Where Do We Find Accurate Dates? – Part VI

Continuing with Joseph L. Allen’s descriptive information in his book Exploring the Lands of the Book of Mormon, that poses as Land of Promise discussion but really is meant to solidify his Mesoamerican model. Note this completely unreliable and non-scholarly approach to justify his 3000 B.C. Flood dating: 
    Allen: “Ten generations are mentioned in the Bible from Adam to Noah.  Ten generations are also mentioned in the Bible from Noah to Abraham.  The life span recorded in years prior to the flood is much longer than those recorded after the flood.  If we allow Noah to be the chronological midpoint between Adam and Abraham, place Adam at the traditional 4000 BC mark, and have Abraham living around 2000 BC, then the flood (Noah) midpoint is approximately 3000 BC.”

This type of thinking is neither scholarly nor serves a purpose and only clouds the issue of the dates given us by the Lord through Moses (left), who was shown a vision by the Lord in which he beheld the world and the ends thereof, and all the children of men which are and which were created (Moses 1:7-8), and in a second vision, he was shown the earth, yea, even all of it; and there was not a particle of it which he did not behold...and he beheld the inhabitants thereof, and there was not a soul which he beheld not (Moses 1:27-28).
    He was given a particular revelation, only an account of this earth and the inhabitants thereof give I unto you, the Lord told him (Moses 1:33,35).  Finally, the Lord told Moses, I will speak unto thee concerning the earth upon which thou standest; and thou shalt write the things which I shall speak (Moses 1:40).  With that preparation, the Lord spoke to Moses of the period of time that we find recorded in the Biblical Book of Genesis. Unlike the attitude of scholars, even religious ones, who have “almost cheerfully gone about the business of discrediting and destroying confidence in the historicity and authenticity of Genesis” (W. Cleon Skousen, The First 2,000 Years, from Adam to Abraham, Ensign Publishing, Salt Lake City, 1953, p13).
    Take as an example, Professor of Old Testament Language and Literature Frederick Carl Eislen, Dean of the Garret Biblical Institute, and Executive Secretary for the Board of Education of the Methodist Episcopal Church, who died in 1937, who once wrote:
    "If anyone is in search of accurate information regarding the age of the earth, or its relation to the sun, moon or stars, or the exact order in which plants and animals first appeared, or the rise of civilization, or the origin of languages, and races, and similar questions, he should go to the books embodying the results of scientific and historical investigation and not to the book of Genesis.  So far as the scientific or historical knowledge in the latter is concerned, it is of little more value than that contained in similar stories among the other nations.  In any consideration of the historical value of the patriarchal narratives it must be kept in mind that, whatever the origin of the book of Genesis, these stories were handed down for several centuries by word of mouth; which means that they were exposed to all the dangers which ordinarily threaten narratives thus transmitted. As a result it becomes impossible to regard the patriarchal stories as historical authorities in the proper sense of that term.”

However, we know from the Book of Moses in the Pearl of Great Price, that Moses received this information in vision and directly from the Lord
    Genesis was actually dictated to Moses by the Lord. As the Lord told Moses: “And now, Moses, my son, I will speak unto thee concerning the earth upon which thou standest; and thou shalt write the things which I shall speak. And in a day when the children of men shall esteem my words as naught and take many of them from the book which thou shalt write, behold, I will raise up another like unto thee; and they shall be had again among the children of men—among as many as shall believe” (Moses 1:40-41).
    The Lord told Moses the dates, times, sequences, and periods as the prophet wrote them down.  It can hardly be intimated that Moses made an error in giving those living before the flood longer lifespans than those living after the flood.  That's the way the Lord told it to him and that is the way Moses wrote it down.  Thus, the dates shown in the Bible are correct, and Noah did not appear chronologically in the middle (time wise) of those 20 generations as Allen suggests, but in the chronological time frame the Lord told Moses.  The Flood was not at the midpoint or 3000 BC, but occurred in 2344 BC as stated  in the scriptures.
    Continuing with Allen’s remarks, he writes: “If we look at Ixtlilxochitl's dating, which also is not totally reliable because of inconsistencies, we arrive at the following.”
    First, Ixtlilxochitl's dating may well be unreliable, but the dating in scripture—especially the Pearl of Great Price—is not in question and certainly cannot be considered, "also not totally reliable" as Allen intimates.  On the other hand, since Ixtilxochitl's dating puts the Flood at 1716 years after the creation of the world, only 60 years different than Moses who stated the time as 1656 years. Thus Ixtlilxochitl's date is within 60 years of the actual event. However, one should not become over confident about Ixtlilxochitl's dating statements, for some are considerably off of other known dates. Because Ixtlilxochitl obtained his information from ancient records, stories handed down from generation to generation, and from earlier Mayan legends and myths, some dates may well be more correct than others. The date of 1716 years from the creation to the flood came from ancient Tolteca history.
    Allen continues with his writing: “Bruce Warren, coauthor of The Messiah in Ancient America, discovered that Ixtlilxochitl made an error in calculation that placed the creation of the earth 4825 BC and the flood date at 3109 BC. For the sake of this study, I will place the 3114 BC date as representative of the flood.
    Isn’t it interesting, despite the Lord telling Moses the accurate dates, and even a Mesoamerican author, Ixtlilxochitl was within 60 years, Allen decides that the Lord, Moses and even his own Mayan Ixtlilxochitl have the incorrect date, and rejects those in favor of the Mayan Calendar and an author of an obscure book about the Mayan god Quetzalcoatl.

The interesting thing about all this is the willingness of Book of Mormon scholars to take the word of Ixtlilxochitl or some other Mayan historian over that of Moses and the Lord, except when the two agree, then they look for another source to use.  But regarding the Flood, it occurred in 2344 B.C. and there is nothing anyone can do about changing that fact for the Lord told it to Moses, and Moses wrote it down chronologically which is referenced in both Genesis and in the Pearl of Great Price.
    Another Allen comment is: “I have not been able to reconcile the 2350 BC flood date, which scholars derive from the Bible, with archaeological reports or with Book of Mormon and Mesoamerican histories.”
    Perhaps it would be wise for Allen to reject archaeological reports and Mesoamerican history in favor of the Biblical dating system of the Flood as the Lord told it to Moses.  As for Book of Mormon history, there is no mention of the Flood by date, and only twice is the word flood used at all: 1) Alma 10:22, referring to the Flood in the days of Noah, and 2) Ether 13:2, that after the waters had receded from off the face of this land, it became a choice land above all other lands.  Thus, one can hardly have any difficulty with Book of Mormon dates and the Flood.  That there would be problems with Mesoamerican history may be true, but that has nothing to do with the Book of Mormon history. And the fact that these two don't jive ought to be another proof that the Lehi Colony did not land in Mesoamerica.
    Not willing to give up on his difference of opinion, Allen adds: “In the future perhaps this dilemma might be solved.”

There is no dilemma when you start with the Book of Mormon and relate all to it.  When you start with a land, archaeological finds and pre-determined attitudes and models, you are likely going to run into problems that create dilemmas--and especially when you don't start with what the Lord has said. His dates of the time of the Flood are irrefutable and despite Allen’s efforts to change them, are strong enough to withstand any such scholarly approach at changing the word of the Lord.
(See the next post, “Where Do We Find Accurate Dates? – Part VII,” for more of Allen’s descriptive information that poses as Book of Mormon discussion but really is meant to solidify his Mesoamerican model)