Continuing with the Great Lakes
theorist, we find his point being: Book of Mormon lands were hidden, not directly connected to the Great Sea:
“And behold it is wisdom that this land should be kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations for behold many nations would overrun the land that there would be no place for an inheritance” (2 Nephi 1:8).
It is not particularly scholarly to make a statement and then use a scripture that neither verifies the statement nor has anything to do with it, as though the two go together.
There is not a single use of the
word “hidden” in the Book of Mormon related to the Land of Promise, Lehi’s
lands, the Nephite lands, etc. The word “hidden” is an invention by the Great Lakes
theorist to try and given reason why his Land of Promise model is not located
along a seacoast as is shown in the scriptural record which they deny and
completely change its meaning.
We need to keep in mind that rather than people’s opinions, not matter who it might be, an opinion simply does not trump a statement in the scriptural record, especially one Mormon inserts for our better understanding of the description of the Land of Promise. He wrote in his insertion in Alma of the various lands: “Now, the more idle part of the Lamanites lived in the wilderness, and dwelt in tents; and they were spread through the wilderness on the west, in the land of Nephi; yea, and also on the west of the land of Zarahemla, in the borders by the seashore, and on the west in the land of Nephi, in the place of their fathers' first inheritance, and thus bordering along by the seashore” (Alma 22:28).
Now we know that the Land of Nephi ran from sea to sea, for
Mormon wrote: “the land of Nephi did run in a straight
course from the east sea to the west” (Alma 50:8), and that the Lamanite lands
that the king controlled for “the king sent a proclamation throughout all the
land, amongst all his people who were in all his land, who were in all the
regions round about, which was bordering even to the sea, on the east and on
the west” (Alma 22:27).
This also shows that Lehi landed along the west sea coast right where Mormon tells us, referring to it as “their fathers' first inheritance,” which means where they first settled, and it was along the seashore since the Land of Nephi ran from sea to sea, which Mormon verifies with the closing comment: “and thus bordering along by the seashore."
No amount of word manipulation is going to change that. So, turning to Jacob, we find Lehi’s son verifying that they landed on a land amidst the sea over which they traveled when he taught in the temple, “we have been led to a better land, for the Lord has made the sea our path, and we are upon an isle of the sea” (2 Nephi 10:20). Now, no matter what argument you want to make out of the word “isle,” the point here is that it was in the midst of the sea, for they were crossing the sea and landed upon a land (island) in that sea!
To deny that is to deny the very scripture that states it so clearly.
To deny that is to deny Jacob’s statement he made in the temple in teaching the Nephites.
To deny that is to set oneself above the scriptural record.
So what is it about
this understanding that is so hard for Great Lakes and other Theorists to
accept?
When one’s model or viewpoint or belief is different than the scriptural record, it is time to set aside one’s petty difference and accept what the scriptural record states. Jacob was on that ship, albeit very young, but he certainly knew he was crossing a great sea and that he landed on a land that was within that sea for he clearly states it to the multitude of Nephites gathered in the temple on the second day of the conference (2 Nephi 6:1; 9:54; 10:1).
To deny that is to claim that Jacob, a prophet and teacher of the people in the presence of the prophet (Nephite) who wrote this down on the plates, lied or spoke a half-truth to the people in the temple.
Following this, Nephite wrote: “now, Jacob spake many more things to my people at that time; nevertheless only these things have I caused to be written, for the things which I have written sufficeth me” (2 Nephi 11:1). Why is it that Great Lakes Theorists so doggedly deny what two prophets spoke who lived on the “isle of the sea” and knew how they got there, that it was in the midst of that sea over which they traveled, yet claim they hold the high ground in this issue merely because they disagree with Mesoamerican Theorists about Central America?
It is time to stop
this ridiculous so-called war and accept what Nephi and Jacob wrote and set
aside this personal feud and difference of opinion, when both Great Lakes and
Mesoamerican Theorists are wrong about the scriptural record and reject what it
says in favor of something a Church leader stated in July of 1835, about a trip
across the sea and landing he never made or participated in, and has no record
of divine providence intervening in the process of his knowledge and no
statement or record of Church acceptance of his view being accurate.
It is also inaccurate to claim that the Lord hid the Land of Promise from people until he was ready to lead people there. While it is true he set up the ocean paths over which a vessel must sail in order to reach that Western Hemisphere, and did not inspire any people to build a ship that would carry them into the deep oceans, nor inspire anyone before Columbus (other than those he led there, i.e., Jaredites, Lehites and Mulekites), he did not in effect “hide” the land of promise so no one could find it or “stumble across it” accidentally, or locate it by accident.
It was simply in a location where for anyone to find it they had to
be led there by the Lord, just like for anyone to interpret the writing of the
Nephite prophets, they had to be inspired by the Lord (Mormon 9:34).
So in recapping:
1. The Land of Promise was not hidden by the Lord.
2. There is no reference or suggestion in scripture that the Land of Promise was not connected to the Great Sea. In fact, just the opposite is true, Jacob tells us how they got to the Land of Promise, and Mormon tells us the Land of First Inheritance where Lehi landed was located in his description of the Lamanites, i.e., “in the borders by the seashore, and on the west in the land of Nephi, in the place of their fathers' first inheritance, and thus bordering along by the seashore” (Alma 22:28).
What we know is that Lehi said “it is wisdom that this land should be kept as yet from the knowledge
of other nations for behold many nations would overrun the land
that there would be no place for an inheritance” (2 Nephi 1:8). And true to
this fact, no one was told (after Lehi who needed the Liahona to find it) how
to get to the Land of Promise until Columbus.
And let us not forget that though the Lord showed Nephi in a vision that he “beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land” (1 Nephi 13:12), that this Columbus, “led to the seed of my brethren” never set foot in North America, never even saw what is now the United States, and certainly never ventured into the area of the Great Lakes—yet he went to the seed of Nephi’s brethren, i.e., the Lamanites.
There is simply no way the Great Lakes Theorists can claim that their model is that of the Land of Promise as shown in the Book of Mormon!
“And behold it is wisdom that this land should be kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations for behold many nations would overrun the land that there would be no place for an inheritance” (2 Nephi 1:8).
It is not particularly scholarly to make a statement and then use a scripture that neither verifies the statement nor has anything to do with it, as though the two go together.
We need to keep in mind that rather than people’s opinions, not matter who it might be, an opinion simply does not trump a statement in the scriptural record, especially one Mormon inserts for our better understanding of the description of the Land of Promise. He wrote in his insertion in Alma of the various lands: “Now, the more idle part of the Lamanites lived in the wilderness, and dwelt in tents; and they were spread through the wilderness on the west, in the land of Nephi; yea, and also on the west of the land of Zarahemla, in the borders by the seashore, and on the west in the land of Nephi, in the place of their fathers' first inheritance, and thus bordering along by the seashore” (Alma 22:28).
Thus, we see that the
Land of Nephi ran in a “straight course” from the Sea East to the Sea West, meaning that the overal land was from the Land of Nephi in the south to the Land of Bountiful in the north and that the overal configuration of the land, as Mormon wrote it in his abridgement, ran north and south as he so clearly stated time and again
This also shows that Lehi landed along the west sea coast right where Mormon tells us, referring to it as “their fathers' first inheritance,” which means where they first settled, and it was along the seashore since the Land of Nephi ran from sea to sea, which Mormon verifies with the closing comment: “and thus bordering along by the seashore."
No amount of word manipulation is going to change that. So, turning to Jacob, we find Lehi’s son verifying that they landed on a land amidst the sea over which they traveled when he taught in the temple, “we have been led to a better land, for the Lord has made the sea our path, and we are upon an isle of the sea” (2 Nephi 10:20). Now, no matter what argument you want to make out of the word “isle,” the point here is that it was in the midst of the sea, for they were crossing the sea and landed upon a land (island) in that sea!
To deny that is to deny the very scripture that states it so clearly.
To deny that is to deny Jacob’s statement he made in the temple in teaching the Nephites.
To deny that is to set oneself above the scriptural record.
Jacob speaking on the second day of a
two-day conference in the temple with Nephi writing down what he said (2 Nephi
10:20)
When one’s model or viewpoint or belief is different than the scriptural record, it is time to set aside one’s petty difference and accept what the scriptural record states. Jacob was on that ship, albeit very young, but he certainly knew he was crossing a great sea and that he landed on a land that was within that sea for he clearly states it to the multitude of Nephites gathered in the temple on the second day of the conference (2 Nephi 6:1; 9:54; 10:1).
To deny that is to claim that Jacob, a prophet and teacher of the people in the presence of the prophet (Nephite) who wrote this down on the plates, lied or spoke a half-truth to the people in the temple.
Following this, Nephite wrote: “now, Jacob spake many more things to my people at that time; nevertheless only these things have I caused to be written, for the things which I have written sufficeth me” (2 Nephi 11:1). Why is it that Great Lakes Theorists so doggedly deny what two prophets spoke who lived on the “isle of the sea” and knew how they got there, that it was in the midst of that sea over which they traveled, yet claim they hold the high ground in this issue merely because they disagree with Mesoamerican Theorists about Central America?
Nephi was on his ship, he lived through the storm, he used the liahona to guide him along the swift moving currents, he saw where they landed, and he verified Jacob's commend about landing on an island in the midst of the sea over which they traveled. Great Lakes people were not there and have no way of knowing anything other than what Jacob said and Nephi wrote
It is also inaccurate to claim that the Lord hid the Land of Promise from people until he was ready to lead people there. While it is true he set up the ocean paths over which a vessel must sail in order to reach that Western Hemisphere, and did not inspire any people to build a ship that would carry them into the deep oceans, nor inspire anyone before Columbus (other than those he led there, i.e., Jaredites, Lehites and Mulekites), he did not in effect “hide” the land of promise so no one could find it or “stumble across it” accidentally, or locate it by accident.
Before Columbus' time, mariners began venturing out of the Mediterranean Sea and into the Atlantic, but they kept to the currents that hugged the shorelines to the north (toward England and France and their tin mines) and to the south (toward Africa and their slave trade and gold). During one of these voyages, Columbus was inspired by the Spirit to recognize a new current heading out into the deep Atlantic Ocean, and from this formulated his plan
So in recapping:
1. The Land of Promise was not hidden by the Lord.
2. There is no reference or suggestion in scripture that the Land of Promise was not connected to the Great Sea. In fact, just the opposite is true, Jacob tells us how they got to the Land of Promise, and Mormon tells us the Land of First Inheritance where Lehi landed was located in his description of the Lamanites, i.e., “in the borders by the seashore, and on the west in the land of Nephi, in the place of their fathers' first inheritance, and thus bordering along by the seashore” (Alma 22:28).
Lehi prophesying to his family shortly before his death
And let us not forget that though the Lord showed Nephi in a vision that he “beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land” (1 Nephi 13:12), that this Columbus, “led to the seed of my brethren” never set foot in North America, never even saw what is now the United States, and certainly never ventured into the area of the Great Lakes—yet he went to the seed of Nephi’s brethren, i.e., the Lamanites.
There is simply no way the Great Lakes Theorists can claim that their model is that of the Land of Promise as shown in the Book of Mormon!
love the humor
ReplyDelete"And true to this fact, no one was told (after Lehi who needed the Liahona to find it) how to get to the Land of Promise until Columbus."
ReplyDeleteThat statement has no scriptural or prophetic basis. It's complete speculation, Del.
Hey, Wonder Boy, haven’t heard from you for a while—good to see you’re still around. As for the comment, poor choice of words. The point being, we know of no other nation that was led to these shores before Columbus, who came sponsored by the governments of Castile and Aragon (Spain) while Leif Erickson, who evidently landed in New Foundland came as a private group from no nation. The point being of the article, that unless someone knew about the winds and especially the ocean current (North Atlantic Gyre), it would have been highly unlikely anyone would have sailed out into
ReplyDeleteThe Atlantic Ocean. We know Nephi had the Liahona on his voyage—what role it played during the ocean voyage we are not told, though evidently it had something to do with showing where to steer the ship, which would have been important to move along one side of the current or the other since that would determine whether or not the ship hugged the inner circle, continuing on around the gyre, or flowed out of the current to be picked up by the lower current (below the Equator) that would have taken them down toward the Southern Ocean.
It is certainly possible someone might have discovered that current in the Atlantic off the Portuguese coast, etc., but history suggests that no one did. As late as 1480s, ships were still sailing north toward Briton and Gaul (France) for tin and down the African coast for gold and slaves—a few adventurers were moving out into the Atlantic to the islands off the coasts, but nothing is recorded of sailing beyond the Canaries on the westward current. It would seem, from Lehi’s prophecy, that no nation (or possibly individuals) were led into that current with the intent of their settling in the Western Hemisphere; however, that we do not know for certain, tough if some large group of people settled somewhere in the North or South American lands, we would have by now some knowledge of that occurrence, and other than highly speculative adventures by Phoenician mariners, there is really nothing to suggest that anyone was led to the New World between the Book of Mormon peoples and Columbus and the following Spanish and Europeans. If anyone came, they must have done so like ghosts, for nothing has yet been found of such arrivals, even though the small group of Erickson left signs that have been identified in modern times.