An example of Neville Land thinking
Jonathan Neville has some peculiar ideas. (Hence the tongue-in-cheek name of this blog.)
His recent reaction to the new Gospel Topics Essay on Book of Mormon geography is one example of his tendency for misinterpretation based on what he wants the text to say, rather than what it actually says.
The essay, published in late January 2019, officially sets forth the neutral position of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints regarding the geographic setting of the events of the Book of Mormon:
Yet Brother Neville has interpreted this clear statement in a most unusual fashion: He believes that it includes “classes taught by CES and BYU” [link 1 | link 2], even though BYU is an academic setting, not a Church setting.
He believes that BYU’s Virtual Book of Mormon—a map of internal relationships of Book of Mormon sites, based on their descriptions in the text alone—should be removed. [link 1 | link 2] He’s also critical of BYU Studies Quarterly for featuring John Sorenson’s Mesoamerican map of the Book of Mormon. [link] That these remain online indicates that BYU’s administration—overseen by members of the Quorum of the Twelve, who are the trustees of the university—does not agree with his interpretation of the Gospel Topics essay.
He also writes, “It is obvious that lds.org [the Church’s website] is a ‘Church setting’” and, therefore, “All links to [sites that advocate a Mesoamerican Book of Mormon geography] should be removed,” from it, including “links to BYU Studies, FairMormon, Book of Mormon Central, the Interpreter, and any other site that advocates a particular theory of Book of Mormon geography.” [link] And yet, the Church continues to link to these and other sources on its Seminary & Institute web page. Clearly, what is “obvious” to Neville isn’t obvious to Church leaders.
According to Brother Neville, “Church settings” also includes its visitors centers, including the one on Temple Square which depicts the prophet Mormon wearing Mesoamerican clothing and seated among Mesoamerican artifacts. Furthermore, it includes artwork depicting Book of Mormon events in Mesoamerican settings. Do these mean that Church leaders and administrators understand the Church’s position on Book of Mormon geography differently than Neville does? No, Neville tells us, it simply means “the new policy is not completely in effect.” He anticipates the purging of these items: “We’ll see how quickly they are removed.” [link]
Despite the clear lack of any liquidation of Mesoamerican Book of Mormon maps, links, and art from Church schools, web sites, and visitors centers, Neville still insists that, “Without the implicit support of the Church”—which he believes “was withdrawn by the new policy announced in the essay”—the Mesoamerican theory of Book of Mormon geography “will fade into oblivion on its own.” [link]
Welcome to Neville‑Neville Land.
His recent reaction to the new Gospel Topics Essay on Book of Mormon geography is one example of his tendency for misinterpretation based on what he wants the text to say, rather than what it actually says.
The essay, published in late January 2019, officially sets forth the neutral position of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints regarding the geographic setting of the events of the Book of Mormon:
The Church takes no position on the specific geographic location of Book of Mormon events in the ancient Americas. Church members are asked not to teach theories about Book of Mormon geography in Church settings but to focus instead on the Book of Mormon’s teachings and testimony of Jesus Christ and His gospel. . . .One shouldn’t have to strain reason too hard to interpret the meaning behind the phrase “Church settings.” Clearly it refers to classrooms in Church meetings, such as Sunday School and Seminary classes, where “Church members” gather to discuss “the Book of Mormon’s teachings and testimony of Jesus Christ and His gospel.”
Some believe that the history depicted in the Book of Mormon occurred in North America, while others believe that it occurred in Central America or South America. Although Church members continue to discuss such theories today, the Church takes no position on the geography of the Book of Mormon except that the events it describes took place in the Americas.
Yet Brother Neville has interpreted this clear statement in a most unusual fashion: He believes that it includes “classes taught by CES and BYU” [link 1 | link 2], even though BYU is an academic setting, not a Church setting.
He believes that BYU’s Virtual Book of Mormon—a map of internal relationships of Book of Mormon sites, based on their descriptions in the text alone—should be removed. [link 1 | link 2] He’s also critical of BYU Studies Quarterly for featuring John Sorenson’s Mesoamerican map of the Book of Mormon. [link] That these remain online indicates that BYU’s administration—overseen by members of the Quorum of the Twelve, who are the trustees of the university—does not agree with his interpretation of the Gospel Topics essay.
He also writes, “It is obvious that lds.org [the Church’s website] is a ‘Church setting’” and, therefore, “All links to [sites that advocate a Mesoamerican Book of Mormon geography] should be removed,” from it, including “links to BYU Studies, FairMormon, Book of Mormon Central, the Interpreter, and any other site that advocates a particular theory of Book of Mormon geography.” [link] And yet, the Church continues to link to these and other sources on its Seminary & Institute web page. Clearly, what is “obvious” to Neville isn’t obvious to Church leaders.
According to Brother Neville, “Church settings” also includes its visitors centers, including the one on Temple Square which depicts the prophet Mormon wearing Mesoamerican clothing and seated among Mesoamerican artifacts. Furthermore, it includes artwork depicting Book of Mormon events in Mesoamerican settings. Do these mean that Church leaders and administrators understand the Church’s position on Book of Mormon geography differently than Neville does? No, Neville tells us, it simply means “the new policy is not completely in effect.” He anticipates the purging of these items: “We’ll see how quickly they are removed.” [link]
Despite the clear lack of any liquidation of Mesoamerican Book of Mormon maps, links, and art from Church schools, web sites, and visitors centers, Neville still insists that, “Without the implicit support of the Church”—which he believes “was withdrawn by the new policy announced in the essay”—the Mesoamerican theory of Book of Mormon geography “will fade into oblivion on its own.” [link]
Welcome to Neville‑Neville Land.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Thoughtful comments are welcome and invited. All comments are moderated.