Continuing
from the previous post, we take a look at other areas where common sense seems
lacking as theorists taut their particular theories and maps regarding the
geographical setting of the Land of Promise in the Book of Mormon. Take, as an
example, those in the Mesoamerica camp that consider their theory is the only
accurate one and continually promote ideas that are not in the scriptural
record, such as Sorenson’s east-west land direction for the Land of Promise;
Joseph Allen’s separate narrow pass from the narrow neck of land when Mormon
tells us of only portion of land between the Land Northward and the Land
Southward and that is the “small or narrow neck.”
The
problem, stated here continually, arises when theorists start comparing
scriptural references with their individual theories and chosen locations and
try to adjust the scriptural record so it agrees with their different views.
Most
of these views fly directly in the face of common sense, as we have been
pointing out in this series, and throughout our blog here for the past nearly
eight years.
As
an example, take the Mesoamerican theme of having people in the Land of Promise
before, during and after the Lamanite-Nephite era. They have been claiming
since the time of Hugh Nibley, that
other people occupied the Land of Promise, despite the fact that none are
mentioned at any time over a 2500 year period in the scriptural record of the
Book of Mormon. To get around this, Mesoamerican theorists claim the "recorders
of the record" were prejudiced toward other people encountered in the land and
refused to mention them. So, without any scriptural evidence whatever, these
theorists stand firm in their belief and promotion of other peoples in the Land
of Promise other than the Jaredites, Nephites, Mulekites and Lamanites. They
feel they have to include other people into the Book of Mormon since in their
area of Mesoamerica there were other people, according to them. Discussing the
People of Zarahemla (Mulekites) encountered by Mosiah around 200 B.C., John L.
Sorenson writes: “It appears that other groups dating to the immediately
post-Olmec centuries had similar ambitions” (An Ancient American Setting for
the Book of Mormon, Deseret Book, Salt Lake City, 1985, p120). The post-Olmec
period is claimed to have been the period following the demise of the
Jaredites, which Hugh Nibley claims had “Jaredite survivors” (Hugh Nibley, Lehi
in the Desert and the World of the Jaredites, Bookcraft, Salt Lake City, 1952,
pp238-247)—to which Sorenson claims the evidence of “Jaredite influence” of
Jaredite survivors following their demise is “persuasive,” and that “Jaredite
elements persisted into Mulekite and Nephite time” (p119). So adamant is
Sorenson, that he adds, “There is really no question about it. Jaredite
contributions to the later peoples were substantial, in just about the manner
and degree we have the Olmec tradition continuing into the post-Olmec era”
(p120).
Of
course, what the Book of Mormon says is that all the Jaredites were wiped out,
particular in the events following “And it came to pass that they did gather
together all the people upon all the face of the land, who had not been slain,
save it was Ether” (Ether 15:12), and then goes on to show that everyone was
killed except for Coriantumr and Shiz (Ether 13:29), then the former killed the
latter and became the last man standing.
However,
the scriptural record does not agree with what took place in Mesoamerica, so
the Mesoamerican theorists rely on the Mesoamerica legends and ignore the
scriptural record. As Sorenson writes: “That overview shows striking parallels
between the archaeological picture on the one hand and what the Book of Mormon
says on the other” (p120-121).
Who
these “other people” were is not known, though Sorenson gives such names as
Tlaxcalans and Tarascans” (p100), other than through sketchy and questionable
Mesoamerican history and archaeological claims, many stretching back before the
Flood as though the Flood never occurred—an event Sorenson and other push back
to around 3100 B.C. in order to leave room for these “other people.” Yet,
despite all this effort to convince us that others existed, Mormon, who had all
the records of the Nephites, as evidenced by his comment: “And now, I speak
somewhat concerning that which I have written; for after I had made an
abridgment from the plates of Nephi, down to the reign of this king Benjamin,
of whom Amaleki spake, I searched among the records which had been delivered
into my hands, and I found these plates, which contained this small account
of the prophets, from Jacob down to the reign of this king Benjamin, and also
many of the words of Nephi” (Words of Mormon 1:3, emphasis added), not one word
is written or implied that there were any other people in the Land of Promise.
There
is simply no way for anyone to claim such a monumental event as having untold
numbers of other people in the land and around the Nephites that went
unmentioned. After all, the Nephites were involved in building of ships and in
shipping (Helaman 3:14), obviously they would have been involved in such areas
as trade and shipping of goods (Helaman 3:10), and would have encountered
anyone else in the land. Yet, not one word.
What
on Earth has happened to common sense? The Book of Mormon gives no indication
in any way that other people than the Jaredites, Nephites, Mulekites and
Lamanites, were in the Land of Promise, yet these Mesoamerican theorists talk
about hundreds and thousands of other peoples inhabiting the land at the same
time.
In
another example of common sense gone awry, Sorenson in his book writes of the
Jaredites building and moving into the Land Southward (p117) even though the
scriptural record never states that they did, and in fact, claims they did not,
for “they did preserve the land southward for a wilderness, to get game” (Ether
10:21), though “they built a great city by the narrow neck of land, by the
place where the sea divides the land” (Ether 10:20).
It
is just that common sense is missing from theorists who have an axe to grind,
i.e., proving their viewpoint and model, and will alter, add to, or delete
facts into or from the scriptural record in order to maintain their illusion of
their model as being accurate.
Evidently,
there is no common sense involved when theorists try to prove their views.
Another
interesting example of not using common sense, is in the fact that Moroni
mentions in Ether that the Jaredites had two animals that were very useful to
them that can actually be found only in one place in the entire Western
Hemisphere. Yet, rather than recognize this reality, theorists try to make up
all sorts of alternative animals that could have been meant, such as a sloth,
or a tapir, as though those animals were or are beneficial to man. The
statement regarding the animals usefulness is: “And they also had horses, and
asses, and there were elephants and cureloms and cumoms; all of which were
useful unto man, and more especially the elephants and cureloms and cumoms”
(Ether 9:19). Thus we see that these two unknown animals (unknown to Joseph
Smith in 1830 ) were considered by the Jaredites as being as useful as an
elephant, and more useful than the horse or donkey.
Now
in Andean South America are and have been for millennia, the Llama and Alpaca,
two extremely useful animals, especially to an ancient people, for the Llama,
like the buffalo to the Western Plains Indian of North America, was an animal
that provided the ancient Peruvians everything they needed, from hide to food
to being a beast of burden, to just about every aspect of living. And the
Alpaca provided all sorts of clothing and material for rugs, carpets, bags,
etc.
Common
sense alone would suggest that no two animals anywhere would have been as
valuable to man as these two, yet they are completely ignored in favor of
ridiculous suggestions by theorists of animals found in their own location
models.
del, would you care to comment on the apparent encroachment on the exclusivityof the promised land to the descendants of Lehi by the Mulekites concurrent with the Nephites, one group being Jews and the other group Manassehites? I am Dave Smith
ReplyDeleteSorry, I do not understand your question. Word it differently. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteWe know that the Promised Land was given exclusively to the Jaredites until their nation became evil. The same occurred in the case of the Nephites. If there were no "others" present in the Promised Land concurrent with the Nephites who left us The Stick of Ephraim" D & C 27:5, ) and I DO agree that was God's intent) How do we explain the descendants of Judah along with the decendants of Manasseh? Is it qualified exclusivity or perhaps some other purpose of God? Thank you for your postings, I am in harmony wit hall that I have read(all of 2010, 2011, 2015, and 2016 and of course this year.
ReplyDeleteMy motivation is not the same as that other David who seems to not be able to learn from your patient explanations.