Here are some
additional comments or questions sent in by readers of this website:
Comment #1: “I understand that in the "Zarahemla”
article printed in the Times and
Seasons 3 (1 October 1842), page 927, an editorial stated: “We are not
agoing to declare positively, that the ruins of Quirigua are those of
Zarahemla, but when the land and the stones, and the books tell the story so
plain, we are of opinion,” which I believe infers that this site in Guatemala
must be “one of those referred to in the Book of Mormon” the article
concluded.” How does that stack up against your model?” Culver O.
Response: At the time
of this article, Joseph Smith was the editor of the Times and Seasons. Some claim he was in hiding at the time, and
others say he was traveling, etc., and not present in Nauvoo when the article
was written and printed. While we can’t say for certain, let’s assume Joseph
Smith was present and knew about and approved the article. We need to keep in
mind the attitude and circumstances of that period.
First of all, in
1842, the church leaders were presented with a newly published book Incidents
of Travel in Central America, Chiapas and Yucatan, written by the explorer and adventurer, John Lloyd Stephens (printed
in London by John Murray publishers in 1841). The Book of Mormon had been in
publication only about 11 years, and had met with an enormous amount of
ridicule by critics and those opposed to the Mormons. Thus, Stephens book
seemed to validate the existence of an ancient civilization in the Americas
and, to members of the church and its leaders, had to have been the ruins of
ancient Nephite cities.
One of the passages in the book read: “Here were the remains
of a cultivated, polished, and peculiar people, who had passed through all the
stages incident to the rise and fall of nations; reached their golden age, and
perished, entirely unknown. The links which connected them with the human
family were severed and lost, and these were the only memorials of their
footsteps upon earth.” To early Latter-day
Saints, eager to find worldly verification of the Nephite nation in the
Americas, this was fodder for great joy. No doubt, leaders and members alike
thought they had found Lehi’s promised land.
Numerous articles,
discussions and, no doubt, sermons, flew about Nauvoo and the early Church. I
personally remember in the 1960s when Jakeman’s interpretation of the so-called
“Lehi Stone” (Izapa Stela #5) caused a great fervor in the church among the
members. My ward in Southern California at that time, and many others, ordered
numerous replicas of the engraven stone and they sold like hotcakes. Who
doesn’t want to see verification of the very heart of the church—the Book of
Mormon—from non-church, archaeological sources?
However, the “Tree of
Life” stone (left) proved to be a hoax in the long run with numerous scientists
claiming Jakeman’s interpretation was in error. In 1841 and over the following
years, the ruins of Mesoamerica, were not supported by the church officially as
the home of the Nephites, and subsequent investigation have failed to turn up
any scientific proof from the ground that this area was, in fact, Nephite.
As for my personal
opinion, when 5,400 Nephites and their families emigrated to a land “which was
northward,” and were never heard from again (Alma 63:4-8), ended up in what is
today called Mesoamerica. There they built fantastic cities and a civilization
to match the Peruvian Andean area from which they came. The ruins in
Mesoamerica are Nephite, but the cities are not those of the scriptural record.
Comment #2: “I heard somewhere that Quechua (Andean
language) means “Robber.” If this is true, does this relate to the Gadianton
Robbers of the Book of Mormon?” Herrera G.
Response: The word kkechuwa, in the Quechua (Qheswa,
Qichwa) language, means “plunderer” or “robber.” The so-called Quechua people
were from central Peru and the dominant element of the Inca empire. Their
language was also called Quechua, which was spoken widely by other Indian
peoples of Peru, Bolivia, Ecuador, Chile and Argentina. However, the original
name, and what the Quechua people call their language, is Runa Simi, which literally means “the mouth or tongue of the
people.” The Inca themselves referred to their language as Qhapaq Runasimi, meaning “The great language of the people.” The
word Quechua was given by Dominican priest Pedro Aparicio in the times of the
conquest in 1540 misundestanding the meaning. The root of the word 'quechua'
means, taken away by force,"quechuanchis" were called the Spaniards
by the Incas an expression that means all together, killers, thieves.
Consequently, there can be no connection in the Runa Simi language of the indigenous people of the “robber” idea,
since that was a name applied by the Spanish priest to a people “who were taken
from their land by force,” while the Inca called the conquerors quechuanchis, which was saying that the
Spanish were killers and thieves. In Runa Simi, the actual word “robber” would
appear something like qichuqkuna. The problem is, since Spanish has long been a
major language in the Andes, it has altered some of the words, sounds and
spelling of original Runa Simi words.
Comment #3: “I have some
serious objections to the last chapter of your BoM where the reader is
encouraged to “ask God, the Eternal Father, in the Name of Christ, if these
things are not true” etc. This approach to validating the inspiration of the
Book of Mormon is fallacious. Some people I know have followed this
prescription of Moroni 10:4 and concluded that the Book of Mormon is not true.
That is, they have read the Book of Mormon, asking God to show them whether it
is true or not, and have not received a testimony of its truth but have instead
become convinced that it is false. All you people can really say to such
persons is that they must not have prayed "with a sincere heart" or
"real intent." But on what basis can this judgment be made? Only on
the assumption that the Book of Mormon is true — that is, only by assuming the
very thing in question” Dallin M.
Response:
If life was that simple, then we would all be perfect. First of all, I know
numerous people who have taken that approach and found a testimony in the Book
of Mormon, but of course, some do not. Perhaps it boils down to real intent,
perhaps it boils down to how much effort did a person really put forth toward
reading and trying to understand or allowing the spirit to work on him. James
said that faith without works is dead (James 2:17-18). I cannot look into a
man’s heart and see what his real intent is or was. The spirit works on people
who will receive that inspiration. The world is full of people who will attest
and testify to that. The offer made by Moroni is meant to show a person, if he wants, how he can come to know the truthfulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Many,
many people in the world want to know that, but never come to an understanding
of it—it is really interesting that you would choose to point a finger at
something people have struggled with for millennia. Then, too, is the question
of real intent. How interested, truly interested, are you or a person in
wanting to really, truly know, the mind of God? Who really wants to learn that
he must repent of his sins, strip himself before God in all humility, baring
his soul to the Father who created him, and spill out all the vile, wicked, and
evil things he has done in life, knowing he is talking to a perfect being? Real
intent cannot be measured by any one of us. Some manage it, some do not. Some
read the Book of Mormon as a curiosity, some as a means to find error, some to
scoff and insult those who believe, and others to learn, to know, to seek the
truth. Only God knows the intent of one’s heart and the purposes of his
actions. It is not a simple manner, Moroni did not intend it to be, nor does
God. We have to earn our place in his kingdom through our efforts, or as James
said, “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith
only,” and also, “Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had
offered Isaac his son upon the altar?” (James 2:21, 24). While most of the
Christian world believe that they will earn the same rewards as the Saint, the
martyr, the apostle, the prophet, etc., I am not so sure any of us who achieve
a much lesser level of humility and faith in God would be comfortable living in
an eternity at the same level as those who far exceeded our efforts.
No comments:
Post a Comment