Why Do Theorists Have Such a Problem Relying and Following the Scriptural Record? – Part IV

Continued from the previous post, regarding the various theories that simply are not consistent with the scriptural record of the Book of Mormon, and how important it is to not defend an idea or belief simply because it seems to make sense, but to compare it with the only criteria that has precedence over all others—the scriptural record.
    There are three very important facts regarding the location of the Book of Mormon that every theorist, academician, and promoter of the land promised to Lehi and his descendants that should alwayhs be kept in mind—both in writing down views and opinions, and in reading other people’s view and opinions:

1. There is no official Book of Mormon geography.
In the quasi-official Encyclopedia of Mormonism, the production of which was overseen by Elders Dallin H. Oaks and Neal A. Maxwell of the Quorum of the Twelve, it states: "The church has not taken an official position with regard to location of geographical places (in the Book of Mormon)." In 1993, in response to a query from some theorists, the office of the First Presidency responded with a statement, which reads in part: "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…there are no conclusive connections between the Book of Mormon text and any specific site."
    George Q. Cannon, First Presidency counselor to Presidents Brigham Young, John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff and Lorenzo Snow, said: "The First Presidency has often been asked to prepare some suggestive map illustrative of Nephite geography but have never consented to do so. Nor are we acquainted with any of the Twelve Apostles who would undertake such a task. The reason is, that without further information, they are not prepared even to suggest (a map). The word of the Lord or the translation of other ancient records is required to clear up many points now so obscure…"
    Obviously, without revelation on the matter, we are left to our own intellects and theories.

2. Joseph Smith's comments should not be construed as revelatory.
While acknowledging, at least in theory, that the Church has no official position on the location of Book of Mormon events, some members, and especially North American theorists, seem to believe that statements made by Joseph Smith implicitly represent revelation on the topic. In their zeal and support of such a view, some suggest that those who disagree with Joseph Smith's geographical comments are guilty of rejecting the prophet or that they are out of harmony with the Church.
    Such an accusation implies that those church leaders who have said that there is no official Book of Mormon geography are also on the road to apostasy, which is obviously illustratively untrue. What some theorists and members should keep in mind is that while Joseph translated the Book of Mormon, it does not logically follow that he received revelation as to whereabouts of those events. When we read his statements on the matter, it becomes apparent that he had some strong opinions but that his opinions changed with time and reflected his best intellectual efforts to discover answers—just as any curious individual would do.
    Since he never claimed to know the geography from revelation, we cannot make this claim for him

3. This also applies to statements by all modern prophets and Church leaders. 
No prophet or General Authority has ever claimed revelation on Book of Mormon geography. Again, many leaders have voiced their opinions over time, both personally and during Church meetings, from Oliver Cowdery to the current time. As an example, critics or proponents like to quote Joseph's mother, Lucy Mack Smith, who said that while the Lord prepared Joseph to acquire the plates, "God…manifest(ed) to him" some of the "particulars" concerning the Book of Mormon. According to her, Joseph described the "ancient inhabitants of this continent," as well as their dress, mode of traveling, their cities and more (History of Joseph Smith, p83).
    According to these theorists and proponents, this suggests that Joseph knew everything about the Book of Mormon, saw exactly what their lives were like, and would know where the events took place. First of all, Lucy dictated her thoughts nearly two decades after they happened. Secondly, just because Joseph saw such things in vision doesn't mean that Joseph knew the location of the events. Seeing people and buildings is not the same as seeing a map or satellite image. There is no evidence that God revealed the location of Book of Mormon events to Joseph Smith.
    As an example, Joseph Smith said of this problem of thinking everything a prophet says is prophetic: “This morning I… visited with a brother and sister from Michigan, who thought that "a prophet is always a prophet;" but I told them that a prophet was a prophet only when he was acting as such” (HC 5:265; Teachings p 278). He also stated: “In addition, in 1892 Elder Charles W. Penrose wrote in the Millennial Star: "At the head of this Church stands a man who is a Prophet…we respect and venerate him; but we do not believe that his personal views or utterances are revelations from God." In 1912, he added, “We do not believe in the infallibility of man. When God reveals anything it is truth, and truth is infallible. No President of the Church has claimed infallibility.” In 1902, Joseph F. Smith said: "The theories, speculations, and opinions of men, however intelligent, ingenious, and plausible, are not necessarily doctrines of the Church or principles that God has commanded His servants to preach. No doctrine is a doctrine of this Church until it has been accepted as such by the Church, and not even a revelation from God should be taught to his people until it has first been approved by the presiding authority–the one through whom the Lord makes known His will for the guidance of the saints as a religious body.” He then added, “The spirit of revelation may rest upon any one, and teach him or her many things for personal comfort and instruction. But these are not doctrines of the Church, and, however true, they must not be inculcated until proper permission is given.”

An official statement of the Church in May 2007, states: “Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine.” Also, in an interesting statement by elder Neil L. Anderson in 2012, he said, “There is an important principle that governs the doctrine of the Church. The doctrine is taught by all 15 members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve. It is not hidden in an obscure paragraph of one talk. True principles are taught frequently and by many. Our doctrine is not difficult to find.” He also added, “The leaders of the Church are honest but imperfect men. Remember the words of Moroni (Ether 12:6): “Condemn me not because of mine imperfection, neither my father…but rather give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest unto you our imperfections, that ye may learn to be more wise than we have been” (Elder Neil L. Anderson, “Trial of Your Faith,” Ensign, Nov 2012).
    In all of this, there is one underlying principle never to be forgotten or not considered, and that is the fact that the scriptural record of the Book of Mormon constitutes explicit, factual truth, upon which any thoughts of geographical locations must be evaluated.
    Simply put, when we claim something different than what the scriptural record tells us, we are on dangerous interpretive ground and cannot claim we are correct as so many theorists so adamantly and continually do!
    We should also understand that there are numerous theories and maps of the location of the Land of Promise, that is, the land promised to Lehi for his descendants (2 Nephi 1:3,5). They range from the Heartland and Great Lakes in North America, to Mesoamerica, to Central America, to South America. They also include the Malay Peninsula, Baja California, and Florida, as well as the Comoros Islands and to northeastern Africa. Now, the obvious response to this is that all these locations cannot be correct. So how can anyone know which location most accurately matches the descriptive information found in the scriptural record of the Book of Mormon?
    There is only one absolutely correct source—the scriptural record written by Nephi, Jacob, etc., and abridged by Mormon and Moroni. And that is only valid when the descriptive information given is interpreted as written, with no attempt to explain away any point with a different interpretation than the simple one given.

So when it states that the Lord prepared plants and herbs for such things as a cure for killing fevers (Alma 46:40), we have to show that in our Land of Promise model, there is a history of such a plant or herb, either presently or in the past. When the scriptural record states there were two animals unknown to Joseph Smith during Jaredite times that were more useful to man than the horse and donkey (Mosiah 9:19), we have to show which animals those were—not just any animal, but ones unknown to a generational family of farmers in northeastern North Americas in 1830. When we find that there were two grains in the Land of Promise that were unknown to a farmer in North America in 1830, then we have to show those two grains, and their ancient or current existence, which grains were on a par with wheat and barley in value and usage (Mosiah 9:9).
    When Nephi tells us the ship he built was “driven forth before the wind,” we have to show the winds and ocean currents that blew from point of embarkation (Bountiful) to point of landing (Land of Promise). And when we learn that gold, silver and copper were plentiful in both the Land Northward and the Land Southward, we need to show such natural resources in our Land of Promise—not just small or temporary findings, but ones that would have lasted for at least 2500 years, from the time of Jared to the demise of the Nephite nation—and no doubt into the current time. When we see that a metal, unknown to Joseph Smith was so popular among the Nephites, that it was used to decorate a temple as well as be taxed along with gold, silver and copper (Mosiah 11:3, 8), then we should be able to identify an unknown metal in 1830 in the Land of Promise that anciently was used for expensive decoration and anciently worth considerable value.
    All we need to do to be correct in searching for anything related to Lehi and the Book of Mormon is to evaluate any point to the scriptural record, use the clear and precise yet simple language for understanding, and verify any conclusion against all that has been written in the scriptural record relating to that subject. This is not rocket science—no degree or special training or knowledge is required; no special experience is needed, though the more we know and learn, the easier it is sometimes to make these connections.