Book of Mormon Geography Debate Makes Headlines...

...in Utah.

But, still.

I think it's rad that a debate between two different groups of believers in the BoM has generated so much interest as to be deemed newsworthy... ok, in Utah.

But, still!

Book of Mormon geography stirring controversy: Dueling theories - Faithful at odds over where events may have taken place. (Salt Lake Tribune, 25 March)

(Does it bother anyone else that not all the words in a news article's title are capitalized? No? Just me? Aight then.)

On the one side you have those LDS who believe most of the events in the BoM were limited to a relatively small area in Mesoamerica (FARMS & FAIR), and on the other you have those who believe the BoM peoples inhabited a much larger area covering considerable portions of present day U.S. Each side claims different chains of evidence, and, for my money, the Mesoamerican blokes have the more plausible arguments, but the other fellas claim the support of authoritative prophetic utterances, which appears to be resonating with many Latter-day Saints.

Since, personally, I struggle in accepting that the events described in the BoM actually occurred at all, I don't really have a dog in this fight.

And after taking in the Trib article linked above, a fight is exactly what it is fast becoming.

That the back and forth between the two camps has gone beyond disagreements over evidence and spilled over into accusations that the other side's methods "undermine" the Church, a simple scholarly difference of opinion between believers could plausibly escalate into the sort of spectacle in which critics of the Church would undoubtedly take delight.



Edited to add: This news story, due, in part, to the growing influence of Mormon Droppings, has now made headlines outside the Mormon Corridor. See the Houston Chronicle's Debate on Mormons' geographic origins heats up.