I haven't posted much on here lately because apparently some people were getting offended by the very idea of Mesomania and I don't want to give offense. By now, readers here know how pervasive Mesomania is among LDS scholars and educators and what I think about that.
What prompted this post is a recent incident. After a fireside a Sister came up to tell me she had talked about the North American setting in her new ward, and the next Fast and Testimony meeting, a long-time member of the ward took the opportunity to tell the ward that the Book of Mormon took place in Mesoamerica and the idea that it took place in North America was false doctrine that should not be allowed in Church.
Some way to greet a new ward member, huh?
I hear these anecdotal stories all the time. They reflect the scholarly arrogance I've seen in the writings of many LDS scholars and educators, as I've documented over the last two years or so. I have a long list of additional examples, but I'm being nice and I don't see any point in continuing the debate because I think the question of Book of Mormon geography is moot now, anyway, as far as I'm concerned. The scholars will no doubt continue debating about what a "horse" is and what constituted a "narrow neck of land," but those semantic debates can never be resolved by relying on human reasoning alone.
That's why we have prophets and apostles, and that's why Joseph and Oliver told us where Cumorah is a long, long time ago.
Any proposed geography that doesn't include one Cumorah in New York, IMO, is false on its face.
This Sister told me she had never mentioned Book of Mormon geography again after being so publicly reprimanded, so she was very happy to come to the fireside. That's another thing I often hear. Members of the Church are relieved and happy to see how the North American setting, with one Cumorah in New York as Joseph and Oliver said, makes sense.
As I've been saying for years, I'm fine with people believing whatever they want. What I oppose is the prevailing attitude among LDS scholars and educators that:
1) censors any mention of Letter VII, the Heartland, Moroni's America, or other ideas about the North American setting (and strongly attacks these if anything does break through) and
2) refuses to give members of the Church a fair comparison between the Mesoamerican and North American theories so members can make up their own minds.
What prompted this post is a recent incident. After a fireside a Sister came up to tell me she had talked about the North American setting in her new ward, and the next Fast and Testimony meeting, a long-time member of the ward took the opportunity to tell the ward that the Book of Mormon took place in Mesoamerica and the idea that it took place in North America was false doctrine that should not be allowed in Church.
Some way to greet a new ward member, huh?
I hear these anecdotal stories all the time. They reflect the scholarly arrogance I've seen in the writings of many LDS scholars and educators, as I've documented over the last two years or so. I have a long list of additional examples, but I'm being nice and I don't see any point in continuing the debate because I think the question of Book of Mormon geography is moot now, anyway, as far as I'm concerned. The scholars will no doubt continue debating about what a "horse" is and what constituted a "narrow neck of land," but those semantic debates can never be resolved by relying on human reasoning alone.
That's why we have prophets and apostles, and that's why Joseph and Oliver told us where Cumorah is a long, long time ago.
Any proposed geography that doesn't include one Cumorah in New York, IMO, is false on its face.
This Sister told me she had never mentioned Book of Mormon geography again after being so publicly reprimanded, so she was very happy to come to the fireside. That's another thing I often hear. Members of the Church are relieved and happy to see how the North American setting, with one Cumorah in New York as Joseph and Oliver said, makes sense.
As I've been saying for years, I'm fine with people believing whatever they want. What I oppose is the prevailing attitude among LDS scholars and educators that:
1) censors any mention of Letter VII, the Heartland, Moroni's America, or other ideas about the North American setting (and strongly attacks these if anything does break through) and
2) refuses to give members of the Church a fair comparison between the Mesoamerican and North American theories so members can make up their own minds.
