Not to question any reader’s inability to follow the above, but because Mesoamerican Theorists rarekt ever quote this scripture and completely misunderstand the location of the Mulekite landing, let me explain:1. Mosiah fled from the Land of Nephi and traveled until he found a land and city called Zarahemla (Omni 1:14)
2. The people of Zarahemla originally came from Jerusalem (Omni 1:15)
3. These people journeyed in the wilderness after fleeing Jerusalem
4. The Lord brought these people across the great waters
5. These people reached the Land of Promise
6. They landed in the area where Mosiah found them
7. They had lived in this area of their landing from the beginning
Now, that doesn’t sound too difficult to understand, does it? How could anyone construe anything different? Yet, listen to what these Mesoamerican Theorists claim:
Sorenson wrote in Mormon’s Map, p 20: “One's point of reference is critical. It is obvious to everyone that Mesoamerica around the Isthmus of Tehuantepec has oceans to the north and south rather than to the east and west. But from the point of view of the Lehites and the Mulekites leaving Jerusalem, the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans were eastward and westward paths to the promised land. The designations of these seas appears to be tied to these original, arduous journeys across oceans and the receding direction of their forfeited homeland. That the directional name might not be an accurate descriptor for every inlet, bay, or stretch of beach is a different matter. These seas had to be the Pacific and Atlantic oceans, respectively, because Lehi arrived from the Old World across the west sea (see Alma 22:28), and the party that brought Mulek from the land of Judah came 'across the great waters' (Omni 1:16) to the 'borders by the east sea. The city of Mulek was located in that area and was presumably near the location where they first settled (see Alma 51:26)."
What? Say that again? The ancestors of the people of Zarahemla were brought across the great waters to the east sea? Come again? We just read where they were brought by the hand of the Lord into the land WHERE MOSIAH FOUND THEM in the city called Zarahemla, not a city called Mulek, which was along the west sea.
To compound this issue, Joseph Allen wrote: “The reader will recall that the Mulekites had direct contact with the Jaredites, as the Mulekites landed in the midst of the Jaredite lands (Alma 22:30). The last surviving Jaredite king lived among the Mulekites for nine moons (Omni 1:21). As long as Allen was quoting Omni, why not quote Omni 1:16 which tells us where they landed and where they had lived all that time until Mosiah found them.
How is it that the Mulekites landed amidst the Jaredites in the Land Northward? Mosiah found them in the Land Southward in the land of Zarahemla just north of the Land of Nephi, where Amaleki said they had landed and always lived (Omni 1:16). The scriptures do not say they were ever in the Land Northward.
And nowhere is the city of Mulek identified with the people of Zarahemla. We do not know from scripture when the city of Mulek was built, or by whom, though it can be conjectured that someone named Mulek built it—but that does not mean the Mulek who was the son of Zedekiah was that Mulek. After all, the city of Lehi (Alma 51:26) was also nearby the city of Mulek on the eastern seashore, but was it a city the erstwhile Lehi who led his family across the sea settled? Obviouysly not. Besides, we know of others named Lehi in the Book of Mormon—the sone of Zoram, the sone of Helaman, the Nephite commander, etc. The fact that a city on the eastern seashore was named Mulek has nothing to do with the Mulek that was the son of Zedekiah (Mosiah 6:10), for they settled on the west seashore in the area of Zarahemla.
No comments:
Post a Comment