Rian Nelson promotes the claim that Russell M. Nelson is “the prophet who teacheth lies”

I’m taking a break from my very busy summer schedule to share what should be a warning to all Saints to not believe or follow the teachings of Rian Nelson, blogger and social media coordinator for Rod Meldrum’s Book of Mormon Evidence website.

For many years, Rian Nelson has been blogging and posting about his opposition to COVID-19 vaccines. He’s compared vaccines in general to sorcery and the occult and called pharmaceutical drugs “poisonous.” (Click here to see more examples of conspiracy theories he’s peddled.)

The problem of course with Rian Nelson’s anti-vaccine stance is that it’s in direct opposition to the repeated counsel of the First Presidency. This has forced him to make increasingly convoluted claims in order to justify his positions in the light of prophetic statements.

The latest example of this is his promotion of Alexander Tibekizis’s Kindle book—available for just 99 cents (you truly do get what you pay for, I suppose)—that claims “by teaching lies, the president of the Church fulfilled the prophet Isaiah’s prophecy” in Isaiah 9:15.* (If his blog post ends up being deleted, you can see a screenshot of it here.)

Rian Nelson first reprinted the Amazon.com description of Tibekizis’s book, unintentionally referring to it as “an amazing quote by Joseph Smith”:

During COVID-19, many members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints were shocked to have their church leaders encouraging them to take the COVID-19 Vaccine. Some questioned the faith of those who would not take the Vaccine; others accused any who spoke against the Vaccine of promoting apostasy. Some questioned their own faith when confronted with their prophet promoting what they saw as a lie. Still, others took the Vaccine even against their better judgment, believing that God would not hold them responsible for the damage it caused if they followed the prophet’s counsel.

By teaching lies, the president of the Church fulfilled the prophet Isaiah’s prophecy in the Old Testament, accompanied by many other leaders worldwide. Avoiding the Vaccine was not only the right and privilege of every member but standing for truth is precisely what the Lord has called those loyal to Him to do, both in and outside the Church. The Book of Mormon records that more part of the people came to believe in the Gadianton’s and thus took part with them in their spoils. This book documents how that same process occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. It also witnesses that none need question their faith in God, the Book of Mormon, the restoration of the Church, or their own membership, but it rather invigorates all to remain faithful to the purposes of the Lord and stand for truth at all times and all places.

Rian Nelson then followed that by reprinting this comment that he wrote to Tibekizis:

I absolutely love the premise of your book. It is the message the Saints need to hear. Often, I think how the Word of Wisdom was not given as a commandment, as it was written for the WEAKEST of the Saints, which is very similar to what you are speaking about.

Over 70% of my family took the jab, which I didn’t, as I was blessed with a calming spirit that told me not to take it. My family didn’t listen, as they were deceived by the craftiness of man. Now, I know the Lord forgives and He will bless my family as they show faith in Him.

Our dear Prophet was not wrong, as he was speaking to the entire world. Many countries would have ostracized or rejected the Church in many countries, like they did in Utah and our own USA. President Nelson knows the Lord will bless those who truly understand or repent. It was a huge trial of our faith and we will go through much more as the Prophet [Joseph Smith] said,

“Does God really want to speak to you? Yes! “As well might man stretch forth his puny arm to stop the Missouri river in its decreed course…as to hinder the Almighty from pouring down knowledge from heaven upon the heads of the Latter-day Saints.”

Let’s break this down, shall we?

• Rian Nelson believes that the First Presidency’s repeated counsel to get vaccinated against COVID-19 was, like the Word of Wisdom originally, not a commandment. (Nelson is correct that the Word of Wisdom was originally given “not by commandment or constraint,” although that changed in the 1920s under President Heber J. Grant.)
• Rian Nelson believes that the First Presidency’s repeated counsel to get vaccinated against COVID-19 was “written for the WEAKEST of Saints.” This would imply, it seems, that spiritually elite Saints knew that President Nelson didn’t mean they should get the vaccine, but all the spiritual commoners didn’t understand this coded message and failed the test.
• Rian Nelson believes that over 70 percent of his family members were “deceived by the craftiness of man.” (Wow, I’ll bet Thanksgivings and family reunions are blast with him around!)
• Rian Nelson believes that the First Presidency’s repeated counsel to get vaccinated against COVID-19 was a ploy to keep the Church in good standing among the nations of the world, and that President Nelson “knows the Lord will bless those who truly understand”—wink, wink—that he really didn’t mean for people to get vaccinated. This was just a secret code that only the spiritually elite like Rian Nelson would understand, while Saints who lacked his understanding or were disobedient (i.e., those who need to repent) didn’t understand and follow.

In an ironic twist, on the very same day that Rian Nelson published his “the prophet who teacheth lies” blog post, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints announced a contribution of $3 million to procure and distribute the new RTS,S malaria vaccine to help 39,500 African children receive the four doses required for immunity against malaria.

Rian Nelson is a false teacher who is leading unsuspecting Latter-day Saints into apostasy. Avoid and shun his teachings, and warn your fellow Saints also against them.

—Mike Parker [“Peter Pan”]

---

* Addendum: Who was “the prophet that teacheth lies” in Isaiah 9:15?

I haven’t (and won’t) read Tibekizis’s book, but if he truly believes that Isaiah 9:15 is prophecy of Russell M. Nelson—or even that President Nelson fits some sort of prophetic type in connection with that verse—then he’s gravely mistaken.

Isaiah 9:8–10:4 is an oracle (prophetic saying) made by Isaiah some time around 730 b.c. against the nation of Israel (also called Ephraim), which lay to the north of Judah where Isaiah lived. Israel had formed an alliance with Syria (also called Aram) to jointly throw off the yoke of Assyrian oppression. The two small nations wanted Judah to join them against Assyria, but king Jotham of Judah refused to participate in their coalition. Israel and Syria responded to Jotham’s decision by attacking Judah to force her to join their alliance. Shortly after the war began, Jotham died and was succeeded by his young son, the wicked Ahaz (r. 732–716). Judah suffered significant defeats during the reign of king Ahaz, and eventually the armies of Syria and Israel marched to Jerusalem and besieged the city. It was at this point that Isaiah gave Ahaz the Immanuel Prophecy to reassure him that Israel and Syria would both be defeated within a few years (Isaiah 7:3–17).

Isaiah 9:8–10:4 follows that by declaring the Lord’s coming punishment on Israel/Ephraim, and its capital city Samaria:

¹¹Therefore the Lord shall set up the adversaries of Rezin [the king of Syria] against him [Jacob, meaning the people of Israel],
 and join his enemies together;
¹²The Syrians before [i.e., from the east], and the Philistines behind [i.e., from the west];
 and they shall devour Israel with open mouth.
For all [despite] this his [the Lord’s] anger is not turned away [does not subside],
 but his hand is stretched out still [to strike Israel].
¹³For the people [of Israel] turneth not unto him that smiteth them [the Lord],
 neither do they seek the Lord of hosts [turn to him in the spirit of repentence].
¹⁴Therefore the Lord will cut off from Israel head and tail,
 branch and rush [i.e., shoots and stem], in one day.
¹⁵The ancient and honourable [i.e., leaders and highly respected people], he is the head;
 and the prophet that teacheth lies, he is the tail.
¹⁶For the leaders of this people [i.e., the “ancient and honourable” and the prophets of v. 15] cause them [the people of Israel] to err;
 and they that are led of them are destroyed.

This prophecy was fulfilled a few years later (ca. 721 b.c.), when the Assyrians attacked and overran the nation of Israel and deported the ten tribes who lived there to the east.

Isaiah’s prophecy condemned the false prophets of the nation of Israel in the eighth century b.c. It has nothing whatsoever to do with modern times, COVID-19, or (heaven forbid) Russell M. Nelson.

“And in these things they do err, for they do wrest the scriptures and do not understand them.” (D&C 10:63)

Photos of Mesoamerican sites in the 1963–1981 missionary edition of the Book of Mormon

From 1963 to 1981, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints published a paperback edition of the Book of Mormon with a photograph of a gold angel Moroni statue on its cover:

This was the standard inexpensive edition that was printed in large quantities and given by missionaries to investigators.

Like the one with the dark blue cover that’s been published since 1981, the earlier edition contained photographs of several paintings of Book of Mormon scenes by Arnold Friberg.

It also contained several pages of photographs of ancient sites, murals, textiles, and crafts that demonstrated the existence of advanced, complex, ancient American civilizations. The first page in the series had two photographs of the hill Cumorah, “where Joseph Smith obtained the gold plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated.”

Click images to enlarge.

None of these images proves that the Book of Mormon took place in Mesoamerica or South America.

However, they do clearly demonstrate that, since at least the early 1960s, leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have considered Mesoamerica and South America to be potential locations for Book of Mormon events.

This continues to be backed up by statements made by President Russell M. Nelson, the current (2023) president of the Church.

—Peter Pan
 

President Nelson and the attention to detail in Saints

Here’s a timely follow-up to my last post:

I’m at this year’s FAIR conference, and Jed Woodworth just gave a presentation about Saints volume 3. Woodworth is a historian and writer in the Church History Department, and he’s managing historian of Saints, the Church’s multi-volume history that Jonathan Neville has done his level best to criticize it for presenting a “false historical narrative.”

Except for the portions in quotations marks, the following is my paraphrase of Woodworth’s remarks. (I’m looking forward to a recording of the presentation becoming available so I can get an exact transcript.)

Woodworth said, “We have learned that President Nelson is a footnote-reader” and will correct the footnotes in draft manuscripts of Saints that he reviews.

He also said that the First Presidency and other apostles “read every word” of Saints before the volumes are published. President Nelson even once corrected a place in the manuscript that was missing the middle initial in a person’s name.

Woodworth’s comments show that the Brethren are concerned about exacting attention to minute detail, something that’s very odd for a history that supposedly “[doesn’t] present an accurate historical narrative,” as critic Jonathan Neville has claimed.

—Peter Pan
 

The First Presidency reviewed Saints before publication

It’s no secret that Jonathan Neville has serious problems with Saints, the Church-published, multi-volume history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Neville maintains an entire blog called Saints Review that he uses to criticize what he considers to be its “censored” version of Church history.

For example, concerning Saints, Neville has written:

• “[Accepting the history in Saints] wouldn’t be a problem if the editors had decided to accurately present the historical events from the perspective of the people involved; i.e., if they had presented an accurate historical narrative. Instead, they chose to promote modern ideas about Cumorah and the translation of the Book of Mormon.” (September 25, 2021)
• “The Saints books, especially volume 1, created a false historical narrative present (meaning, how did historical figures think and act in their day) to accommodate M2C and SITH.” (August 12, 2021)
• “The Saints books…are anonymous. We don’t know who wrote or edited them, we don’t have access to editorial decisions, and despite the numerous footnotes, readers can’t tell what was omitted or spun unless they have extensive background in the source materials.” (May 17, 2021)

Neville is, of course, entitled to his opinion, but that last statement from him is not even factually accurate: Jed Woodworth is the Managing Historian for the Saints project, and Scott Hales is also an editor. These facts are easily discovered with a simple Google search, which Neville apparently didn’t even attempt.

In a podcast produced by the Church about Saints volume 2 and published to the Gospel Library, Jed Woodworth had this to say about how the books have been produced:

My main duty is to ensure that the history [published in Saints] is accurate, to make sure that our writing measures up to the highest standards, [and] that we’re source-accurate. And I also incorporate feedback from a number of reviewers—external reviewers, general authority reviewers, including the First Presidency.

(The Saints Podcast, season 2, episode 1, “Gather Up a Company,” timestamp 0:59–1:19; emphasis added.)

So, contrary to what Jonathan Neville has been telling his readers for almost three years, the editors of Saints have “decided to accurately present…an accurate historical narrative.” Not only that, but the the manuscripts for Saints have been reviewed by general authorities, including members of the First Presidency. The First Presidency also wrote a foreword to the first volume, in which they encouraged “all to read the book and make use of the supplementary material available online” and expressed their hope “that this volume will enlarge your understanding of the past, strengthen your faith, and help you make and keep the covenants that lead to exaltation and eternal life.”

The raises an important question: Whom are we to believe? The First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or Jonathan Neville, conspiracy theorist, ark-steadier, and critic of the Church?

—Peter Pan
 

Jonathan Neville continues to assert that the Church is “out of the way”

In his October 1965 general conference address, Elder Harold B. Lee warned the members of the Church:

There are those among us who would set themselves up as critics of the Church, saying that the Church has gone out of the way. Some splintered apostate clans even from the beginning of this dispensation have made fictitious claims to authority. We should warn these, as well as those who are in danger of being led astray of what the Prophet [Joseph Smith] predicted. He said, “That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church saying they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly that that man is [on the way] to apostasy and if he does not repent, [he] will apostatize, as God lives.”

In April 1989, Elder (now President) Dallin H. Oaks warned the Saints about “alternate voices” who “speak of…the doctrines, ordinances, and practices of his church,” but do so “without calling or authority”:

The Church does approve or disapprove those publications that are to be published or used in the official activities of the Church, general or local. For example, we have procedures to ensure approved content for materials published in the name of the Church or used for instruction in its classes. These procedures can be somewhat slow and cumbersome, but they have an important benefit. They provide a spiritual quality control that allows members to rely on the truth of what is said. Members who listen to the voice of the Church need not be on guard against being misled. They have no such assurance for what they hear from alternate voices.

Elder Lee’s warning about “those among us” who criticize the Church and Elder Oaks’ warning about “alternate voices” both firmly apply to Jonathan Neville, who continually criticizes the Church, its leaders, and its publications. His July 14, 2022, blog post, “The Rising Generation, SITH and the GTE,” is rife with examples of this. For the sake of brevity, I’ll share just the following excerpt.

Note how different Neville’s evaluation of Church publications is to the one given to us by Elder Oaks:

Not only has Cumorah been censored from the Saints book, volume 1, but the teachings of Joseph and Oliver about the Urim and Thummim have been all but erased as well.

A prime example is the Gospel Topics Essay on Book of Mormon Translation as we’ll discuss below. This essay has been criticized by outsiders, but it is more problematic from a faithful perspective.

There are two aspects of the Gospel Topics Essays that people seem to overlook.

1. They were written by committee, published anonymously, and are not canonized.
2. They are subject to revision at any time without notice, and have been revised from time to time in the past.

These two aspects lead me to hope and propose that the essays continue to be improved. As it is now, the Translation essay misleads readers—particularly the rising generation.

…

[Joseph Smith] never said or implied that he dictated the Book of Mormon from words that appeared on the stone in the hat (SITH).

But the rising generation does not know any of this.

They are not being taught to refer to original sources but instead are led to the Saints books and to the Gospel Topics Essay on Book of Mormon Translation.

That essay omits and edits important, relevant original sources, including the teachings of the prophets, to promote the narrative generated by David Whitmer and others, contrary to the plain teachings of Joseph, Oliver, and their successors in Church leadership.

Just in this brief excerpt of his much longer blog post, Jonathan Neville has:

• Accused Church employees of censoring the historical record in official Church publications.
• Accused Church publications of being “problematic from a faithful perspective.”
• Downplayed the authority of the Gospel Topics Essays. (This, despite the Church’s explicit statement that the Gospel Topics Essays “have been approved by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles,” something I pointed out three years ago.)
• Hand-waved the Essays’ authority away on the spurious basis that they can be and have been revised. (Every position of the Church is subject to revision as “further light and knowledge” are received, either from divine or earthly sources. The Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants have been revised; that doesn’t in any way lessen their authoritative status.)
• Accused the Gospel Topics Essay on Book of Mormon translation of “mislead[ing] [its] readers.”
• Accused Church publications of misleading the youth of the Church (“the rising generation”) by teaching them to ignore original sources.
• Accused Church publications of “omitting” and “editing” sources so they are “contrary to the plain teachings” of Joseph Smith and other early Church leaders.

Please explain to me how Neville’s statements do not clearly fit Elder Lee’s warning about “those among us who would set themselves up as critics of the Church, saying that the Church has gone out of the way.”

Please explain to me how Neville’s statements do not explicitly call into question Elder Oaks’s witness that Church publications have “a spiritual quality control that allows members to rely on the truth of what is said.”

I am not claiming that Church publications are perfect. Everything produced by mortals is fallible, including scripture. There’s a difference, however, between (a) having concerns about or disagreements with specific articles published by the Church and (b) claiming that there is a conspiracy within the Church to suppress all teaching about a specific pet doctrine that one espouses. There will of course be errors in Church publications, and most publications will eventually be superseded by newer ones that correct these errors. But claiming that the entire Church is off the rails on supposedly important matters of doctrine and history is where Neville goes horribly wrong.

His approach can and will lead people in only one direction: into apostasy and out of the Church.

—Peter Pan
 

Jonathan Neville continues to mislead about the Church’s position on seer stones

Jonathan Neville has repeatedly quoted President Russell M. Nelson’s teaching, “Good inspiration is based upon good information.”

President Nelson’s counsel is true. Would that Jonanthan Neville would put it into practice. Instead, he withholds key pieces of information, leaving his readers uninformed in order to mislead them.

One example of this is Neville’s July 4, 2022, blog post, “The seer stone in Harmony.” In this post, Neville disputes the historical narrative on display at the Priesthood Restoration Site in northern Pennsylvania. Neville complains:

The display nudges visitors toward accepting SITH, even to the point of misrepresenting what both Joseph Smith and Lucy Mack Smith actually wrote.

Because it’s an overview display, we can’t expect it to relate the entire history in any detail. But visitors should be able to rely on the display being at least accurate, instead of teaching the opposite of what the sources tell us.

Following this, Neville critically reviews the historical record on display at the visitor center, concluding by mentioning “the SITH exhibit of the table with the hat and the covered plates.”

Because “good inspiration is based on upon good information,” one could expect that Neville would mention that President Russell M. Nelson agrees with the narrative at the Priesthood Restoration Site and has taught it himself in a Church video recorded at that very site.

But Neville didn’t mention this key piece of information, potentially leaving his readers to be misled into thinking that it was renegade Church employees who were responsible for the narrative at Harmony.

Jonathan Neville has opined before on what he believes is wrong information being taught at Church visitor centers. So far, Church leaders have wisely ignored his criticisms.

—Peter Pan
 

Heartland research director: “Many members of our church [have] a cult mindset.”

About a year ago, Kimberly W. Smith, research director for the “Joseph Smith Foundation”—a DBA for the late James Stoddard’s for-profit company, Integrivizion LLC—was caught claiming on social media that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is “off course.” Ms. Smith or Rian Nelson later deleted her comments, but not before my sources could grab some screenshots of what she had written.

Ms. Smith is back again, this time claiming that those who follow the repeated counsel of the First Presidency to be vaccinated against COVID‑19 “have fallen victim to a cult mindset.”

On the FIRM Foundation’s BookOfMormonEvidence.org blog run by Rian Nelson for Rodney Meldrum, Ms. Smith—an anti-vax conspiracy theorist—writes:

Many people and churches accuse us of being a cult for believing in a living prophet. Of course, they don’t fully understand that prophets are a blessing from God and have always been his mouthpiece to guide his children, especially in times when the people were extremely wicked and did not have the companionship of the Holy Ghost.

But the difference between a prophet and cult leader (aside from the obvious calling from God) is that a prophet will tell you his message and encourage you to seek the guidance from the Lord. Whereas a cult leader expects and often demands absolute loyalty to his words.

Obviously, we all know that our beloved prophet has offered his guidance and support in regard to the ‘thingy’. But he very carefully stated that it should be a decision between you, your medical advisor, and the Lord.

However, it has become abundantly clear that many members of our church have fallen victim to a cult mindset. After this past year, and some very disturbing comments under Elder Holland’s recent message I realized how bad it truly is. That many in our church would willingly “poke” or poison themselves without thought purely on the basis that the Prophet “said to”. As upsetting as this realization was, it quickly opened my mind to the immense opportunity we have before us, to encourage and develop spiritual growth within ourselves and our church. We have so much to do you guys!

I think our prophet and the Lord’s apostles know this; they’ve been trying to teach this principle for a long time. That personal relationship with the Savior takes work! A cult mindset really does not. It is a lazy path. We have a duty to help our families and friends recognize the true role of the prophet and our relationship with our Savior. [emphasis added]

Ms. Smith’s comments are the latest in a long line of irresponsible anti-vax statements made by prominent individuals in the Heartland movement. Despite the First Presidency’s counsel that members of the Church should be vaccinated against COVID‑19, their reassurances that “available vaccines have proven to be both safe and effective, and the personal example they set by being vaccinated themselves, anti-vaxxers within the Church—including Rian Nelson and Kimberly Smith—have continued to spread lies and misinformation, calling COVID‑19 vaccines “poison” and even comparing vaccines to sorcery and the occult.

Anti-vax conspiracy theorists like Ms. Smith have also repeatedly distorted the true principle of agency by claiming “a prophet will tell you his message and encourage you to seek the guidance from the Lord,” thereby falsely implying that personal revelation overrides prophetic counsel. The First Presidency’s counsel is that “if members have concerns” about vaccinations, “they should counsel with competent medical professionals and also seek the guidance of the Holy Ghost.” Irresponsible anti-vaxxers have twisted this counsel to suit their own purposes, telling gullible members of the Church that they can ignore prophetic counsel just because they falsely believe the Holy Ghost has told them the vaccines are “poison.”

As Apostle Dallin H. Oaks warned in October 2010 General Conference:

Unfortunately, it is common for persons who are violating God’s commandments or disobedient to the counsel of their priesthood leaders to declare that God has revealed to them that they are excused from obeying some commandment or from following some counsel. Such persons may be receiving revelation or inspiration, but it is not from the source they suppose. The devil is the father of lies, and he is ever anxious to frustrate the work of God by his clever imitations.

The Savior exhorted the people of Galilee and the descendants of Lehi to “beware of false prophets,” and that observant individuals could detect such impostors by their fruits. The individuals at the forefront of the Heartland movement are false prophets who wrest the teachings of true prophets and the scriptures “unto their own destruction.”

[To Jonathan Neville’s credit, he has stated that he believes “Church leaders have given common sense advice ever since the COVID outbreak started, regarding both the face masks and the vaccinations.”]

—Peter Pan
 

Assertion ≠ evidence

One of the greatest vices of Heartlanders in general—and Jonathan Neville in particular—is their tendency to make assertions without providing any evidence that their assertions are true.

Here’s just the latest example from Jonathan Neville’s blog Book of Mormon Central America:

Does Brother Neville have any evidence that this supposed progression happens in real life?

Consider for a moment that Book of Mormon Central, perhaps the best-known and most popular Book of Mormon site on the internet,* teaches both “M2C”** and “SITH,” and yet the organization, its officers, and its employees are completely faithful to the gospel and to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Elders Jeffrey R. Holland and D. Todd Christofferson of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles have spoken at Book of Mormon Central events. Yet Neville would have us believe that Book of Mormon Central is just one step away from apostates like Jeremy Runnels and John Dehlin!

(And before Book of Mormon Central existed, Elders Neal A. Maxwell, Dallin H. Oaks, Henry B. Eyring, and L. Tom Perry spoke at the annual FARMS banquets. The fact that an apostle or other current general authority has never spoken at a Heartland event tells us a lot about who the Brethren trust.)

And what of members of the Church who believe that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon with a seer stone (“SITH”) but also believe that the hill Cumorah of the Book of Mormon is in New York? Did they just skip a step in Neville’s supposed “progression”? Let’s not forget that, until a few years ago, Heartlanders believed in “SITH”; how did they manage that without accepting “M2C” first?

Perhaps the most damning contrary evidence against Neville’s assertion is that the prophets teach “SITH.” I’ve presented the abundant evidence for this multiple times on this blog, but Neville has yet to engage with or respond to any of it. The list of Church presidents, apostles, and other general authorities who have taught that Joseph Smith used a seer stone to translate the Book of Mormon includes President Russell M. Nelson, President M. Russell Ballard, President Dieter F. Uchtdorf, Elder D. Todd Christofferson, President Wilford Woodruff, President George Q. Cannon, and Elder B.H. Roberts. Are the prophets themselves progressing away from the teachings of the prophets?

Does Jonathan Neville have an explanation for any of this? Perhaps he can deign to give us some evidence of his supposed “progression away from the teachings of the prophets.”

—Peter Pan

* bookormormoncentral.org gets nearly six times as many monthly visits as Rod Meldrum’s bookofmormonevidence.org site. BMC also has nearly 43 times the number of links to its content from other sites (backlinks) than Meldrum’s site does. (Site vs. site comparison data.)
** “M2C” is Jonathan Neville’s acronym for the theory that the Book of Mormon took place in Mesoamerica and that the hill Cumorah in the Book of Mormon is not the same hill in New York where Joseph Smith received the plates of Mormon.
 

Pandemic falsehoods and “two lines of communication”

The crackpottery over at the FIRM Foundation blog continues unabated. This time, it comes from David W. Allan, who will be one of the keynote speakers at next month’s FIRM Foundation Conference.

Rian Nelson, who runs the FIRM Foundation’s blog, is a hardcore anti-vaxxer. He’s compared vaccines to sorcery and the occult and called pharmaceutical drugs “poisonous.” This, of course, runs face-first into the First Presidency’s recent counsel urging individuals to be vaccinated for COVID-19 which states, “Available vaccines have proven to be both safe and effective.”

The First Presidency’s letter of encouragement leaves Latter-day Saint anti-vaxxers in a state of cognitive dissonance. How can one sustain the Brethren while simultaneously believing that they’ve been duped by “BigPharma” or, even worse, are complicit with them? Cue David Allan, who has no medical background of any sort.

How does Allan thread this needle? First he tells us that Satan “uses the imperfections of [the Church’s] membership and leadership to impede the Church’s designed goal.” Having established that Church leaders are imperfect, he then informs us that the letter from the First Presidency was general counsel, not revelation. “Since this counsel didn’t line up with my database,” he explains, “I then in prayer asked the Lord how I can know.”

Allan doesn’t tell us what the answer to his prayer was. Instead, he did his own “research using some of the best experts on the planet,” from which he “determined that the theory that the only solution for the pandemic is a vaccination to be false.” Who are these experts? He lists fourteen individuals, each of whom is an anti-vax crusader or general conspiracy theorist. His list includes such luminaries as:

• “Professor" Delores Cahill, who is no longer a professor, since she was relieved of her position at the University College of Dublin earlier this year. Cahill’s credentials are impressive, but she started going off the rails around 2016 when she published a peer-reviewed paper on HPV that was later retracted due to methodological problems. You can learn more about her recent bizarre statements and behavior here.
• Dr. Ryan Cole, who also has impressive credentials but has claimed that COVID vaccines can cause cancer and autoimmune diseases, that the federal government has been suppressing ivermectin as a COVID treatment, and that vitamin D supplements are a better alternative to masks and social distancing. More about Dr. Cole here.
• Dr. Sherri Tenpenny believes that COVID vaccines make people magnetic and are connected to 5G cellular transmissions. More about her here.

I bet if I went through all fourteen people in David Allan’s list of “best experts” that every one of them would be showing the same symptoms of the dreaded Nutbag Virus.

Allan concludes his blog post:

Going back to my main point of how to know if something is true is only if God tells you. It is critical for each of us to hearken to the voice of our Savior. We have the sure scriptural promise that as we treasure up His word, we shall not be deceived. Having our own personal revelation on this critical matter is critical at this time, trusting in the Lord and not the arm of flesh.

The Lord has given us warnings of the kinds of satanic lies of the globalists and many government leaders. They fit the scriptural descriptions perfectly, and we know the pandemic is one of Satan’s later-day [sic] strategies.

Starting with his second claim first, is David Allan actually implying that the First Presidency is spreading “satanic lies of the globalists”? It certainly seems that way to me—that, or Allan doesn’t realize the implications of what he writes.

To Allan’s claims about needing “our own personal revelation on this critical matter” and “trusting in the Lord and not the arm of flesh”—the “arm of the flesh” being the First Presidency, of course—this kind of thinking is precisely what Apostle Dallin H. Oaks warned the Saints about in his October 2010 General Conference address:

I feel to add two other cautions we should remember in connection with this precious direct, personal line of communication with our Heavenly Father.

First, in its fulness the personal line does not function independent of the priesthood line. The gift of the Holy Ghost—the means of communication from God to man—is conferred by priesthood authority as authorized by those holding priesthood keys. It does not come merely by desire or belief. And the right to the continuous companionship of this Spirit needs to be affirmed each Sabbath as we worthily partake of the sacrament and renew our baptismal covenants of obedience and service.

Similarly, we cannot communicate reliably through the direct, personal line if we are disobedient to or out of harmony with the priesthood line. The Lord has declared that “the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness” (D&C 121:36). Unfortunately, it is common for persons who are violating God’s commandments or disobedient to the counsel of their priesthood leaders to declare that God has revealed to them that they are excused from obeying some commandment or from following some counsel. Such persons may be receiving revelation or inspiration, but it is not from the source they suppose. The devil is the father of lies, and he is ever anxious to frustrate the work of God by his clever imitations.

Sadly, the Saints have not been immune to the vast amounts of misinformation circulating on the internet. We’re now seeing more and more people like David Allan, Rian Nelson, Jonathan Neville, and Rod Meldrum who claim to know better than the sustained, ordained leaders of the Lord’s Church about vaccines, the Book of Mormon, Church history, and many other subjects. This can only lead to division and schismatic groups made up of people who have found that the counsel of Church leaders doesn’t fit their personal political views.

My prayer is the the Lord will frustrate the efforts of David Allan and other the Heartlanders and cause their misguided efforts to come to naught.

—Peter Pan
 

President Joseph F. Smith warned against “gospel hobbies”

Joseph F. Smith served as sixth President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints from 1901 until his death in 1918. He was a magnificent expounder of gospel principles, and he taught with clarity and plainess.

In the March 15, 1902, edition of Juvenile Instructor, the magazine for youth published by the Deseret Sunday School Union, President Smith warned of what he called “gospel hobbies.” (See pp. 176–177.)

Almost 120 years later, President Smith’s warning seems particularly applicable to the Heartland movement in general and Jonathan Neville in particular. I reprint it in full below:

Brethren and sisters, don’t have hobbies. Hobbies are dangerous in the Church of Christ. They are dangerous because they give undue prominence to certain principles or ideas to the detriment and dwarfing of others just as important, just as binding, just as saving as the favored doctrines or commandments.

Hobbies give to those who encourage them a false aspect of the Gospel of the Redeemer; they distort and place out of harmony its principles and teachings. The point of view is unnatural. Every principle and practice revealed from God is essential to man’s salvation, and to place any one of them unduly in front, hiding and dimming all others is unwise and dangerous; it jeopardizes our salvation, for it darkens our minds and beclouds our understandings.

We have known good men and good women who appeared to think, if they may be judged by their actions and conversation, that the all absorbing doctrine of the Church was the healing of the sick, or the law of tithing, or the Word of Wisdom, or the gift of tongues. Before this one doctrine or gift all things else connected with the plan of salvation were but secondary. Such a view, no matter to what point directed, narrows the vision, weakens the spiritual perception, and darkens the mind, the result of which is that the person thus afflicted with this perversity and contraction of mental vision places himself in a position to be tempted of the evil one, or through dimness of sight or distortion of vision, to misjudge his brethren and give way to the spirit of apostasy. He is not square before the Lord.

We have noticed this difficulty: that Saints with hobbies are prone to judge and condemn their brethren and sisters who are not so zealous in the one particular direction of their pet theory as they are. The man with the Word of Wisdom only in his brain, is apt to find unmeasured fault with every other member of the Church who entertains liberal ideas as to the importance of other doctrines of the Gospel. We simply mention the Word of Wisdom to exemplify our idea, not that we would in the least minimize the importance of its observance. But we hold that it is possible for a man to abstain, rigidly and completely, from all things forbidden in that revelation and yet be sadly lacking in charity towards the brethren, zeal towards God, and faith in His holy work.

There is another phase of this difficulty—the man with a hobby is apt to assume an “I am holier than thou” position, to feel puffed up and conceited, and to look with distrust, if with no severer feeling, on his brethren and sisters who do not so perfectly live that one particular law. This feeling hurts his fellow-servants and offends the Lord. “Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.” (Prov. 16:18.)

There are some great truths in the plan of redemption that are fundamental. They cannot be ignored; none others can be placed before them. The fatherhood of God, the efficacy of the atonement of our Lord and Savior, the restoration of the Gospel in these latter days, must be accepted with our whole hearts. We cannot compensate for a lack of faith in these essential doctrines by the most absolute abstinence from things unhealthful, by the rigid payment of tithing on our “anise and cummin” [Matthew 23:23], or by the observance of any other outward ordinance. Baptism itself without faith in God avails nothing.

Then let none of us become so zealous in any principle or law of God that, in our minds, any one part of the Gospel grows to be as large, or to fill the place of the entire plan of salvation. No one part is ever equal to the whole. If we permit ourselves to thus misjudge we shall lose the comprehension of the due relationship of the things of God, and be in a condition to be unable to discern between truth and error, right and wrong, when the adversary of our souls conspires for our destruction.

Joseph F. Smith

I can easily imagine President Smith today warning the Saints who have embraced the Heartland movement that they have become “prone to judge and condemn their brethren and sisters who are not so zealous in the one particular direction of their pet theory as they are,” and placed themselves “in a position to be tempted of the evil one, or through dimness of sight or distortion of vision, to misjudge [their] brethren and give way to the spirit of apostasy.”

I would not apply President Smith’s teachings in this way if it were not the sad and obvious truth. For over six years now, Jonathan Neville has continually published and blogged and spoken, with single-minded focus, on his insistence that the hill Cumorah of the Book of Mormon is in New York, that the editorials about Book of Mormon lands in Central America published under Joseph Smith’s name were written by a conspirator who sought to destroy Joseph, and that Joseph used only the Urim and Thummim and never used a seer stone to translate. All this while, he has written in condemnation of Church employees, Church scholars, and others who have questioned his evidence and rejected his conclusions.

His gospel hobby, if not abandoned, will result in his loss of faith in the leaders of the Church. And I fear that many who follow him will experience the same loss.

—Peter Pan
 

Jonathan Neville’s pants are on fire

It’s simply unfathomable to me how Jonathan Neville can make a statement like this with a straight face:

For the first 200 years of the restoration, believers accepted the claims of Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery that the Book of Mormon was a translation of ancient records kept on metal plates. They rejected the claims of critics that Joseph merely read words that appeared on a stone he put in a hat (SITH).

About 20 years ago, LDS scholars re-interpreted the historical evidence to reject what Oliver and Joseph said in favor of SITH. Lately, SITH has gained more widespread acceptance.

This claim is absolutely baseless and thoroughly false. As the Neville Land blog has demonstrated repeatedly, eyewitnesses to the translation process, early Latter-day Saint publications, Church leaders in the 19th through the 21st centuries, and official histories published by the Church have accepted and taught that Joseph Smith used a seer stone that he placed into a hat—along with the Nephite interpreters—to translate the Book of Mormon.

The only believing Latter-day Saint of any standing who “rejected” the eyewitness testimonies of seer-stone translation process was Joseph Fielding Smith, who wrote that he, “personally, [did] not believe that this stone was used for this purpose.” (Doctrines of Salvation, 3:225–226.) Heartlanders have taken Elder Smith’s quote and run with it, considering it to have more weight than the statements of all the other witnesses and authorities combined. In doing so, they have fallen into serious error and are leading others into the same error.

President Russell M. Nelson, the current prophet and president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, has repeatedly taught the “stone in the hat” as factual history, but Jonathan Neville simply ignores President Nelson’s teachings and continues to press his “alternative facts.”

His dishonesty is plainly manifest for all who have eyes to see.

—Peter Pan
 

Those who live in glass houses, pt. 10

(Part ten of a series.)

In his latest broadside against any and all things connected to Book of Mormon Central, this week Jonathan Neville published a petty attack on their new website, Evidence Central, a site that defends the historicity of Book of Mormon and the truth of restored gospel of Jesus Christ.

This statement from Neville’s latest hit piece is deeply ironic in at least two ways. (The bold formatting is Neville’s.)

A moment’s reflection may remind us that the first principle of the gospel is faith, specifically faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Next is repentance, baptism, and the gift of the Holy Ghost.

“Reliance on evidence” doesn’t make the list. Actually, the Articles of Faith don’t mention or imply that “reliance on evidence” has anything to do with the gospel. They are Articles of Faith, not Articles of Evidence.

People can believe whatever they want, but it does no one any good to simply censor the teachings of the prophets while promoting scholarly theories as “evidence.”…

[Evidence Central offers] a restatement of scholarly theories and interpretations, focused on promoting the Mesoamerican/two-Cumorahs theory and the stone-in-the-hat (SITH) theory, both of which directly contradict what Joseph and Oliver taught.

Evidence Central is an elaborate effort to indoctrinate Latter-day Saints to accept the theories of scholars, while rejecting the teachings of the prophets on these topics.

First, it’s quite bold of Neville to rail against “reliance on evidence” and appeal to the Fourth Article of Faith when he himself has spoken repeatedly at Rodney Meldrum’s regular conferences that are held under the name “Book of Mormon Evidence.” Meldrum’s site sells Neville’s books along with DVDs of his presentations at these conferences.

So, Neville doesn’t appear to be opposed to evidence, per se, only to evidence that “rejects the teachings of the prophets” on the location of the hill Cumorah and how Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon.

Neville, of course, doesn’t bother to address the inconvenient fact that prominent Church leaders have questioned—or at least have been hesitant to be definitive about—the “one Cumorah” idea. These leaders include President Anthony W. Ivins, Elder John A. Widtsoe, and President Harold B. Lee (see here and here.)

Neville also continues to falsely assert that the claim that Joseph Smith used a seer stone, in addition to the Urim and Thummim, to translate the Book of Mormon “rejects the teachings of the prophets,” while simultaneously ignoring that the living prophet, President Russell M. Nelson, has repeatedly taught that Joseph used to seer stone to translate the Book of Mormon.

If anyone should be concerned about using evidence to contradict prophetic teachings, it’s Jonathan Neville, not Evidence Central.

—Peter Pan

Those who live in glass houses, pt. 9

(Part nine of a series.)

Jonathan Neville invites us to contemplate:

Imagine how much stronger the Church would be, and how much more united Latter-day Saints would be, if our scholars decided to support and corroborate the prophets on such basic topics as the truthfulness of the scriptures, the translation of the Book of Mormon and the New York Cumorah.

This, coming from the man who doesn’t support President Russell M. Nelson, the living prophet, on such a basic topic as the translation of the Book of Mormon.

This, coming from the man whose pet theory about the identity of the angel who appeared to Mary Whitmer contradicts the public teaching of Elder Gerrit W. Gong in October 2020 General Conference.

This, coming from the man who has implied that prophets, seers, and revelators who speak in General Conference have strayed from teaching doctrinal and historical truths since 2008.

This, coming from the man who apparently believes that the members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles are dupes who don’t understand supposedly basic doctrines of the Restoration.

Happy 2021, everyone! It sadly appears that we’re in for another year of Jonathan Neville rejecting the teachings of the prophets.

—Peter Pan

Neville-Neville Land 2020 year in review

2020 was the second year of operation for this humble blog. This year we published 74 posts (75, including this one) examining the heterodox beliefs and assertions of Jonathan Neville and his comrades in the Heartland Book of Mormon movement.

Among the most significant developments this year, I would include the following:

• The Neville-Neville Land blog demonstrated that Jonathan Neville’s claims about how Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon are in opposition to the public teachings of President Russell M. Nelson, President M. Russell Ballard, President Dieter F. Uchtdorf, Elder D. Todd Christofferson, President Wilford Woodruff, President George Q. Cannon, and Elder B.H. Roberts. Neville’s continued insistence that Joseph Smith never translated by placing a seer stone into a hat—which Neville ominously began calling “SITH” this year—ignores the context of Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery’s statements in the 1830s and rejects the teachings of living prophets and apostles as well as the testimonies of Church leaders who knew Joseph Smith personally.
• Neville continued to openly criticize apostles and other general authorities this year, including Elder Gerrit W. Gong of the Quorum of the Twelve (see here and here for context), Elder LeGrand R. Curtis Jr. of the Seventy, and pretty much all Church leaders who have spoken in General Conference since 2007.
• Neville also continued to attack the Church’s official magazines for not teaching Heartlander beliefs. He literally accused the editors of the Ensign of using Orwellian methods to cover up the truth and recommended that investigators and interested nonmembers stay away from official Church publications because they supposedly teach falsehoods. He also continued to attack Saints, the new official Church history with a foreword by the First Presidency, for not teaching that the hill Cumorah in New York is the same hill Cumorah in the Book of Mormon. He told his readers to not give credence to Saints because the Brethren supposedly don’t know what it contains.
• Neville also inexplicably defended critics of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints like Wayne Cowdrey and John Dehlin. I’m seriously inclined to ask him whose side he’s on in the war for the souls of God’s children.

In keeping with the tradition set last year, here are the top ten Neville-Neville Land posts for 2020 by number of views:

1. FIRM Foundation accuses the Church of deceiving the elect (February 18, 2020)
2. Jonathan Neville still doesn’t get it (March 3, 2019)
3. When Heartlanders are unintentionally hilarious (February 29, 2020)
4. My latest example of “outrage theater” (May 15, 2020)
5. A response to Opie regarding Wayne May (July 26, 2020)
6. Jonathan Neville vs. Royal Skousen (January 19, 2020)
7. Wayne May and the apostasy of the Heartlanders (July 11, 2020)
8. President M. Russell Ballard, M2C/SITH intellectual (April 20, 2020)
9. Come, Follow Me 2021 doesn’t care about Jonathan Neville’s opinions (July 21, 2020)
10. Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf, SITH intellectual (April 21, 2020)

Hopefully, 2021 will see Jonathan Neville back away from his extremist views and bring himself more in line with the teachings of the prophets regarding the Book of Mormon and how the Prophet Joseph Smith translated it.

—Peter Pan

President Russell M. Nelson, SITH intellectual

It’s been rather quiet on this blog for the last month, mostly because Jonathan Neville has been posting deeply unfunny (and often inaccurate) memes instead of making actual claims that can be examined.

Today a friend of mine pointed me to this video on the Church’s website, which appears to have been posted last May and overlooked by me at the time. President Russell M. Nelson and Jean B. Bingham, Relief Society General President, discussed the translation of the Book of Mormon at the site in Pennsylvania where Joseph Smith translated it:

Note this interesting comment from President Nelson, beginning at timestamp 3:30:

We have a lot of suggestions about how it [the translation of the Book of Mormon] was done. We know that they [Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery] had a table like this. We know they had the golden plates, covered usually, and Joseph used these—the Urim and Thummim, seer stones—in the hat, and it was easier for him to see the light [from the stones] when he’d take that position [placing the hat to his face].

After this, President Nelson compared Joseph’s use of the stones in a hat to President Nelson’s use of a mobile phone to receive messages that only he can see. (President Dieter F. Uchtdorf, another confirmed SITH intellectual, used the same analogy in a June 2016 Facebook post.)

And so we have yet another example of how Jonathan Neville’s insistent, repeated assertion that Joseph Smith never used a stone in a hat to translate the Book of Mormon is completely contrary to the teachings of living prophets and apostles, and how what Neville calls “the stone in the hat theory” (or “SITH”) isn’t simply part of some conspiracy by “intellectuals” to lead members of the Church astray.

My friend commented, tongue firmly in cheek, “Can a prophet be led astray? Yes, if the people leading him astray are the M2C* citation cartel and the fine young scholars at Book of Mormon Central. Neville should write to his stake president to express how he thinks President Nelson has been deceived.”

—Peter Pan

* “M2C” is Jonathan Neville’s acronym for the theory that the Book of Mormon took place in Mesoamerica and that the hill Cumorah in the Book of Mormon is not the same hill in New York where Joseph Smith received the plates of Mormon.

Jonathan Neville at the summit of confirmation bias

It requires a breathtaking lack of self-awareness for Jonathan Neville to write:

Once you realize that M2C* advocates think of themselves as priests policing heresy rather than investigators seeking truth, the M2C logo and the censorship by the M2C citation cartel will make a lot more sense.

Priests policing heresy. This, coming from the very man who has claimed hundreds of times that his intellectual opponents are “repudiating the teachings of the prophets.”

The simple fact that Neville is unwilling or unable to comprehend is that Latter-day Saint scholars and other Church members who believe that the Book of Mormon took place mostly in Mesoamerica could not care less if anyone has a difference of opinion about that matter. Everyone is free to express his or her own beliefs and put forth evidence in support of those beliefs. There will be (and should be and has been) vigorous debate over these evidences. Since there is no revelation on this matter, it is open for discussion.

So why does Neville perceive that there is a conflict? This goes back nearly thirteen years to Rodney Meldrum’s presentation at the inception of the “Heartland” movement. In his presentation, Meldrum used a quote from President Gordon B. Hinckley about anti-Mormons and twisted its meaning to assert that Latter-day Saint scholars “disdain” the Prophet Joseph Smith by teaching a Mesoamerican setting for the Book of Mormon.

Since that time, Heartlanders like Meldrum and Neville have been self-appointed heretic hunters, calling out “M2C” for being opposed to “the teachings of the prophets” and asserting that the Heartland theory is the only view that is supported by prophetic teaching (and making quite a bit of money at it along the way). Their claims have received widespread attention and not a small number of followers. Their accusations have become so strident that the First Presidency was motivated to issue the following counsel:

Individuals may have their own opinions regarding Book of Mormon geography and other such matters about which the Lord has not spoken. However, the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles urge leaders and members not to advocate those personal theories in any setting or manner that would imply either prophetic or Church support for those theories. All parties should strive to avoid contention on these matters.

And yet, because he is firmly entrapped in his own web of confirmation bias, Jonathan Neville continues to insist that it is Mesoamericanists who are “policing heresy.” (And he’s spilled no small amount of ink disparaging the First Presidency’s counsel, above, in an attempt to justify his shameful behavior.)

Neville doesn’t like that I’ve claimed his actions place him on the road to eventual apostasy. The Book of Mormon prophet Nephi responded to such objections in 1 Nephi 16:2.

—Peter Pan

* “M2C” is Jonathan Neville’s acronym for the theory that the Book of Mormon took place in Mesoamerica and that the hill Cumorah in the Book of Mormon is not the same hill in New York where Joseph Smith received the plates of Mormon.

Jonathan Neville’s passive–aggressive personality

In a post the other day, I mentioned Jonathan Neville’s “continual posting of passive–aggressive statements.” He dropped another blog post today that perfectly reflects this, so I thought I’d use that as an example of his style.

For those who aren’t familiar with the term or are are uncertain of the definition of passive–aggressive:

Passive–aggressive behavior is when you express negative feelings indirectly instead of openly talking about them.…

Someone who uses passive aggression may feel angry, resentful, or frustrated, but they act neutral, pleasant, or even cheerful. They then find indirect ways to show how they really feel.

Examples of passive aggression show up in most of Neville’s blog posts. Most often, they’re reflected in how he refers to those who disagree with Heartlander views of Book of Mormon geography and the hill Cumorah.

In his October 19, 2020, blog post “Logos and perspective,” he criticizes Book of Mormon Central’s use of a Mayan glyph in their logo. (This is the same logo that was formerly used by the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies.)

In this post, Neville tells us:

Those who read my blogs know that I have great respect and fondness for the members of the M2C* citation cartel. All those I’ve met are great people, sincere, dedicated, smart, etc.

While I disagree with their interpretations of the text and the relevant extrinsic evidence, it doesn’t bother me in the least that other people have different opinions.

Despite his supposed “respect and fondness” for these “great people” with whom he disagrees, he persists in referring to them as “the M2C citation cartel.” That term that is not just inaccurate; one can also reasonably infer from its use that he is comparing his opponents to an international crime syndicate.

Neville responded to that concern back on September 3rd, not by apologizing and changing his terminology, but by making any offense taken at the use of the term “cartel” the fault of those who interpreted it in a negative light (!):

Apparently some of the members of the M2C citation cartel…consider the acronym “M2C” pejorative, and they think the term “citation cartel” invokes images of drug cartels in Latin America.

Such paranoia is a good example of how members (and employees) of a citation cartel think and operate. The credentialed class all too often take personal offense to differences of opinion, resort to academic bullying, and employ censorship to protect their intellectual cartels.

So, according to Neville, the problem isn’t his choice to use potentially offensive words; the problem is those who take offense, because they are “paranoid,” “resort to academic bullying, and employ censorship”—a textbook example of blame-shifting.

Back to his October 19th post:

After expressing his “respect and fondness” for these “great people” with whom he disagrees—as well as claiming that the matter is “a simple difference of perspective” and accepting “diversity of thought”—he then proceeds to belittle and disparage these “great people”:

• He claims that, for people such as himself, the Book of Mormon Central logo “represents completely closed minds and bias confirmation presented in the guise of scholarship.”
• He claims “this logo is the antithesis of the Church’s position of neutrality.” (A subject that he completely misunderstands or continually misrepresents.)
• He calls the “great people” who work for Book of Mormon Central “hirelings,” a defamatory term that refers to “a person who works only for pay, especially in a menial or boring job, with little or no concern for the value of the work.” (These “hirelings” are the same people he has referred to as “fine young scholars” nearly seventy times in other passive–aggressive posts.)
• These “hirelings,” he tells us, “spend their time trying to convince Church members that the prophets are wrong,” and Book of Mormon Central’s logo “represents a deliberate choice to repudiate the teachings of the prophets about the New York Cumorah.” Yet this completely contradicts his earlier claim that these same people are “sincere” and “dedicated”!

“Once those who identify themselves with this M2C logo understand how the rest of us perceive it,” Neville concludes, ”maybe they will be a little more understanding of our point of view.”

Absolutely incredible. Neville longs for people who are part of the “M2C citation cartel” to understand how he and other Heartlanders perceive its meaning, yet he himself is completely unaware of how deeply insulting he is—over, and over, and over again—toward them.

“Unlike some of my critics,” he writes, “I don’t resort to name-calling, accusations of apostasy, etc.” Yet he calls those with whom he disagrees “hirelings” in the very same post.

When I claim that Neville and his cohorts are flirting with apostasy, I’m not “resorting” to anything—I mean it. For evidence of this, look no further than his other post today on one of his other blogs where he criticizes Saints, the Church’s new official history with a foreword by the First Presidency: In that post he clearly implies that the Church historians who wrote Saints are like employees of the Ministry of Truth in George Orwell’s dystopian novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four.

The Church’s General Handbook defines apostasy as “repeatedly acting in clear and deliberate public opposition to the Church, its doctrine, its policies, or its leaders.” If Neville’s continual public opposition to the way the Church’s leaders and historians describe its history isn’t apostasy, then I don’t know what else one could legitimately call it.

—Peter Pan

* “M2C” is Jonathan Neville’s acronym for the theory that the Book of Mormon took place in Mesoamerica and that the hill Cumorah in the Book of Mormon is not the same hill in New York where Joseph Smith received the plates of Mormon.

President Wilford Woodruff, SITH intellectual

It’s becoming more and more apparent that Jonathan Neville rejects the teachings of the prophets—an accusation he’s repeatedly leveled at Latter-day Saints who disagree with his iconoclastic beliefs.

According to Neville, Joseph Smith never used a seer stone. He claims that “the peep stone story originated with people who sought to destroy Joseph, the Book of Mormon, and the Church,” and that its origins were with the 1834 anti-Mormon book Mormonism Unvailed.

And yet, as I’ve demonstrated on this blog, many leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have publicly taught that Joseph used a seer stone to translate the Book of Mormon, from President George Q. Cannon in 1888, to Elder B. H. Roberts in 1930, to Elder (now President) Russell M. Nelson in 1993, to President Dieter F. Uchtdorf in 2016.

To those testimonies above, we can add President Wilford Woodruff’s. In his journal entry for May 19th, 1888, he wrote:

Before leaving [Manti] I consecrated upon the altar [of the temple] the seer stone that Joseph Smith found by revelation some 30 feet under the earth [and] carried by him throughout life.

At the time he wrote this, Wilford Woodruff was president of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and the de facto head of the Church, President John Taylor having died the previous July.

Wilford Woodruff was a close associate of Joseph Smith. He met the Prophet in 1834 after converting to the restored gospel and coming to Kirtland. He was ordained an apostle and member of the Quorum of the Twelve by Joseph on April 26, 1839, and he and his wife Phebe received their endowments from the Prophet in 1844. This short blog post can’t begin to do justice to his sixty-four years of service, nine as President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (1889–1898).

Here we have incontrovertible evidence that Wilford Woodruff believed Joseph Smith found his seer stone “by revelation” while digging a well, and that the Prophet carried and used that seer stone “through [his] life.”

Surely even Jonathan Neville wouldn’t dare accuse Wilford Woodruff of being a “revisionist historian” who believed that “scholars are more important than prophets” and that Joseph Smith was “an ignorant speculator,” as he written about “M2C* scholars.”

Surely even he wouldn’t accuse Wilford Woodruff of being a critic of the Church, as he has about anyone who has taught that Joseph Smith used a seer stone.

The sad fact is that everything Jonathan Neville believes about Joseph Smith’s possession and use of a seer stone is wholly and completely untrue. And yet he continues to “condemn others” and “find fault with the Church saying that they are out of the way,” as Wilford Woodruff recorded the Prophet Joseph warning the Twelve in 1839 about those who are on “the high road to apostacy.”

When will it end? And will it end with Neville repenting of his false accusations against the Church, its employees, and scholars of Church history? Or will it end with Neville leaving the Church and forming his own splinter movement?

—Peter Pan

* “M2C” is Jonathan Neville’s acronym for the theory that the Book of Mormon took place in Mesoamerica and that the hill Cumorah in the Book of Mormon is not the same hill in New York where Joseph Smith received the plates of Mormon.