Were There Other People in the Land of Promise? Part IV

Continuing with the last post, Sorenson’s next points are:

9. “Jacob 5:25 and 43 clearly speak of Lehi's people being represented by such a broken-off branch.

It would seem that vs 43 is specifically indicting the land of promise, however, once again, this grafting took place with the restitution of the Church in America by Joseph Smith and the conversion to the Church by thousands upon thousands of indigenous people of North, Central and South America, especially in the countries of the latter.

10. “That branch was to be planted in "the choicest spot" of the vineyard. In that prime location, the Lord had already cut down "that which cumbered this spot of ground," clearly a reference to the elimination of the Jaredites.”

Same comment as above in #9.

11. “In addition, the statement that one part of the new hybrid tree brought forth good fruit while the other portion "brought forth wild fruit" is an obvious reference to the Nephites and the Lamanites respectively (v. 45). So the Lehite "tree" of the allegory was constituted of a geographically transplanted population from the original Israelite promised land "grafted" onto a wild root—joined with a non-Israelite people. (Note that the Lord considered the new root to be "good" despite its being "wild," v. 48).”
The verse referenced above states: “And thou beheldest that a part thereof brought forth good fruit, and a part thereof brought forth wild fruit; and because I plucked not the branches thereof and cast them into the fire, behold, they have overcome the good branch that it hath withered away” (Jacob 5:45). In this case, the “good fruit” was Nephi’s immediate people who were basically a righteous people for about 900 years or more until around 344 A.D., when Mormon “saw that the day of grace was passed with them, both temporally and spiritually” (Mormon 2:15). In the case of the “wild fruit,” the reference is clearly of the Lamanites. And because the Lord did not remove the Lamanites from the Land of Promise, they “overcame the good branch that it hath withered away’—surely, the reference is about the Lamanites destroying the Nephites socially and spiritually, as Mormon said, before they did so physically.

12. “This allegorical description requires that a non-Israelite "root"— "other peoples" in terms of this paper—already be present on the scene where the "young and tender branch," Lehi's group, would be amalgamated with them.”

This is purely Sorenson’s imagination. The three groups involved in this allegorical description has to do with the Nephites and Lamanites and very likely the Mulekites, where a true grafting took place. The Nephites were the chosen lineage to earn the promise of the land given to Lehi, they were planted in a choice spot in the vineyard, the Land of Promise, their grafting took place with a wild group, that is, a people of Jerusalem who had “denied their God,” the Mulekites, and the Lamanites are the ones that should have been “plucked up” and burned.

13. “DNA analysts should expect that the immigrants, Lehi's party and Mulek's group too, would immediately begin to incorporate and hybridize with New World "native" populations.”

This is true and we should keep in mind that this line was eventually wiped out. Which means there would be no DNA of either the Nephites or the Mulekites. As for the Lamanites, their DNA was changed, as was those who joined with them, by the Lord who caused their skin and features to be altered. Thus, no DNA in the Western Hemisphere should be found to match anything form the Jerusalem area.

The point is, as is always the case, there is no need to invent people or groups that are not mentioned in the scriptural record in order to make sense out of what is written. Everything has its understanding when taken within the framework of what is written. When someone starts adding to, creating people not listed, the clear and concise language of the Book of Mormon is clouded and much is taken away from the plain and simple writing Nephi so loved.