The Mopologists' War with the Heartlanders is Heating Up

[_Lemmie]

Maybe they can't post in the Interpreter because statements like below could also be applied to the Dales' Mesoamerican conclusions:

Thus, the self-proclaimed purpose of the AEBOM is to vindicate the Heartland theory and thereby establish the historicity and divinity of the Book of Mormon.

Astonishingly, the editors of the AEBOM deny any intention to “establish a specific geography” for the Book of Mormon (x). However, pages of annotations, images, maps, and commentary make this claim impossible to believe.

It is plainly obvious that the ultimate goal of the AEBOM is to demonstrate the Book of Mormon is a pre-Columbian record of North America’s “heartland.”

Just like it is plainly obvious that the ultimate goal of the Dales' paper to demonstrate the Book of Mormon is a:

"*factual, historical document according to the cumulative, relevant evidence summarized in The Maya..."
[*Bruce Dale]

[_honorentheos]

While John Sorenson’s Mesoamerican model remains the favored theory for most credentialed scholars writing on Book of Mormon historicity and geography,3...

I anticipated footnote 3 would offer some backup for the claim that preceded it. Instead it is a citation for Sorenson's book.

I guess I'll continue to wonder about the breakdown of so-called credentialed scholars who happen to write on Book of Mormon historicity and geography.

[_Markk]

Young Rappleye and young Smoot are at it again, waging war with the Heartlanders.

https://www.plonialmonimormon.com/2019/ ... art-1.html

I an just getting into this “war”....but did the Mopologists actually try to have this book banned at Deseret Books? They are really out of touch and it show how Un-relavant they are with the folks.

From: The Annotated Book of Mormon Editors Team;

It has been with keen interest that the editors of the Annotated Edition of the Book of Mormon have watched the non-stop litany of attacks frantically being hurled at the Heartland Geographic theory over the past few years and now the latest target found worthy of the heavy artillery is the Annotated Edition of the Book of Mormon. While this type of response is not surprising, we are, at times taken aback by the strident language employed by our fellow Elders in the Gospel. Be that as it may, we appreciate the amount of work they have undertaken to bring our work to the attention of the public. Joseph Smith once commented: “… yet men of high standing would take notice sufficient to excite the public mind against me” (JSH 1:22). In saying this, we do not mean to suggest that our small editorial project is anything on the order of what Joseph was called upon to do, but the comparison is worth noting.

As brother Smoot correctly points out in his introduction, our book has seen very brisk sales since the arrival of the first 5,000 copies on Sept 22nd 2018, which sold out in less than two weeks. The second printing arrived just prior to Christmas, and those sales have continued to surge despite the protracted efforts by brother Smoot and his colleagues to have it banned from Deseret Book and then failing that, throwing everything shy of the kitchen sink at it.

Despite those efforts, positive reviews in the form of e-mail, on-line postings, in-person comments and phone calls to the publisher come in on an almost daily basis. Many of the book’s most ardent supporters hail from the highest ranks of Church leadership. While it would be tempting to list them by name, suffice it to say that everyone reading this blog would easily recognize their names. Also among the book’s most loyal supporters are many of the less-well-known but equally salt-of-the-earth rank-and-file leadership, such as a wide swath of current and former mission presidents, stake presidents, temple presidents, Bishops, CES and Institute people, as well as many ordinary run-of-the-mill Church members. While it is true, the mere acceptance and readership by leaders and lay-people is not in itself a validation of all the claims found in the book, it is an indication that the Spirit has not raised red-flags of concern for these doctrinally-proven and time-tested Latter-day Saint leaders and members is worthy of note.

In his introduction, brother Smoot seems to take exception to one particular aspect of the book’s introductory remarks. He says the following:

Astonishingly, the editors of the AEBOM deny any intention to “establish a specific geography” for the Book of Mormon (x). However, pages of annotations, images, maps, and commentary make this claim impossible to believe. It is plainly obvious that the ultimate goal of the AEBOM is to demonstrate the Book of Mormon is a pre-Columbian record of North America’s “heartland.”

To this we reply, yes, we do include several “suggested” locations for possible geographic settings, but we do not attempt to “establish” a specific geography for every city, land feature, body of water, etc. mentioned in the Book of Mormon. What we do instead is attempt to establish one unassailable “pin-in-the-map.” One place where the Book of Mormon narrative and Church history actually come together. It is our belief that if one common point can be established somewhere in the western Hemisphere, a point that is irrefutable and irreducible, then it might be possible, from that one pin, to begin to earnestly try to discover and map other possible geographic verities. Without at least one point that is fixed and verifiable, we do not think it is possible to ever establish any kind of real world placement for the events described in the Book of Mormon.

So to be clear, the text in the introduction on page to which brother Smoot is referring (page x) actually reads:

“The intent is not to establish a comprehensive geography. Apart from the location of the Hill Cumorah in New York, leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as well as leaders of other denominations that accept the Book of Mormon as scripture, have declined to correlate Book of Mormon sites with modern locations. It is left to individuals to do their own research and reach their own conclusions. In 1929, Anthony W. Ivins, counselor in the First Presidency, added, “There has never been anything yet set forth that definitely settles that question [of overall Book of Mormon geography]…We are just waiting until we discover the truth” – Conference Report [April 1929], 16.”

We agree with President Ivins on this point, that for the overall detail geography and mapping of the Book of Mormon there is nothing that definitively settles that question. And we acknowledge that fact in that statement. However, we also agree with President Ivins, when he says in the next quote (which follows the above paragraph on page x also).

“Regarding the Hill Cumorah, however, Church leaders have consistently taught the New York setting. President Ivins himself made this distinction when he discussed the location of Cumorah in General Conference in April 1928, shortly after the Church had purchased the Hill Cumorah near Palmyra, NY. “It was here that two once-powerful nations were exterminated so far as their national existence was concerned. It was here that these nations gathered together for the last great struggles…all of the sacred records of the Nephite people, were deposited by Mormon in that hill.” (Improvement Era [June 1928]; see also “Celebration of the Purchase of the Hill Cumorah,” p. 442.)”

President Nelson has said that it has long been his practice to place a period or exclamation point rather than a question mark after the words of prophets. As editors of the Annotated Book of Mormon we have sought to follow his lead in that respect. Therefore, by placing an exclamation point rather than a question mark after President Ivin’s statement along with the many other Apostolic statements and their respective exclamation points which are referenced on pages x-xiii it is quite impossible (for us) to separate the actual Book of Mormon Cumorah from the New York Cumorah which was identified by Joseph Smith by name as early as 1827 (even before he received and translated the plates).

We look forward to the future installments from our good friends at Book of Mormon Central. They have done an admirable job of peer-review and constructive criticism of our work, for which we are grateful. Peer review is a proven and effective means of improving research findings and documentation, citations, etc. This excellent criticism is being taken into account by all of the editors on this project and serves as a gauge by which we measure our accuracy and academic compliance. One of the nice things about rapid book sales is the opportunity it affords us to issue newly printed editions that will feature many amendments, corrections, enhancements, improvements and overall enrichment of our research and its supporting data (which we are finding in abundance).

As the time for our third printing of 10,000 more copies draws near, we have to say that the release of this critical peer-review is indeed very timely. Perhaps it may be said that we are guilty of not expressing our sincere appreciation for the hours and hours of counter-intelligence being conducted in behalf of our publication by our colleagues at Book of Mormon Central, and so to that we unitedly declare: Thank you! Thank you and thank you again!

Sincerely,

The Annotated Book of Mormon Editors Team

Dear Annotated Book of Mormon Editors Team,

How would you respond to those that claim that your editors/team and their findings lack academic credentials? (Elder Ballard and Elder Cook recently stressed the importance of academic creditability. See references below.)

Also, if faithful Latter-day Saints believe in two Cumorah’s, would you consider them placing question marks on prophetic statements instead of exclamation marks?

Thank you for addressing this important issue.

Best,
Mike R. Harris
Utah Valley Institute of Religion, Instructor

Elder Ballard see https://speeches.BYU.edu/talks/m-russel ... d-answers/
Elder Cook see https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/bro ... k?lang=eng

[_moksha]

https://www.plonialmonimormon.com/2019/06/a-review-of-the-annotated-edition-of-the-book-of-mormon-part-1.html

Young Hugh Nibley in Temple apron facing the remains of Elder
General Orin A. Zelph, First Quorum of Skeletal Warriors

[_Doctor Scratch]

Yes, Mark: you are very right. This is starting to get *exceptionally* nasty. First, you sort of have to admire the thoroughness with which the Heartlanders are rubbing the Mopologists face in it: a third printing, with 10,000 additional copies on deck? How many copies did Shaken Faith Syndrome sell? (And that was not even a "fully approved" er, um, "peer reviewed" effort! Which is to say: it wasn't the product of Interpreter's press.) What is the best-selling Mopologetic book? And can the Mopologists boast of having a reach as wide as this?

As for the apologists trying to get the book banned from Deseret Book: well, we were told that this happened quite a long time ago--perhaps ten years ago--with one of Meldrum's books (was it Prophesies and Promises?). The story was that Midgley was "pulling strings" in order to put the kibosh on the book, but Elder Packer personally intervened on the Heartlanders' behalf! Well, suffice it to say, being the prudent business owners that they are, the Brethren are certainly going to take notice of the Heartlanders' sales model.

And I have to say: apart from the gloating I mentioned, the Heartlanders come off far better in this exchange. They aren't stooping to the same kind of low blows, such as this one, that you cited, Mark:

How would you respond to those that claim that your editors/team and their findings lack academic credentials? (Elder Ballard and Elder Cook recently stressed the importance of academic creditability. See references below.)

Also, if faithful Latter-day Saints believe in two Cumorah’s, would you consider them placing question marks on prophetic statements instead of exclamation marks?

Thank you for addressing this important issue.

Best,
Mike R. Harris
Utah Valley Institute of Religion, Instructor

This is full-blown, Soviet-style stuff, with people going around threatening others with "disfavor" from the men in suits who are leading everything. And check this out from Midgley:

Before the meltdown, I wrote the "editor's introduction," entitled "A Tidy Garden," for the FARMS Review 22/1 (2010): xi-xxvii, in which I described the crackpottery about geography that constitutes the Heartland Muddle (pp. xvi-xxv), in which I situated an essay by Gregory Smith and one by Ugo Perego that demonstrate that Rodney Meldrum is a fake and a fraud. He grants that the Brethren have never indicated exactly where the Book of Mormon took place in American and then claims, falsely, that Joseph Smith indicated exactly where it took place. This is a way of saying that the Brethren are misleading the Saints.

Or that they (the Heartlanders) believe in "continuing revelation"? It's clear that Midgley sees this is a high-stakes war for the soul of the LDS Church. What's the next volley going to look like?

[_Markk]

Hey Doc,

These guys are actually going off on a lay membership that are following what we (50 plus year old saints) were brought up being taught without reservation or doubt. It was just a given for my generation and older, that the story was in the heartland.

in my opinion...please correct me if I am wrong. There is really no doubt that the mopologists are fervently trying to protect their "legacy." And, it appears they are now using these younger BYU graduates, like Smoot, that they may have even groomed, to keep their beloved LGT alive now that their platform has been reduced to the back pages of the blogosphere.

Of all the mopologist doctrines, again my opinion, the two most important to them are the LGT and the Book of Abraham. I don't see them salvaging anything on the Book of Abraham anytime soon, and they know it, so the LGT is all they have left, and their focus.

Bottom line here is that it now appears that Mopology is using these young guys in an attempt to protect any legacy they might salvage. If the LGT crashes and burns, starting with Gardner, Soronsen... they all crash and burn in regards to their "life's work," and that is why it appears we see absolutely no compromise with the Heartlanders, and they are basically eating their own.

[_moksha]

I especially like the new catechism chosen by the Saints Interpreter Journal:

It is all true even when made up. Any revisions to the truth are the truest of all.

Even the subcatechism insisted upon by the young Rappeyes and Smoot will add to the Saints Interpreter value:

All your arguments are belong to us!

These subtle changes are destined to send the subscription rate through the roof.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Hey Doc,

These guys are actually going off on a lay membership that are following what we (50 plus year old saints) were brought up being taught without reservation or doubt. It was just a given for my generation and older, that the story was in the heartland.

in my opinion...please correct me if I am wrong. There is really no doubt that the mopologists are fervently trying to protect their "legacy." And, it appears they are now using these younger BYU graduates, like Smoot, that they may have even groomed, to keep their beloved LGT alive now that their platform has been reduced to the back pages of the blogosphere.

Of all the mopologist doctrines, again my opinion, the two most important to them are the LGT and the Book of Abraham. I don't see them salvaging anything on the Book of Abraham anytime soon, and they know it, so the LGT is all they have left, and their focus.

Bottom line here is that it now appears that Mopology is using these young guys in an attempt to protect any legacy they might salvage. If the LGT crashes and burns, starting with Gardner, Soronsen... they all crash and burn in regards to their "life's work," and that is why it appears we see absolutely no compromise with the Heartlanders, and they are basically eating their own.

They certainly have been more bold lately (I mean the Mopologists). I wouldn't be surprised if they've been made privy to some rumor about the hammer coming down from Church leadership. Think about how giddy they'd be: first, Holland's "lecture" to the Maxwell Institute, and now (if true), "punishment" of some kind for the Heartlanders? They would be over the moon if this turns out to be true. (Pure speculation on my part, I should add.)

On a somewhat related note: I see that Dr. Peterson has now claimed, more than once, that he's received "dozens" of nasty emails from the Heartlanders. I'm going to have to issue a public "CFR" on that one. Dozens? I kind of doubt it. And the Mopologists have had no problem in the past with posting emails that portray their enemies in a negative light: just take a quick jaunt through the archives of SHIELDS. (And DCP has a long, long track record of deliberately misrepresenting what others say.) If he really has been receiving of these emails, let him post them.

[_Markk]

They certainly have been more bold lately (I mean the Mopologists). I wouldn't be surprised if they've been made privy to some rumor about the hammer coming down from Church leadership. Think about how giddy they'd be: first, Holland's "lecture" to the Maxwell Institute, and now (if true), "punishment" of some kind for the Heartlanders? They would be over the moon if this turns out to be true. (Pure speculation on my part, I should add.)

On a somewhat related note: I see that Dr. Peterson has now claimed, more than once, that he's received "dozens" of nasty emails from the Heartlanders. I'm going to have to issue a public "CFR" on that one. Dozens? I kind of doubt it. And the Mopologists have had no problem in the past with posting emails that portray their enemies in a negative light: just take a quick jaunt through the archives of SHIELDS. (And DCP has a long, long track record of deliberately misrepresenting what others say.) If he really has been receiving of these emails, let him post them.

I haven’t followed the Heartlander’s enough to know whether or not the rebuttals to the Mopolgist’s is just passive aggressive rebutted...but from what I have read they seem nice enough folks, only with a differing opinion.

I agree with you, if there were truly nasty e-mails floating around, they would publish it.

I don’t now if the brethren could come down on the heartlanders? I believe it would bring too much attention to chapel Mormons of our generation and older, from a ‘business” stand point it would be stupid.

What are they going to say to the folks that put on the Hill Cumorah pageant, let alone Deseret Books.

If the GA have learned anything, they will play both sides and play it safe.

[_Everybody Wang Chung]

Dr. Scratch,

I've noticed that Priestcraft Peter$on is blogging about his Peru tour right now. Is Peter$on telling this group that the Book of Mormon events took place in Peru? Peter$on is by no means an expert in Peruvian culture. What is he qualified to do in Peru other than lie to the tour group by telling them Peru was a location for the Book of Mormon? I'm hoping you can provide some insight.

The Mopologists have gone on record that the LGT is for the proposition that the Book of Mormon took place in what is now southern Mexico (Veracruz and Chiapas) and possibly Guatemala. Not Peru.

I have to believe the reason that Peter$on is in Peru is because he is never one to pass up an all expense paid vacation, even if it means throwing the LGT under the bus.

If Rodney Meldrum offered Peter$on an all expense paid vacation to take a Heartland tour group to New York, Peter$on wouldn't hesitate.

Peter$on is the personification of intellectual dishonesty and priestcraft.