits best with his personal interpretation of the history of the Western Hemisphere, Southerton should attempt his own population genetic study to test the hypothesis for “Lamanite DNA.” He will soon “discover” the limitations with designing such a research project, the difficulties in obtaining and processing the necessary ancient and modern DNA samples (including those for comparison), find “reconciliation” between his conclusions with those from other disciplines (such as linguistic, archaeology, anthropology, paleontology, etc.), find a suitable journal with a high impact factor that will publish his work, and be ready to reply to criticisms from other scientists, including geneticists. Through this experiment he might finally realize the complexity of such proposition and understand that others are not actively pursuing a similar objective.

The Book of Mormon withstood 180 years of criticism and it should be evident by now that man-made philosophies alone can neither destroy nor support its truthfulness. The book itself provides a pattern to know if it is from God or from man. As a scientist and as a member of the LDS faith, I find no difficulties in reconciling my scientific passion about Native American history with my religious beliefs. I am not looking for a personal testimony of the Book of Mormon in the double helix. The scientific method and the test of faith are two strongly connected dimensions of my existence, working synergistically in providing greater understanding, knowledge, and from time to time even a glimpse into God’s eternal mysteries.

I have always been fascinated with ancient civilizations and I look forward to my involvement in future genetic studies that would contribute to a greater understanding of human history, including that of Native American populations.

-Ugo Perego

John Welch on Book of Mormon Legal Cases

Keller — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 01:39:08 +0000

We here at FAIR Blog are pleased to report on the latest Olivewood Books fireside featuring BYU law professor John Welch. In case you missed it, we have covered past speakers John Sorenson, John Gee, Mark Wright, and Daniel Peterson. If you live in the Utah County area and don’t want to miss out on future events, you may consider bookmarking this informative site and checking often.

Ever the prolific scholar, Welch authored a recent book examining legal cases in the Book of Mormon. Since attending his lecture, I have read the new book, which will inform my recap and commentary. Welch related the story of how Rex E. Lee recruited him to teach at to work at the fledgling BYU law school in 1979. Lee’s pitch was that if Welch taught a designated course he could teach whatever else interested him. Welch half-jokingly suggested Babylonian law as it relates to the scriptures and Lee responded that that was exactly the type of course BYU needed.

Law students taking Welch’s course over the years have been asked to write papers on the topic and a large collection has been archived in the HWH Law Library. Welch dedicated his book to his former students and identified a couple of them in the audience. He repeatedly referred to one of the papers addressing the transistion from kings to judges to provide background for Alma the Younger’s cases. Mosiah’s reforms enabled freedom of belief, so precedences had to be set for when beliefs led to criminal actions (Nehors slaying of Gideon and enforcing priestcraft by the sword) and belief in the form of freedom of speech (Korihor’s speech incited others to criminal actions).

Cases in the Book of Mormon include Jacob vs. Sherem, the City of Nephi vs. Abinadi (continued through Mosiah 17), the City of Melek vs. Nehor, the City of Ammonihah vs. Alma and Amulek, Alma vs. Korihor, the People vs. Paanchi, and the People vs. Seantum (see also selections from Helaman 8 and 9). At least these are the texts that Welch reproduces in an appendix in his book. Ten other incidences round out a list expanded to include legal procedures such as imprisonments and executions (p. 100): 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 . Welch indicted that biblical legal proceedings have provided fertile ground for scholarly explorations in the last few decades. So while I am at it, here are 15 cases Welch lists (p. 78) from the Bible: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12a 12b 13 14 15 .

Hebrew rîb is likely the word underlying contend wherever it appears in the Book of Mormon and it signifies a legal controversy. The plaintiff was called an adversary or attacker (Hebrew satan). Does that make it easier to see why contention is said to be of the devil or the Ammonihah lawyers were said to inspired by the devil? Even though a judge was not present in Sherem’s contention against Jacob, Welch argued that it was nevertheless a legal controversy. Sherem levied charges that are based on Mosaic legal codes: 1) causing apostasy (Deut. 13:1-10), 2) false prophesy (Deut. 18:20-22), and 3) blasphemy (Lev. 24:16). The penalty each of these crimes was death. After some divine intervention, Sherem’s confession uses a chiastic structure, convincing Welch that Sherem truly was good with words. Welch compared the restoration of peace in Jacob 7:23 with Bovati’s insight into the overarching purpose of ancient trials to restore peace and justice in a society (p. 133).

I learned about the differences between ancient and modern judicial culture. Oath taking was much more serious. Releasing prisoners of war on their word that they wouldn’t continue fighting would not fly in today’s world. We have a low threshold for getting into legal disputes with no penalties for losing a frivolous lawsuit. In the ancient world, an accuser had to worry about suffering the punishment prescribed for the crime, if he lost. In the ancient world there were no lawyers, so everyone argued their own case. If the defendant remained silent he was presumed guilty.

Susanna and the Elders, case #15 above, was told by Welch to illustrate the importance of multiple witnesses and the fate of false accusers. Susanna rebuffed the two elders’ sexual advances made under the threat that they would accuse her of adultery. They figured that their double witness would convict her. Daniel foils their plans by tripping up in the world’s first recorded cross examination. The multiple witness concept shows up in a few places in the Book of Mormon. The solitary Moroni calls upon the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost to back him up. Alma used the earth as another witness in like manner.

Responding to a tangential question about Nephi’s slaying of Laban, Welch referred us to his previous work in the inaugural issue of JBMS, but said it needs to be updated. He expects to write a couple of more books discussing legal issues in the Book of Mormon that aren’t centered around cases. Jerusalem’s lack of reception to prophetic lawsuits set the stage for Lehi’s family’s difficulties. Prophets prior to Lehi had been brought to trial for false prophesy and false witnessing. Urijah (case 13) was sentenced to death, while Jeremiah (case 14) used his connections to royalty to get off. Lehi needed little incentive to flee a similar fate. Laban was able to charge Lehi’s sons with being robbers because they were a roving band. Nephi’s killing follows the code in Exodus 21:12-14, because he did not plan before hand. Nephi probably had such passages memorized because they had less scriptures in those days.

Abinadi’s case involved interesting Juridictional issues. King Noah handles charges against his person, as reviling against the king was a serious crime. Meanwhile the priests handle charges like blasphemy and false prophesy. A tradition among the Sanhedrin was that the youngest renders judgment first so as not to be unduly overwhelmed by seniority opinion. Alma was probably the youngest member and he spoke up in Abinadi’s defense.

Due to time constraints the other cases were not covered in the same detail. Alma and Amulek’s trial is actually a text book case of what not to do according to Exodus legal codes. Especially offering bribes.Welch quipped about the predominance of trial reports in Alma the Younger’s record even after he stepped down from being Chief Judge. ”You can take Alma out of the bench but you cannot take the bench out of Alma.”

The Truth Will Out At Last

Robert White — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 15:11:42 +0000

Ever since FAIR published an introductory review concerning Rod Meldrum’s presentations and DVD, various members of FAIR have been vilified by him for shining some light on what he was doing. On Rod Meldrum’s blog he wrote this:

…FAIR has claimed that I have said or ‘implied’ that I think I have received revelation from God for the church. That is a blatant untruth that they have been propogating without a shred of evidence, because none exists. I have never thought, claimed, nor said that I have ever received revelation for the church. Ever. They intercepted an email where in I said that I felt that I had had some prayers answered, and they have tried to make that into ‘getting revelation directly from God for the church’. That is their FAIRytale. That is the problem with their attacks, they claim things that are absolutely untrue in order to castigate my character.

Because Rodney blocks me from his blog, using a pseudonym I posted the entirety of the email that Rodney inaccurately claims was intercepted by FAIR. (It was actually sent to a FAIR member by someone to whom Rodney sent it, who was concerned about what Rodney was saying.) I wanted readers to have the full information so they could judge the accuracy of Rodney’s allegations for themselves. Rodney refused to publish it.

I am now submitting, here, where Rodney cannot censor it, the entire Rodney Meldrum email of May 9, 2008, without any alteration except for the bolding of a few key phrases. No editing has been done to the original wording. Unequivocal legal opinions have been obtained assuring everyone that publication of this email is not a violation of copyright, nor of privacy, contrary to claims by Rodney Meldrum.

In the denials that Rodney addresses to those who have not seen his emails, he typically adds qualifiers such as “for the church” (as in “I am not attempting to speak for the church”). Because the words “for the church” do not appear in the email and in other evidence FAIR has collected, Rodney claims that he is thus being truthful in his denials. The transparency of that excuse will be obvious, however, because any Latter-day Saint will recognize the phraseology in the email, and in the other evidence FAIR has, as claims to divine guidance and other intervention validating his work. For example, he says that having “prayed about a name for this organization” that “the name that was received…” Well, Rodney, received from whom? No Latter-day Saint will miss his intent: He prayed, the name was “received.” We all know the language of purported revelation.

Readers will see at once why Rodney blocked the submission to his blog.

Any reader who has believed Rodney Meldrum’s denials to revelatory guidance will, I trust, having seen this, now ask him at least these questions:

1. Why did he block the posting of this email to his blog?

2. How, in truth, can he allege that FAIR has been stating “blatent” untruths, without a shred of evidence, and why he has denied any claim to revelation and divine intervention for his work?

3. How, given nothing more than one can read in this email, he expects anyone to accept that he does not purport to have the revelation and blessing of God for his work?

4. Does he agree that FAIR may publish the other evidence it has that he claims a calling by God to do what he is doing?

Rodney often states that the “truth will out.” Well, here is the truth, and it is out. Shall FAIR publish the rest of the truth on this issue, also, Rodney?

Date: May 9, 2008 4:35:39 PM MDT
To: “rodneymeldrum@hotmail.com”
Subject: Update, and request to serve on the FIRM FOUNDATION Counsel?

Hello dear friends,

There is so much to share with you about the progress of the DNA Evidence for Book of Mormon project. My heart is full to overflowing from the tender mercies and blessings of the Lord for the overwhelming response now coming from all around the country through this project.

I am deeply humbled by the opportunities that this has opened to have the privilege of assocation with wonderful stalwarts in the gospel such as yourself. I hope you feel as I do that we are all engaged in saving souls and spreading the good news of the gospel with all those around us.

Exciting NEW FOUNDATION

Many people have asked ‘What does FARMS think of your research’ and my response is that I have not heard anything at all from them, but after much prayer, I know that we are not to attempt to ’convert’ FARMS, but rather to establish a new organization of those espousing a North American Book of Mormon setting that ‘competes’ in the realm of ideas with FARMS. I have pondered and prayed about a name for this organization and the name that was received is ‘Foundation for Indigenous Research and Mormonism’ and it will be called ‘The FIRM Foundation’.

Within 48 hours the Lord provided the answer to how this was to be accomplished. While talking with a brother from Washington state, I told him of the name idea and he thought it was terrific, and then said ‘I’ll take care of it for you.’ When I asked what he meant he then told me that he is semi-retired now, but for 45 years had been a trademark and patent attorney and had set up many foundations, and that he would do it to help the project move forward! What a tremendous blessing!

Ancient Historical Research Foundation

Brother Shawn Davies, president of the Ancient Historical Research Foundation, reviewed the DVD and then we met at my home. He explained the objectives of the foundation, to retain and protect ancient North American artifacts, and to do research and provide scientific verification relating to their authenticity. They have had many people contact them about donating artifacts and they made contact with the University of Michigan about the possibility of obtaining the Milton R. Hunter collection for display. They agreed upon verification that the artifacts would be held in a ’secure’ location, such as a museum. Shawn said that they would like to build the museum in the next 5-7 years. Within 48 hours again the Lord provided another ‘miracle’ as I was talking to Val Killian, world-renowned architect who told me he was working with a group who are building a Conference Center in Nauvoo! He then told me about the 600 seat auditorium, the meeting rooms, the 110 family suites, and….the MUSEUM! I asked him ‘What were you planning to put into your museum?’ and he said…after a short pause…. ‘Your stuff!’.

I responded ‘But, Val, I don’t have any ’stuff’.

Then I told him of the conversation between Shawn and I and then he said that they were wondering what to do with all the empty space in the basement of the facility. Right then he was prompted and he said ‘We can make it into a research lab/facility to study these artifacts!’ So the Lord is watching out for this project!

Interact Medical and time constraints

Because of the strain of trying to work a full time job with Interact Medical, continue to do this project, be YM’s President, as well as husband and father to 4 teenaged children, I have been going on a sever lack of sleep which has been taking its toll on my health and ‘well-being’. With all the upcoming presentations scheduled, I knew that I was going to be shortly out of vacation time to go and do them. I also know that it is important to get the book project done, and after fasting and praying about it with my family, and after reading my patriarchal blessing, I asked each of my children and sweetheart what I should do about it, and the clear answer was ‘Dad, you know what you need to do!’ It was clear that I was going to have to leave interact to work on these projects full time, but I wanted more of a ’sign’ from the Lord. So I had three big projects about to close with Interact Medical, and I told the Lord that if he wants me to make this project my #1 priority to please cause that none of these jobs go through, but that if I was to stay with Interact to let at least one come in. I said this a little ‘tongue in cheek’, however, because one of the jobs I had already received an email to expect the Purchase Order in the next day or two. Well, within three days all three of the jobs were either terminated by the client, lost to another company, or delayed until next year! So on Monday, April 21st, I put in my two weeks notice and began my new life working full-time on this project on Monday this week!

It was a huge decision and so I asked my dear friend Hartman Rector Jr. if he would give my wife and I a special blessing.

Special Blessing from Elder Hartman Rector Jr.

Tonya and I had the most incredible and special experience as we met with Hartman and Connie in their peaceful home. After talking for some time, and updating him on all the latest developments, he and Brother Ron Rowen gave us the most incredible blessing imaginable.

They were incredibly powerful and caused both Tonya and I to no longer doubt the validity of work in which we are engaged. The only thing I can share from the blessings is that the overall understanding is that this information will go out to “millions” who will be touched by the work, and that this will “embolden” the saints to open their mouths and declare anew the truthfulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ so that millions will find and enter his kingdom! The spirit was overwhelmingly wonderful and we felt so blessed to have that privilege.

Cedar Fort Publishing offers to make DNA ‘Inspire-Side’ DVD

Lyle Mortimer, President of Cedar Fort Publishing in Springville, contacted me about the possibility of producing an ‘Inspire-Side’ documentary on the DNA Evidence research. He was very nice and cordial and we discussed the project at some length. It may be a huge opportunity to get this information out and I have been doing some research and have arguments both pro and con doing this project.

I met with Lyle and Jeffrey Marsh (a professor of religion at BYU) today for lunch and they again reiterated their desire to put together a wonderful DVD documentary.

FIRM Foundation Counsel

I’d like input and counsel on this and many other items of importance to this project, and that is why I am calling on each of you receiving this email to help in this process.

I would appreciate your input and help in coming up with some good suggestions about how to more properly move forward.

I have arranged to use a room at Grandview Elementary School on to dates. See this link for a map to the school.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=%22grandview+elementa

ry+school%22+provo,+UT&ie=UTF8&ll=40.280835,-111.677742&spn=0.117338,0
.119305&z=13&iwloc=A

Tomorrow morning, May 10th, at 9:00 am and Thursday evening May 15th at 7:00 pm.

If you could possibly make it one of the other of these time frames it would be very much appreciated.
Address of the school is 1591 North Jordan Avenue. Call Rod at 801-473-3111 for any other questions.

THANK YOU for all you are doing in forwarding this work. It is hoped that this group will form the nucleus for the organization that will be responsible for turning the tide of anti-Mormon falsehoods and re-establishing Joseph Smith as the preeminent scholar on the subject of Book of Mormon geography and reinforcing it as the foundation of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Get Free (PRODUCT) RED™ Emoticons, Winks and Display Pics. Check it out!

The missing introduction to Mosiah

Larry Poulsen — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 02:30:05 +0000

Upon the loss of the 116 pages containing the Book of Lehi, Joseph Smith turned to the small plates of Nephi for this period of history. This translation concludes with the Book of Omni and his brief description of Mosiah’s move to the land of Zarahemla.

This is followed by the Words of Mormon. This section was apparently written in preparation for his transfer of the plates to Moroni.

And now I, Mormon, being about to deliver up the record which I have been making into the hands of my son Moroni, behold I have witnessed almost all the destruction of my people, the Nephites.

The plates given to Joseph included the small plates of Nephi used to replace the book Lehi and were uniform in size and appearance to the balance of the plates. In an attempt to rationalize this fact, Gardner has proposed that Mormon used the size of the Brass Plates as a model to make the plates used in Mormon’s abridgment of the Nephite record. We have , however, no description of the Brass Plates so this is pure conjecture.

On the other hand we do have a description of the plates given to Joseph and they included the small plates of Nephi. I would suggest that rather than using the Brass Plates as a model that Mormon used the small plates of Mormon as his model and made sufficient plates at this time to contain his entire projected project. Gardner makes a good case for the proposal that Mormon planned the contents of his plates before he ever engraved anything on the actual plates. It is reasonable that when he went looking for more records after creating the Book of Lehi and found the small plates that he had not yet engraved the Book of Lehi on any plates but rather on some other more easily used medium.If this is true it would account for the uniformity of the plates and preclude the necessity of copying the small plates to those given to Moroni. It would also account for the fact that the book of Mosiah is actually introduced in the last few verses of the Words of Mormon. There is speculation that Joseph had translated the first part of Mosiah and this was lost with the 116 pages. However if one removes the verse numbers and joins the last part of the Words of Mormon to the first part of Mosiah, one gets the following narrative:

And now, concerning this king Benjamin—he had somewhat of contentions among his own people. And it came to pass also that the armies of the Lamanites came down out of the land of Nephi, to battle against his people. But behold, king Benjamin gathered together his armies, and he did stand against them; and he did fight with the strength of his own arm, with the sword of Laban. And in the strength of the Lord they did contend against their enemies, until they had slain many thousands of the Lamanites. And it came to pass that they did contend against the Lamanites until they had driven them out of all the lands of their inheritance.

And it came to pass that after there had been false Christs, and their mouths had been shut, and they punished according to their crimes; And after there had been false prophets, and false preachers and teachers among the people, and all these having been punished according to their crimes; and after there having been much contention and many dissensions away unto the Lamanites, behold, it came to pass that king Benjamin, with the assistance of the holy prophets who were among his people— For behold, king Benjamin was a holy man, and he did reign over his people in righteousness; and there were many holy men in the land, and they did speak the word of God with power and with authority; and they did use much sharpness because of the stiffneckedness of the people— Wherefore, with the help of these, king Benjamin, by laboring with all the might of his body and the faculty of his whole soul, and also the prophets, did once more establish peace in the land.

*And now there was no more contention in all the land of Zarahemla, among all the people who belonged to king Benjamin, so that king Benjamin had continual peace all the remainder of his days. And it came to pass that he had three sons; and he called their names Mosiah, and Helorum, and Helaman. And he caused that they should be taught in all the language of his fathers, that thereby they might become men of understanding; and that they might know concerning the prophecies which had been spoken by the mouths of their fathers, which were delivered them by the hand of the Lord.

And he also taught them concerning the records which were engraven on the plates of brass, saying: My sons, I would that ye should remember that were it not for these plates, which contain these records and these commandments, we must have suffered in ignorance, even at this present time, not knowing the mysteries of God. For it were not possible that our father, Lehi, could have remembered all these things, to have taught them to his children, except it were for the help of these plates; for he having been taught in the language of the Egyptians therefore he could read these engravings, and teach them to his children, that thereby they could teach them to their children, and so fulfilling the commandments of God, even down to this present time. I say unto you, my sons, were it not for these things, which have been kept and preserved by the hand of God, that we might read and understand of his mysteries, and have his commandments always before our eyes, that even our fathers would have dwindled in unbelief, and we should have been like unto our brethren, the Lamanites, who know nothing concerning these things, or even do not believe them when they are taught them, because of the traditions of their fathers, which are not correct.

O my sons, I would that ye should remember that these sayings are true, and also that these records are true. And behold, also the plates of Nephi, which contain the records and the sayings of our fathers from the time they left Jerusalem until now, and they are true; and we can know of their surety because we have them before our eyes. And now, my sons, I would that ye should remember to search them diligently, that ye may profit thereby; and I would that ye should keep the commandments of God, that ye may prosper in the land according to the promises which the Lord made unto our fathers. And many more things did king Benjamin teach his sons, which are not written in this book.

This reads to me as though it should be read together and the part from The Words of Mormon is the missing introduction to Mosiah and any information about Mosiah lost in the 116 pages was actually part of the Book of Lehi. The * designates the point where the two parts are divided in the present text of the Book of Mormon.

Larry Poulsen

Book of Mormon geography

Greg Smith — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 04:42:40 +0000

In another thread, one poster wrote:

If you don’t agree with me on Cumorah being our best strating point, I would be very open to hearing what you consider to be the best piece of evidence or the best witness to call upon as the most solid to date.

To which I responded:

In my opinion, it is a huge problem to start with ANY physical location. You’re already making assumptions, no matter how hard we try.

First, you need an internal map and geography. Only when you can say that you’ve got the Book of Mormon text figured out, can we start looking for physical locations.

So, I would say–pick a theoretical geography, and start from there. You can build your own, but since Sorenson has done the most work, I don’t understand why people don’t cheat and start with his. Explain what he gets wrong, and why. Then modify his map. Repeat.

Once that’s done, then one can start to think about placing that map with real-world correlates.

The article in question is here, and here and here should be read too.

Heck, just go ahead and read everything Clark has written, because he’s given more serious thought to the issues (even if you don’t agree with him) than most people who’ve written on the topic. See here. His are the sorts of issue any competent theory will have to address.

There’s lots of geography refs at the FAIR wiki here, including a long list of statements from various Church leaders and publications. It is by no means complete–it has been basically done in a “Hey, I stumbled onto a quote, I’m gonna note it” sort of a way. I recently noted that even some well-known statements were missing, as I worked with this data a little more. They’ve been added, but I have more in hard copy to add when I get time.

So if you can post sources with as much bibliographic info as possible, I’ll add them as I see new stuff show up and can confirm it. (This is called getting others to do my work for me!)

Since long threads get unwieldy with two many separate threads of conversation, I’ve started this thread for those interested in discussing geographic issues in a general, theoretical sense (which does not, of course, preclude real-world hypotheses).

With any luck, some experts in the field will show up.

Examining the Secular Side

Allen Wyatt — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 19:46:30 +0000

Late in June of this year, FAIR posted an initial review of Rodney Meldrum’s DNA Evidence for Book of Mormon Geography. At the time, there were several folks who indicated that they were looking forward to the promised analysis of the DVD’s use of research and scholarship.

I’m pleased to report that FAIR has published the first three reviews, as promised, this morning. (We’re sorry they took so long; we hope you won’t be displeased at the results so far.) Posted on the FAIR website are reviews dealing with DNA Evidence, Geography, and Joseph Smith. All three of these reviews correspond with sections in the DVD DNA Evidence for Book of Mormon Geography. The reviews in various forms–along with an explanation of why these reviews have been done–can be found at this single page.

During the past two months, working with other FAIR volunteers on these reviews, I’ve been quite interested in the responses that some people have made to our introductory review. A good number of people were appreciative; some others took the approach denouncing the review as consisting of “blatant and inflammatory lies,” “conjecture,” “innuendo,” and amounting to little more than “character assassination.”

For those who think it not appropriate to look a the manner in which information is presented (as was done in the introductory review), perhaps you will be more satisfied with the examination of the research and scholarship in these latest reviews.

For my part, regardless of whether you look at the presentation techniques or the content delivered by those techniques, there is little to recommend in DNA Evidence for Book of Mormon Geography.

-Allen

PS: Why did I name this post “Examining the Secular Side?” Because of my belief that some topics tangentially related to the LDS faith (such as DNA, geography, and what Joseph Smith may have known or not known) are essentially secular in nature. They deal with science and history, two disciplines distinct from theology.

Joseph the Geographer?

Brant Gardner — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 03:24:42 +0000

The Book of Mormon is inextricably intertwined with Joseph Smith. We undeniably have the text because he translated it. Recently there has been much ado about what Joseph Smith thought about the book’s geography. Without trying to tie Joseph down to any particular idea at any particular time (and there is also evidence that he was flexible in his thinking on the subject, altering and refining some of his views with later information), the real question is what we should expect of Joseph as a geographer of the Book of Mormon. For those who might suggest that Joseph should be held as the definer of Book of Mormon geography, that suggest appears to be based on one or more assumptions about Joseph that neither the church nor he would accept as accurate. Any of the following might be the basis for assuming that Joseph knew the geography of the Book of Mormon, but none are correct.

1) Joseph was a prophet, therefore he knew everything. That is perhaps an enticing thought, but one that Joseph and every other modern prophet has actively denied. Joseph Fielding Smith taught:

When is a prophet a prophet? Whenever he speaks under the inspiration and influence of the Holy Ghost. Men frequently speak and express their own opinions. The Lord has not deprived men of individual opinions. Good men, men of faith, have divergent views on many things. There is no particular harm in this if these views are not in relation to the fundamentals. Some men are Democrats, some Republicans. Some believe in a particular political philosophy and some are bitterly opposed to it, and yet they are faithful men with a testimony of the gospel.

When prophets write and speak on the principles of the gospel, they should have the guidance of the Spirit. If they do, then all that they say will be in harmony with the revealed word. If they are in harmony then we know that they have not spoken presumptuously. Should a man speak or write, and what he says is in conflict with the standards which are accepted, with the revelations the Lord has given, then we may reject what he has said, no matter who he is. Paul declared that he, at times, gave his own opinion in his writing.

(Doctrines of Salvation 1: 187. The reference to Paul is actually to Joseph Smith’s explanation of 1 Cor. 7:4 as recorded in D&C 74—see verse 5.)

2) Joseph translated the Book of Mormon, so he knew the geography. As a translator, he wouldn’t know any more than the text did. If he knew more, it would be because he created the text, not translated it. As an author he would know because he had it in mind so that he could write the text. Of course, we don’t believe that, so we should accept this reason.

3) Moroni told Joseph. This idea is usually based on a late statement from his mother that prior to the translation, Joseph told stories to his family. This is the statement from Lucy Mack Smith’s draft of her history, before it was recast into smoother language:

In the course of our evening conversations Joseph would give us some of the most amusing recitals which could be imagined he would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent their dress their manner of traveling the animals which they rode The cities that were built by them the structure of their buildings with every particular of their mode of warfare their religious worship—as particularly as though he had spent his life with them.

(Lucy’s Book: A Critical Edition of Lucy Mack Smith’s Family Memoir, 345.)

Accepting that the basic statement is correct (while allowing for some variation in the details since it was written down long after the fact), we have Joseph receiving cultural information about the people (presumably from Moroni). The statement never says anything about geography. In fact, the statement is consistent with what Moroni seems to have done, which is provide a vision. That is a good way to understand the people, but a poor way to learn geography. I doubt Joseph knew how to create a geography based on background images to the people he was paying attention to.

4) Joseph made statements related to geography, therefore he knew. This is really a fascinating assertion, because it is the faith-promoting reworking of both 1 and 2. It assumes that because he said something that he both knew what he was talking about and that it had to be right because he said it. That is denied by any close examination of Joseph’s history. In Richard Bushman’s Rough Stone Rolling, he documents a number of occasions when Joseph Smith indulged in the frontier habit of exaggerated boasting (much to the discomfort of accompanying saints who felt he should be more circumspect). Bushman describes:

Charlotte Haven, an observant young lady from New Hampshire who heard Joseph report on his Springfield adventures, was appalled. “His language and manner were the coarsest possible. His object seemed to be to amuse and excite laughter in his audience.” Expecting more from a man who claimed to be a prophet, she thought nothing he said “impressed upon his people the great object of life.” Joseph appeared raucous and impious. He uttered not a word “calculated to create devotional feelings.”

(Rough Stone Rolling, 483.)

Joseph Smith certainly never assumed that everything he said was to be considered either inviolate truth or even religious. Sometimes he simply amused his audience. Accepting statements only because Joseph made them denies Joseph the right to be the man he was, a right he declared firmly.

Conclusion: None of these assumptions ought be accepted as a reason to assume that Joseph Smith knew much more about the Book of Mormon than anyone else, and certainly not about geography. I find it much more plausible that he was excited to learn how marvelous a work he had translated, just as the rest of us are.

A Note from a Clown

Allen Wyatt — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 21:13:48 +0000

In a previous blog post I mentioned how Simon Southerton “has been trying to polarize apologists and others who promote various theories about the Book of Mormon.” An astounding example of that very avocation recently appeared under Dr. Southerton’s nom de plume on the Recovery from Mormonism message board.

The article, under the title of Cirque Du Apologetique – starring Sasquatch and UFOs, has received kudos from Dr. Southerton’s intended audience. (Don’t be surprised if you try the link and the post is gone; posts don’t remain long on RfM.)

While it is encouraging to see that Dr. Southerton is trying his hardest to recover from his past Mormonism, it is disheartening to see a researcher and scientist with credentials such as his resort to distorting information in the apparent hope of poisoning the well against others who disagree with his conclusions.

In this particular post, Dr. Southerton provides short bios of some whom he claims are “stars in the current apologetic circus.” He provides information about the circus’ ringmaster (Dan Peterson) and a host of “clowns.” As one of the clowns listed by Dr. Southerton (and thus the title of this blog post), I thought it might be interesting to examine the evidence presented by Dr. Southerton in his posting. I’ll quote each of the bios written by Dr. Southerton, in their entirety, and then provide my thoughts.

DANIEL PETERSON: Professor of Islamic Studies and Arabic at BYU. Regarded by many apologists to be assuming Nibleyesque (lay prophet) status. Unheard of by leading scholars in his professional sphere as Tal Bachman discovered when he contacted academics in his field in five US universities. The head of the department at UCLA where he obtained his PhD hadn’t heard of him! Yikes! http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon458.htm

It is interesting that the message cited as evidence by Dr. Southerton (the message by Mr. Bachman) never specifically indicates who was contacted about Dr. Peterson’s credentials. It is a safe bet that if Mr. Bachman contacted people in the wrong fields, he would get the answers he got. For instance, Mr. Bachman indicates that he contacted “the current head of the very graduate program” where Dr. Peterson received his Ph.D. He doesn’t bother to tell us the name of this person, or which department the person chairs. I wrote to Dr. Elizabeth Carter, head of UCLA’s Near Eastern Languages & Cultures department, asking about Dr. Peterson. She responded back that “I remember him, I think he went on to teach a BYU. His dissertation should be in the UCLA library.” It makes me wonder who Mr. Bachman wrote to, if anyone.

What Dr. Southerton fails to inform his readership of is that Dr. Peterson is president of The Society of Mormon Philosophy, editor-in-chief of the Middle Eastern Texts Initiative, and author of an Eerdmans-published book on Muhammad that was reviewed by Parviz Morewedge (Professor at Rutgers and UCLA Ph.D. recipient) as “The best scholarly text on the prophet Muhammad written by a Christian.” According to non-LDS Dr. Hossein Ziai (Director of Iranian Studies, UCLA), Dr. Peterson’s work with METI is “superb” and that he is a “fine scholar.”

It is somewhat telling that Dr. Southerton, in dismissing the credentials of someone with whom he religiously disagrees, would rely upon the undocumented research of an uncredentialed individual in preference to the comments of Dr. Peterson’s credentialed peers.

D. JEFFERY MELDRUM: Associate Professor of Anatomy and Anthropology, Idaho State University. Meldrum appears in the deeply flawed FAIR DVD (The Book of Mormon and New World DNA, 2008). Meldrum is the foremost authority on BIGFOOT. He is considered a “joke” among his peers and dozens of scientists at ISU have called for his dismissal. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15548356/

It is unclear why Dr. Southerton considers Dr. Meldrum one of the apologetic “clowns.” Dr. Meldrum does not consider himself an apologist, but he does disagree with several things—mostly religious in nature—espoused by Dr. Southerton. Does such disagreement mean that Dr. Meldrum is, indeed, an apologist? If so, then why doesn’t Dr. Southerton characterize himself as an apologist for the same reason?

Apparently Dr. Southerton feels that Dr. Meldrum can be relieved of any credibility on two counts: because he researches Bigfoot and because he appears in a DVD that Dr. Southerton pronounces as “deeply flawed.” If Dr. Meldrum’s work is to be tossed aside due to these criteria, perhaps Dr. Southerton should lobby his publisher, Signature Books, to recall all copies of the book it has published by Dr. Meldrum. (Why would Dr. Southerton choose to be published by a publisher who would print a book by a Sasquatch researcher?)

JOHN TVEDTNES: Career apologist with FARMS and retired scholar from BYU. Masters degree in linguistics, but self-appointed expert on DNA studies. Tvedtnes has written at length on the DNA issue. http://www.meridianmagazine.com/ancients/050713dna3.html. He was recently forced to retract two of the boldest claims he made in the above mentioned FAIR DVD they were so blatantly incorrect.

Actually Mr. Tvedtnes was not a “career apologist,” despite Dr. Southerton’s attempt to dismiss his credentials with such phrasing. He is a Hebrew scholar whose research has been published in numerous scholarly publications including the Journal of Near Eastern Studies. He has taught at both BYU and the University of Utah. He has lectured in the history and sociology departments of Haifa University and presented papers at numerous symposia, including a paper on “Hebrew Names in the Book of Mormon” at the non-LDS thirteenth annual World Congress of Jewish Studies.

As to Mr. Tvedtnes being “recently forced to retract” claims, I can assure you that there was no force involved. An error was drawn to Mr. Tvedtnes’ attention and FAIR is making a change in the video—which is more than can be said for errors brought to Dr. Southerton’s attention in his publications.

WARREN ASTON: Travel agent and UFO expert. No formal training. Aston runs a travel agency (Bountiful Tours) that conducts tours to Arabia after discovering what Terryl Givens and Daniel Peterson consider to be the strongest archaeological evidence for the Book of Mormon. In his book “By The Hand of Mormon,” Terryl Givens touts Aston’s work as “the first actual archaeological evidence for the historicity of the Book of Mormon.”

Aston is also an internationally recognized “expert” on UFOs. Aston speaking at a UFO Symposium http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NikV6YDW4Lk Aston claiming UFO cover-up at Pine Gap (US military base in Australia) http://www.ufoinfo.com/ufoicq/auforn4.shtml Aston’s tour company http://www.bountifultours.com/tour.html

Here is another individual that Dr. Southerton indicates is an apologist “clown” who, undoubtedly, would not label himself as an apologist. Perhaps this is Dr. Southerton’s way of dismissing the geographic verification of Nahom in 1994 by Mr. Aston.

I’ve read past comments by Dr. Southerton where he objects to being labeled a “plant geneticist” when discussing DNA issues because he feels that the phrase is used as a way to dismiss his contribution to the topic. (As in ‘plant geneticists don’t have the credentials to discuss ancient human DNA.’) And, yet, here we have Dr. Southerton utilizing the same tactic which he deplores by labeling Mr. Aston a “UFO expert” as a way to discredit anything he may have to contribute on the matter of Book of Mormon archaeology.

RODNEY MELDRUM: (no relation to Jeffery Meldrum but you must wonder) Studied marketing for one year at Utah State University. Self-appointed “senior scientist” promoting Great Lakes Geography theory. He is also firmly in the creation science camp, which believes the earth is only 6,000 years old. Currently involved in a stoush with FAIR apologists who are firmly in the Mesoamerican geography camp. http://www.bookofmormonevidence.org/index.php

Nice spin by Dr. Southerton, but he does violence to the facts. FAIR does not promote any particular geography theory. In fact, if Dr. Southerton did his homework, he would find that FAIR includes resources for several geographic theories. The “stoush” (whatever that is) has to do with the way in which Mr. Meldrum presents his theories and with his research and scholarship.

Surely Dr. Southerton can understand disagreements over research, scholarship, and presentation?

STEVEN JONES: Professor of Physics at BYU. He was “let go” from BYU because even they were embarrassed by his behavior. Widely known in the US as one of the scientists who believes that the US government was behind the demolition of the World Trade Centers. Jones was a scientific adviser for a group of Great Lakes apologists and has dabbled in Book of Mormon archeology. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_E._Jones

Another odd choice by Dr. Southerton as an apologist “clown.” While Dr. Jones’ feelings relative to the 9/11 tragedies are controversial, how do those feelings make him an apologist for anything other than his 9/11 theories?

Even if Dr. Jones is a “scientific adviser for a group of Great Lakes apologists,” does that make him an apologist himself? Dr. Southerton has served as a scientific advisor to groups that stake out religious positions; does that make him an apologist (let alone a “clown”)?

ALLAN WYATT: FAIR watchdog and webmaster with no publicized academic background. According to FAIR Wyatt’s words “should not be interpreted as official statements of LDS doctrine, belief or practice.”

Other than the misspelling of my name (it is “Allen”), I can find no real quarrel with this very short bio. I could be considered a watchdog; I am FAIR’s webmaster; I have no publicized academic background; and my words should not be considered official.

If Dr. Southerton wants to continue his studies about me, he is sure to find out that I am a technical writer who has quite a lengthy publication history—but all in the realm of boring computer books. In this regard I have just as much academic background as the critic Brent Metcalfe, who is also a technical writer in the computer industry. Such credentials seem good enough to allow Mr. Metcalfe to publish and edit for Dr. Southerton’s publisher, Signature Books.

MICHAEL ASH: FAIR apologist with no publicized academic background. Author of newly published FAIR book “Shaken Faith Syndrome” http://www.shakenfaithsyndrome.com/#about. According to FAIR Ash’s words “should not be interpreted as official statements of LDS doctrine, belief or practice.”

It would appear that Dr. Southerton believes that because Mr. Ash’s words “should not be interpreted as official statements of LDS doctrine, belief or practice” that they can be ignored. It is convenient how he dismisses those words without engaging the arguments those words make. I certainly hope that Dr. Southerton has not exercised such an illogical approach in his studies and career. (In fact, Dr. Southerton decries the ad hominem approach of apologists while sharpening his own dismissive rhetorical skills.)

I would have hoped for better from Dr. Southerton and his circus assemblage—if he can’t even get the simple things right, how can we hope for better in his more serious presentations? But, perhaps, his post is merely a manifestation of a stage of post-Mormonism that he feels he must traverse in his spiritual journey to the promised (non-Mormon) land. My best certainly goes out to him in his Quixotic quest.

-Allen

Advice from a Nobel Prize Winner

Greg Smith — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 16:43:23 +0000

Much has been said in the last few days about FAIR’s publication of our concerns regarding Rod Meldrum’s scientific and theologic errors in the Book of Mormon DVD he is selling. As more material appears, doubtless more will be said.

I had the opportunity to spend several hours reviewing the material. As I did so, I found one over-riding error that is probably responsible for 95% of the other errors which I found.

Meldrum begins his presentation with an apparent promise that the information he is going to present is scientific:

One of the things I’ve learned in the scientific field is that there are three ways that you can go about learning. One of them is, when you get new information, you can look at it skeptically, you can look at it affirmatively, or you can also look at it objectively.

My hope is that you’ll look at the information that you’re going to be presented tonight in as objective a fashion as possible. [1]

In saying this, Meldrum makes a common, but very serious mistake, founded on the assumption that it is possible to “objective.” It is not. Everyone has biases and pre-conceived notions which make them prone to accept some things and reject others.[2] Scientists learned long ago that they cannot be objective—no one can. Someone who asserts that he is being objective is hiding his biases from himself, if from no one else.

Instead of trying to be “objective” (which is impossible), scientists have learned to recognize their biases and reduce their effects. Nobel Prize winner Richard Feynman, a member of the team that developed the atomic bomb, told a group of students something that ought to be tatooed on the forehead of every scientist, and everyone who consumes scientific information (which is all of us):

[The] first principle [of the scientific method] is that you must not fool yourself—and you are the easiest person to fool. So you have to be very careful about that. After you’ve not fooled yourself, it’s easy not to fool other scientists.[3]

The first way to stop fooling ourselves, and possibly fooling others, is to quit believing and asserting that one is objective.

Dr. Feynman went on to say that a scientist must have:

a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty—a kind of leaning over backwards…

Details that could throw doubt on your interpretation must be given, if you know them. You must do the best you can—if you know anything at all wrong, or possibly wrong—to explain it. If you make a theory, for example, and advertise it, or put it out, then you must also put down all the facts that disagree with it, as well as those that agree with it…

In summary, the idea is to try to give all of the information to help others to judge the value of your contribution; not just the information that leads to judgment in one particular direction or another.

I’m talking about a specific, extra type of integrity that is not lying, but bending over backwards to show how you are maybe wrong, that you ought to have when acting as a scientist. And this is our responsibility as scientists, certainly to other scientists, and I think to laymen.

Rather than assuming or insisting we are objective—because we cannot be—we should be skeptical. We should be skeptical of our own scientific ideas as well as those of others. To do this requires that we hear both sides of any disputed question. Of course we may argue for the side we believe to be correct—but we must give all the relevant facts to be engaged in scientific study.

“Ultimately, the best thing to do is simply to listen with an open mind,” Meldrum tells us.[4] Our minds should be open—but, we should also be testing and proving the material we let into our minds. That is what skepticism is about. It is no good having an open mind if we accept nonsense into it. As one wit observed, “Keep an open mind—but not so open your brain falls out.” Hyrum Smith cautioned the Saints in 1844:

“…it is better not to have so much faith as to have so much as to believe all the lies.”[5]

Since Meldrum has decided that skepticism is not the way he wishes to approach his material, it has fallen to others to help the reader do it for him, because of the unacceptably high consequences of not doing so.

I want to here examine a couple of his questionable claims and provide the rest of the information needed to assess his conclusions. The open-minded reader can then decide if Meldrum has made his scientific case or not.

Bias

Meldrum admits that he has a bias toward the Church being true. I share that bias, and I believe my colleagues at FAIR do too.

The most dangerous biases are, however, those that go unrecognized. Meldrum’s has a bias that goes beyond believing the truth of the gospel. He says, for example, of his ideas about the buffalo: “I just love this…I literally felt like I was being directly guided in this particular portion.”[6] When one is this confident, extra skepticism and evidence is needed. Being “guided” by the Spirit in a secular research is evidence for no one else, and may make us less skeptical about our conclusions. So it proves, sadly, in this case. There is a great deal that is wrong about his buffalo section; I will examine only one error among many here.

Another of Meldrum’s biases is his unchallenged assumption that “If [the Book of Mormon] is true, there has to be physical evidence in addition to the spiritual evidence. You can’t have an entire civilization of people come and go and leave no trace.”[7] At first glance, this statement appears both obvious and worthy. However, it is wrong.

Firstly, it is a logical fallacy. How could we possibly know if a civilization has come and gone without a trace if they don’t leave a trace? Absence of evidence is never evidence of absence. There is not a single physical trace of Washington’s crossing of the Delaware, but he did it. How do we know he did it? There is no trace of it at all, unless we allow that a written record is itself a trace in which case we have traces in abundance. The city of Ebla, long known from Egyptian and Akkadian inscriptions, was not discovered until 1968. Did it cease to exist until then? When Meldrum excludes the written record from his definition of “a trace” he rules out most of the historical world.

William Hamblin has pointed out that were it not for written records, we would be unable to prove that Christians existed in the Roman Empire before A.D. 300. There is simply no genetic or archaeological evidence of them.[8] Without a written record there would be no trace of the resurrected Savior’s appearance to the disciples in the upper room, and there would be no trace of the wounds in his hands and side that Thomas felt, and thus believed—which was, we all recall, immediately followed by the Lord’s invocation of a blessing of all who believe without “a trace” of similar evidence.

In the Americas we thus far have no verified written record of the Nephite civilization except for the Book of Mormon—which is, actually, a significant and convincing trace. Should we really be so confident that we can find the Nephites if we couldn’t find Christians in a much-better-studied area of the world?

“[F]rom archaeological data alone,” notes Dr. Hamblin, “we would know almost nothing about the religion and kingdom of ancient Judah. Indeed, based on archaeological data alone we would assume the Jews were polytheists exactly like their neighbors. Judaism, as a unique religion, would simply disappear without the survival of the Bible and other Jewish written texts.”[9]

Even when we find a Nephite artefact, how will we know it for sure? Must a pot have “Made In Zarahemla” stamped on the bottom? Must we find “Coriantumr was here” scrawled on a wall? How could we tell whether a Mesoamerican atlatl or a Hopewell knife is a Nephite weapon?

In a demonstration of how biases can blind us to obvious answers, Meldrum says of the buffalo:

There were 60 million buffalo, and buffalo average about 1,600 pounds, compared to an average 200 pound human. How many buffalo do we still find out there? How much of their remains are there? See, if they’re not buried and they’re just left on the plains like these people were, according to the Book of Mormon, they just disintegrate. And they’re gone. No record.

[This is true; the buffalo left no record or records.]

OK, so only the ones that were buried are going to be the ones that you’re going to be able to find. So the idea of finding massive amounts of people at the Hill Cumorah and finding their bones and so forth is really kind of ludicrous. It’s not going to happen. If they were left out there on the plains, on the valleys, they would have just disintegrated like the big, 1,600 pound buffalo did. 60 million of them just disappeared.[10]

Meldrum has ensnared himself in his own arguments. All civilizations must leave a trace, he says. But 60,000,000 buffalo haven’t, and neither have Cumorah’s dead. Which is it: can we not believe in things that the toll of time erases, or can we depend upon a record even when there is no physical proof? I would opt for the record: the one in the Bible and the one in the Book of Mormon.

This fundamental error sets Meldrum’s audience up for a fall. If he’s correct that there must be physical evidence, what is his audience to do if they learn that the evidence he has presented does not hold water? He regrettably does not appear to understand that if the premises upon which he asks his audience to believe in the Book of Mormon prove to be false, faith in the scripture can crumble with the shaky edifice of flawed facts. The things he offers as powerful arguments for his religion can become powerful arguments against it if those arguments are based on false assumptions, and since he tells them that such evidence must exist.

Archaeological, anthropological, linguistic and other corroborative contributions to an understanding of both the Bible and the Book of Mormon are all topics of considerable interest, but they are not the foundation of faith in Jesus Christ that is the object of both books. Until qualified researchers can agree among themselves, I recommend watching and reading their work with skeptical interest. However, hundreds of thousands have obtained, and thousands upon thousands continue daily to receive, a witness by the Holy Ghost that the Book of Mormon is what it claims to be. There is abundant information available to satisfy the intellectual needs of anyone with an open mind, but we should not expect that such evidence must exist, or that it will take the form we presume it must.

We must examine our biases. As Joseph Smith observed, “…if we get a good start first we can go right, but if you start wrong you may go wrong.”[11] This applies, I believe, to both spiritual and secular knowledge.

Endnotes
[1] Rod Meldrum, “Introduction,” 4:30. All references to the DVD unless otherwise indicated; time-stamp is approximate.
[2] See Peter Novick, That Noble Dream: The “Objectivity Question” And the American Historical Profession, Ideas in Context (Cambridge [England]: Cambridge University Press, 1988).
[3] Richard P. Feynman, “Cargo Cult Science [from 1974 Caltech Commencement Address],” in Engineering and Science (June 1974), 10–13, emphasis added.
[4] Meldrum, “Introduction,” 4:30–5:00.
[5] Cited in John Sorenson, Instant Book of Mormon Archaeology BYU Studies 16:3 (Spring 1976): 429.
[6] Meldrum, Section #8, “Buffalo,” 0:00–0:25.
[7] Meldrum, “Introduction,” 5:40, emphasis added.
[8] William J. Hamblin, message posted 28 October 2004 in thread, “Not So Easy? 2 BoM Challenge,” on FAIRboards.org (accessed 10 April 2005),
[9] William J. Hamblin (posting under the screen-name, “MorgbotX”), “What Would Be Proof of the Book of Mormon,” on Zion’s Lighthouse Bulletin Board (ZLMB) (29 January 2004) (accessed 10 April 2005). http://p080.ezboard.com/fpacumenispagesfrm67.showMessage?topicID=213.topic
[10] Meldrum, Section #8, “Buffalo Evidence,” 6:00–6:45.
[11] Andrew F. Ehat and Lyndon W. Cook, The Words of Joseph Smith: The Contemporary Accounts of the Nauvoo Discourses of the Prophet Joseph, Religious Studies Monograph Series (Provo, Utah and Salt Lake City, Utah: Religious Studies Center, distributed by Bookcraft, 1980), 323; from 7 April 1844, citing Wilford Woodruff diary.

A Faulty Apologetic for the Book of Mormon

Allen Wyatt — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:17:48 +0000

FAIR provides an “Ask the Apologist” service to which people send questions. In recent months many well-meaning individuals have asked why FAIR has not endorsed DNA Evidence for Book of Mormon Geography, a DVD created and promoted by Rodney Meldrum.

Mr. Meldrum’s DVD is essentially a four-hour video of a shorter “fireside” presentation he has been making around the nation for months. Mr. Meldrum presents himself as a researcher who has carefully and methodically analyzed information related to Native Americans, LDS history, scientific findings, and scripture. Indeed, he touts his video as “correlation and verification [of the Book of Mormon] through DNA, prophetic, scriptural, historical, climatological, archaeological, social, and cultural evidence.”

That’s a tall order, even for a four-hour video. It would appear that Mr. Meldrum has, in approximately three years of research, uncovered the “verification” (read that as “proof”) that has somehow escaped prophets, leaders, scholars, and students for most of the past two centuries. And, he is on a mission to bring that knowledge to the world, starting with the Church.

To those unfamiliar with DNA science, population genetics, and the historical facts, the information presented in the DVD (and Mr. Meldrum’s presentations) may appear plausible and welcome. FAIR volunteers recently examined the DVD, attended presentations, exchanged e-mails with Mr. Meldrum, and talked with him. After reviewing the material he presents, examining the existing LDS and scientific literature, and consulting experts in the relevant fields, FAIR cannot support or endorse Mr. Meldrum’s theories or presentation. FAIR has unreservedly concluded the following:

Mr. Meldrum has attempted to assert revelation for those outside of his stewardship, and has used that revelation as a substitute for solid scholarship.
The DVD contains much material that is misrepresented because the author is unfamiliar with the large body of work that addresses the very topics he seeks to address.
The DVD plants erroneous concepts and expectations in the minds of viewers, making them easier targets for hostile critics when these errors are inevitably trumpeted by enemies of the Church.

These conclusions are addressed, in varying levels of detail, in two overview papers recently made available on the FAIR Website. The first overview paper is a five-page executive summary, available in either HTML format or PDF format. (The PDF format is better for printing and handing to other people, if desired.)

The second overview paper is the “full version,” which goes into more detail. Entitled Misguided Zeal and Defense of the Church, it is also available in either HTML format or PDF format.

Church members, when considering Mr. Meldrum’s DVD and presentation, would do well to remember the counsel of President Harold B. Lee:

“Now this is something that needs repeating to this great body of priesthood, because we have a rash of writings by certain persons who claim to be in good standing in the Church, going into considerable detail as they recite their past and present Church affiliations and activities in the forward and advertising. There are sensational predictions and observations, and to make their writings appear to have Church sanction, they use quotations and addresses from Church leaders, past and present, taken out of context in such a way as to make it appear as though these quotations were an endorsement of the book they wish to sell to Church members, who may thereby be induced to accept their writings as from unquestioned sources …. Furthermore, some designing individuals have solicited opportunities to speak at Church gatherings, firesides, priesthood quorums, sacrament meetings. Now, brethren, we feel it is of the utmost importance to lift a warning voice so that our people will be safeguarded against such tactics as an all too obvious self-seeking opportunity to spread their own propaganda for their own interests. We must urge that priesthood leaders use careful discretion in screening out those whose motives may be subject to serious questions.” (Harold B. Lee, Conference Report, April, 1973, 127-28).

Mr. Meldrum appears sincere in his beliefs about the Book of Mormon. FAIR is worried, however, by the means Mr. Meldrum uses to promote his beliefs and the damage that his presentation and promotion could ultimately do to the faith of Church members. We have therefore concluded that Mr. Meldrum’s theories should be publicly addressed. These overview papers are just the first treatment of the DNA Evidence for Book of Mormon Geography DVD.

-Allen

The latest Olivewood fireside

Keller — Sat, 17 May 2008 01:43:40 +0000

Last night I attended another in a wonderful series of firesides hosted by the Olivewood bookstore. Tyler Livingston was also there and took good notes, so I will refer everyone to here. The speaker used his knowledge of Mesoamerican languages and interpretations of murals, stela, and other Classic period art to draw intriguing parallels with various passages in the Book of Mormon.

Seer or Pious Fraud?

Keller — Tue, 06 May 2008 06:53:45 +0000

In my explorations, the first person to actually use the term pious fraud in conjunction with Mormonism was Mark Twain in Roughing It. Surprisingly, the reference was not to Joseph Smith, but to Brigham Young allegedly dressing up as Joseph Smith. This is Twain’s take on the narratives about assuming the prophetic mantle. More recently, Dan Vogel’s biography is essentially a book length defense of an earlier 1996 essay championing the pious fraud model as the most plausible solution framed by Jan Shipps in “The Prophet Puzzle:”

What we have in Mormon historiography is two Josephs: the one who started out digging for money and when he was unsuccessful, turned to propheteering, and the one who had visions and dreamed dreams, restored the church, and revealed the will of the Lord to a sinful world.

While Vogel argues that the pious fraud model can give us special insight into the mind of the prophet, the model is deficient in providing much explanation on other subjects. Richard Bushman pointed this out about Brodie’s (and by extension, I think, Vogel’s) biography in comparison to his own Rough Stone Rolling:

Many will prefer Fawn McKay Brodie’s account in No Man Knows My History. She portrayed Joseph Smith as a pious fraud who became a prophet despite perpetrating a hoax with the Book of Mormon. That does not work for me. In Brodie’s narrative. Mormon believers inevitably become simpleminded dupes. If Smith was a charlatan, everyone who followed him was deluded—including myself and all my Mormon friends. Making Joseph Smith an impostor may accord with our modern view of what is possible and impossible—no gold plates or angels, please—but it does not explain why he succeeded. Why did people then and now believe him? To understand their belief you have to get inside his world, in my opinion,and think of him as his followers did.

Pious fraud theory does a very poor job at handling the existence of the plates. However where students of Mormon history might be persuaded is in Joseph’s pre-translation activities as a village seer. Here Vogel’s thorough-going naturalism has the potential to more plausibly (in an Occam’s razor sense) explain the data in the early accounts. To paraphrase, Vogel asks us what is more plausible: believing in bleeding ghosts, slippery treasure, and seeing things underground that comes with the territory of treasure seeking folklore or simply believing that Joseph Smith deceived people into thinking he had spiritual gifts? As least one regular bloggernacle contributor (a very bright individual I might add) has embraced the latter:

Nor do I believe that God gave Joseph (and only Joseph out of the many, many treasure seers of early 19th-century New England) the power to actually see underground in his seer stones. So I’m left with some idea of Joseph the treasure seer as a fraud and a kind of backwoods con man.

The remarkable forthrightness is commendable, when so many historians merely report the substance of the treasure digging accounts and leave it up to their readers to judge their authenticity. In terms of apologetics, I think it is wise to be agnostic to things that are not part of our common experience like bleeding ghosts and slippery treasure, but I also think we need to go further and try to explain the consequences of choosing one position over another. To play Devil’s Advocate: If Joseph Smith misrepresented what he could see with his seer stone, I see no reason to tar his entire body of work. He was young and could have repented. If the data about his days as a treasure seeker are ambiguous, his religious works are not! Just about every high point in religious innovation came accompanied with profound spiritual experiences witnessed by multiple people.

It is difficult for me to advocate the pious fraud theory in such a manner. It seems to say more about a proponent author’s judgment on whether (and why) Joesph Smith lied on case by case basis (D&C 19, Zelph, polygamy denials, etc.) than it does about Joseph Smith. After polygamy and racial issues, the 3rd most common query to FAIR involves people disoriented by learning about seer stones. I think it is much more helpful to steer these individuals towards the literature that supports a prophet-in-training model as described by Mark Ashurst-McGee and to a lesser extent, Richard Bushman. As long as one doesn’t take the position that any explanation is better than the provided supernatural one, than I think this model holds up fairly well.

I actually think Joseph Smith was able to see treasure underground. He was able see the Book of Mormon in his seer stone before uncovering it. He had a reputation for being able to locate well water. He was able to read from the page of book with his back turned. He beat Martin Harris in a foot race through the woods with a blindfold on and relying only on his seer stone. He located a pin Martin dropped in a pile of straw. He described what inns David Whitmer had stopped at on his 3 day journey from Fayette to Harmony. He described the homestead of Josiah Stowell from a similar distance. He located some animals that had been lost for 3 days for a neighbor and a mare for another neighbor. Stowell found a buried money at “Bend Mountain” as Joseph represented it. Joseph kept tabs on whether the plates were safe through his divining aid. Dale Broadhurst pointed out to me an account where Joseph Smith sucessfully pointed out at which point a Judge Clark had dropped a wallet in a stream on a cross country trip. Many of these references are quoted in a message board thread I participated a few years ago on. I am aware that I am cherry picking the success accounts and not engaging in responsible source criticism.

Just to move forward, let’s take these anecdotes at face value. The question becomes how did Joseph see all of these objects obscured by distance or dirt? One model that I lack the expertise to thoroughly evaluate and hence leave for others is whether Joseph was crazy or mentally ill. The crazy model does an unsatisfactory poor job of explaining things observed by a group even when the power of suggestion, hypnotization, and propensity to hallucinate are considered.

Another model I won’t consider at length is the one used in the counter-cultists that concede that supernatural power was involved, but that it was all witchcraft and magic of the sort that the Bible strongly condemns. I think the Mormon apologetic response has been adequate in this area. Joseph Smith and many before and after him that had the gift of seeing thoroughly situated in the supernatural narratives of the Biblical good guys like Moses, Aaron, Samuel, Jesus, and the Apostles. In the Bible the presence of true wonder working prophets frequently drew competitors who duplicated miracles but drew power from false gods and evil spirits. If this paradigm has any understanding to offer, it might help explain some of Joseph’s failures as a treasure seer. Mischievous spirits could have been messing with Joseph Smith. It is not trivial that historical sources about Joseph incrementally have him learning how to discern evil spirits and the source of revelation whether it be of man, God, or the devil.

Moroni 7 is one such text that has been put into the service of the pious fraud model. Verse 16 reads in part

I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God

Looking through the lens of pious fraud. this passage might seem to suggest “the end justifies the means.” Restated, it is appropriate to lie if it brings someone closer to Christ. Such a reading, though, can at best be an ad hoc justification for something that has already occurred and produced observable pious results. It can’t be used in concocting a scheme, because the potential for disillusioned faith is immense if exposed. Whether the pious fraud is exposed or not, the impact, in general, is such that it strains the relationship the deceiver has with God. In sum, Mormon’s keys to discernment provide an interpretive framework when intent is not directly knowable. Mormonism has never embraced a strictly utilitarian philosophy if I read my Blake Ostler volumes right.

Vogel concluded an article locating numerous treasure digs by emphasizing Joseph’s failure as a treasure seer in contrast to his later success as a prophet. In some of these accounts of failure Joseph is described as reluctantly participating while being pressured to do so. Mormon apologists can comfortably admit that there were failures but some critics can’t admit to a single success despite overwhelming evidence. Vogel’s favorite story that illustrates that Joseph Smith was a pious fraud involves a friendly witness that described uncovering a feather but the treasure beneath it slipped away. Vogel considers it more plausible that Joseph planted the feather, but we have no evidence either way.

Vogel considers the failure accounts fit well within the general pattern of a charlatan in contrast to other historians have fit Joseph in the backdrop of other religiously-striving visionaries. What is interesting to me is despite having a law in the books against vagrant, defrauding seers and having over four years to build their case; Joseph’s opponents were unable to get a conviction. It seems odd that Joseph would form a profit-sharing company if he didn’t expect to find anything and he stuck around with his employer long after the initial dig was deemed a failure. If Joseph was a deceiving magician he was exceedingly bold to continue to do business in the same locale he was exposed. Perhaps Joseph didn’t read the How to be a Huckster guide very well.

I am open to suggestions how to better frame the issues or represent the arguments for or against the pious fraud model of understanding Joseph Smith and what the challenges of advocating the seer-in-training-model are.

DCP at Olivewood on olive trees and evidences

Keller — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 01:04:13 +0000

The Olivewood Bookstore in Provo has done it again! After February’s fireside featuring John Sorenson, for an encore they brought in another prolific Mawell Institute scholar, Daniel C. Peterson. Dr. Peterson did not disappoint, but if you missed it, don’t fret as it was captured on video and I have updated this blog now that it has been made available on YouTube. The event was well attended. John Clark and John Sorenson were in the audience. Bill Hamblin arrived late, but seeing that no anti-Mormon contingent had materialized to disrupt the event as they had threatened, did not stay long. I met a few personalities who I originally became aware of over the internet, but I don’t know if they wanted to be outed in this space.

From what I hear, Dr. Peterson is a busy man these days. I don’t know how he managed to squeeze in time to do the fireside in between all the globe trotting he does, all the time he puts in as a bishop over a student ward, all the time working on four book manuscripts, etc. So it is understandable that he constructed his presentation from previous writings. He gave us a dramatic reading of portions of a essay covering the miraculous translation process of the Book of Mormon that draws on the observations made by Royal Skousen and early witness accounts. Dr. Peterson insisted the challenges he has brought up have not got the serious attention they deserves from critics, so it is worth repeating and disseminating to give them a better opportunity.

But whether critics respond or not, I think it is important to educate the Saints on such matters. From the question and answer period, it was clear Joseph’s later translation method that involved a seer stone placed in a hat but did not involve a curtain or the plates being physically present was news to some of the audience members. Peterson’s response to this persuasively flips such concern around and makes it a selling point of the Book of Mormon’s authenticity. I remember lurking on a message board when Dr. Peterson originally made this point:

A knowledgeable academic friend who does not believe in the historical authenticity of the Book of Mormon once asked me, since it seems that the plates were not actually necessary to the translation rocess and were sometimes not even present in the room, what purpose hey served. I responded that I did not know, exactly, except for one thing: They are an indigestible lump in the throats of people like im who contend that there were no Nephites but that Joseph Smith was nonetheless an inspired prophet. If the plates really existed, somebody made them. And if no Nephites existed to make them, then either Joseph Smith, or God, or somebody else seems to have been engaged in simple fraud. The testimony of the witnesses exists, I think, to force dichotomous choice: true or false?

Dr. Peterson talked about some his favorite evidences (not proofs!) of the Book of Mormon. He told us the story of how he got interested on reading about guerrilla warfare tactics as a young man and how Book of Mormon authors illustrate the problems that occur when guerrillas try to start occupying territory prematurely. He contrasted that to Joseph Smith and his culture had romantic notions of military, just picture the Nauvoo Legion parades.He explained his belief that the Gadianton Robbers correspondences more to guerrillas than they do 19th century Masons.

Dr. Peterson talked about the presence of if … and conditionals which make good Hebrew, but is not typical of any known English dialect. He also mentioned a statistical study of chiasms, or literary structures that use inverted parallelisms, in the Book of Mormon that concluded the probability of them being unintentional was virtually nil. He discussed the significance of the Nahom find. He brought up a subject that one Gospel Doctrine teacher got excited about, with Jacob’s long allegory pending in Church curriculum. He discussed the paper he did with John Gee on olive tree culture entitled (bad puns intended) “Graft and Corruption,” which unfortunately is not available over the internet. Dr. Peterson contended that Lehi was a refuge from the Northern Kingdom and that Zenos would have been right at home with the olive tree culture which had its origins there before spreading.

It was fun listening to Dan as he stayed late to do some book signings and continued to answer questions. I got to talk to John Clark about his Hickman lecture. Apparently about 20 or so of his slides are being worked to add footnotes and before long they will be available through a department secretary. We also talked about some of the difficulties overzealous Great Lakes geographers are causing. Eventually those of us who still remained got the hint that we needed to leave, because the bookstore manager started packing up the refreshments.

Lindsay on Clark on Book of Mormon archeology

Mike Parker — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 15:37:06 +0000

Blogger and apologist extraordinaire Jeff Lindsay discusses John Clark’s 2005 FAIR Conference presentation, “Debating the Foundations of Mormonism: The Book of Mormon and Archaeology.”

http://mormanity.blogspot.com/2008/04/where-we-stand-archaeology-and-book-of.html

Jeff, as usual, injects some good humor into his writing:

For this post, I’m not interested in getting dozens of the standard uninformed comments about how there is “no evidence for anything in the Book of Mormon.” And yes, I already know that there are serious questions about the evidence for horses, silk, metals, and iPods in the Book of Mormon.

I don’t know about iPods, but there is conclusive evidence that there are handheld electronic devices in the celestial kingdom. (See Revelation 7:9.)

John Clark on Mesoamerican Origins

Keller — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:47:57 +0000

John E. Clark of the New World Archaeological Foundation gave a riveting presentation that explored the origins of Mesoamerican civilization. Arriving late to the Spencer W. Kimball tower meant that I was one of the many that had to sit on the floor in the aisles. I am glad nobody called the fire marshal. From my vantage point I saw several young students diligently taking notes on lap tops, something I wish I had done for this report.

Dr. Clark began his lecture by observing that when the Spanish explorers encountered native Americans, they had no book like Genesis that could explain the origins of the civilization they saw. Clark defined civilization so that the essential component is that the community had a government that had authority to tax and put to death its subjects, usually in that order.

Then, Dr. Clark segued into a personal history about his involvement in archaeological studies in Mesoamerica. We learned about some of his adventures in digging in the dirt while taking 10 years to get a dissertation together and we applauded the sacrifices of his wife throughout this ordeal. He talked about his role in the New World Archaeological Foundation that was started in the early 1950′s and was later funded by LDS Church. Interestingly, Clark mentioned that most of those who worked for the Foundation were non-Mormon or were on their way to becoming such.

A transcript of Dr. Clark’s lecture will never do it justice. Someone asked if his slides will be made available, but Dr. Clark declined, estimating that the photography and art had a value of around $50K. The pictures we saw were visually engaging. John Clark led us around on a virtual tour of ruins in the area like Teotihuacan, San Lorenzo, Monte Alban, Tikal, and other places I don’t recall. He showed us pottery that was reserved for corn beer, noting tha many of his discoveries involved Word of Wisdom violations. He showed us stone carvings of fat men sitting, obviously a symbol of leadership, with the quip that not much has changed over the centuries.

Towards the end of the lecture, Dr. Clark surveyed different theories for origins of new civilizations before discarding most of them in favor of his current findings, which he noted are tentative. He mentioned that the NWAF has the research cornered on Mesoamerican origins, while other outfits concentrate on the later periods where the finds are often more sensational.

In his concluding remarks, Dr. Clark addressed a question about what all this archaeological study has to do with the Book of Mormon. Here he referred to earlier presentation he has given such as his Library of Congress address and FAIR’s 2005 conference (a transcript of which has recently been posted on FAIR’s site). In sum, Dr. Clark finds the trajectory of increasing archaeological finds that corroborate the Book of Mormon encouraging and the opposite of what one would expect if the Book was fraudulent. He cautioned that critics will fail to be impressed by statistical analysis of Book of Mormon hits and missed, because of different assumptions about what constitutes evidence. The best way to find out the Book is authentic remains praying about, if it means shutting yourself in a closet until you get the job done.

John Sorenson rocks Olivewood

Keller — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 00:10:14 +0000

Arriving late at a venue whose existence I was unaware of until just a week ago, I joined a standing room only crowd to listen to the pioneering Book of Mormon archaeologist speak. The atmosphere at the Olivewood bookstore in Provo was electrifying for a student of all things FARMS like myself. There was nary a saccharine, fluff-filled book to be found on any of the shelves, in contrast to the typical fare offered at Deseret Book. Art depicting scenes from the Restoration riddled the walls and was a welcomed relief to the poor quality stuff I have been subjected to from a recently publicized antagonistic website. What caught my attention most was the very enticing Neil A. Maxwell Institute reading room.

Dr. Sorensen discussed his publication history on Book of Mormon topics, starting with articles for the Ensign and work on his landmark An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon. He explained his main research interest was in transoceanic voyages. The aged archaeologist indicated that he had one more book left in him, a magnum opus that will be called Mormon’s Codex. In it, Dr. Sorenson will defend the thesis that the Book of Mormon had to have been written by a 4rth century author.

Then after this introduction, he engaged in a lengthy Q&A session with the assembled audience. A few highlights:

When asked for some examples of what he considered to be a good correlation of the Book of Mormon text with antiquity, Dr. Sorenson mentioned military commanders who would can their troops “sons.”
Dr. Sorenson shot down the expectation coins would be found in Nephite lands as the word only appears in Orson Pratt’s chapter headings.
Dr. Sorenson explained how obsidian swords were very effective and used for a very long period of time, satisfying the Book of Mormon’s description of their use.
Dr. Sorenson identified a well photographed and very deep lake that was reconfigured during volcanic activity. He suggested some of the ruins that are being imaged under the lake are that of the city of Jerusalem.
Dr. Sorenson does not believe that Hagoth’s ships would have made it very far from a coastline, and hence he does not subscribe to the speculation about a Polynesian colony.

Much more was said than this and my meager reporting hardly does justice to the occasion. I met FAIR’s Tyler Livingston after Dr. Sorenson offered some concluding remarks and was pleased to find that he had recorded the event. See:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWVGnv7yTEI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjTz5RpBkME

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCoXk5iEf1o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNfNV52l3ho

The “Two Cumorah Theory”

Larry Poulsen — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 01:47:47 +0000

There has been much talk both in publications and on the internet about the existence of two Cumorahs with relation to the location of the Book of Mormon culture.

The following verses from the book of Ether describe the relationship between the Jaredite lands, the hill Shim and the Hill Cumorah.

To summarize:

The only seashore mentioned with respect to the Jaredite lands was eastward.
This seashore was eastward of both the Hill Shim and the Hill Cumorah
The Hill Cumorah and the Hill Ramah were where Mormon hid up all the records save those few that he gave to his son Moroni.
The Book of Mormon was translated from the plates given to Moroni and not those buried in the Hill Cumorah.
The last battle of both the Nephites and the Jaredites took place at or near the same location.

Ether 14:12–13, 26

And it came to pass that he fought with Lib, in which Lib did smite upon his arm that he was wounded; nevertheless, the army of Coriantumr did press forward upon Lib, that he fled to the borders upon the seashore. And it came to pass that Coriantumr pursued him; and Lib gave battle unto him upon the seashore. * * * And it came to pass that Shiz did pursue Coriantumr eastward, even to the borders by the seashore, and there he gave battle unto Shiz for the space of three days.

Ether 9:3

And the Lord warned Omer in a dream that he should depart out of the land; wherefore Omer departed out of the land with his family, and traveled many days, and came over and passed by the hill of Shim, and came over by the place where the Nephites were destroyed, and from thence eastward, and came to a place which was called Ablom, by the seashore, and there he pitched his tent, and also his sons and his daughters, and all his household, save it were Jared and his family.

Ether 15:11

And it came to pass that the army of Coriantumr did pitch their tents by the hill Ramah; and it was that same hill where my father Mormon did hide up the records unto the Lord, which were sacred.

The BofM only mentions one Cumorah. It was the same hill that the Jaredites called Ramah. It was located near the western seashore of a body of water large enough to be called a sea.

The Hill in New York, mistakenly named Cumorah by early Saints is south of any body of water large enough to be called a sea. It is too far west to be thought of as near the Atlantic seashore. This seashore being the only one east of Palmyra.I think we do a miss service when we talk about two Cumorahs or the “Two Cumorah theory.” This is like talking about the Two Yorks theory as an explanation of why there is a York in England and a new York in America.

Cultural Context of the Book of Mormon

Larry Poulsen — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:40:48 +0000

It never ceases to amaze me that critics insist that the Book of Mormon read like a doctoral dissertation with an extensive introduction and massive references explaining all of the details relative to the culture and environment in which the history takes place.

Brant Gardner explains something about this in his introductory chapter to volume one of “Second Witness” He references Bible scholars who point out that our modern culture is what is called a “low context environment” culture. This means that we expect the writer to explain every detail of the environment in which the story takes place. An example is the need for an extensive introduction to a doctoral dissertation with massive amounts of references and extensive explanations of what has already been done in the field. The Bible and other ancient writings, however, are written in what is classified as a “High context” environment. In this environment the reader is expected to have a broad and concrete knowledge of the common cultural context of the culture that the writer is talking about.

If, indeed, the Book of Mormon is an ancient document then one should not expect it to explain every detail of the culture and environment related to the recorded history. In fact, the lack of detail is a hallmark of an ancient document and gives further support to the historicity of the book.