Relying on the text and not on interpretation
| Tags:
Based on their dubious interpretation of D&C 125:3, Jonathan Neville and other Heartlanders believe that the Book of Mormon city of Zarahemla was located across the Mississippi River from the modern city of Nauvoo. Neville asserts:
This is just one example of how Heartlanders’ beliefs drive their interpretations of the text instead of the text determining their beliefs: Because of their idiosyncratic interpretation of D&C 125:3—an interpretation that no Church leader has ever so much as suggested—Heartlanders are forced to assert that the Sidon must be the Mississippi River, which flows south into the Gulf of Mexico. They rely on their own interpretations of the text, not the text itself.
—Peter Pan
M2C scholars insist that Zarahemla cannot be in Iowa. When we read their justifications, though, they rely on their own interpretations of the text, not the text itself. While there is nothing inherently wrong with their interpretations, there is nothing inherently correct, either. Their M2C hypothesis is merely the logical result of their assumptions and interpretations.Despite telling us that “the text itself” should be the authority, Neville tells us later in the same blog post:
The text [of the Book of Mormon] tells us little about the geography of Zarahemla, but we can tell the city was located along the river Sidon….Neville’s insistence that the Sidon flowed south conflicts with his previous assertion that “the text itself” and not “interpretations of the text” should determine one’s beliefs. As I demonstrated earlier this year, a close reading of the Book of Mormon clearly indicates that the Sidon flowed to the north (unless one believes that gravity operated differently in Book of Mormon times than it does today).
Some claim the river Sidon must flow north because the “head of the river” was south of Zarahemla, but the text reads “head of the river,” not “headwaters of the river.” The phrase “head of the river” is somewhat ambiguous; we can find usage and definitions that include both a conjunction and a source.
This is just one example of how Heartlanders’ beliefs drive their interpretations of the text instead of the text determining their beliefs: Because of their idiosyncratic interpretation of D&C 125:3—an interpretation that no Church leader has ever so much as suggested—Heartlanders are forced to assert that the Sidon must be the Mississippi River, which flows south into the Gulf of Mexico. They rely on their own interpretations of the text, not the text itself.
—Peter Pan
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Thoughtful comments are welcome and invited. All comments are moderated.