Can they correct Saints?

I frequently encounter members of the Church who are appalled by the Saints book. Some have objections I haven't publicly commented on, but many besides me have noticed the censorship of Cumorah.

It is obvious to everyone who knows Church history that the Saints book creates a false historical narrative present. This was not a mistake. The issue of Cumorah was raised and discussed at the highest levels of the Church history department long before the excerpts were published in the Ensign, which was many months before the book was released.

This means the authors intentionally misled readers. They publicly admitted that they changed the history to accommodate M2C, as we've discussed before.

https://saintsreview.blogspot.com/2018/10/the-historians-explain-censorship-in.html

All of this leads to the question, can the historians correct Saints?
_____

The easy answer is, yes, of course they can correct Saints. They are capable of fixing the problems, despite the logistics of translation and printing. The book has been out less than a year. They could publish an errata sheet for printed versions.

They can correct the digital versions instantly.

The real question is, will the historians correct Saints?

The answer to that seems obvious: No. 

The revisionist historians who wrote Saints have no intention of relating the truth about Cumorah and everything else related to Cumorah. They are systematically erasing Cumorah from the historical record to accommodate their peers and colleagues who continue to promote M2C (the Mesoamerican/two Cumorahs theory).

Will Church leaders insist that they correct the book?

That appears unlikely. Church leaders delegate everything they can, and they have long trusted the historians and intellectuals. In my view, these employees have violated their trust.

The beauty of censorship is that readers don't know what they're missing.

Just as M2C censorship makes sure that students will never learn what the prophets have taught about the Hill Cumorah in New York, censorship also prevents Church leaders to know what they are missing when they read the materials published by the M2C intellectuals and revisionist Church historians.

Fortunately, President Nelson is emphasizing that Church members have an obligation to do their own study.

We're not beholden to or dependent upon the M2C intellectuals and revisionist Church historians.

But we have to take President Nelson's guidance seriously.

_____

Recently Scott Adams observed that history books are written to promote agendas.

History is written by the winners for the purpose of brainwashing the youth. If you don't know that that is what history is for, you're probably living a confused life. History, in terms of the history books and history lessons, is not designed to tell you what happened. It doesn't have that purpose. 

You're taught that it has that purpose when you go to school. You think you're learning history for the purpose of becoming educated, becoming a citizen who knows how to function, etc. But that's not the purpose. That's not even the intention. 

It is expressly for brainwashing.

Now, I'm not complaining about that because brainwashing children is what you need to do to children. If you didn't brainwash children to be good citizens, they would not be as good a citizens. You have to train children because they have no critical reasoning... If you don't do that you don't get good citizens.

[History can be written in two ways.] The question is, which truth will be in the history books?

https://www.pscp.tv/w/1rmxPeWozNDKN?q=scott+adams