Thursday, June 26, 2025

Narrow necks, etc.

M2Cers seem to think there is only one "narrow neck of land" in the entire Book of Mormon. That's what drives their "hourglass" theory of geography.

It is a strange interpretation for several reasons. 

For example, the phrase "narrow neck of land" occurs only once in the text, in Ether 10:20. This a Jaredite reference.

A Nephite passage refers to a "narrow neck" without the limiting qualifier "of land." Normally, that omission would be considered significant because a "narrow neck" can be a waterway or a land mass. Omitting the "of land" qualifier suggests a waterway.  

Other verses refer to a "narrow pass" a "small neck" and a "narrow passage." These different terms could refer to land or water and would normally be interpreted to refer to different geological features, but M2Cers conflate all these different terms to make their model fit.

_____

a "narrow neck" that is not
a "narrow neck of land"
An unstated premise by the M2Cers is that there can be only one "narrow neck" in the 1,000-year history of the Nephites, on top of the 33+ generations of Jaredite history.

Yet in America in the 1700s and 1800s, people referred to innumerable different places as a "neck of land" and even a "narrow neck of land." A "narrow passage" was defined as a "strait," which make sense anyway. 

I discussed some examples from George Washington and Thomas Jefferson here: https://www.lettervii.com/p/narrow-and-small-necks-and-other.html

But the M2Cers rationalize away those examples, apparently because they don't believe Joseph Smith actually translated the plates, and so he wouldn't have used the ordinary language he grew up with (thanks to Royal Skousen and his followers). 

So let's look at a few more.

The phrase "neck of land" was a common descriptor used in land deeds. Litigation over the meaning of "neck of land" was even a thing. 

In the case quoted at the end of this post, a lawyer wrote, "The Almighty made every thing that is upon the face of the Earth, but did not assign Names to them, but left that to Man to do, and that some Men assign one, and others another Name to the same thing; and some by one Name understand one thing, others by the same Name understand another thing."

Everyone interested in the setting of the Book of Mormon should keep that observation in mind.

_____

A description of Boston in 1769 referred to "a small neck of land of 100 rods at low water, but not 20 at high." 100 rods = 1650 feet. 20 rods = 330 feet. That would qualify as a "small neck of land" far better than what the M2Cers propose.

Captain Cook's journal refers to a "narrow neck of land" on one of his voyages:

the land of the cape, from several situations, has the appearance of an island. It is still more remarkable when it is seen from the southward, by the appearance of a high round island at the S. E. point of the cape; but this also is a deception; for what appears to be an island is a round hill, joined to the cape, by a low narrow neck of land. Upon the cape we saw a hippah, or village, and a few inhabitants; and on the south east side of it there appears to be anchorage, and good shelter from the south west and north west winds

In 1775, the debates between the colonists and the royalists discussed the "neck of land" in Boston: 

In pursuance of this part of their plan, the Congress remonstrate to the King’s Governor and General, acting by his immediate authority, against his fortifying the neck of land that leads into Boston, and magisterially require him to desist: Whereas the King has as unquestionable a right to erect fortresses in any part of his dominions, as to erect Beacons, &c.

Thomas Paine described his participation in the conflict:

THESE are the times that try men’s souls: The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly:— It is dearness only that gives every thing its value....

As I was with the troops at fort Lee, and marched with them to the edge of Pennsylvania, I am well acquainted with many circumstances, which those, who lived at a distance, know but little or nothing of. Our situation there was exceedingly cramped, the place being on a narrow neck of land between the North river and the Hackensack.

A 1784 history of New Hampshire includes this passage about "Blind Will."

Major Waldron sent out eight of his Indians whereof Blind Will was one, for farther information. They were all surprized together by a company of the Mohawks; two or three escaped, the others were either killed or taken: Will was dragged away by his hair; and being wounded, perished in the woods, on a neck of land, formed by the confluence of Cochecho and Isingglass rivers, which still bears the name of Blind Will’s Neck.

Jonathan Carver, writing about his travels among the Indians, described a "narrow neck of land."

Not far from the place where they then happened to be, stood two small lakes, between which ran a narrow neck of land about a mile in length, and only from twenty to forty yards in breadth.

A 1791 geography text explains the terms "narrow neck of land" as joining a peninsula to a continent or other land (not two continents) and a "narrow passage" as a strait (waterway). 

A peninsula is a piece of land encompassed by water, except on one side where it is joined to the continent, or other land.—An isthmus is a narrow neck of land, which joins a peninsula to the continent or other land.—A promontory is a point of land running out into the sea, the extremity of which is called a cape.—An ocean is a vast body of water; a sea or gulph, a smaller one.—A lake is a body of fresh water, surrounded by land.—A bay is a part of the sea, contained between two shores.—A strait is a narrow passage, whereby seas, gulphs, &c. communicate with the ocean.

William Bartram, describing his travels through North and South Carolina in 1781, used "narrow pass" to describe a waterway.

Should I say, that the river (in this place) from shore to shore, and perhaps near half a mile above and below me, appeared to be one solid bank of fish, of various kinds, pushing through this narrow pass of St. Juans into the little lake, on their return down the river, and that the alligators were in such incredible numbers, and so close together from shore to shore, that it would have been easy to have walked across on their heads, had the animals been harmless.

I could give many more examples, as could any of the M2C scholars who nevertheless insist that these different terms in the Book of Mormon all refer to only one geographical feature.

Because we pursue charity along with clarity, we assume the M2Cers are sincere. They are certainly earnest. 

But anyone can see that these terms have long been used to describe common geographical features that make far more sense when interpreting the Book of Mormon than the conflated interpretation that M2C depends upon. 

_____

APPENDIX To the DECREE in the Suit of Palmers, & others, COMPLAINANTS Against Philipse, and others, DEFENDANTS. In Cancellaria Nova-Eborac.

THe generality of the People of this Province, are not unacquainted how much Noise the above Decree has made; tho’ few but the Contrivers of the present Clamours, know the secret Arts and Managery that have been made use of to procure them; and the Ends intended by them are not difficult to guess.

Whether the Court of Chancery be, or be not, rightly founded; or whether the Expence of Prosecuting a Suit in that Court, be too great, or not, cannot affect the merits of this Cause: But the sole Question is, Whether Mr. Philipse or the Complainants be in the Right? And whether the Decree given by the Governour be just, or not?

...

Observations on Charge 4 th.

ITs to be Observed, That in fol. 145. of the Answer, the Defendant Philipse says, That Nature makes a NECK, and that the same cannot go further than the Water makes it so. Which, by what appears in the First Charge, under the Letters (b) (i) (k) (l) and (m) confines the Great Neck to the Markt Trees at Westchester-Path; And in fol. 106, he Swears, He always was, and still is of Opinion, that neither of the Necks extend further than Nature makes them so; Upon which no small stress has been laid. But, with all due Deference to that his OATH, the Complainants will beg leave to assign a few Instances, wherein he either understood the Necks to go further, or his Actions did not square with his Opinion or Understanding of the Necks, or, in plain English, meant one thing, and said, acted and transacted another.

First Instance. Let the Reader turn back to pag. 10. of the Decree, where he will find this Clause in the Articles of Agreement, Ask whereas it does not appear that the LINE running into the Woods, between the said GREAT NECK and the said WESTERMOST NECK, has ever been settled, run [Page 42]or markt out, or own the Course that it ought to run, appointed or limited, which may occasion Differences between tix Parties aforesaid, if the said Jacobus van Courtland should purchase the Reversion of the saide WESTERMOST NECK. It appears in the 2 d Charge, No. 2. that Mr. Philipse transacted that Agreement for Mr. Courtland; Then, the Candid Reader, and all the World besides Mr Philipse, will understand by that Clause, That the GREAT NECK and WEST NECK, were such things, as were capable of having a LINE between them, running into the Woods. And Mr. Philipse knows b _t whether he did not understand so too, by the words GREAT NECK and WEST NECK there, and LINE between them; And if he did not, he can best tell what he meant by them there; 

For sure it is, if the GREAT NECK extended no further than where the Water comes up, (as he Swears, he always understood) it could not be divided by a LINE from the WEST NECK, it being already seperated from it by the Water; and if it was such a thing as was to be seperated by a LINE, from the WEST NECK, Undoubtedly, that LINE must begin where the Water ceased to seperate them, and from thence to run into the Woods; and on the one side of that LINE, (by that Clause) was the GREAT NECK understood to run, and on the other, the WEST NECK; which is further than what the Water, or Nature makes to be a Neck.

The Complainants say, The Almighty made every thing that is upon the face of the Earth, but did not assign Names to them, but left that to Man to do, and that some Men assign one, and others another Name to the same thing; and some by one Name understand one thing, others by the same Name understand another thing. 

For Exemple, The Geographers and the Learned World, understand by a Neck of Land, that which joyns a Peninsula (or what’s almost an Island) to the Continent or Main Land; and the similitude seemeth to be drawn from the human Body; for as the Neck there joyns the Head to the Body, so a Neck of Land joyns a Peninsula to a Continent; and there, neither the Peninsula nor the Continent are understood to be included in the Neck, no more than the Head or Body of a Man are included in his Neck. Mr. Philipse again, being a little more favourable to the Complainants, than the learned World, in the meaning of a Neck of Land, allows it to contain, not only what the Learned World understand by a Neck of Land, but also the Peninsula it self, or something in a gross way, allows the Head to be part of the Neck: This certainly is favourable! seeing the Complainants can show no Title to the Peninsula, more than to the part of the Main Land they claim; and of Consequence, had he dealt with them so hard as the Learned World, (it seems) would do, instead of 320 Acres, that he allows them, the learned World would not have left them, perhaps, the 20 Acres; so the 300 is a piece of meer Favour and Grace.

But others again, (in still a more gross and vulgar way) such as Governour Lovelace, John Richbell, John Rider, Robert Richbell, Steenwick, Kelland, Edward Richbell, and the Complainants, by the Patent and Deeds before Printed, tell you plainly, that they understand, that a Neck of Land contains, not only the Neck, (as the Learned World understand it) and the whole Peninsula, (as Mr. Philipse is so favourable to understand it) but also a part of the Main Land besides; and even Mr. Philipse by his Words and Actions, for near one year (as by this and the eleven following Instances will appear) had the same way of Thinking of a Neck too. The Complainants [Page 43]don’t deny that the Name is gross, and far from being accurate and expressive the thing meant; but its s _me Excuse, that the whole Herd of Statuaries and Painters have given as gross and unapt Names from things meant by them; As, By what they call a Head, they mean Head, Neck and Shoulders. Our Fore-Fathers, (whom we ought not to despise) have by a Yard of Land, meant often, many Acres, whereas the Learned World, by A Yard of Land, don’t mean so much as the Four hundreath part o […]​ one Acre. Nay, for one Name that’s accurately Expressive, of the thing meant by it, the Complainants will be at no great loss to assign ten Names that are not. But had the Complainants no such Presidents of Vulgar Conceptions to cite, they think its a sufficient Excuse, that its the Liberty and Priviledge of Mankind to assign such Names as they think proper to Things, and also to assign such Meanings as they think proper to Names; and if a Man will call his Land, or any part of it, a Head, a Neck, a Shoulder, a Hand, a Finger, or a Toe, &c. who can hinder him? And if he tells you, that by the Name of Head, Neck, Shoulder, &c. of Land, he means a Tract bounded so and so, what reason can there be to mis-believe him? for he certainly best knows what he means by the Names he uses. What right has the Learned World, or Mr. Philipse, to say to the Parties to all the before Deeds, We understand so and so by the word NECK, and you shall not have the Liberty of understanding otherwise? The Complainants say, the Learn _d World have no such Right, and far le _s Mr. Philipse; and that neither have _ight to impose Names or Meanings on any Body, but as the Liberty of every ones Meaning and Naming for himself, has hitherto existed, _oth _y hope that Liberty will continue, notwithstanding all the Efforts of Mr. Philipse to the contrary.

Second Instance. Let the Reader turn to the 3 d Clause of the Agreement, in pag. 10 […]​ 11, which has these Words, And shall proceed from thence to take a View of the said Great Neck and the Westermost Neck, and after they have so viewed the […]​, will endeavour amicably, betwixt themselves, to settle the Line […]​ into the Woods, betwixt the same Necks. We shall suppose the Words Twenty Miles had not been there, and the Articles always to have been as Mr. Philipse has taken upon himself to alter them, as appears in the 3 d Charge; and were they even so, Can any man who reads that Clause, think it was the understanding of the Parties, who transacted that Agreement, that the GREAT NECK and WEST NECK were such Things as were not capable of […]​ a LINE between them? But if what Mr. Philipse Swears be […]​ understood so there: How consistent his understanding will be […]​ Readers, is left to be judged of.

Third […]​ Let the Reader turn to the Additional Agreement in pag. 11. and […]​ and consider it, which, as appears by Charge 3 d, No. 7. was […]​ Philipse himself, with this, That its confessed by the Answer, pag. 167 […]​ Great Neck, so far as the Water makes it a Neck, is much larger […]​ West-Neck, so understood. And in fol. 159. its admitted, That the Great Neck, so understood, contains only 320 Acres; and of Consequence, the West-Neck contains much less than 320 Acres: And on the whole, let the Reader judge, VVhether by the word NECK, thrice mentioned in that Agreement, there was not more understood, than what he Swears he always understood of the Necks. To lead the Reader the easier to consider [Page 44]this, he finds by that Agreement, it was agreed, That in case the Complainants Agents should _tually have finished a Bargain for the aforesaid Westermost Neck, then the Complainants were to convey one half thereof to Mr. Courtland, _e pa _ing an equal half of the Purchase Money, and bearing likewise a f _ll half of all the Incrumbrances, that are upon the said Neck. Now, Suppose the Complainants had made the Purchase of all the remainder of Richbell’s Right, (as appears by Charge 3 d, No. 5. they were about to have done) and suppose the Defendants then der _an _ed of the Complainants to perform this Additional Agreement, and to that Demand the Complainants had answered, Gentlemen, We agreed with you, ’tis true, to let you into the half of the Purchase of the WEST NECK, bearing _e half of the _ncumbrances upon it, and paying one half of the Purchase Money; but we meant by the WEST NECK only so far as the Water makes it a NECK, which contains much less than 320 Acres; Now, if you’ll discharge one half of the Incumbrances which are upon it (which by Charge 1 st, No. 3. is said by the Defendant, to be as much again as the Incumbrances on the Great Neck, which are Twenty Thousand Pounds) to wit, the half of 40,000 Pounds, We will Convey to you for it, the half of the WEST NECK (which is the half of much less than 320 Acres) and we will not insist upon the half of the Purchase Money. Now, according to Mr. Philipse’s way of understanding the Necks, this would have been a generous Proffer in the Complainants, to have given this Less than 160 Acres, for Twenty Thousand Pounds, when they might have insisted on the half of the Purchase Money besides. That it was Mr. Philipse’s Meaning to accept of this generous Proffer of the Complainants, if this case had happened, who can doubt? seeing he Swears, He always was of Opinion, (or, which is the _ame) understood the NECKS to run Only so far as the Water; and in this Agreement, nothing more than the NECKS is mentioned (Here’s none of his NECKS Running Twenty Miles into the Woods, which he cleverly Distinguishes from NECKS so often, thro’ his Answer) If this was his Meaning, and he thought better to accept than to slight the Proffer of this Agreement, as he says in fol. 100. of his Answer, he did; None can deny but that he was then very moderate in his Demands, for half of the Incumbrances on the West-Neck, to accept of much less than 160 Acres for them, and that of Land too, whereon no Improvement was, as appears in fol. 167. of the Answer. But behold! how variable are Sublunary Things, running from one Extream to its Opposite! The Man who was lately Satisfied, to accept of much less than ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY ACRES of Land, whereon no Improvement was, for TWENTY THOUSAND POUNDS, so great a Change is wrought on him, that for only FOUR HUNDRED POUNDS, for which he has got the Lands Exchanged by Pell, to which he had no Pretence before, and the Reversion of the WEST-NECK, which are admitted to be of much more Value than Four Hundred Pounds, Now nothing less will serve him, for the same Four Hundred Pounds, than to have, over and above that, ONE HUNDRED TIMES ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY ACRES OF SUCH LAND, and that from People too, who, with their Ancestor, have been above Twenty Five Years in Possession of it; People who have Expended a great deal in Improving of it, People who have paid the full Value of it, for it; People whom he had Solemnly agreed with, to have no Difference with them about it. Upon the Whole, the Complainants think, The Candid and Judicious Reader cannot long be at a stand in Determining, That Either Mr. Philipse [Page 45] meant more by the Word NECK, Thrice mentioned in the Additional Articles, than by his Answer, he Swears he always did; Or else He meant to give more than half of the Incumbrances on the WEST NECK, for what’s much less than 160 Acres of Unimproved Land. If he meant the first, the Complainants think the Reader will be at some Difficulty to reconcile it with his Oath; for the Complainants cannot see how to Reconcile them; And if he meant the last, the Reader will be no less at a L _ss to Reconcile his then Moderation, and his now Vast Demands. And the Complainants think, the Man will be of a happy Invention, that can show what else Mr. Philipse meant, if he meant neither of these, barring that of his Meaning as Hackerton did of his Cow, or which is the same, That he meant, that he was to mean by the Word NECK, when the Complainants should Claim; by it, only so far as the Water comes; but when he himself should Claim by it, in that Agreement, then he was to mean all that, and Twenty Miles more. This Third Meaning of Hackerton’s the Complainants allow, he might have, and therefore they must barr the Man of Invention from assigning that as another Meaning.

And now the Complainants will come to the Articles of the 4 th Charge, for some further Instances of Mr. Philipse’s Meaning more by the NECKS than he Swears he ever did. Or, &c.

Fourth Instance. —1— Its confessed, The time appointed by the Articles, for settling the DIVISION LINE, between the GREAT NECK and WEST NECK, was put off by the Defendants. Will Mr. Philipse say, he understood here, that the GREAT NECK and WEST NECK, were not capable of having ANY LINE run betwixt them? If what he Swears be true, he then so understood. But these words, or that act, of putting off the Time for running the DIVISION LINE, between the GREAT NECK and WEST NECK, must with all Men of the common way of Thinking, import, That he understood the GREAT NECK and WEST NECK, were then capable of having A LINE run betwixt them. So either he thinks different from the Common way of Thinking, or his Sayings and Actions differ much from his Meaning. Again▪

Fifth Instance. —2— Let the Reader see again the third Clause of the Agreement, in page 10 & 11, for the view that the Parties were to take, in order amicably betwixt themselves to settle the Line (call it as he has made it) to its Extent into the Woods, betwixt the Necks; And in this 2 d Article, Mr. Philipse confesses, he told the Complainants, he designed to come and take a view of the Premisses; the above part of the Articles declares for what purpose; upon this, the same Question may be put as in the last Instance, and the same Resolution must be of it; so that at that time also, it would seem, he understood differently of the Necks, from what he Swears he always did.

Sixth Instance. —2— In February, 1723–4, its confessed, it was proposed to meet, viz. for taking a view in order to settling the Line amicably. Upon this, the same Question and Answer may be as before, so he then understood, that the Necks were capable of having a Line between them, or all the Absurdities before must follow.

Seventh Instance. —2— But being hindered, he sent them word by Letter he could not go. From whence, a Man of the common way of Thinking, will [Page 46]understand, that Mr.Philipse, when he wrote that Letter, intended (had he not been hindered) to have gone, in order to settle the Line amicably, betwixt the Great Neck and West Neck; And if he so intended, the like Question and Answer may be as before.

Eighth Instance. —1— He confesses, He proposed afterwards to meet the letter end of March, viz. in order to settling the Line amicably between the Great Neck and West Neck. Upon this the like Question and Answer may be, and so a further time, when he understood differently of the Necks, or &c.

Ninth Instance. —2— But the Arrival of a Vessel hindered him, and therefore he sent another Letter. The like may be said on this, as on the Seventh Instance.

Tenth Instance. —3— Afterwards, he met the Complainants at New-Rochel, viz. for to endeavour, amicably to settle the LINE between the GREAT NECk and WEST NECk, according to the 3 d Clause of the Articles. Upon which still, the like Question & Resolution therof may be.

Eleventh Instance. —4— Afterwards, ARBITRATORS were appointed, pursuant to the Articles, for determineing, how the DIVISION LINE between THE TWO NECKS, should run into the Woods. Did he then, as before, understand that the NECKS were not capable, of having A LINE run betwixt them? other Folks would think, that when People solemnly enter into an Agreement about A LINE and appoint ARBITRATORS, to settle how the Course of that LINE should run, that these People really understood, there was such a thing as A LINE to be run, which these ARBITRATORS were to determine the Course of; but, if what Mr. Philipse Swears be true, he had no such meaning, had no thoughts, nor did not understand, that the GREAT NECK and WEST NECK, were capable of ANY LINE betwixt them, at the same time that he appointed ARBITRATORS to determine the Course of it.

Twelfth Instance. —4— That the 16 th or 17 th of May, 1724. the Arbitrators, Mr. Philipse and the Complainants, came to New-Rochel, &c. viz. For determineing how the LINE OF DIVISION should run into the Woods, between the TWO NECKS pursuant to the Articles, upon which, the like Question and Resolution may be, as in the Eleventh Instance.

Above, the Complainants have assigned a Dozen of Instances, and if a necessity were for it, could assign as many more, wherein, according to the Conception of Men of common Reason, the Defendant Philipse, must have understood more by the NECKS, than to where the Water comes up; and that, he understood where the Water ceased to divide THE NECKS, they were to begin to be divided by A LINE, from thence running into the Woods: And if every Man of common Reason, must so interpret his Words and Actions; Why must all these Clamours be against the Court for so understanding them? when without understanding them so, the grossest Absurdities and Contradictions must of Course follow. But the reason of his Swearing, he always understood so of the Necks, may be guessed at a little; because, if he allows they go beyond the place where the Water divides them, whatever [Page 47]reason will carry them one Foot beyond it, will carry them to the Extent of the Patent; for, let but A LINE be, and he well knows there’s no st _pping it till it come there. But when he Swore so, he must have either Thought his Antagonists so Blind, as not to see thro’ it, or, that if they did, they would not, or durst not _enture to point it out: which _t he conceived not altogether amiss in, for tho’ they very well saw that, and many other things herein set forth, before the hearing, yet they were very loath to Touch upon them, and what they did towards it, was in so tender Touches, as _ew but Mr. Philipse himself could gather much from them; and that because, they thought the Deeds themselves, made all clear enough, without dipping into these things; and so the matter should have remained upon that footing only, if so many vile, false and scandalous Reports. Reproaches and Clamours, had not since the Decree, been invented and spread thro this Province, of this Cause, and of the Complainants, and of most who have dared to do their duty in it, (by whose means the Complainants say not, but leave the Reader to guess) that more than sufficiently, give these Complainants cause, to keep the Truth no longer hid.

But to proceed,—5—The Complainants shall agree, that Mr. Philipse now began a little nearer to square his Actions and Words, with what he Swears, always was his Meaning of the NECKS. And in order to that, it being, by the 3 d Clause of the Articles of Agreement, in the most Express words agreed, That in case the Parties cannot by themselves agree How the LINE OF DIVISION between the TWO NECKS shall Run TO ITS EXTENT (as Mr. Philipse has made it) into the Woods, Then they have agreed, to leave the Determination thereof to six Indifferent Persons. The first Step that’s taken, is to break th […]​ _hat Solemn, Plain and Express Agreement: That this his Declining to enter into Bo _ds, was a breaking thro’ it, is plain; for when People agree to leave a Thing to the Determination of others, it certainly must be thereby also tacitly agreed, to do every thing that may be necessary to impower these to Determine, and to compel the Performance of what’s determined; and the denying to do these things, (as here to enter into Bonds) is a denying to comply with the Agreement, or in plain terms breaking thro’ it.—6—The Sequel shows, how much of verity there was in this; if he thought that Power from Mr Courtland, and his verbal assent, impowered the Arbitrators, why would not he also give his Bond; Its said AN HONEST MAN, will never Scruple his Bond where he gives his Word; for AN HONEST MAN, values his Word as much as his Bond, and should think it a Dishonour to him, for any one to think it of less force; but it seems Mr. PHILIPSE here, did not put an equal Value on them.—7—The next step Mr. Philipse took, to square his Actions and his Words, with what he Swears always was his meaning; was, that the Defendant Philipse then observed, that the TWENTY MILES INTO THE WOODS, was A SEPARATE GRANT, and that the NECK, cannot go further than the Water makes it so. How much truth was in this Observation, and whether this was not the first time, he had ever opened his RESERVE, by telling the Complainants so; the Reader is referred to the Patent, Deeds and Decree it self, which fully discuss that matter; and to the 6 th Observation on the 3 d Charge, to judge by. And how Just, Equitable and Conscionable, his pretension by Edward Richbell’s Release is, the Reader is referred, to the first Charge and Observations thereon, to judge by.—8—Mr. Philipses denying, that this was the first time, that he had Expressed his Sentiments about the Boundaries; must appear very Evasive and Ambigu _us; when its considered, that a Man may have different [Page 48]Sentiments at different Times, and declaring any of th _se, comes up to all this: and this may as well mean, that he had before declared his Sentiments, that the Boundaries of the GREAT NECK, went to the Extent of the Patent, as that they did not; but when its considered, that Mr. Philipse, for near a years time, viz. From the Executing of the Articles to this time, had different Sentiments, even at the same times, viz. a Set of EXPRESSED SENTIMENTS by his Words and Actions that A LINE was to be run between the GREAT NECK and WEST NECK, as appears from the 12 Instances before, and a Set of RESERVED SENTIMENTS, that NO LINE was to be run at all, seeing _e Swears, he always understood the NECKS to reach no further than the Wat […]​, and of Consequence, not capable of being divided by A LINE. Now his Expressed Sentiments, its agreed, this was not the first time he declared them, but as to the others, he can hardly show a probability, to induce any Man to believe he did declare them to the Complainants before; seeing, his Expressed Sentiments, were so Diametrically opposite thereto. The next Paragraph, viz. And affirms, that he had long before, and at several times, told some of the Complainants, they had a Right to no more than the Middle Neck only; as has been set forth before. When its considered, will appear equally Ambiguous with the last; for, as to what’s before the words, as has been set forth before, its agreed he might tell them so, and the Complainants never pretended to any more than the Middle Neck; but they always understood the Middle Neck, to extend further than what he says he understood it, so that that was just nothing. Then does the words, as has been set forth before determine his meaning here, to be theirs or his? No, for the Complainants set forth before, that the Middle or Great Neck, does extend to the Extent of the Patent, and he otherwise, and which of these is meant, is left Ambiguous. The next Paragraph is, The alteration of the Articles, was declared at first sight thereof. The Complainants need not dispute that, seeing, as before, they were not with him at the first sight thereof, as appears by the 2 d and 6 th Articles, and latter part of the first Article of the 3 d Charge, and the Observations thereon; and of Consequence, that declaration was not to them. The next Paragraph is, And at the time of making the alteration, not objected against by them, as is set forth before. That the alteration was objected to, the Complainants conceive plain, from what appears under the 6 th Article of the 4 th Charge, and Observations thereon. But why did not Mr. Philipse once mention to the Arbitrators, this (so much insisted on) Argument, that he objected to the words TWENTY MILES before hand; it seems very strange, that what he now conceives, so weighty an Argument, should have been intirely forgot by him, and not one word of it thought of, at least Expressed, during all this Arbitration, the Complainants may well say so, seeing thro’ all his Answer he does not say he did; but to make up for it, he here introduces in his Answer, concerning the Transactions before the Arbitrators, a repetition of the old Story, in order probably to induce these who read it unwarily, to think that it was a matter insisted on or mentioned before the Arbitrators: but whoever will but read it, with the least Attention, may easily see, its not pretended to be a matter mentioned to the Arbitrators; tho’ sl _ly so introduced, as to make it seem as if it had. And as its Evident from hence, that this mighty new pretence, of having objected to the TWENTY MILES beforehand, and of having told the Complainants thereof, was not so much as once thought on, or mentioned before the Arbitrators, the Reader is left to judge, whether that gives not a great deal of Ground, to Suspect that to be AN AFTER THOUGHT, as is before hinted, under Charge 3 d, No. 2 and 6; for, had [Page 49]such a thing ever been, its hardly reasonable to be supposed, it would have been then forgot; seeing that time, was within a year of the Transaction. And to suspect that Mr. Philipse finding his GRAND ARGUMENT before the Arbitrators (in the next Article) Defeated, by making it so obvious to his memory, that the Facts then asserted by him were untrue: there was a necessity of thinking, or dreaming of some colour or other, to make an excuse, for that flagrant act, of striking out the word […]​ TWENTY MILES, after the Consideration for the Agreement had been accepted of; and that without Consent of the Parties, as before in the 3 d Charge fully has appeared. And when the several places in the Answer, where this Exception or Objection is _epeated;  are carefully consider’d together, these Suspicions will be not a little encreased. Truth is always the same, but the Contrary varies. But these Suspicions, will be much more encreased, when he means that Mr. Philipse is capable of taking, for to gain his Ends (as in the 2 d Charge) are considered, with his Swearing concerning his Opinion of the Necks, (as in the beginning of the Observations on the 4 th Charge) and concerning the power of Attorney (as in the Observations on the Answer in general.)

And now We come to the GRAND ARGUMENT insisted on before the Arbitrators, —9— which the Reader is desired to turn back to, and carefully to peruse. The GRAND ARGUMENT it may be called, for had it been true, there would have been a great deal of weight in it. As for the other ARGUMENT, That the NECKS are to the Markt Trees, and what’s above them is a seperate Grant, it may well be called the LITTLE ARGUMENT, in respect of the Other; in so far, as any Man of very moderate Capacity, by looking over Lovelace’s Patent (above, Printed in fol. 1 and 2, of the Decree) cannot be long in Determining, that the Facts of that Argument are Untrue; For its plain, there’s not Two Grants, but One Grant, Not Two Tracts, but One Tract, granted thereby. But this Argument appearing so fully Refuted in the Decree, there’s no need here of further showing the Weakness and Littleness of it. But Unluckily the GRAND ARGUMENT falls to the Ground!

(18c: 1720s; 1727, N02480 / 2. APPENDIX To the.12–12,19¶)



Friday, June 20, 2025

Cumorah 100 years ago vs today

100 years ago, the Hill Cumorah was important to Latter-day Saints. Everyone knew it was not only the place where Joseph obtained the plates, but also the site of the repository of records and the scene of the final battles of the Jaredites and Nephites.

Today, most Latter-day Saints have no idea what the prophets have taught about Cumorah. As an example of why, and to see how the situation can be remedied, see these annotations to the entry on Cumorah written by the Church History Department.

https://www.ldshistoricalnarratives.com/2025/06/improving-church-websites-cumorah.html

_____


100 years ago, the Church owned a slice of the Hill Cumorah (purchased in 1923) and was hoping to purchase the rest from the owner, Pliny T. Sexton. Sexton had offered to sell the hill for $100,000 (about $1.8 million in 2025 dollars), which the Church rejected. 

Sexton died on September 5, 1924, and his heirs disagreed about selling the property to the Church. By 1925 half of them thought a price of $50,000 was acceptable.

Negotiations continued until 1928, when a series of events enabled the Church to purchase Cumorah. In the April 1928 General Conference, President Ivins discussed the acquisition. We discussed his address in what is still the most-read post on this blog (so far).

https://www.lettervii.com/2017/01/the-hill-cumorah-by-president-anthony-w.html

Background:

In 1915 President Joseph F. Smith set apart Willard Bean  (the "Fighting Preacher") and his wife Rebecca as missionaries to Palmyra, NY. President Smith described the area as “the most prejudiced place in the world.” The Beans raised their family there. In 1923 they were able to enable the Church to purchase part of the Hill Cumorah. In 1928 arranged for the Church to purchase most of the rest of the hill.

An outstanding article titled "Acquiring Cumorah" by Cameron J. Packer explains how the Church was able to finally purchase Cumorah.

https://rsc.byu.edu/vol-6-no-2-2005/acquiring-cumorah

Excerpts:

Early Church member W. W. Phelps wrote, “Cumorah . . . is well calculated to stand in this generation, as a monument of marvelous works and wonders.”

..... 

It is interesting to note that while events in obtaining the hill were developing rapidly in New York, Church leaders in Salt Lake City were right in step without actually having conversed with Willard Bean. 

On February 2, 1928, Willard wrote up the proposal for the purchase of the hill and surrounding properties and airmailed it to the First Presidency, asking them to let him know “at their earliest convenience.”[72] Two days later Willard received a telegram from the First Presidency that said, “See lawyer of Sexton estate and get definite offer for Hill Cumorah alone if possible; if not, with adjacent properties, put it in writing, put up forfeit, and let us hear from you at earliest convenience.”[73] This telegram was dated the same day that Willard had written and sent his letter to the First Presidency. 

Two days after receiving this telegram, Willard received another from the First Presidency that said, “Terms satisfactory. Close deal.”[74] It is therefore evident that the First Presidency was well aware that the time had come for the Church to purchase the Hill Cumorah, a point acknowledged by the First Presidency in a letter they sent to Willard Bean that said, “We were very glad to learn that you had secured an option on the Hill Cumorah Farm and other property before receiving word from us to do so. We had already noticed the singular coincidence of your writing to us the very same day and possibly the same hour that we were writing to you.”[75]

At the first General Conference after the acquisition, President Ivins gave the address we discussed in the post linked to above.

_____

In our day, few Latter-day Saints remember what the prophets have taught about Cumorah. Some of us remember these things from our seminary manuals, but those references have all vanished from current curriculum.

Nevertheless, the teachings of the prophets are available for anyone to read, including Letter VII and other references here:

https://www.mobom.org/byu-packet

Thursday, June 12, 2025

How be it that ye have not written this thing?

People soon forget what is not written down. As Alma taught, "it has hitherto been wisdom in God that these things should be preserved; for behold, they have enlarged the memory of this people." (Alma 37:8)

In some cases, things are forgotten even when they were written down because the old writings are ignored or lost. That seemed to be the case with the Nephites. They had kept a record of Samuel the Lamanite's prophecies but the official record omitted his prophecy about saints arising from the dead.

The Lord made this point to the Nephites, when he asked them, "How be it that ye have not written this thing?" (3 Nephi 23:11)

Samuel had prophesied about 40 years earlier. Mormon inserted the official record of Samuel's prophecies and the associated events at the end of the Book of Helaman (our modern Chapters 13-16 in Helaman, Chapter V in the 1830 edition).

But when Nephi "brought forth the records," Christ noticed that some of Samuel's prophecies were missing from the official record, specifically that many would arise from the dead.

The disciples remembered that Samuel had prophesied about this, and that people did arise from the dead, but that was not found in the official records they gave to Christ.

In other words, Samuel's prophecy had once been known. Presumably his prophecy about saints rising from the dead had been recorded somewhere, but it was not included in the official records. The knowledge would have been lost to the Saints of that day once those who lived during that time had died with their memories. 

That's why Christ told the disciples to put it in the official records.
_____

We have a similar situation in our day regarding the origin and setting of the Book of Mormon.

In our day, few Latter-day Saints know what the prophets have taught about the New York Cumorah/Ramah. 

Shortly before his death, Brigham Young expressed his concern that the truth about Cumorah would be forgotten.

I tell you this as coming not only from Oliver Cowdery, but others who were familiar with it, and who understood it just as well as we understand coming to this meeting, enjoying the day, and by and by we separate and go away, forgetting most of what is said, but remembering some things. So is it with other circumstances in life. I relate this to you, and I want you to understand it. I take this liberty of referring to those things so that they will not be forgotten and lost.

(1877, BY Trying to ¶7 • JD 19:38)

Brigham Young had good reason to be concerned. 

While these accounts were written, and some have been preserved in the Joseph Smith Papers, they are mostly forgotten because they have been omitted from modern media and curriculum. Modern LDS scholars ignore what was taught (except when the M2Cers are repudiating it).

For example, Letters IV and VII were published in 1835 and then republished in all the Church newspapers during Joseph Smith's lifetime, so the New York Cumorah was common knowledge among Latter-day Saints as long as Joseph lived. 

The Messenger and Advocate

The Times and Seasons

The Gospel Reflector

The Millennial Star

The Prophet

Joseph even had them copied into his own journal, where we can all read them here:

Letter IV: "[Moroni] said this history was written and deposited not far from that place [Joseph's home near Palmyra, NY]"

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1834-1836/69

Letter VII: "the fact, that here, between these hills, the entire power and national strength of both the Jaredites and Nephites were destroyed."

http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1834-1836/90

In Utah, they were republished in the Improvement Era.

But they have never been republished in the Ensign or Liahona.

Consequently, few Latter-day Saints today know about it. What was common knowledge in Joseph's day is lost knowledge for Latter-day Saints today.

_____

A modern version of 3 Nephi 7-13. 

In our day, the Lord could say:

7 And it came to pass that he said unto Church Historian: Bring forth the record which ye have kept.

8 And when the Church Historian had brought forth the records, and laid them before him, he cast his eyes upon them and said:

9 Verily I say unto you, I commanded my servant Oliver Cowdery, the Assistant President of the Church, that he should testify unto this people, that my servant Moroni told Joseph Smith that the record of the Nephites was “written and deposited not far from Joseph’s home,” and that it is a fact that the final battles of the Nephites and Lamanites took place in the mile-wide valley west of the hill Cumorah in New York. And he said unto them: Was it not so?

10 And the Church historians answered him and said: Yea, Lord, Oliver did testify according to thy words, and they were all written.

11 And Jesus said unto them: How be it that ye have forgotten this thing, that made these things clear to my Saints?

12 And it came to pass that the Church Historian remembered that this thing had been written but had been long forgotten and ignored.

13 And it came to pass that Jesus commanded that it should be written again; therefore it was written according as he commanded.

14 Then Jesus said again, Verily I say unto you, I commanded my servant Brigham Young, President of the Church, that he should testify unto this people, that my servants Joseph and Oliver visited the repository of Nephite records in the hill Cumorah in New York, lest that, too, be forgotten among this people. And he said unto them: Was it not so?

15 And the Church historians answered him and said: Yea, Lord, President Young did testify according to thy words, and they were all written.

16 And Jesus said unto them: How be it that ye have forgotten this thing also, that made these things clear to my Saints?

17 And it came to pass that the Church Historian remembered that this thing had been written but had been long forgotten.

18 And it came to pass that Jesus commanded that it should be written again; therefore it was written according as he commanded.

19 Then Jesus said again, Verily I say unto you, I commanded my servants Orson Pratt, Heber C. Kimball, Marion G. Romney, Mark E. Peterson, and others, yeah, even every one of my servants who has testified about this topic, to reiterate and corroborate the testimony of my servants Joseph and Oliver. And he said unto them: Was it not so?

20 And the Church historians answered him and said: Yea, Lord, all of these servants did testify according to thy words, and they were all written.

21 And Jesus said unto them: How be it that ye have forgotten these things also, that made these things clear to my Saints?

22 And it came to pass that the Church Historian remembered that these things had been written but had been long forgotten.

23 And it came to pass that Jesus commanded that they should be written again; therefore it was written according as he commanded. 

_____

 

7 And it came to pass that he said unto Nephi: Bring forth the record which ye have kept.

8 And when Nephi had brought forth the records, and laid them before him, he cast his eyes upon them and said:

9 Verily I say unto you, I commanded my servant Samuel, the Lamanite, that he should testify unto this people, that at the day that the Father should glorify his name in me that there were many saints who should arise from the dead, and should appear unto many, and should minister unto them. And he said unto them: Was it not so?

10 And his disciples answered him and said: Yea, Lord, Samuel did prophesy according to thy words, and they were all fulfilled.

11 And Jesus said unto them: How be it that ye have not written this thing, that many saints did arise and appear unto many and did minister unto them?

12 And it came to pass that Nephi remembered that this thing had not been written.

13 And it came to pass that Jesus commanded that it should be written; therefore it was written according as he commanded.

(3 Nephi 23:7–13)

_____



Monday, May 12, 2025

"of worth unto my brethren"

The first verse of Moroni relates something important if we have eyes to read and minds to think.

4 Wherefore, I write a few more things, contrary to that which I had supposed; for I had supposed not to have written any more; but I write a few more things, that perhaps they may be of worth unto my brethren, the Lamanites, in some future day, according to the will of the Lord.

(Moroni 1:4)

Mormon had explained that he "made this record out of the plates of Nephi" when he was at Cumorah.
(Mormon 6:6)

Moroni reiterated this when he told Joseph Smith that "this history was written and deposited not far from that place," referring to Joseph's home near Palmyra, New York.


Because Moroni was writing for his brethren, the Lamanites, it makes sense that he deposited the record in the area where they lived; i.e., western New York.

Cumorah "not far from" Joseph's home

That first night Moroni identified the location of the record by name: 

"the record is on a side hill on the Hill of Cumorah 3 miles from this place remove the Grass and moss and you will find a large flat stone pry that up and you will find the record under it laying on 4 pillars."


Joseph Smith explained he knew about Cumorah before he even got the plates. 

"And again, what do we hear? Glad tidings from Cumorah! Moroni, an angel from heaven, declaring the fulfilment of the prophets—the book to be revealed." 

(Doctrine and Covenants 128:20)

This is all common sense, well documented in Church history.

Next, we consider what Moroni meant by "my brethren, the Lamanites."

Mission to the Lamanites

We know from D&C 28, 30, and 32 that the Lord described the Indians in New York, Ohio and Missouri as Lamanites when he commanded Oliver Cowdery, Parley P. Pratt, Ziba Peterson, and Peter Whitmer to go on a mission "to the Lamanites." They taught members of the Seneca, Wyandot, and Delaware nations.

- Moroni wrote his part of the record so it would be of worth to his brethren, the Lamanites. 
- That history was "written and deposited" not far from Joseph's home. 
- Cumorah is about three miles from Joseph's home. 
- The Lamanites, whom Moroni identified as his brethren, were the Indians living in western New York and those tribes who had been pushed westward from their ancestral homes.

Joseph Smith teaching the Lamanites

While in Nauvoo, Illinois, Joseph Smith told the Sac and Fox Indians who lived in the area that the Book of Mormon was the record of their ancestors.

He also wrote the "Wentworth letter" which described the Book of Mormon. Joseph adapted an 1840 pamphlet by Orson Pratt and replaced Orson's speculation about Central America by writing that the remnant of Lehi's people "are the Indians that now inhabit this country." 


For a comparison between Orson's pamphlet and the Wentworth letter, see 



So far, so good.
_____

But some LDS scholars reject all of that. They claim the early accounts about Cumorah in New York were all false speculation by the people involved. They claim that the "real Cumorah" is somewhere in southern Mexico, hence the Mesoamerican/two-Cumorahs theory ("M2C").

The M2Cers claim that instead of the history being "written and deposited not far from" Joseph's home, it was actually "written" thousands of miles away. 

Then, according to them, Moroni went on a long solitary march of thousands of miles to deposit the records in western New York, an area where his "brethren, the Lamanites" had never visited during the thousand-year history recorded in the Book of Mormon.

The M2C version of Moroni's route
(click to enlarge)

The M2Cers point to some non-scriptural and non-historical usage of the term "Lamanites" that conveyed a broad, generalized sense of the term to apply to native people throughout the western hemisphere and the Pacific basin. E.g., https://ldsmag.com/who-are-the-descendants-of-the-lamanites/

People can believe whatever they want, of course.

But everyone wants to make informed decisions. And most Latter-day Saints have never heard or seen the references from the Joseph Smith papers set out above.

And we can ask, which makes more sense?

What Joseph, Oliver, Lucy and others reported, versus what modern M2C scholars claim?







Thursday, May 1, 2025

"head of the river Sidon"

People are still asking me about the head of the river Sidon. I discussed this almost 10 years ago on this blog, but most people have no idea about that.

I'm reposting it here, with some additions.

Several verses are implicated.

17 And it came to pass that I was desirous that Laman and Lemuel should come and partake of the fruit also; wherefore, I cast mine eyes towards the head of the river, that perhaps I might see them.
(1 Nephi 8:17)
 
the borders of the wilderness which was on the north by the land of Zarahemla, through the borders of Manti, by the head of the river Sidon, running from the east towards the west
(Alma 22:27)

nevertheless the Nephites had taken possession of all the northern parts of the land bordering on the wilderness, at the head of the river Sidon, from the east to the west, round about on the wilderness side;
(Alma 22:29)

11 And thus he cut off all the strongholds of the Lamanites in the east wilderness, yea, and also on the west, fortifying the line between the Nephites and the Lamanites, between the land of Zarahemla and the land of Nephi, from the west sea, running by the head of the river Sidon
(Alma 50:11)

 25 Neither durst they march down against the city of Zarahemla; neither durst they cross the head of Sidon, over to the city of Nephihah.
(Alma 56:25)

The John Sorenson translation--he always writes "headwaters" instead of "head" when he refers to this--seems to have replaced Joseph Smith's translation in the minds of many M2Cers. They think these passages refer to the "source" of the Sidon river, which is one step removed from even the Sorenson translation.

For purposes of this discussion, I'll agree to set aside the Joseph Smith translation in favor of the Sorenson translation. Let's say, for sake of argument, that the "head of Sidon" is the same as "headwaters of Sidon." Now let's look at how the term was used in Joseph's Smith's day.

In the Zarahemla book, p. 273 (2nd Ed.) I pointed out that:

"Even “headwaters” does not always mean the source of a river. In 1842, Jesse W. Crosby kept a journal about his missionary journey from Nauvoo to Michigan. “I set off on a northeasterly course towards Michigan, crossing the headwaters of the Illinois at Ottawa, thence up the Knakakee River.” The Illinois River extends another 30 miles east of Ottawa, so what was Crosby referring to? The Fox River joins the Illinois River at Ottawa. To Crosby, “headwaters” meant a confluence."

I used to live along the Fox River in Illinois. It's not a major river, but it is notable and there are several towns along the river (as in most of the Midwest, people settled along the rivers, just as they did in Book of Mormon times). If I canoed down the Fox River behind our house I would end up entering the Illinois River.

Here's a map showing the "headwaters" vs. the "source" of the Illinois River.




Next, let's see how Oliver Cowdery used the term.

In his Letter VIII, Oliver Cowdery wrote "This gentleman, whose name is Stowel, resided in the town of Bainbridge, on or near the head waters of the Susquehannah river. Some forty miles south, or down the river, in the town of Harmony, Susquehannah county, Pa...." I quoted letter VIII previously here:
  



Bainbridge, NY, is at least 40 miles from Cooperstown, the location of the source of the Susquehannah River. (South Bainbridge, today known as Afton, was where Stowell lived, and it is another 5 miles downriver.

Did Oliver not know the source of the river was nowhere near Bainbridge? Of course he did. Then why did he say Stowel resided "on or near" the head waters in Bainbridge?

You can see from the map that tributaries flow into the river at or near Afton. Oliver used the term "head waters" the same way Jesse Crosby did.

Some say "headwaters" may refer to a crossing or bridge. That definition also makes sense in the Book of Mormon. One thing for sure is when Oliver wrote "head waters" he did not mean the source of the river.

These are two actual uses of the term head waters, contemporaneous with Joseph Smith, that don't mean the source. The fact that Oliver Cowdery of all people used the term to mean a confluence should be enough to settle the matter, but I suppose this debate will never be settled until Moroni sets us straight.
_____

Then there is Jonathan Edwards.

Edwards wrote a couple of letters referring to the "head of the river" that anyone can read at the Edwards Center at Yale University. 

As to the affair of preaching the gospel to the Indians, Mr. [Elihu] Spencer went the last fall, far into the western wilderness; to the Oneidas, one of the tribes of Indians called the Six Nations, living on Susquehanna River, towards the head of the river , to a place called by the Indians, Onohquauga, about 180 miles southwest from Albany on Hudson's River, where he continued almost through the winter; and went through many difficulties and hardships, with little or no success, through the failing of his interpreter.

There had been here the last summer a man whose name was Jonah [Tonaughquunnaugus] from Onohquaga, a town of the Oneidas situated on Susquehanna River near the head of the river about 200 miles southwest from Albany. He was one of the principal inhabitants of the town, who, having heard of the things which were doing here for the instruction of the Indians, came to visit this place and make report to his people. 

Naturally, we wonder where this Indian town was located.

Wikipedia explains: Onaquaga (also spelled many other ways) was a large Iroquois village, located on both sides of the Susquehanna River near present-day Windsor, New York

Windsor, NY, is about 13 miles upriver from Harmony, Pa, where Joseph translated the abridged plates (which included the passages of Alma quoted above). On the map below, you can see it would take over 4 hours to walk from Windsor, NY (formerly Onaquaga) to Harmony, PA.

(click to enlarge)


The source of the Susquehanna River is Otsego Lake, at Cooperstown, NY, about 67 miles upstream from Windsor, NY. 

Obviously, Edwards was not referring to the source of the Susquehanna River when he referred to the "head of the river." Instead, he referred to the "head of the river" at Onaquaga (now Windsor) because at that location, there is a tributary to the Susquehanna. 

Windsor is about 100 miles from Albany as the crow flies. Edwards said it was "about 180 miles southwest from Albany on Hudson's River" because the Hudson River is on the other side of the watershed from the Susquehanna River. To get to Onaquaga, you can sail down the Hudson part of the way, then paddle upstream to the watershed divide and portage your boat over to one of the rivers on the other side that feeds into the Susquehanna. 

The point is that to Edwards, the "head of the river" was only a few miles upstream from where Joseph translated the Book of Mormon, using that very term. And neither Joseph nor Edwards used it as a synonym for "source."

But people can disagree and still claim Joseph should have dictated the word "source" because (in their minds) that is what Joseph meant. 

Other Latter-day Saints, such as me, prefer Joseph's translation to the Sorenson or other M2C translations.



Monday, April 28, 2025

Another account of the repository in Cumorah in New York

Jesse N. Smith kept a journal from 1834-1906. He was at an evening meeting in Cedar City in February, 1874, when Brigham Young came to visit.

Jesse wrote:

"I heard him at an evening meeting in Cedar City describe an apartment in the Hill Cumorah that some of the brethren had been permitted to enter. He said there was great wealth in the room in sacred implements, vestments, arms, precious metals and precious stones, more than a six-mule team could draw."

You can see this in his published journal here:

https://catalog.churchofjesuschrist.org/assets/391cd59a-72e8-4b45-bf35-9a2e2aadfd22/0/235?lang=eng


  


Tuesday, April 15, 2025

Simple comparison: scholars vs prophets

In the pursuit of clarity, charity and understanding, and in the spirit of no more contention, the table below compares two alternative approaches to the Cumorah question.

The purpose is to simplify and clarify the differences while: 

(i) assuming all parties are acting in good faith and 

(ii) seeking understanding of both sides with no contention about "who is correct." 

“All parties should strive to avoid contention on these matters.” 

Cumorah: prophets vs scholars

Prophets

M2C Scholars

New York Cumorah

M2C (Mesoamerican/two-Cumorah’s theory that puts Cumorah in Mexico)

Basic premise

Basic premise: Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, their contemporaries and their successors in Church leadership told the truth about Cumorah/Ramah in New York.

Basic premise: Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, their contemporaries and their successors in Church leadership did not tell the truth about Cumorah but instead were merely speculating because a few RLDS and LDS scholars have figured out that the “real” Cumorah must be in Mexico to make their maps of the Book of Mormon fit.

Specific examples

Moroni called the hill Cumorah during his first visit to Joseph Smith

Joseph Smith, Lucy Mack Smith, and Oliver Cowdery were all wrong

Joseph referred to the hill as Cumorah even before he translated the plates

Lucy Mack Smith was wrong

The messenger took the abridged plates from Harmony to Cumorah

David Whitmer was wrong

Joseph and Oliver visited the repository in Cumorah multiple times

Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, Brigham Young, Wilford Woodruff, Heber C. Kimball were all wrong

Joseph’s contemporaries and successors in Church leadership, including members of the First Presidency speaking in General Conference, reaffirmed that Cumorah is in New York

They were all wrong.

Who discusses which approach (with no more contention)

Ordinary Latter-day Saints who accept the teachings of the prophets have taught and who confirm their bias by assessing the extrinsic evidence that supports and corroborates the teachings of the prophets and Cumorah/Ramah in New York. Often referred to as “Heartlanders.”

Scholars in legacy organizations such as FAIRLDS, Interpreter, FARMS, BMAF, Book of Mormon Central, etc., all of whom reject the teachings of the prophets and confirm their bias by interpreting the Book of Mormon to fit in a Mesoamerican setting. Often referred to as “M2Cers.”


The references are available here:

https://www.mobom.org/church-history-issues