The Book of Mormon

[TexanKnight]

An article by Sandra Tanner included this quote from a 1978 publication of Deseret News:

THE GEOGRAPHY OF the Book of Mormon has intrigued some readers of that volume ever since its publication. But why worry about it?

Efforts to p(name removed by moderator)oint certain places from what is written in the book are fruitless because the record does not give evidence of such locations in terms of our modern geography.

Attempts to designate certain areas as the Land Bountiful or the site of Zarahemla or the place where the Nephite city of Jerusalem sank into the sea ‘and waters have I caused to come up in the stead thereof’ can bring no definitive results. So why speculate?

To guess where Zarahemla stood can in no wise add to anyone’s faith. But to raise doubts in people’s minds about the location of the Hill Cumorah, and thus challenge the words of the prophets concerning the place where Moroni buried the records, is most certainly harmful. And who has the right to raise doubts in anyone’s mind?

Our position is to build faith, not to weaken it, and theories concerning the geography of the Book of Mormon can most certainly undermine faith if allowed to run rampant. 

Why not leave hidden the things that the Lord has hidden? If He wants the geography of the Book of Mormon revealed, He will do so through His prophet, and not through some writer who wishes to enlighten the world despite his utter lack of inspiration on the point.

SOME AUTHORS have felt ‘called upon’ to inform the world about Book of Mormon geography and have published writings giving their views. These books, however, are strictly private works and represent only their personal speculations. (Deseret News, July 29, 1978, Church News Section, p.16)  [utlm.org/onlineresources/cumorah.htm](http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources/cumorah.htm)

So your questions as to the locations of Book of Mormon events and places are not “easily answered” by those who believe the Book of Mormon, and even speculation on the subject is probably not something most Mormons want to spend time doing.

That is a silly answer and not even your own thoughts. But, at least you took the time to find someone else’s thoughts.

For a book to be claimed to be HISTORICAL it absolutely IS important to know where these places are, as IF the book is what is it claimed to be, those places should be easy to find.

As to Cumorah, the point is moot because more than one “prophet” has definitively stated that the Cumorah I have visited in NY IS the one from the Book of Mormon.

I don’t know your intent with the series of questions you posed.

My intent is to discuss. On THIS thread, it is to discuss the Book of Mormon because on e of our LDS brothers stated unequivocally that this book is THE main reason he cannot be Catholic. If a person puts THAT much stock in an alleged historical and doctrinal book, then these questions should be answered.

I prefer to be charitable

Hmmm…I suppose that is matter of opinion. I have seen many of your posts and charity is not the word that has come to mind in a lot of them. But I will give you the benefit of the doubt and say that the written word makes it hard, sometimes, to sense the intent and “charity” of the poster.

and assume you are honestly seeking answers to questions you don’t know the answers to.

I do not believe anyone knows the answers. Heck, if Bountiful were ever found, I might return to the LDS Church…

After all, the whole purpose of the Non-Catholic Religions forum is to “explore the history and beliefs of non-Catholic and non-Christian faiths, dialogue with their adherents,” and all members of this forum are expected to be willing to learn from the dialogue (“If you aren’t going to go into the discussion with the resolution that you could just possibly have your view broadened, you may as well not go into it.”).

And how does your post achieve that goal?

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=162027

I don’t see the connection between your being Catholic and whether or not you are trying to undermine someone’s faith.

Because, if my true intent was to undermine another faith, I would go to THAT faith’s board and discuss there. Instead, I am at a Catholic Board.

I’ll leave it to you to understand your own motives.

And this post meets your idea of what posting is for…how?

 

[jrtrent]

That is a silly answer and not even your own thoughts. But, at least you took the time to find someone else’s thoughts.

Your first three questions asked a person who presumably believes in the Book of Mormon, and might even be a member of that church, to speculate on the geography of Book of Mormon events and places. Not having any authority to speak for the church, I found what seems to be an authentic LDS position on such speculation. In your original post, you said you doubted that the person you addressed would respond. The information I provided might be one reason for that lack of response.

To my quoting the forum purpose that we are to “explore the history and beliefs of non-Catholic and non-Christian faiths, dialogue with their adherents,” you asked:

And how does your post achieve that goal?

By seeking out LDS information on the question of geographical speculation with respect to the Book of Mormon, I learned and shared something of the beliefs of a non-Catholic faith on a topic brought up in the original post.

Because, if my true intent was to undermine another faith, I would go to THAT faith’s board and discuss there. Instead, I am at a Catholic Board.

Runningdude suggested in an earlier post that your intent with the six questions you posed was to undermine people’s faith in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. As I said before, I don’t claim to know your motives, but I still fail to see how your being Catholic and posting on a Catholic board has anything to do with your intent with the questions you posed to McMullen.

As the Deseret News article stated, “Our position is to build faith, not to weaken it, and theories concerning the geography of the Book of Mormon can most certainly undermine faith if allowed to run rampant.” Was the lack of geographical evidence one of the issues that led you to leave the Mormon faith?

 

[TexanKnight]

Your first three questions asked a person who presumably believes in the Book of Mormon, and might even be a member of that church, to speculate on the geography of Book of Mormon events and places.

I did not ask anyone to speculate. If it is a historical book, as claimed, then the answer should be there sans speculation

Not having any authority to speak for the church, I found what seems to be an authentic LDS position on such speculation.

Except the person you found has no more authority than you to speak for the LDS Church. She is not LDS.

By seeking out LDS information on the question of geographical speculation with respect to the Book of Mormon, I learned and shared something of the beliefs of a non-Catholic faith on a topic brought up in the original post.

Ah…did you, now?

Runningdude suggested in an earlier post that your intent with the six questions you posed was to undermine people’s faith in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. As I said before, I don’t claim to know your motives, but I still fail to see how your being Catholic and posting on a Catholic board has anything to do with your intent with the questions you posed to McMullen.

I am uncertain as to my my point escapes you so. If I am on a Catholic Board, and Mormons are here posting, then my intent is to inform readers of the truth so as not to be fooled by those who post about the LDS Church, as I suspect most of the readers are Catholic. Should I intend to undermine the LDS Church, I would certainly not use a Catholic Board to accomplish that.

As the Deseret News article stated, “Our position is to build faith, not to weaken it, and theories concerning the geography of the Book of Mormon can most certainly undermine faith if allowed to run rampant.” Was the lack of geographical evidence one of the issues that led you to leave the Mormon faith?

The Deseret News, a paper to which I once subscribed, MUST take that position because they have no idea where the lands are. Trust me, if they had any clue, they would shouting from mountaintops where they are as proof to the validity of the book. Since they don;t, they MUST, then, take that position. It proves or shows nothing.

 

[jrtrent]

did not ask anyone to speculate. If it is a historical book, as claimed, then the answer should be there sans speculation . . . Except the person you found has no more authority than you to speak for the LDS Church. She is not LDS.

What I quoted were not the words of Sandra Tanner, but those of an article she referenced in the Deseret News. It is the content of that article that I consider to be authentic LDS teaching on the subject.

From my previous post: By seeking out LDS information on the question of geographical speculation with respect to the Book of Mormon, I learned and shared something of the beliefs of a non-Catholic faith on a topic brought up in the original post.

Ah…did you, now?

Yes.

I am uncertain as to my my point escapes you so. If I am on a Catholic Board, and Mormons are here posting, then my intent is to inform readers of the truth so as not to be fooled by those who post about the LDS Church, as I suspect most of the readers are Catholic.

I don’t know what McMullen posted about the LDS church, or how he was attempting to fool people, other than that it appears his belief in the Book of Mormon will keep him from being a Catholic. You didn’t provide a link to another thread, and the user name McMullen comes up as invalid in a search, so I wasn’t able to learn any more about the situation.

This may be a Catholic website, but this is also the non-Catholic religions forum. For a Mormon to say the Book of Mormon is true is no more an attempt to fool people than for a Catholic to say that the doctrinal decisions of the Magisterium are infallible. For the non-Catholic and non-Mormon, neither claim would be accepted as true, but both can be respected as being part of the faith of the person speaking.

 

[TexanKnight]

What I quoted were not the words of Sandra Tanner, but those of an article she referenced in the Deseret News. It is the content of that article that I consider to be authentic LDS teaching on the subject.

From my previous post: By seeking out LDS information on the question of geographical speculation with respect to the Book of Mormon, I learned and shared something of the beliefs of a non-Catholic faith on a topic brought up in the original post.

The Deseret News, a paper to which I once subscribed, MUST take that position because they have no idea where the lands are. Trust me, if they had any clue, they would shouting from mountaintops where they are as proof to the validity of the book. Since they don;t, they MUST, then, take that position. It proves or shows nothing.

Yes.

I am glad you think so

I don’t know what McMullen posted about the LDS church

yet you addressed it anyway. Odd.

You didn’t provide a link to another thread, and the user name McMullen comes up as invalid in a search, so I wasn’t able to learn any more about the situation.

Again, yet you addressed it without knowing the facts. Again, odd.

This may be a Catholic website, but this is also the non-Catholic religions forum.

Does not change the fact that it is a Catholic website.

For a Mormon to say the Book of Mormon is true is no more an attempt to fool people than for a Catholic to say that the doctrinal decisions of the Magisterium are infallible.

Depends on the forum. I am puzzled as to how this point escapes you. If a Mormon comes to a Catholic site and says the can;t be Catholic because the Book of Mormon is true or if a Catholic goes to a Mormon site and says the Pope is infallable, so no way he can be LDS, you might actually have a point.

But for a Mormon to come to a Catholic site and say that requires Catholics to explain how it cannot be. Just as I would expect Mormons to do that to me should I venture to an LDS site and say those things. I am hopeful you will eventually be able to understand this point.

For the non-Catholic and non-Mormon, neither claim would be accepted as true, but both can be respected as being part of the faith of the person speaking.

you seem to equate respect with not questioning or advising as to truth. That is simply unfounded.

 

[Stephen168]

So your questions as to the locations of Book of Mormon events and places are not “easily answered” by those who believe the Book of Mormon, and even speculation on the subject is probably not something most Mormons want to spend time doing.

If a Mormon spent much time thinking about these questions, it would undermine their faith. The reason it would undermine their faith is because their religion based in the Book of Mormon and the Book of Mormon is not what Joseph Smith claimed it to be, so Joseph Smith is a liar not a prophet.

Therefore it makes sense that the Mormon Church would encourage Mormons to not spend anytime thinking about these questions.

The Catholic Church encourages seeking the truth, and has been asking and answering questions for 2000 years.

 

[lax16]

The issue is you will get answers, but you won’t like them, and won’t understand how anyone can believe such nonsense. Rhetoric can be abused to mimic apologetics, and can be used used to convince anybody willing to believe that there are no logical inconsistencies.

Ironing out such inconsistencies is a monumental task; so great that God himself had to establish a whole bureaucracy to do so!

I think the issue is that rmcmullan is stating on the other thread (that several of us having been posting on for a couple of weeks now), is that the only thing keeping him from becoming Catholic is his belief that the Book of Mormon is true.

By asking these questions, TexanKnight is hoping rmcmullan will look into the answers himself and find the truth.

And yes, there is TONS of information available to prove the BoM is most likely fraudulent.
I suggest reading An Insider’s View of Mormon Origins written by former LDS teacher and historian Grant Palmer.

Once you have read the book, it is very clear that the BoM has many, many problems.

 

[TexanKnight]

If a Mormon spent much time thinking about these questions, it would undermine their faith. The reason it would undermine their faith is because their religion based in the Book of Mormon and the Book of Mormon is not what Joseph Smith claimed it to be, so Joseph Smith is a liar not a prophet.

Therefore it makes sense that the Mormon Church would encourage Mormons to not spend anytime thinking about these questions.

The Catholic Church encourages seeking the truth, and has been asking and answering questions for 2000 years.

exactly. If the book claims to be historical, then its history should be able to be proven. It can’t, so the LDS Church tells its members not to think about it.

We are proud of our history…and, in some instances, ashamed of it…but we do not shy away from it or tell our members not to think about it because we cant prove any of it

 

[lax16]

So your questions as to the locations of Book of Mormon events and places are not “easily answered” by those who believe the Book of Mormon, and even speculation on the subject is probably not something most Mormons want to spend time doing.

hi jrtrent - But the LDS church has “easily answered” the questions as to the locations of the Book of Mormon events and places, so speculation is not necessary.

It seems now they are moving away from these declarations:

“The great and last battle, in which several hundred thousand Nephites perished was on the hill Cumorah, the same hill from which the plates were taken by Joseph Smith, the boy about whom I spoke to you the other evening.” (Talk given by Apostle Orson Pratt, Feb. 11, 1872 Journal of Discourses Vol. 14, pg. 331)

“Thirty-six years prior to this time his nation was destroyed in in what we term the State of New York, around about a hill, called by that people the Hill of Cumorah, when many hundreds of thousands of the Nephites-men, women and children, fell, during the greatest battle that they had had with the Lamanites.” (Talk given by Apostle Orson Pratt, Aug. 25, 1878 Journal of Discourses Vol. 20, pg. 62)

“Finally, they became so utterly wicked, so fully ripened for destruction, that one branch of the nation, called the Nephites, gathered their entire people around the hill Cumorah, in the State of New York , in Ontario County; and the Lamanites, the opposite army, gathered by millions in the same region. The two nations were four years in gathering their forces, during which no fighting took place; but at the end of that time, having marshalled all their hosts, the fighting commenced, the Lamanites coming upon the Nephites, and destroying all of them, except a very few, who had previously deserted over to the Lamanites.” (Talk given by Apostle Orson Pratt, April 6, 1874 Journal of Discourses Vol. 17, pg. 24)

"The passages which I have quoted from the Book of Mormon and the more extended discussion of this subject by Elder B. H. Roberts which was published in The Deseret News of March 3, 1928, definitely establish the following facts: That the Hill Cumorah, and the Hill Ramah are identical; that it was around this hill that the armies of both the Jaredites and Nephites, fought their great last battles; that it was in this hill that Mormon deposited all of the sacred records which had been entrusted to his care by Ammaron, except the abridgment which he had made from the plates of Nephi, which were delivered into the hands of his’ son, Moroni. We know positively that it was in this hill that Moroni deposited the abridgment made by his father, and his own abridgment of the record of the Jaredites, and that it was from this hill that Joseph Smith obtained possession of them. " (President Anthony W. Ivins, Conference Report, April 1928-Morning Session)

“Cumorah, the artificial hill of north America, is well calculated to stand in this generation, as a monument of marvelous works and wonders. Around that mount 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. There slept the records of age after age, for hundreds of years, even until the time of the Lord.” (The Latter-day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate, Vol.2, No.2, p.221)
“The hill, which was known by one division of the ancient peoples as Cumorah, by another as Ramah, is situated near Palmyra in the State of New York .” (Apostle James E. Talmage, Articles of Faith , chapter 14)

"It must be conceded that this description fits perfectly the land of Cumorah in New York, as it has been known since the visitation of Moroni to the Prophet Joseph Smith, for the hill is in the proximity of the Great Lakes and also in the land of many rivers and fountains. Moreover, the Prophet Joseph Smith himself is on record, definitely declaring the present hill called Cumorah to be the exact hill spoken of in the Book of Mormon.

“Further, the fact that all of his associates from the beginning down have spoken of it as the identical hill where Mormon and Moroni hid the records, must carry some weight. It is difficult for a reasonable person to believe that such men as Oliver Cowdery, Brigham Young, Parley P. Pratt, Orson Pratt, David Whitmer, and many others, could speak frequently of the Spot where the Prophet Joseph Smith obtained the plates as the Hill Cumorah, and not be corrected by the Prophet, if that were not the fact. That they did speak of this hill in the days of the Prophet in this definite manner is an established record of history…” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation , Vol.3, Bookcraft, 1956, p.232-43.)

Apostle LeGrand Richards, in A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, chapter 7, also stated that Cumorah is in New York.
"Both the Nephite and Jaredite civilizations fought their final great wars of extinction at and near the Hill Cumorah (or Ramah as the Jaredites termed it), which hill is located between Palmyra and Manchester in the western part of the State of New York.

"This time it will have to do with so important a matter as a war of extinction of two peoples, the Nephites and the Jaredites, on the self same battle site, with the same ‘hill’ marking the axis of military movements. By the Nephites this ‘hill’ was called the ‘Hill Cumorah,’ by the Jaredites the ‘Hill Ramah’; it was that same ‘hill,’ in which the Nephite records were deposited by Mormon and Moroni, and from which Joseph Smith obtained the Book of Mormon, therefore the ‘Mormon Hill,’ of today—since the coming forth of the Book of Mormon—near Palmyra, New York. (B.H. Roberts, Studies of the Book of Mormon, p.277)

 

[lax16]

continued:

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
Office of the First Presidency
Salt Lake City, Utah 84150

October 16, 1990

Bishop Darrel L. Brooks
Moore Ward
Oklahoma City Oklahoma South Stake
1000 Windemere
Moore, OK 73160

Dear Bishop Brooks:

I have been asked to forward to you for acknowledgment and handling the enclosed copy of a letter to President Gordon B. Hinckley from Ronnie Sparks of your ward.  Brother Sparks inquired about the location of the Hill Cumorah mentioned in the Book of Mormon, where the last battle between the Nephites and Lamanites took place.

The Church has long maintained, as attested to by references in the writings of General Authorities, that the Hill Cumorah in western New York state is the same as referenced in the Book of Mormon.

The Brethren appreciate your assistance in responding to this inquiry, and asked that you convey to Brother Sparks their commendation for his gospel study.

Sincerely yours,
(signed)
F. Michael Watson
Secretary to the First Presidency

 

[jrtrent]

hi jrtrent - But the LDS church has “easily answered” the questions as to the locations of the Book of Mormon events and places, so speculation is not necessary.

It seems now they are moving away from these declarations:

All of those declarations concern the Hill Cumorah, which the church has long maintained they know the current location of. I don’t know of other places/events, such as the ones the OP mentioned in his first post, that have been declared as known by the church. That’s why the 1978 Deseret News article said:

Attempts to designate certain areas as the Land Bountiful or the site of Zarahemla or the place where the Nephite city of Jerusalem sank into the sea ‘and waters have I caused to come up in the stead thereof’ can bring no definitive results. So why speculate?

To guess where Zarahemla stood can in no wise add to anyone’s faith. But to raise doubts in people’s minds about the location of the Hill Cumorah, and thus challenge the words of the prophets concerning the place where Moroni buried the records, is most certainly harmful.

What’s interesting is that you say that at present, the church is backtracking on the location of the Hill Cumorah, or at least of what events may or may not have occurred there. A curious development, to say the least, and not something I’ve read about, but then, I’ve been out of the LDS church for over 20 years now. Maybe it’s time to schedule a meeting with some Mormon missionaries and get caught up to date, if they’re willing to spend time with someone who doesn’t intend to convert.

 

[jrtrent]

Guidelines for posting, "Members are not allowed to be disrespectful of anyone’s faith or religion, whether it is Catholicism or not. . . all discourse must be civil and charitable.

And yes, there is TONS of information available to prove the BoM is most likely fraudulent.
I suggest reading An Insider’s View of Mormon Origins written by former LDS teacher and historian Grant Palmer.

Once you have read the book, it is very clear that the BoM has many, many problems.

Just a personal opinion, but this reply seems civil and charitable.

the Book of Mormon is not what Joseph Smith claimed it to be, so Joseph Smith is a liar not a prophet.

And this does not.

 

[lax16]

All of those declarations concern the Hill Cumorah, which the church has long maintained they know the current location of.

Yes, you are right. There has also been claims that the battles that took place near the Hill Cumorah are actually in Central America. I used this to prove the inconsistencies in the LDS answer to this location where the battles took place.

I don’t know of other places/events, such as the ones the OP mentioned in his first post, that have been declared as known by the church. That’s why the 1978 Deseret News article said:

Attempts to designate certain areas as the Land Bountiful or the site of Zarahemla or the place where the Nephite city of Jerusalem sank into the sea ‘and waters have I caused to come up in the stead thereof’ can bring no definitive results. So why speculate?

To guess where Zarahemla stood can in no wise add to anyone’s faith. But to raise doubts in people’s minds about the location of the Hill Cumorah, and thus challenge the words of the prophets concerning the place where Moroni buried the records, is most certainly harmful.

Here is a quote from Joseph Smith:

The following article written by Joseph Smith appeared in the Times and Seasons on October 1, 1842, in Nauvoo, Illinois:

**ZARAHEMLA
Central America, or Guatimala [sic], 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:—“And now it was only the distance of a day and a half’s journey for a Nephite, on the line Bountiful, and the land Desolation, from the east to the west sea; and thus the land of Nephi, and the land of Zarahemla was nearly surrounded by water: there being a small neck of land between the land northward and the land southward.” [Alma 22:32.]
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 engraving upon it, as Mosiah said; and a ‘large round stone, with the sides sculptured in hieroglyphics,’ [such as found in Quiriguá] as Mr. Stephens has published, is also among the left remembrances of the, to him, lost and unknown. We are not agoing [sic] to declare positively that the ruins of Quiriguá are those of Zarahemla, but when the land and the stones, and the books tell the story so plain, we are of [the] 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.[4]
**

In regards to the areas mentioned by the OP, I think this is an interesting link. It may not be an official LDS Church website, but it seems to be affiliated with those teaching history/geography from the BoM: funforlesstours.com/newsletter/17/2012-02-29/

What’s interesting is that you say that at present, the church is backtracking on the location of the Hill Cumorah, or at least of what events may or may not have occurred there. A curious development, to say the least, and not something I’ve read about, but then, I’ve been out of the LDS church for over 20 years now. Maybe it’s time to schedule a meeting with some Mormon missionaries and get caught up to date, if they’re willing to spend time with someone who doesn’t intend to convert.

Yes, it is an interesting development. I think it would be very interesting if you were to point out these changes to missionaries - to explain that you were taught something different twenty years ago would certainly catch their attention!

 

[lax16]

Guidelines for posting, "Members are not allowed to be disrespectful of anyone’s faith or religion, whether it is Catholicism or not. . . all discourse must be civil and charitable.

Just a personal opinion, but this reply seems civil and charitable.

Thank you and thank you for posting this reminder. I have gotten better but I can always use friendly reminders!

 

[Stephen168]

What’s interesting is that you say that at present, the church is backtracking on the location of the Hill Cumorah, or at least of what events may or may not have occurred there.

Yes, that was the theme of the link you quoted. You only quoted the backtracking part but didn’t quoted the Mormon teaching part.

Just a personal opinion,

Yes it is.

 

[jrtrent]

Here is a quote from Joseph Smith:

Interesting site and information. There is a rebuttal to Dr. Lund’s travel promotions in an article here:

firmlds.org/feature.php?id=21

However, both sites seem to suggest that there may have been more certainty concerning the geography of Book of Mormon events and places on the part of LDS leaders in days gone by than is shown even by that 1978 article I referenced previously. Joining as a teenager, I was a member of the church for 14 years, but I don’t recall being taught or having much interest in trying to specify exactly where different Mormon events took place. Could be an interesting study to look up church teaching on the subject, and when and how such teaching may have changed over the years.

 

[TexanKnight]

All of those declarations concern the Hill Cumorah, which the church has long maintained they know the current location of. I don’t know of other places/events, such as the ones the OP mentioned in his first post, that have been declared as known by the church. That’s why the 1978 Deseret News article said:

Attempts to designate certain areas as the Land Bountiful or the site of Zarahemla or the place where the Nephite city of Jerusalem sank into the sea ‘and waters have I caused to come up in the stead thereof’ can bring no definitive results. So why speculate?

To guess where Zarahemla stood can in no wise add to anyone’s faith. But to raise doubts in people’s minds about the location of the Hill Cumorah, and thus challenge the words of the prophets concerning the place where Moroni buried the records, is most certainly harmful.

What’s interesting is that you say that at present, the church is backtracking on the location of the Hill Cumorah, or at least of what events may or may not have occurred there. A curious development, to say the least, and not something I’ve read about, but then, I’ve been out of the LDS church for over 20 years now. Maybe it’s time to schedule a meeting with some Mormon missionaries and get caught up to date, if they’re willing to spend time with someone who doesn’t intend to convert.

sigh…again as to Deseret…it is a LDS Newspaper trying to get members to forget about the importance of location because they don’t have any! If they did…they would claim it is terribly important. Why can;t you see that?

 

[TexanKnight]

Guidelines for posting, "Members are not allowed to be disrespectful of anyone’s faith or religion, whether it is Catholicism or not. . . all discourse must be civil and charitable.

Just a personal opinion, but this reply seems civil and charitable.

And this does not.

Are you saying you are judge now of what is charitable?

 

[TexanKnight]

Interesting site and information. There is a rebuttal to Dr. Lund’s travel promotions in an article here:

firmlds.org/feature.php?id=21

However, both sites seem to suggest that there may have been more certainty concerning the geography of Book of Mormon events and places on the part of LDS leaders in days gone by than is shown even by that 1978 article I referenced previously. Joining as a teenager, I was a member of the church for 14 years, but I don’t recall being taught or having much interest in trying to specify exactly where different Mormon events took place. Could be an interesting study to look up church teaching on the subject, and when and how such teaching may have changed over the years.

I am amzed that you go to LDS websites for your information. Either you have not learned that there is constant backtracking and whitewashing or you choose to ignore it. I would be curious to know which

 

[pablope]

I am amzed that you go to LDS websites for your information. Either you have not learned that there is constant backtracking and whitewashing or you choose to ignore it. I would be curious to know which

There is a member who started this thread in the Scripture section, asking about the LDS teaching of multipel gods:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=752248

Former mormon responses are indeed needed.