F. Michael Watson Personally clarifies Hill Cumorah Letter

[TwoCumorahFraud]

It is clear that the old NAMIRS crew (chief among them DCP and Hamlin) were trying to put words in the mouths of the PSRs. Funny, but my understanding of Mormon teachings is that is God's role, not that of BYU professors.

Not when the Professors want to make money from 100-year old books with expired copyrights now in the Public Domain.

For example, you can resell Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s 1912, “The Lost World” and call it “Jurassic Park.”

Or L.E. Hills’ books from 1924 and call it “Mormon’s Codex” - but never give credit to the original author.

[TwoCumorahFraud]

Donate to Book of Mormon Central, a 501(c)(3) non-profit.

They need the tax-free funds to research the importance of Book of Mormon geography in Mesoamerica, with a cut by the owners.

Don’t forget to go on a cruise to their Excellent Adventures in the Yucatan where they can gaze upon the Land of Promise while floating safely offshore to avoid bichos y gambu.

[TwoCumorahFraud]

The Hill Cumorah Expedition Team - has published its Spring 2023 Newsletter after a "three year hiatus." (Due to the Pandemic, apparently.)

https://hillcumorahexpeditionteam.com

This is a "RLDS" or Community of Christ and Restoration Branch, organization. So please be respectful of others beliefs.

This Two Cumorah theory was meant for The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. NOT for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Welch and DCP apparently never figured this out before promoting it as F.A.R.M.S.

"New Light on American Archaeology," the title of L.E. Hills' 1924 book, was a response to the RLDS "Committee on American Archaeology," created in 1894 which had a hemispheric map for The Book of Mormon.

That map confused members of the RLDS Church because the Land of Nephi and the Land of Zarahemla located in South America, was too far for King Limhi's search party to reach Cumorah (Ramah) in New York, to discover Ether's 24 plates, then return again to South America. Thus some members of the RLDS Church proposed that the original Hill Cumorah had to be closer in Central America.

L.E. Hills later shrunk the geography inside the Isthmus of Tehuantepec and published three books each with a map, and an earlier stand-alone map in 1917.

Our fellow Utah Saints, called F.A.R.M.S., copied it without acknowledging the original author. (1978) Then spent their time since ragging on fellow members who didn't agree with them.

Now F.A.R.M.S. after a period at the BYU Maxwell Institute, has morphed into Book of Mormon Central and Interpreter Foundation. FAIRLDS tags along with them.

[MsJack]

I don't think there's much mystery here. There never was a second Watson letter; what was called the "Second Watson Letter" for years was, in actuality, the Carla Ogden fax. I don't even think Dan or the late Bill Hamblin were lying. Memories can be faulty. Hamblin may have, in his mind, mixed up the Carla Ogden fax with some other correspondence he had with OFP in the mid-80s.

What is troubling to me is that the apologists spent years saying Watson went rogue and addressed the question on his own without FP authority, essentially smearing him. Did they even try to contact Watson to confirm that before going with that version of events? Mormonism isn't all that big of a place. Someone knew someone who knew Watson.

[Kishkumen]

I don't think there's much mystery here. There never was a second Watson letter; what was called the "Second Watson Letter" for years was, in actuality, the Carla Ogden fax. I don't even think Dan or the late Bill Hamblin were lying. Memories can be faulty. Hamblin may have, in his mind, mixed up the Carla Ogden fax with some other correspondence he had with OFP in the mid-80s.

What is troubling to me is that the apologists spent years saying Watson went rogue and addressed the question on his own without FP authority, essentially smearing him. Did they even try to contact Watson to confirm that before going with that version of events? Mormonism isn't all that big of a place. Someone knew someone who knew Watson.

My problem is that the whole thing is so convoluted. You could be right about the Second Watson letter, but it comes off like some kind of pointless snipe hunt, which I tend to think is, at least in some respects and on some level, deliberate. Faulty memory probably does play some role here, but I don't think it is the whole story.

[Marcus]

I think It is concerning that Hamblin put the Carla Ogden fax contents (dated April 23, 1993) into an article that was published in Spring of 1993.

Hamblin, footnote 70, misidentifies the fax contents and leaves off the last three words, but uses the fax date:

[footnote] 70 Correspondence from Michael Watson, Office of the First Presidency, 23 April 1993.

But the date above Hamblin’s title, posted in the pdf J of B of M studies gives for the Spring 1993 journal is January 31, 1993.

Journal of Book of Mormon Studies

Volume 2 Number 1 Article 11

1-31-1993
Basic Methodological Problems with the Anti-Mormon Approach to the Geography
William J. Hamblin
Brigham Young University

https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/vie ... ntext=jbms

How is he dating a source in an article, to AFTER he published an article?

[Kishkumen]

How is he dating a source in an article, to AFTER he published an article?

Great catch, Professor Marcus. Indeed! This is exactly the kind of thing I am talking about. I published a 1980s letter in 1993 which is was not a letter from the person I claimed but a fax from someone else which postdates the publication in which I am publishing it?!?!?!?!?

[Doctor Scratch]

I noticed a few weeks ago on "SeN" that someone in the comments section mentioned the "2nd Watson Letter," and Dr. Peterson responded very firmly with something along the lines of, "Do not ever mention the 2nd Watson Letter again here or you will be instantly banned." So whether his memory was faulty or not at the time, as of today, he seems to recognize that he, Hamblin, and the other Mopologists made a grievous mistake: they basically completely manufactured a statement from the First Presidency.

[Marcus]

FAiR verifies the date that Hamblin published in his footnote, even acknowledging it was a fax:

THE SECRETARY TO THE FIRST PRESIDENCY LATER WROTE TO FARMS: "THERE ARE NO CONCLUSIVE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE Book of Mormon TEXT AND ANY SPECIFIC SITE"

On April 23, 1993, F. Michael Watson provided a letter after a discussion with a FARMS staffer. The text is similar and consistent with what was published in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism the previous year:

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.[1]

(Some have complained that the fax was private and should not be cited--but why would Watson send a private note to FARMS if it was not anticipated that it would be used to answer the questions being put to FARMS? The letter has long been available publicly, since its text was published by FARMS soon after its receipt

So I ask again, how did Hamblin, in an article published 1-31-1993, have access to a source that is dated AFTER that?

This must be why he had to tell Peterson he got the letter in 1985, but that story falls apart when all the information is added up.

I think Hamblin invented the Carla Ogden fax. Or forged it.

[MsJack]

How is he dating a source in an article, to AFTER he published an article?

I don't know that this is what happened, but journals often get published late. So the 31 January 1993 edition may not have actually been published until May or June of that year, and the reference may have been slipped in last minute.