Ten Criteria for Informational Source Consideration

    There must be some logical and meaningful hierarchy of criteria for consideration of such things that relate to coming to an understanding of the geography of the Book of Mormon. For example between a direct revelation from God upon the matter and my own prefered personal feelings of what I think it should be, it ought to be easily determined that God's word trumps what I think.

And with those two extreme positions upon that hierarchal ladder, God's word on top and my personal inovations near the bottom as one of the lower rungs upon that ladder, I will proceed to develop a 'Hierarchy for Considertion' relative to logically or attempting to logically come to an understanding of Book of Mormon Geography.

So First comes God's word upon it, that is an absolute given. High up on that ladder, ought to be what the Book of Mormon itself says about it. Perhaps the only thing that would trump that, beside God's own word, would be the prophet's or a prophet's authoritative voice upon the matter. As Joseph Fielding Smith concluded, man's word, including even a prophet's word when not speaking as the prophet of God, ought to be trumped by the Book of Mormon's scriptural word upon it. So thus far I have:

1. God's Word

2. Prophet of God's Authoritative Word

3. Book of Mormon's Statements

Those seem to be a pretty solid top three, or at least they seem to be to me until coming up with something better. The next rungs however seem to be not as clearly set. I might consider that 'facts' of the matter to be high on the list and perhaps at number 4, but sometimes one man's facts are another man's opinions. So facts are funny things. Perhaps to qualify the as 'true facts' would help in their positioning, but then also one is faced with an attempt to determin what is a 'true fact' and what is not. Yet that being said, I would think to place as number 4, 'True Facts', mixing the truth with fact as a matter of what is.

Next then truely comes the things of man and what things of man out weigh other such things of man. Now there are men of authoritative position who relate more to the first three items as their source. Then there are such men of science who claim their information to be based in scientific fact. Then there are men of logic and deduction and even of philosophy and learning. And I suppose to a certain degree, depending upon just what it is that they are saying and the weight thereof, these rungs may be somewhat interchangable.

And then I would suppose I would consider myself, a man of reason and of for the most part of an objective approach. And in some ways, though being subserviant to the other criteria, it will be myself through whom all the data or information must flow through.

Next and lowest on the ladder, I would think to place the off the cuff man on the street, who really just does not know, and at best but repeats what he may have heard someone else to have said. There may be some ideas for consideration here, but certainly they must be screened as per their real source, relavance, importance, objectivity and degree of any real meaning.

Next I would think to place the ignorant or 'know nothing' man, who for the most part really knows nothing upon the matter. He may be a sounding board, he may stumble across something of import. And so he would likely be but the bottom rung, but one that ought not to be totally ignored and should at least be tolerated.

Then there is a whole group who ought to be avoided. These are the prevaricators, mean spirited slanders and critics. They are those who have nothing of worth or of value to be contributed. They are they who do nothing ] but to tear down and destory. It would seem to me that to so run with them would be to first dig a hole in the ground, out of which you much reach one's self up and out of before one could even embark upon the ladder of hierarchy and beneficial consideration. Sadly in our world of today, these are a great many to be avoided upon the matter.

And thus it would seem that my Hierarchal Criteria for Consideration is this:

1. God's Word

2. Prophet of God's Authoritative Statement

3. Book of Mormon & Scriptural Statements

4. True Facts

5. General Authorities' Statements

6. Enlightened Authorities

7. Men of Science and learning and deduction and reasoning and philosophy

8. Myself - of objective reasoning

9. Man on the Street

10. The Ignorant Man

With this Hierarchy of Consideration, might it be said that information of importance seems to trump the rung order. That is from a lower rung with exception of the highest rungs, that which has been obtained from any particular rung may be of use above that of a higher rung due to significance of the information obtained. That is, even the 'ignorant man' may put forth something to be had and placed in importance above other such contribution in determining the geography of the Book of Mormon.

And I do not hesitate to point out that what a General Authority of the Church may have stated is to be initially given greater weight of consideration than that of the men of learning, who generally contrive and even publish their theorized geographical models. That is not to say that some statement of such authority may not be disgarded and over riden by other such significant valid information obtained elsewhere. Such an example might be the case of the Chili landing site of Lehi which some authorities have stated. That claim just cannot be concluded upon due to overwhelming eveidences to the contrary and general logic of feasibility.

An Example of Criteria Use and Application

The Book of Mormon states that from Nehem/Nahom, Lehi's group travel virtually due east to arrive at that first land of Bountiful (1 Nephi 17:1) where the ship was built. That is a Book of Mormon statement #3. Facts can be seen to show that Nahom to the site of the building of the ship is directly east. Fact, east is east and not north, south or west, facts #4. In order to contrive a fit for the Mesoamerican model a logical reasoning is set forth by learned men that east is north, north is west, west is south and south is east for their 'narrow neck' to fit according to some eastern societies, that is #7 supported by #4. By order of criteria, what the Book of Mormon states as supported by facts #3&4 is accepted over the Mesoamerica theoriest deduction in order to make their 'narrow neck' fit, #7&4. As in golf and my criteria set, a 34 beats a 74 by a safe margin of acceptance. Objective reasoning accepts east is east and rejects east is north reasoning of the Mesoamerican theoriests.