So-Called Book of Mormon Anachronisms: Sheep, Goats and Swine – Part II

Continuing with these posts regarding the critics’ claim of anachronisms in the Book of Mormon. Regarding the mention of sheep, goats and swine, the critics claim that such animals were never in the New World prior to the coming of the Spaniards. In the last post, it was shown that all these animals were brought by the Jaredites.

Contrary to the popular belief about no animals found in the Andean area before the Spaniards arrived, Edward P. Lanning, in his book “Peru Before the Inca,” that in the Andean area before the Inca there were both wild and domesticated animals which “played their role in the life of the ancient Andean people.” And that “domestic animals were more varied and more important in the Andes than anywhere else in ancient America.”

In addition, Constance Irwin, in the book “Fair Gods and Stone Faces,” claimed that before the Spaniards arrived, “the only domesticated animals in all of south America were found in Peru.” And, Abbe Don I. Ignatius Molina, in his 1787 work, “The Geographical natural and Civil History of Chile,” tells us that “In Chile there was an animal called the pudu, which was considered a species of wild goat.” This information was originally written in 1787 and later published in 1808. However, the “Pudu” today is considered to be a very small deer, it must be that in 1787 and 1808, this information was unknown, and the animal was considered of the goat family, at least by the author—probably from the horns found on the male Pudu. The Pudu is native to Chili, and because of its horns, may have led Nephi to write of these small animals as wild goats, separating them in fact from domesticated goats (1 Nephi 18:25).

The point is, researchers into the area of South America have long known that there were both domesticated and wild animals, as those described by Nephi, in the Andean area of South America, notably in Peru and Chile, long before the Inca, and thus, long before the arrival of the Spaniards. Remains have been found, as shown above, by earlier writers and archaeologists, but in later times, so-called “mainstream” archaeologists tend to reject such earlier findings, because, as they state: “Everyone knows that domesticated animals could not have existed in the Americas before being introduced by the Spaniards and later Europeans.” In one particular case, pre-Columbian sheep wool claimed to have been found in Mesoamerica by John L. Sorenson, but is disputed by “mainstream” archaeologists.

In fact, “mainstream” archaeologists dispute everything about the Book of Mormon. First, they claim there is no archaeological evidence of the Jaredite people described in the Book of Mormon that is accepted by mainstream archaeologists; second, the 19th century archaeological findings of roads, metal points and implements, copper breastplates, head-plates, textiles, inscriptions, elephant remains, timber fortifications and towns, use of plaster-like cement, etc., is not considered by mainstream academia as proving the historicity or divinity of the Book of Mormon; third, the fossil evidence of New World horses is disputed by mainstream archaeologists; and finally, the Book of Mormon is viewed by many mainstream scholars as a work of fiction.

With such attitudes among the so-called experts, it is no wonder that nobody has found anything that supports the Jaredite and Nephite cultures in the Western Hemisphere. If something is found, it is disputed and ridiculed, and considered acts of fiction. Because of this, even some LDS people try to claim what is written in the Book of Mormon must be inaccurate and actually meant something else. Mainstream archaeologists, historians, and scientists label such LDS people as apologists, because they apologize for the anachronisms in the scriptural record.

(See the next post, “Who are the Apologists of the Book of Mormon,” to see what comments are made and the damage it causes when “well meaning” people try to explain away God’s word)