Difference between revisions of "Question: Do we need to know where the Book of Mormon took place?"

(m)
m ()
Line 11: Line 11:
 
{{Conclusion label}}
 
{{Conclusion label}}
  
It is not required for salvation to know where the Book of Mormon took place.
+
Since a precise knowledge of where the Book of Mormon took place is not necessary for it to bring spiritual conversion, the Church has never offered a revealed or official geography, and is unlikely to do so.
  
 
== ==
 
== ==

Revision as of 00:06, 13 February 2014

  1. REDIRECTTemplate:Test3

Do we need to know where the Book of Mormon took place?

Questions


It is claimed that the Church has no official position on geography of the Book of Mormon because the lands in the Book of Mormon never existed.

To see citations to the critical sources for these claims, [[../CriticalSources|click here]]

Answer


Since a precise knowledge of where the Book of Mormon took place is not necessary for it to bring spiritual conversion, the Church has never offered a revealed or official geography, and is unlikely to do so.

Detailed Analysis

Those who offer this criticism often exaggerate the extent to which Biblical locations are known, and ignore the disadvantages under which New World archaeology labors compared to the Old World.

Critics also ignore that there is substantial evidence for the Old World accounts in the Book of Mormon that were not known in Joseph Smith's day.

Most LDS scholars believe that a Mesoamerican setting best matches the Book of Mormon data, but other models have been advanced by others. Given that the Church has no revealed geography outside the Book of Mormon text, it is unlikely that a "Church-endorsed" map will be published. This does not prevent other researchers from seeking the most plausible correlation, but such undertakings remain secular, not spiritual.


Further reading and additional sources responding to these claims