Two Cumorahs

[_Trevor]

With all of the bonkers Book of Mormon theories out there, I have toyed around with my own, and I don't believe that I am the only person to have imagined along these lines.

Mormon and Moroni were a father and son team who encountered Christianity and converted, thanks to the efforts of a rare Christian contact of the ancient Mediterranean/Europe. They recast their history through their understanding of what their contact taught them and shared with them (in terms of scriptures). They clearly lacked, however, a clear undertanding of the orthodox Christian theology of the day. To no small degree the "history" is a work of imagination that seeks to take an Asian population and graft it onto ancient Hebrew and Early Christian myth. Its connection to the actual history of ancient America is extremely tenuous.

[_MCB]

And centrifugal force spins some people clear off the face of the earth.

[_Trevor]

And centrifugal force spins some people clear off the face of the earth.

I'll maintain a sense of humor as you do.

[_MCB]

LOL!! Good response.

[_Yoda]

I personally think he is. However, while his hypothesis is also valid, the Church put it's stamp of approval on the possibility of two Cumorah's in a later article. Whenever applying the Church's standard for doctrine (publication), one must never forget continuing revelation and understanding. One also must never forget that it's completely unreasonable to expect that the apostles and prophets have their mouths guided by the Lord 24/7.

You are assuming that Sorneson's(a BYU professor and bishop) article holds more weight than Elder Peterson's(a prophet, seer, and revelator) article simply based on timing. I think it is you who is unclear on what is considered doctrine and what is considered commentary. Take a look at this clarification by Elder Dallin H. Oakes regarding scripture reading and revelation:

Latter-day Saints know that true doctrine comes by revelation from God, not by scholarship or worldly wisdom (see Moses 5:58). Similarly, the Apostle Paul wrote that we are not “sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God” (2 Cor. 3:5). Rather than trusting in our own interpretations of written texts, we rely on God and the glorious “ministration of the spirit” (2 Cor. 3:8). Here we encounter a new meaning of Paul’s familiar teaching that true believers are “ministers … of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life” (2 Cor. 3:6).

Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery set the example for this dispensation. After their baptism, they were filled with the Holy Ghost. Then, as Joseph explained in his personal history, “Our minds being now enlightened, we began to have the scriptures laid open to our understandings, and the true meaning and intention of their more mysterious passages revealed unto us in a manner which we never could attain to previously, nor ever before had thought of” (Joseph Smith—H 1:74).

Latter-day Saints know that learned or authoritative commentaries can help us with scriptural interpretation, but we maintain that they must be used with caution.

Commentaries are not a substitute for the scriptures any more than a good cookbook is a substitute for food. (When I refer to “commentaries,” I refer to everything that interprets scripture, from the comprehensive book-length commentary to the brief interpretation embodied in a lesson or an article, such as this one.)

One trouble with commentaries is that their authors sometimes focus on only one meaning, to the exclusion of others. As a result, commentaries, if not used with great care, may illuminate the author’s chosen and correct meaning but close our eyes and restrict our horizons to other possible meanings. Sometimes those other, less obvious meanings can be the ones most valuable and useful to us as we seek to understand our own dispensation and to obtain answers to our own questions. This is why the teaching of the Holy Ghost is a better guide to scriptural interpretation than even the best commentary.

(Bold emphasis mine)

This is the link to the entire article:
http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?l ... 82620aRCRD

I think we need to discern whether or not Sorensen's article was revelation or commentary before we can decide on whether or not his article would override Petersen's. Since Mark E. Petersen was sustained as a prophet, seer, and revelator, I would think that his words would hold more weight than Sorensen's in that regard.

One also must never forget that it's completely unreasonable to expect that the apostles and prophets have their mouths guided by the Lord 24/7.

However, it is completely reasonable to expect that the apostle's or prophet's mouth is guided by the Lord when he is addressing the Lord's church in his official capacity as such.

My references are directly from the scriptural canon. I'm referring to the scriptural canon that we take to Church with us every Sunday.....the scriptural canon that we study on a weekly basis. Your reference is a commentary article from the Ensign.

In Joseph Smith-History 1:51, it reads:

51 Convenient to the village of Manchester, Ontario county, New York, stands a ahill of considerable size, and the most elevated of any in the neighborhood. On the west side of this hill, not far from the top, under a stone of considerable size, lay the plates, deposited in a stone box. This stone was thick and rounding in the middle on the upper side, and thinner towards the edges, so that the middle part of it was visible above the ground, but the edge all around was covered with earth.

Notice the cross-reference for hill:

51a
D&C 128: 20.
20 And again, what do we hear? Glad tidings from aCumorah! bMoroni, an angel from heaven, declaring the fulfilment of the prophets—the cbook to be revealed. A voice of the Lord in the wilderness of Fayette, Seneca county, declaring the three witnesses to dbear record of the book! The voice of eMichael on the banks of the Susquehanna, detecting the fdevil when he appeared as an angel of glight! The voice of hPeter, James, and John in the wilderness between Harmony, Susquehanna county, and Colesville, Broome county, on the Susquehanna river, declaring themselves as possessing the ikeys of the kingdom, and of the dispensation of the fulness of times!

Dana and I were on the same wavelength. What other possible Cumorah could this cross-reference be talking about? Moroni was the last Nephite standing at the end of the great battle.

Moroni 10:1(Notice the cross-reference):

1 Now I, Moroni, write somewhat as seemeth me good; and I write unto my brethren, the aLamanites; and I would that they should know that *more than bfour hundred and twenty years have passed away since the sign was given of the coming of Christ.

The cross reference bolded leads you here:

Mormon 8:5 AND Moroni 1:1:

b
Morm. 8: 5.
5 Behold, my father hath made athis record, and he hath written the intent thereof. And behold, I would write it also if I had room upon the bplates, but I have not; and ore I have none, for I am alone. My father hath been slain in battle, and all my kinsfolk, and I have not friends nor whither to go; and chow long the Lord will suffer that I may live I know not.
Moro. 1: 1.
1 Now I, Moroni, after having made an end of abridging the account of the people of Jared, I had supposed anot to have written more, but I have not as yet perished; and I make not myself known to the Lamanites lest they should destroy me.

Now, let's take a look again at Joseph Smith History 1:51-52:

51 Convenient to the village of Manchester, Ontario county, New York, stands a ahill of considerable size, and the most elevated of any in the neighborhood. On the west side of this hill, not far from the top, under a stone of considerable size, lay the plates, deposited in a stone box. This stone was thick and rounding in the middle on the upper side, and thinner towards the edges, so that the middle part of it was visible above the ground, but the edge all around was covered with earth.
52 Having removed the earth, I obtained a lever, which I got fixed under the edge of the stone, and with a little exertion raised it up. I looked in, and there indeed did I behold the aplates, the bUrim and Thummim, and the breastplate, as stated by the messenger. The box in which they lay was formed by laying stones together in some kind of cement. In the bottom of the box were laid two stones crossways of the box, and on these stones lay the plates and the other things with them.

(Bold emphasis mine)
Note how heavy the stone box is...and that there was also the breastplate from battle, the Urim and Thummim, and the plates themselves.

Let's take a look again at Moroni 9:24:

24 And if it so be that they perish, we know that many of our brethren have adeserted over unto the Lamanites, and many more will also desert over unto them; wherefore, write somewhat a few things, if thou art spared and I shall perish and not see thee; but I trust that I may see thee soon; for I have sacred records that I would bdeliver up unto thee.

This is Mormon speaking to his son, Moroni. He is speaking of the plates which Moroni later inherits.

Here is further clarification in Moroni 10:2:

2 And I aseal up bthese records, after I have spoken a few words by way of exhortation unto you.

This is the cross-reference for these:

#
Morm. 6: 6
6 And it came to pass that when we had gathered in all our people in one to the land of Cumorah, behold I, Mormon, began to be old; and knowing it to be the last struggle of my people, and having been commanded of the Lord that I should not suffer the records which had been handed down by our fathers, which were asacred, to fall into the hands of the Lamanites, (for the Lamanites would bdestroy them) therefore I made cthis record out of the plates of Nephi, and dhid up in the hill Cumorah all the records which had been entrusted to me by the hand of the Lord, save it were ethese few plates which I gave unto my son fMoroni.

There is no mistake from these cross-references that Moroni was referring to the same plates his father had hidden in the Hill Cumorah.

Sorry, BC, but I will trust "the most correct scripture", "the second testament of Christ", the very "keystone of our religion" over an Ensign commentary article.
>
>
>
>
>
>

[_mikwut]

Dr. Shades,

Not if God is at the helm.

I am surprised that with the many years of discourse you've indulged in this is the level of sophistication you will allow believers. With all due respect, sincerely, (and thank you for the wonderful board by the way) - isn't your response just silly. I mean does your rigid and literal suggestions axiomatically follow from "if God is at the helm"? I just don't think so - it in fact presses some of your dichotomous beliefs about believers onto believers and I think maybe for that very reason. Most, even conservative and "tbm" as it is used on these boards members that I know don't carry a belief that God is at the helm therefore every jot and tittle of the verbal expressions, beliefs, opinions, educational attainments, published or not, etc.. of the prophet are direct quotes from deity. Even if the majority of members did, it would be just as silly as the response you gave.

my regards, mikwut

[_Dr. Shades]

Not if God is at the helm.

Most, even conservative and "tbm" as it is used on these boards members that I know don't carry a belief that God is at the helm therefore every jot and tittle of the verbal expressions, beliefs, opinions, educational attainments, published or not, etc.. of the prophet are direct quotes from deity.

You didn't refer to "every jot and tittle of the verbal expressions, beliefs, opinions, educational attainments, published or not, etc. Your specific words were these:

But as education evolves doesn't contradiction necessarily follow? Einstein/Newton?

If God is the one behind this "education," then He wouldn't contradict Himself. He would get it right the first time. Otherwise, He would cease to be God.

[_mikwut]

Dr. Shades,

We must be talking past each other. My statement, "But as education evolves doesn't contradiction necessarily follow? Einstein/Newton?" was a follow up from education evolves within a revelatory institution. So the education occurs just like any other right along with revelatory receptions. Is your response intended to imbue the reader or myself with the impression that a wise man with a beard who can walk through walls is standing in front of a chalkboard?

my regards, mikwut

[_Paul Osborne]

I would daresay Mormon apologists are in open defiance of Mormon church leadership, both past and present, rejecting the power of the priesthood, and are apostates.

That's because Mormon apologists are apostates! BC is an apostate and will not bear witness to the name of Shulem. He doesn't believe Joseph Smith, nor does Tommy boy Monson.

When it comes to Cumorah, some of the GA's teter on the brink of apostasy! FARMS, well, they are total apostate and don't give a hoot about Shulem's name written in the characters or the New York Cumorah. Poor Mark E. Peterson, he just opened his big mouth too many times about Cumorah. He mocked the whole church by abusing his authority and getting members to actually think that the New York Cumorah was the real Cumorah -- and the Holy Ghost testified to them that it was the real Cumorah. The Holy Ghost oozed all over the congregations! But then come the apostates, the apologists! The apologists will take over the church and dictate what the GA's will think and say.

Paul O

[_mikwut]

Paul,

Let us assume you are correct. Doesn't the long years that brought you to the current belief state you are in speak volumes of how difficult it is to mature to your position? And if that is correct, as cathartic as I am sure your goading is, it is really in the end healthy for the believer or yourself?

Posing your problems with the church in an articulate fashion is not only more becoming, (not that even I haven't found much humor in your posts) for yourself and others but might very well get your point across in a more amenable towards dialogue fashion.

I know you feel duped and are even angry and if simply venting is all that is at stake, then by all means carry on - otherwise I might suggest the above.

my regards, mikwut