DiscussMormonism.com

Since my original thread on this matter has turned into PPI (Peterson Personal Interview) I though I would get back on topic here.

Lets take a look at what the Office of The First Presidency actually said in 1990 and what Hamblin/FARMS claims they learned from Watson in 1993.

In 1990, the Office of The First Presidency made this statement upon inquiry from a member:

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.

Now, supposedly in 1993, FARMS received this communication:

The Church emphasizes the doctrinal and historical value of the Book of Mormon, not its geography. While some Latter-day Saints have looked for possible locations and explanations [for Book of Mormon geography] because the New York Hill Cumorah does not readily fit the Book of Mormon description of Cumorah, there are no conclusive connections between the Book of Mormon text and any specific site. **

**Correspondence from Michael Watson, Office of the First Presidency, 23 April 1993.


While we have the complete photocopy of the First Presidency letter for the 1990 statement, we only have this footnote reference for the claimed 1993 correspondence. However, Mr. Peterson claims that these two sentences from the 1993 correspondence constitute the entire letter/communication.


Lets compare the two statements.

The 1990 statement is rather clear, the Church has long maintained that there is only one Hill Cumorah, it is in New York. No qualifiers or opinions.


The claimed correspondence FARMS/Hamblin recieved in 1993 states (1):

"The Church emphasizes the doctrinal and historical value of the Book of Mormon, not its geography'.

No surprise there at all either. It should not emphasize that which cannot be supported today.


And (2):

"While some Latter-day Saints have looked for possible locations and explanations [for Book of Mormon geography] because the New York Hill Cumorah does not readily fit the Book of Mormon description of Cumorah, there are no conclusive connections between the Book of Mormon text and any specific site."

Here again, no surprise either. Some members (Latter-day Saints), such as those with FARMS/BYU have looked for other possible locations because the place long maintained by the Church (ie New York) poses many problems for the scholarly and secular communities (as well as FARMS obviously). It does not say that the "Church" has changed, retracted, or withdrawn the statement from the Office of the First Presidency in 1990. While Peterson would like to convince gullible posters at MAD and in Provo that the 1993 correspondence changes things, read for yourself! It simply does not.

In effect, all Hamblin asked for (and apparently received) was validation from Watson that FARMS (and other members) are looking for another Hill Cumorah. It did not say that the Church has adopted, agreed, or supported this search or this position.

Had Hamblin/FARMS had the integrity to post the 1990 statement in his article, since the 1993 communication proves that the 1990 letter has never been retracted, it would have seriously hurt his position. But full disclosure, as we all know now, is not part of the FARMS culture.

This is why I question if Peterson/Hamblin can comprehend or interpret what Watson was really saying. It is also, I suspect again, why this letter will never see the light of day. Clearly the 1990 statement from the Office of the First Presidency establishing a long maintained position of one Hill Cumorah is unchanged.

Joey wrote:While Peterson would like to convince gullible posters at MAD and in Provo that the 1993 correspondence changes things, read for yourself! It simply does not.

Actually, my fiendish plan is to convince both gullible and non-gullible people everywhere -- not just in benighted Provo -- that there is no official Church position on Book of Mormon geography.

Joey wrote:In effect, all Hamblin asked for (and apparently received) was validation from Watson that FARMS (and other members) are looking for another Hill Cumorah.

We scarcely needed "validation" to confirm that.

Joey wrote:It did not say that the Church has adopted, agreed, or supported this search or this position.

Since we don't believe that the Church has adopted, agreed with, or supported any position on the geography of the Book of Mormon, we've never expected it to adopt, agree with, or support this position -- and we didn't ask that it do so.

Joey wrote:Had Hamblin/FARMS had the integrity to post the 1990 statement in his article

Why should we have published a 1990 letter from Michael Watson to a bishop named Brooks?

And what would have given us the right to do so? Brother Watson evidently didn't write it for publication. Brother Brooks probably didn't release it for publication. The Tanners don't seem to care about such things, but I do.

Joey wrote:since the 1993 communication proves that the 1990 letter has never been retracted

How, exactly, should Michael Watson have "retracted" his three-year-old letter to Brother Brooks?

Joey wrote:it would have seriously hurt his position.

How?

Joey wrote:But full disclosure, as we all know now, is not part of the FARMS culture.

Whatever.

Joey wrote:This is why I question if Peterson/Hamblin can comprehend or interpret what Watson was really saying.

Whether we're capable of comprehending or intepreting it seems a fairly marginal issue, given that Professor Hamblin's article quotes the letter in its entirety.

Joey wrote:It is also, I suspect again, why this letter will never see the light of day.

But it has seen the light of day. Perhaps I haven't mentioned this before, but Professor Hamblin's article quotes the letter in its entirety.

Will the original ever be available for physical inspection by forensic document analysts? Probably not. As I think I've pointed out, Professor Hamblin mislaid it. And there's nothing whatsoever that I can do about that.

Has the purported letter published by the Tanners ever been made available for forensic investigation? Not that I've heard. How do you know that they didn't forge it? Answer: You don't. You're simply a belligerent partisan with a glaring double standard and an unreasonable axe to grind.

Joey wrote:Clearly the 1990 statement from the Office of the First Presidency establishing a long maintained position of one Hill Cumorah is unchanged.

Clearly, the long-standing consensus view that the hill in New York is the Cumorah of the final Nephite battle is a consensus view of . . . well, long standing.

Is it the official doctrine of the Church? Plainly, no. If it were, the Church wouldn't be permitting its official magazine to publish articles teaching otherwise, wouldn't be permitting its wholly-owned publishing house to print and distribute books arguing otherwise, wouldn't be permitting professors at its wholly-owned university to teach and write otherwise, wouldn't be permitting an institute at its wholly-owned university to support speeches and produce films and publish periodicals advocating otherwise, and wouldn't have authorized the naming of that institute after one of its most beloved recent leaders. And furthermore, if it were, there would be better and more authoritative evidence for it than occasional passing references to an assumed New York Cumorah in scattered speeches and a secretary's letter to an obscure bishop.

All in favor of dropping this non-issue, please indicate by not posting on this thread. Thank you.

I wonder how many prophets have to be wrong and for how long before some people will start to question the prophetic ability of the leadership of the LDS church?




"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)


"We visited the Hill Cumorah and were accorded the courtesy of going thereon by the wife of Mr. George Sampson, a brother of Admiral Walmart. Sampson, who before his death owned the property.....We were delighted to be there. Looking over the surrounding country we remembered that two great races of people had wound up their existence in the vicinity, had fought their last fight, and that hundreds of thousands had been slain within sight of that hill."(Elder George Albert Smith, Conference Report, April 1906, p.56)



"These records were carried by Ether from the hill Ramah, afterwards called Cumorah, where the Jaredites were destroyed, as well as the Nephites." (Talk given by Apostle Orson Pratt, May 18, 1873 Journal of Discourses Vol. 16, pg. 50


"Thirty-six years prior to this time his nation was destroyed 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)


"It will be, next Thursday night, 54 years since the Prophet Joseph Smith, then but a lad, was permitted by the angel of the Lord to take the gold plates of the Book of Mormon from the hill Cumorah, as it was called in ancient times, located in the State of New York. " (Talk given by Apostle Orson Pratt, Sept. 18, 1881 Journal of Discourses Vol. 22, pg. 224)



"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 is known that the Hill Cumorah where the Nephites were destroyed is the hill where the Jaredites were also destroyed. This hill was known to the Jaredites as Rama. It was approximately near to the waters of Ripliancum, which the Book of Ether says, "by interpretation, is large, or to exceed all." Mormon adds: "And it came to pass that we did march forth to the land of Cumorah, and we did pitch our tents round about the hill Cumorah; and it was in a land of many waters, rivers, and fountains; and here we had hope to gain advantage over the Lamanites."

"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.)

"In the western part of the state of New York near Palmyra is a prominent hill known as the “hill Cumorah.” On July twenty-fifth of this year, as I stood on the crest of that hill admiring with awe the breathtaking panorama which stretched out before me on every hand, my mind reverted to the events which occurred in that vicinity some twenty-five centuries ago—events which brought to an end the great Jaredite nation .



"This second civilization to which I refer, the Nephites , flourished in America between 600 B.C. and A.D. 400. Their civilization came to an end for the same reason, at the same place, and in the same manner as did the Jaredites’" (Talk given by President Marion G. Romney in General Conference, October 4, 1975, Ensign Nov. 1975 pg. 35)

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.

"Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery and many of the early brethren, who were familiar with all the circumstances attending the coming forth of the Book of Mormon in this dispensation, have left us a pointed testimony as to the identity and location of Cumorah or Ramah."(Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, page 174-175, Bookcraft 1966)


"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)

"According to the Book of Mormon the Hill Cumorah of the Nephites--the Ramah of the Jaredites--must be regarded as a natural monument overlooking ancient and extensive battle fields. Around it early in the sixth century B.C., the Jaredites were destroyed. Here, also, a thousand years later, at the dose of the fourth century A. D., the Nephites met with practical annihilation in a battle which, whether judged by the importance of the changes it wrought in the affairs of one of the world's continents, or the number slain,a ranks as one of the world's great battles. In view of these Book of Mormon facts one would naturally expect to find some evidences in this section of the country for such wonderful historical events. Here one has a right to expect the evidences of military fortifications; for, though a thousand years had elapsed between the destruction of the Nephites and the discovery of America by the Europeans, still some military monuments would doubtless survive that length of time." (B.H. Roberts, New Witnesses for God, Vol.3, Ch.34, p.67)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------


How obvious would it have be what the early church taught "on record" and "establishing as fact"? Can so many of the LDS leaders be wrong and leading the church astray. Perhaps it is the current crop of apologists who are in an apostate nature?

christopher wrote:I wonder how many prophets have to be wrong and for how long before some people will start to question the prophetic ability of the leadership of the LDS church?

If the Church had ever claimed a revealed Book of Mormon geography, your post would be relevant here.

Daniel Peterson wrote:
Will the original ever be available for physical inspection by forensic document analysts? Probably not. As I think I've pointed out, Professor Hamblin mislaid it. And there's nothing whatsoever that I can do about that.

Has the purported letter published by the Tanners ever been made available for forensic investigation? Not that I've heard. How do you know that they didn't forge it? Answer: You don't. You're simply a belligerent partisan with a glaring double standard and an unreasonable ax to grind.

Dan, you know the original letter wasn't forged, but you choose to grab for any straw or fog the discussion by introducing the Tanners and suggesting the forgery, yet then elsewhere feign dismay over how you are treated on various message boards.

You also know that you are bright, and have a decent command of the English language, and the verbal games may be fun or sport for some, but there are people out there truly looking for answers to problems from being born into "the only true and living church" on the earth. If you think you are helping anyone stay in the church, you are just fooling yourself. That you cannot see the martyr complex you have in most of your postings is sad.

Chris <><

Peterson wrote:We scarcely needed "validation" to confirm that.

Well what else did the 1993 communication provide FARMS?

How, exactly, should Michael Watson have "retracted" his three-year-old letter to Brother Brooks?

I don't know if Watson is authorized to retract a statement from the church. I think that's why he did not.

Since we don't believe that the Church has adopted........

Who is "we"? Speak for yourself and not those who you have no authority to represent!

Clearly, the long-standing consensus view that the hill in New York is the Cumorah of the final Nephite battle is a consensus view of . . . well, long standing.

From the 1990 statement from the Office of the First Presidency:

"The Church has long maintained..."

Daniel, ignorance is bliss, but you are taking it to a new level. Denial is worse however. Please don't try to put words in the statements from the Office of the First Presidency. Unlike you, most of us can read and comprehend simple english. We do not need FARMS to interpret!

christopher wrote:I wonder how many prophets have to be wrong and for how long before some people will start to question the prophetic ability of the leadership of the LDS church?

That's like asking: "How long does FARMS have to be ignored before people outside of Provo start to pay attention to it?"

Daniel Peterson wrote:

christopher wrote:I wonder how many prophets have to be wrong and for how long before some people will start to question the prophetic ability of the leadership of the LDS church?

If the Church had ever claimed a revealed Book of Mormon geography, your post would be relevant here.

I've never heard "the church" speak. I have heard, and quoted as above, it's prophets say such in general conference.

Chris <><

Joey wrote:That's like asking: "How long does FARMS have to be ignored before people outside of Provo start to pay attention to it?"

The best example of what FARMS is all about that I have seen is the quote below.


FARMS spokesman John Sorenson

"With [DNA] sampling, you may or may not find evidence of a connection to the Old World," he says. "If you do, that says something. If you don't, that says more research needs to be done."

From: "BYU Gene Data May Shed Light On Origin Of Book of Mormon's Lamanites", Salt Lake Tribune, November 30, 2000

Daniel Peterson wrote:

christopher wrote:I wonder how many prophets have to be wrong and for how long before some people will start to question the prophetic ability of the leadership of the LDS church?

If the Church had ever claimed a revealed Book of Mormon geography, your post would be relevant here.

Unless history takes place in a vacuum, I think it is fair to say that the Church *has* claimed a "revealed" Book of Mormon geography.

Anyways, here is a kind of side question (and please forgive my ignorance!): What is the current apologetic explanation for how the Golden Plates turned up in New York?