With my love of the United States of America and my belief that this is the Promised Land of the Book of Mormon, I participated in a dialogue last year with a staunch Meso believer. His name is Stephen O. Smoot, not to be mistaken for our great friend named Steven E. Smoot author of Lost Civilizations of North America. Most intellectual Meso believers have the same opinion of America. They don’t think the land of the USA is a land chosen by God for the gathering of Israel. They generally believe all of North and South America is that choice land.
While reading below don’t worry so much about the time listed by names as it was off on that day. All of this dialogue was on the same day and all blogs below are in order. I have left some of the Meso believers responses off, as I just wanted to focus on the comments of just Mr. Smoot so you could focus on specific ideas. You will also see Jonathan, Rod, and our friend Leslie Rees who get in on the dialogue.
My main purpose of bringing this up again after over a year is that I would like the readers of my blog to see both sides of this debate and let you make your own judgement. I have never met Mr. Stephen O. Smoot and I have no animosity against him. I am sure he is a good member of the Church and loves the Book of Mormon as much as I do.
I report, You decide. I would love to hear your responses.
Rian Nelson comments in Blue
Rod, Jonathan and Leslie in normal black text.
Stephen O. Smoot comments in Red
Jonathan Neville
July 27, 2018 at 2:47 pm | Reply
Hi Steve. One of my readers suggested I respond to your post, so here I am. Thanks for paying a little attention to a point of view and some facts that don’t confirm your bias. But you’ve merely attacked a straw man of your own creation, as I point out here:
https://interpreterpeerreviews.blogspot.com/2018/07/steve-smoot-and-letter-vii.html.
Maybe now that this is off your chest we can engage in a serious, rational discussion of the actual facts and what I’ve actually written instead of your caricature. I’ve offered to participate in such a discussion and exchange for years now, but the M2C intellectuals have refused. Instead, they rely on obfuscation, censorship and disinformation to keep their readers ignorant of what the prophets have taught about Cumorah.
The comments here by Mike, Geoff, Heber, Andrew, etc. reflect the disinformation the M2C intellectuals have disseminated. For example, I’ve never called the Church to repentance and I’ve never criticized the Brethren; to the contrary, the principal difference between “Heartland” (which I did not fully accept as it had been articulated in the past) and M2C is whether or not we believe what the prophets have taught about the New York Cumorah.
Your M2C theory is based on the premise that the prophets have misled the Church by persistently (and ignorantly) teaching that Cumorah is in New York. I disagree because I accept what the prophets have taught, which is corroborated by the text and the relevant sciences (archaeology, anthropology, geography, geology, etc.).
Most of the literature on this topic is pure confirmation bias. That’s why opponents on each side (and investigators) find it completely unpersuasive. As the comments here show, people choose sides and prefer caricatures over honest exchanges.
Another way to state the fundamental question is, which bias do you seek to confirm? My bias is that the prophets teach the truth. Your bias is that, at least with respect to the New York Cumorah, the prophets are wrong. Then we each marshal facts and logical arguments to confirm our respective biases.
My second bias is I think most members of the Church, if fully informed, would choose the prophets over the scholars. That’s why I favor full disclosure and why I encourage people to read M2C literature to see for themselves what the M2C intellectuals teach. I link to BOMC all the time, but BOMC never links to contrary views. That’s not only intellectually dishonest, but it demonstrates the weakness of the M2C position.
It’s telling that in this very blog post, you didn’t cite a single article, book, or blog post of mine. Nor did you in your BOMC Kno-why. You don’t want your readers to know what I have actually written because it’s easier to attack your straw man. Judging by the comments here, your readers also prefer confirming their biases by reading your caricature instead of what I’ve actually written.
I think the M2C intellectuals share my belief that Church members would choose the prophets over the scholars. That explains why they don’t want Church members to know what the prophets have taught and how it is consistent with the sciences.
As I said, I’ve long sought an M2C proponent who is intellectually honest enough, and self-confident enough, to engage in a serious discussion of the facts and relevant sciences. Breaking through the respective confirmation bias filters is the only way to reach unity, or at least agree to disagree on actual facts instead of caricatures. Perhaps you are now willing to undertake such a project?
BTW, for anyone interested, I have an entire blog dedicated to Letter VII, which you can see here:http://www.lettervii.com/
Stephen Smoot
July 27, 2018 at 3:41 pm | Reply
Jonathan,
You have abundantly proven that you are not somebody who can have a rational argument in good faith with an “M2C intellectual.” You have, repeatedly, demonized and belittled and cast aspersion on anybody who doesn’t accept your dogmatic interpretation of early Mormon historical sources relevant to Book of Mormon geography. This isn’t just a matter of having differences of opinion. As your blog posts have more than demonstrated, you have a personal vendetta against the “citation cartel” (which is, in reality, peer reviewed academic scholarship, as opposed to your own brand of trashy Internet pseudo-scholarship) and anybody who is out of step with your narrow and uncompromising Heartland apologetics.
I suspect I know why you are so personally angry and upset at “M2C intellectuals.” It must be very frustrating that your pseudo-scholarship which you’ve invested so much time and energy into is not making mainstream inroads in Mormon studies. It must be frustrating to be a laughingstock at the Church History Department and amongst BYU faculty. It must be frustrating that the best you can do is publish semi-coherent ramblings on obscure personal blogs or with no-name presses. But just know that it isn’t anything personal: it’s because both your Mormon history and your Book of Mormon geography are nonsense and you’re a deeply unpleasant person to interact with..
I don’t know why you have chosen to become such a fanatic over this one issue, but I will say that it is genuinely sad that your testimony is so fragile that even the slightest contradiction of your pet theory causes your cognitive dissonance to flair up like lights on a Christmas tree.
I am content with what I wrote in my post and in the KnoWhy, and I’ll allow readers to decide for themselves which explanation they find more persuasive. I will not, however, waste further time or attention on your shenanigans. Like I said, since you refuse to engage people who disagree with you in good faith, and since you’re a close-minded fanatic, it would be utterly pointless for me to engage you any further.
I will just say this one thing: for all of your self-righteous preening about how you accept the apostles and the prophets, and how “M2C intellectuals” are subversive apostates, it is breathtakingly hypocritical for you to lambast the Church History Department and BYU faculty and Seminaries & Institutes faculty for not kowtowing to your theories, since all of them are ultimately hired by the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve. It is astoundingly hypocritical for you to criticize the “Correlation Department” of the Church, which approves “M2C” artwork and videos and articles in Church publications, when, again, the First Presidency and the Twelve are a part of Correlation. It is monstrously hypocritical of you to accuse Saints of being “revisionist history” attempting to deceive people about Book of Mormon geography when Saints has been authorized, reviewed, and approved by the First Presidency and the Twelve.
So please, Jonathan, spare us all the self-righteous BS about how “M2C intellectuals” are trying to get people to disbelieve the prophets and apostles.
Because guess what: as long as you keep doing what you’re doing, you are, in fact, doing the exact same thing. As long as you keep screaming about “M2C intellectuals” ruining the Church, you’re actually telling people to disbelieve the modern prophets and apostles who keep hiring them to work for the Church and guide the Church’s membership in intellectual and historical matters.
“Physician, heal thyself!”
Rian Nelson
July 27, 2018 at 10:00 pm | Reply
Hi Steve. I am current friends of Rod Meldrum and Jonathan Neville. I have only been following them for a few years now and I find they make so much sense. I have studied the Mesoamerican theory all my life and loved it very much. I was fascinated with the pyramids and all the discoveries in Central America. Recently however I feel strongly in one very import aspect. With all the information in the Book of Mormon talking about the Promised Land I feel strongly that is speaking about our Constitution and the Unites States of America. That doesn’t mean we are better than any other country, but we have made a covenant with the Lord to share the gospel and if we don’t we will be punished greater than anyone in other countries who don’t share the gospel. With our covenant we have been richly blessed but with that blessing comes stronger curses if we fail in our promise with the Lord.
Please share with me why it seems so many people deride Rod and Jonathan and say they are as you describe, “so-called Heartland model for the geography of the Book of Mormon is built on a foundation of fraud. Fraudulent artifacts, fraudulent science, fraudulent theology, and fraudulent history secured in place by racist ethno-nationalism are the four cornerstones of Heartlanderism.” I am especially troubled how you say they are racist for expressing their belief that this Unites States of America is an exceptional nation and we are under a covenant with God unlike any other nation in the world. I interpret this as being under a covenant like the Jews of the Land of Israel were and still are. The Jews rejected Christ so they were smitten and scattered, but the Land of Israel has and will always be a promised land, just like the USA is and will always be a Promised Land. Just because Libya and Jordan are connected to Israel doesn’t mean they are part of that covenant land. It doesn’t matter what race or color we are, it is those that live in the USA and join that banner of freedom that this covenant is with all. There is no special covenant with any other country except Israel. Of course, God loves us all equally, but we are allowed here in the USA to survive only as we are righteous.
Please address where you think I am wrong about this great nation the USA. I also believe that Adam-Ondi-Ahman by revelation was in Missouri and by revelation the New Jerusalem will be in Missouri, this is a sacred land. None of those sacred events are talked about in Mesoamerica. I served a mission in Fiji and love them as my own, but by no means do I feel they live in “THEE” promised land spoken of in the Book of Mormon, but I know God loves them as much as He loves me. They live in a most beautiful land, but it wasn’t a land set apart for the preaching of the gospel and the establishment of the Church. I love Pres Nelson’s talk before he was a prophet that says,
“The Book of Mormon reveals that Joseph, the son of Jacob who was once sold into Egypt, foresaw the Prophet Joseph Smith and his day and noted that there would be many similarities in their lives. Centuries later, the Prophet Joseph stated, “I feel like Joseph in Egypt.” The Book of Mormon reveals that the inheritance of Joseph, son of Israel, was not forgotten when land was distributed to the tribes of Israel, as promised in the Abrahamic covenant. Joseph’s inheritance was to be a land choice above all others. It was choice not because of beauty or wealth of natural resources, but choice because it was chosen to be the repository of sacred writings on golden plates from which the Book of Mormon would one day come. It was choice because it would eventually host the world headquarters of the restored Church of Jesus Christ in the latter days. And it was choice because it is a land of liberty for those who worship the Lord and keep His commandments.” The Book of Mormon: A Miraculous Miracle President Russell M. Nelson President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles June 23, 2016
For these reasons I don’t believe Mesoamerica is “THEE” Promised Land and I don’t believe there could be a second hill Cumorah somewhere other than in up-state New York. I would appreciate your comments.
Stephen O. Smoot
July 27, 2018 at 10:38 pm | Reply
Rian,
“Please share with me why it seems so many people deride Rod and Jonathan and say they are as you describe, “so-called Heartland model for the geography of the Book of Mormon is built on a foundation of fraud. Fraudulent artifacts, fraudulent science, fraudulent theology, and fraudulent history secured in place by racist ethno-nationalism are the four cornerstones of Heartlanderism.””
The sources cited in footnote 1 make this abundantly clear.
At several points Heartlanders like Meldrum have been refuted by mainstream LDS scholars. On DNA. On geography. On early Mormon history. On the authenticity of artifacts they (especially Meldrum) use as evidence for the Heartland. Again and again. And again and again they refuse to consider that the criticism they encounter is valid. They stop their ears and close their eyes and act as if nothing ever happened.
Heartlanderism is fraudulent. That’s a criticism I’ll publicly stand by and make until I see Meldrum discontinue his use of pseudo-science and forgeries.
“I am especially troubled how you say they are racist for expressing their belief that this Unites States of America is an exceptional nation and we are under a covenant with God unlike any other nation in the world.”
It’s more than that. Heartlanders have said countries like Mexico or Guatemala positively cannot be the land of promise because they’re full of crime and corruption. I’ve heard this with my own two ears from Heartlanders. “How could a country like Mexico possibly be the land of promise with all the problems going on with it?”
The implicit (and sometimes explicit) conclusion is that those countries full of criminals (brown people) aren’t good enough to be the land of promise, unlike the good ole’ US of A (at least when it’s not being run by a secret Kenyan communist like Obama).
“Please address where you think I am wrong about this great nation the USA.”
I don’t have to do that. Just go ahead and read what Joseph Smith and Brigham Young had to say about the “great” USA in the Council of Fifty minutes.
But okay. I’ll say something.
You’re conflating the arbitrary and imaginary political borders drawn on maps by corrupt and powerful Gentiles with guns with the soil of the American continent. Church leaders since Joseph Smith have made it abundantly clear that all of North and South America are a part of the land of promise. Yes, the physical “center place” of Zion is to be what is now Jackson County, Missouri. But it was the foretold New Jerusalem before the US acquired Missouri from the French in 1803, and will be after the United States, like the other kingdoms of this earth, have been smashed to pieces with the ascendency of the Kingdom of God upon Christ’s return.
It just so happens that the political state which controls the land prophesied as the New Jerusalem is the United States. But before that it was France. And before that, Spain. And before that, it belonged to indigenous Indian peoples. Why is it that somehow it’s the US that has special, divine privilege, and none of these other nations?
I’m well aware, and believe, that the Lord was behind the founding of the United States as a means to the end of establishing Zion, the Kingdom of God, and as means to the end of creating an environment in which the Restoration of the gospel could come to pass. But I do not believe that the Lord was behind the founding of the United States as an end to itself.
My point is you (like other Heartlanders) are saying the geo-political entity the United States of America has a special covenant or destiny. I reject those claims as misunderstanding the prophecies in the Book of Mormon and the teachings of Joseph Smith and other prophets, who affirm the entire continent of America (North and South) is under the covenant of which you speak, not just the United States.
Hence my mentioning the racist ethno-nationalism of Heartlanderism, which mistakenly gives divine credence to the United States and its predominantly white leaders and population at the expense of the remnant of the house of Israel found scattered throughout Lehi’s seed in all of North and South America.
That’s just the start of my many problems with Heartlanderism.
Jonathan Neville’s Reply:
July 28, 2018 at 5:18 am | Reply
Now that you brought up your “racist, ethno-nationalism” meme, I’ve addressed it with interlinear comments here:
http://interpreterpeerreviews.blogspot.com/2018/07/steve-smoot-fights-straw-men.html
Rod Meldrum
July 28, 2018 at 1:22 am | Reply
Hi Steve,
Wow, I’m somewhat taken aback by the boldness in which you proclaim your views as established fact. I find it interesting to learn from you how the Heartland model was built, rather than my own personal experience.
From my experience, the Heartland model geography was built upon looking for an answer to the dna questions being thrust upon the church due to the complete lack of any genetic evidence in Mesoamerica for any Hebrew population(s). After finding mainstream journal articles stating that a new Haplotype (Haplogroup X) had been found among Native American populations, and the same markers being found in many Jewish populations including the Ashkenazi and Shepardic Jews, the Druze of Israel and others I felt that other members and scholars would like to know and pursue it. To my dismay, because the Native American populations having these markers weren’t found in Mesoamerica, but rather amongst the Algonquian populations to which the Lord through Joseph Smith send the first missionaries (see D&C 28, 30 and 32) I was attacked personally and my referenced main-stream peer-reviewed based research as well. The primary difficulty was (and is) the dating of the arrival time of the Haplogroup X dna type, which originally was said to have happened 40,000 years ago, then revised to about 25,000 years ago and more recently to about 13,000 years ago, all based on the underlying genetic assumption that humans evolved from apes 5-6 million years ago. For more info download the free PDF 160+ page book, ReDiscovering the Book of Mormon Remnant through DNA at http://www.bookofmormonevidence.org.
Based on what I understand the scriptures, prophets and apostles to have written and spoken regarding our coming from Adam and Eve rather than lower life forms, I seriously question the validity of the genetic dating which is founded upon that assumption. I found that if the observed rate of dna change is utilized, rather than the theoretical dating methods, that it places the arrival of Haplogroup X to America consistant with the Book of Mormon account. Unfortunately, geneticist Ugo Perego, an unabashed believer in the humans from apes evolutionary theories (he was a featured speaker at the Mormon Transhumanist Association Conference in 2012 in which he openly and proudly proclaimed his evolutionary beliefs see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ilin4lt0nQwherein at 9:45 he states “We believe as scientists that about 6 million years ago there was a common ancestor to apes and humans” and that humans descended from Eukaryotic cells 3.2 billion years ago at 28:50). So if you, like Ugo accept that you came from apes and slime, then it makes it easier to accept the dating derived from that viewpoint. I don’t accept that, so you call me a scientific fraud. If accepting the words of the scriptures and prophets puts me at odds with science that tells me my ancestry derives from apes and slime, I’m going with the scriptures and prophets, even if others, like yourself, declare me a fraud. Those reading this blog can decide for themselves which they prefer to believe in. But I’m not the one calling names.
After discovering what Joseph Smith said in many instances and the complete lack of anything authoritative from Joseph regarding Mesoamerica, and putting that up against the revelations Joseph claimed regarding the first missionaries, his vision on Zelph’s mound, his discussions with North American Indians proclaiming the book to be their history, etc. I realized that there is not a single solitary historical instance that can be authenticated by official church history, in which Joseph indicated anything other than North America as the lands of the Book of Mormon.
After this, I began researching the ancient civilizations that once existed in North America and using non-LDS, mainstream archaeology and the dating of these civilizations, found them to fall within the proper time-frames as outlined in the Book of Mormon, along with many evidences that correlate well with it. This lead to finding many artifacts that remain controversial because of their having Hebrew writing, which mainstream archaeology does not yet accept for various reasons we’ve discussed at length in other articles and books. That there has been a deliberate attempt to hide certain aspects of this ancient history can be demonstrated.
I have no idea what ‘fraudulent theology” you are refering to, so I can’t address that, but calling us racists reminds me of the hue and cry of progressives against conservatives in our national political scene. I guess there are enough duped Mesoamerican advocates who will believe such dribble on its face, but the vast majority of church members, like those of a more conservative viewpoint, see your name calling and rants as the sure sign of an attempt to defend the indefensible, so you have to resort to name calling and personal attacks to try to convince the uninformed to believe you without question and without looking into it for themselves. Unfortunately, this has been the mantra of the ‘citation cartel’ of which you are a part. This is not peer review, but rather a group of back-slapping buddies backing each other up no matter how bad the research. Real peer review requires opposing points of view to be given a chance to respond, to corroborate and be heard. The Mesoamerica theory proponents have consistently done just the opposite. They deliberately hide the things that undermine their promotion and they don’t allow critical review, which is why Jonathan and I and others have had to use our own blogs and websites to address the citation cartels allegations.
Stephen Smoot
July 28, 2018 at 3:37 am | Reply
Rod,
I have been following your movement since you began it back around 2006 or 2007 (as I recall). In fact, you and I have met. I sat down with you, my father Stephen Smoot, and Richard Holzapfel in Richard’s living room in Provo and listened to you personally present your case for the Heartland model.
At the time I was 16 and was initially impressed with what I saw. But then over time I began to see the cracks, and then I witnessed your enterprise crumble under the weight of its own unsustainability.
I see from your comments here that you have doubled down on each of my categories: fraudulent science (young earth creationism and evolution denialism), fraudulent history (a misuse of the Zelph incident and other statements from Joseph Smith), fraudulent archaeology (the forgeries you rely on to make your case for Hebrew in pre-Columbian North America), and fraudulent theology (your American exceptionalism and the promotion of Tim Ballard’s “American covenant” doctrine).
You are, of course, free to persist in your errors. But as long as you do, you will be met with opposition by those such as myself and others who take the Book of Mormon too seriously to let your fraudulent claims go uncontested in the public square.
I will merely ask you this question: if you are, in fact, someone who accepts the words of the prophets, as you claim to be, then do you accept the words of the modern prophets who supervised the publication of these words?
“Much as critics and defenders of the Book of Mormon would like to use DNA studies to support their views, the evidence is simply inconclusive. Nothing is known about the DNA of Book of Mormon peoples. Even if such information were known, processes such as population bottleneck, genetic drift, and post-Columbian immigration from West Eurasia make it unlikely that their DNA could be detected today.”
https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-mormon-and-dna-studies?lang=eng
Leslie Rees
July 28, 2018 at 2:47 am | Reply
Sorry to just now respond to this- I’ve been helping care for 6 very active young grandsons today.
Stephen, I realize it is probably foolish for me to continue this conversation, because neither of us will convince the other. But I will just point out a few things to explain why I feel the “Heartland” model is right. I realize “this continent” would have included Mesoamerica- but don’t feel as comfortable with asserting “this country” includes them. I would say we are different countries. And Pres. Benson definitely said “this nation.”
Also, the Book of Mormon clearly states in 3 Nephi 21 that in the day the record we now have as the Book of Mormon was taken to Lehi’s descendants, the work of gathering would begin among all the scattered tribes of Israel. Missionary work. And it was to the Native American Indians in the Heartland and New York to whom Joseph first sent missionaries. Then the work spread out to the rest of the world. (D&C 28:8-9,14; 30:5-6; 32:2; 54:8;557:4 ) Missionaries were not sent to Mexico until 1875, and it was 1941 before missionaries were assigned to Central America.
I have read some- but not all- of the footnotes you cited. As for the DNA article by Perego, it was published in 2010. I found the article published in National Geographic and a number of other magazines in 2013 about the Native Americans more interesting., They pointed out the “new discovery” that about a third of those native people, primarily those coming from the region around the Great Lakes, carry the DNA of Western Eurasians. As for the Bernhisel letter, even the Church Historian’s Office admit they don’t know who wrote that letter- even though the name Joseph Smith is signed. They say it was definitely not his handwriting. And the letter was written a few short days after he received the 600 pages, two-volume travel books. Joseph was NOT known as a fast reader! And was very busy at that time. He did not write that.
I won’t take time to go through the problems I found with some of the other footnoted articles. Just would point out a few things that really struck me. Ancient Meso temples are filled with altars of stone- covered in carvings The Lehites lived the Law of Moses until the Savior came- which specified altars had to be made of completely uncut stones. (Deu. 27:5-6, Exo. 20:25) Altars in those Meso temples are reached by a series of step/stairs. Exodus 20:26 forbade that, calling for ramps. This doesn’t even get into the animals–like sheep- NEVER found in ancient Meso sites- but now found in digs in the New York area. Where did the Lamanites get all those dyed-in-blood sheepskins? How could they practice the Law of Moses without lambs for sacrifice? There are many other animals and plants mentioned in the Book that have never yet been found in Mesoamerica, but have been in the Heartland of America.
Stephen I’m a old lady, a great-grandmother, but I have been seriously studying and learning all I could about the Book of Mormon since I was 13. I appreciate greatly the work of Jonathan Neville and others, but long before I read their work I gained a personal conviction of not only the truth of the Book of Mormon, but it’s importance in understanding the mission given the “promised land which is choice above other lands.” The place where freedom was to be established so the Gospel could be restored.
Do I think that means none of the rest of North America is a covenant or promised land? No. I have no problem believing it is also a wonderful and special land with wonderful people. I believe the descendants of those people whose history we find in the Book of Mormon have spread over both North and south America. But I think it is obvious that only in the United States were conditions brought about to allow a restoration of the Gospel. And it was Pres. Benson who said the US. is: “the place where Adam dwelt; . . . the place where the Garden of Eden was located. It was here that Adam met with a body of great high priests at Adam-ondi-Ahman shortly before his death and gave them his final blessing, and the place to which he will return to meet with the leaders of his people. This was the place of three former civilizations: Adam’s, the Jaredite, and the Nephite. This was also the place where our Heavenly Father and his Son, Jesus Christ, appeared to Joseph Smith inaugurating this great and last dispensation.
“The Lord has also decreed that this land should be ‘the place of the New Jerusalem, which should come down out of heaven” He went on to say all this was part of OUR NATION’S history and destiny. I find it very offensive that you would call this ethno-nationalism, implying racist. So it’s racist to believe Native Americans are the descendants of Lehi and responsible for the incredible mound cities and other great structures which once stood on this land?
And Mike Parker, I do assume that Joseph knew where the Hill Cumorah of the Book of Mormon was located. He spent many hours with Moroni learning even about the clothing and means of travel for those people. Do you honestly believe he didn’t ask where those momentous events took place? I give him much more credit than that! And when Oliver wrote his 8 letters, he was the Assistant President of the Church, second only to Joseph in authority. He did say that Joseph’s help in writing them was “indispensable” and added, “we therefore ask the forbearance of our readers, assuring them that it shall be founded upon facts.”
Joseph did see Letter VII published several times in different Church Publications, and did ask scribes to hand copy the letters into his own personal history. Pretty sure he would have spotted as big a “mistake” as describing the place of the final great battles of two great nations in the wrong location! Or maybe I just have more faith in his intelligence and perception than some others. “None of this denies that Oliver’s letters were influential, or even that Joseph Smith may have been influenced by them But, ”Joseph was influenced by Oliver to believe the last battles took place near the NY Hill Cumorah”?? Give me a break!
And Tim, I have read through many of Jonathan Neville’s blogs. I have also spent a lot of time with him, and I wouldn’t change a thing I’ve said about his character or his honesty or his desire to have some honest discourse on all this with scholars who refuse to allow that to happen. True scholars wouldn’t avoid this just because they felt he had insulted them.
I’m well aware my words will not make a whit of difference to those who have made up their minds that Mesoamerica is the site of Hill Cumorah. (Jonathan Neville, though offering places he thinks fit well with many B of M cities, has only insisted on one actual site- the one Letter VII describes in New York, and that has been reaffirmed as true by one Prophet after another. Interesting that even Orson Pratt- the one Apostle who seemed to give several speeches placing some of the history of the Book in Central and South America, nevertheless ALWAYS insisted that the final battles took place near the Hill Cumorah in New York! (And yes I do believe some of them are speaking as a result of revelation on that subject. None of them said “maybe.”) But the only reason I kept this going was in the hope that some readers will honestly consider all Joseph himself said, the account Pres. Cowdery gave with “help from Joseph Smith,” the testimony Brigham Young bore shortly before his death about several of early brethren actually entering a room in the hill where the records and sword of Laban were, at that time, kept, and the testimony of many other Prophets and Apostles on the Hill’s location and history..
Stephen Smoot
July 28, 2018 at 4:25 am | Reply
Take your time, Leslie. No rush. My blog will be around for a while (hopefully).
Much of what you say here is a reiteration of points already addressed in the body of my post, or in the KnoWhy. I will therefore simply direct readers’ attention to such to judge for themselves whether your claims have any merit.
You are probably correct that we are not going to convince each other. I do, however, want to go on the record as pointing out the following:
- The authorship of the Bernhisel Letter, like the Times and Seasons editorials in mid-1842 while Joseph Smith was editor affirming a Mesoamerican setting for the Book of Mormon, really isn’t in dispute. The Joseph Smith Papers includes it among Joseph’s documentary record. By any reasonable standard it is a Joseph Smith document: http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/letter-to-john-m-bernhisel-16-november-1841/1
Frankly, attempts by Meldrum and Neville to make it not be a JS document is little more than obfuscation employed out of necessity to save a failing theory.
- The timing and sequence of LDS missionary work to certain groups of Native Americans is irrelevant. There is nothing special about the fact that the Book of Mormon went first to the group of Native Americans closest to earliest Mormon missionaries. This idea, in fact, even contradicts the teachings of scores of prophets and apostles, starting with Joseph Smith, who have affirmed that Lehi’s remnant is found throughout the peoples of North and South America.
- The DNA studies you mention from post-2013 are inadmissible as evidence for the Book of Mormon, as discussed by Ugo Perego in a study published in 2015:
I’m sorry, I really am, but contrary to Heartlander claims, DNA does not prove that modern North American Indian tribes are descendants from Hebrews.
- Claims about Mesoamerica not fulfilling certain requirements of the Law of Moses are overplayed. On the issue of the animals you specifically mention, for instance, see Miller and Roper (2017): 156–159.
- Your arguments about the United States being the “land above all other lands” and therefore Book of Mormon lands have been addressed by Roper in footnote 1. See for instance here: https://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1467&index=4
The rest of your points about Oliver Cowdery’s letters (including Joseph Smith’s participation in composing them and their republication) have been addressed already in the body of my blog post. I find you merely repeating the original arguments I refuted in my blog post unconvincing.
You’re perfectly free to personally believe early Church leaders were speaking from revelation on BoM geography. Just as I am free to believe that they weren’t. But you’re begging the question by using such as evidence that Heartlanderism is therefore true.
Finally, I would wager dollars to donuts that the reason Jonathan Neville is so nice and pleasant towards you is because you agree with him and are cordial to his theories. I would implore you, for just one minute, to put yourself in my shoes and the shoes of my friends and associates (like Neal Rappleye, Matt Roper, and John W. Welch, and others) whom Neville has incessantly mocked and derided with the most mean-spirited, condescending, snide, and self-righteous words I have yet to see from a Heartlander.
So, forgive me, Leslie, but I simply don’t buy it. The evidence is there for all to see: despite his pretended feelings of goodwill and respect towards “M2C intellectuals,” Neville is, deep down, a spiteful and vindictive and unpleasant fellow.
Thank you for your comments on my blog, and keep up your study of the Book of Mormon!
p.s. expect a KnoWhy in the near future on the Hill Cumorah, including the phenomenon known today as “Cumorah’s Cave.”
Rian Nelson
July 28, 2018 at 5:03 am | Reply
I think it has become easy for Mesoamerican theorists and Hearlander theorists to simply speak on blogs and dismiss each other as frauds without having to debate each other one on one. I think it would be awesome for Steve and Jonathan to have such a debate so whoever comes can evaluate both sides. I think Jonathan could invite Rod Meldrum and Steve could invite whomever he would like. If Steve and Jonathan agree I would love to set that up. Please Steve and Jonathan email me at [email protected] and I will get both schedules and I think it would be fun. I assume both of you are faithful members of the Church and love challenges. Understand I am friends with Jonathan and I have never met Steve, but as I have said on this blog I believed the Mesoamerican theory for over 40 years and over the past few years have been intrigued with the Heartland theory and think it has merit. Even if we have the debate in front of only 5 or 6 of each of your friends, I would pay to see it happen. Why? Because I would love to see both of you go at it as two fellow saints who love the Book of Mormon. Im very serious. I will pay each of you $200 to make this happen. It would be very insightful if both of you would take the challenge and if not why not? The only thing I ask is that there will be no name calling and allow me to ask 3 or 4 questions of each of you. Please email me to let me know your schedule for the next two weeks and I will get a mutual time and place to make this happen. I am up late and would love to have your responses tonight if possible.
Stephen Smoot
July 28, 2018 at 5:14 am | Reply
I respectfully decline your invitation.
Neville is free to write obsessive blog posts about me and other “M2C intellectuals” as long as he pleases. But I will not grant him any more credibility than he deserves by sharing a stage with him.
(As it is I only wrote this blog post because I had suffered his calumnies for long enough before I felt it necessary to go on the public record.)
Stephen Smoot
July 28, 2018 at 4:37 pm | Reply
Leslie,
Mike has already summarized why I am not inclined to publicly debate Neville.
It is not out of fear or insecurity that the Mesoamerican theory cannot be defended.
It is because, frankly, I don’t feel like wrestling in the mud with a conspiracy-monger.
I feel like I have demonstrated the correctness of my views on my blog and in my published writings, and stand by what I have written. I would thus turn interested persons’ attention thereto.
Please share with me your opinion. I think it is important we seek to understand each other. No judgement, just understanding. If you would like to read the entire blog by Stephen O. Smoot, it is here!
