Here are more comments that we have received from readers of
this website blog:
Comment #1: “You continually write about Lehi landing on
an island, and that it was South America. Are you suggesting South America as a
continent would have been called an island? If so, it seems far too large for
the geographical descriptions in the Book of Mormon” Clyde W.
Response: Evidently
you have missed the many maps we have posted showing South America prior to the
rising of the eastern portions when the Andes rose during the crucifixion and
the numerous destructive descriptions found in 3 Nephi and Samuel the
Lamanite’s prophesy in Helaman. And not
to repeat all that, for it is found in the blog site in earlier postings, I’ll
include one map here, showing the basic difference between the “Isle” mentioned
by Jacob and the present map of South America.
Comment #2: “Angkor
Wat (the largest temple complex in the world) did not just magically appear on
the Malay Peninsula. There was an advanced civilization there (buildings,
temples etc.). It was called Zhenla. Add a few letters and you're pretty close
to Zarahemla”
Sithu Mon
Angkor Wat
temple complex in Cambodia that was built in the 12th Century A.D.
Response: Evidently Angkor Wat, which means “Temple City”
(City of Temples), in Khmer, and is located in Angkor, about 3 ½ miles north of
Siem Reap, in the Siem Reap Province, Cambodia. Angkor Wat was built in
Cambodia, not the Malay Peninsula, in the 12th Century A.D., during
the reign of Suryavarman II (1113 to 1150). Dedicated to the
Hindu god Vishnu (Supreme God of Faishnavism), it was built as the king's state
temple and capital city. As neither the foundation stela monument nor any
contemporary inscriptions referring to the temple have been found, its original
name is unknown, but it may have been known as "Varah Vishnu-lok"
after the presiding deity. Work seems to have ended shortly after the king's
death, leaving some of the bas-relief decoration unfinished. About 27 years
after Suryavararman’s death in 1177, Angkor was sacked by the Chams (Chăm Pa from Vietnam), the
traditional enemies of the Khmer.
As for the kingdom of
Zhenla, which was an early Khmer state covering what is now (Red Arrow) northern Cambodia (Yellow Arrow: The Malaysa Peninsula
where Nephites were supposed to have been) Cambodia and southern Laos
(which some refer to as Dvāravatī),
was originally a vassal state of Funan, revolting in the latter part of the 6th
century, and by 627 A.D., during the reign of Isanavarman I, the previous lords were
completely subjugated. It expanded under Jayavarman I in the late 7th
century, and by 706 A.D., the kingdom was divided (Land Chenla and Water Chenla) and
later in the century fell under the domination of the Sri Vijaya empire of
Sumatra—its successor was the Khmer kingdom of Angkor.
Comment #3: “Writing systems
are revised or reformed very rarely. Speech is always changing over time and
space, yet we Americans can still understand Chaucer and Shakespeare rather
well in writing and comprehend our friends the Brits, Australians, etc.
tolerably well in speech and quite well in writing. Therefore, it is surprising
to read that Mosiah "caused that [the people of Zarahemla, the Mulekites]
be taught in his language" since neither he nor his people could
understand them (Omni 17-18), even though the Mulekites had come from Jerusalem
only some 300 years later, during which time the spoken language would not have
changed all that much. Joseph Smith appears to have known that glottochronology
impinges on the credibility of his entire story and this may account for the
insertion of an episode which nonetheless is totally unbelievable” Arthur J.
Response:
Let’s see, where to begin…first, the Mulekites came to the Land of Promise
within a few years of Lehi, they just landed a distance apart and were unknown
to each other, having developed separately in their lands over nearly 400 years
before Mosiah “discovered” Zarahemla. Second, language deteriorates rather
rapidly under certain circumstances—the main one is where there are no written
“records” from which a language can be compared over time as it begins to
change. Between Geoffrey Chaucer and William Shakespear and us (600 and 400
years respectively) has been a continual usage of the same language by an
ongoing stream of people with contact with one another throughout this time.
That is, the language you cite as not undergone isolation from anyone else
during that time. This is a major issue with language changes.
Left: Chaucer’s English is not all that easy
to read; had it been “discovered” without knowing it was English, the
connection would not have been that simple—to understand the writing of Chaucer
most of us would need an interpreter; Right: Shakespeare’s writing is not much
easier; most people require college courses to read the actual style of
writing, not the modern-day writing of the same wordage that is found in high
school classes and undergraduate college classes—but that actual writing style
itself
Chaucer’s “Whan that Aprill with his shoures soote the
droughte of March hath perced to the roote, thanne longen folk to goon on
pilgrimages,” with the pronunciation of that time, where the vowels
are pronounced as in Italian or Spanish, "R"s were trilled or flapped, and words
like droughte are pronounced
as in German, it might take us a while to realize that we were being told that
“When April with its sweet showers has
pierced the drought of March to the root, then folks long to go on
pilgrimages.” And this of a language that has had centuries
of constant use among us as it evolved to what we use today. Stated
differently, the language didn’t just appear out of nowhere, but was in
constant usage, and any changes in spelling, grammar, pronunciation, etc.,
evolved through people slowly so that all understood.
This was not the case
with the Mulekites, whose changes evolved from basically one language to
another without any Nephite being aware of the changes in between. You can make
this sound simple, but linguists who can make such leaps in understanding have
been trained and spend their lifetime studying the changes that have taken
place.
I might also add,
having traveled extensively across this country, spending time in 46 states, in
the backwoods of Alabama, or the academic halls of Boston, or the ranches of
Texas, one hears a language that is far from the same—in fact, I would say that
at times, you think you are in a totally separate, non-English speaking land.
And for the British, go visit Devonshire, or across into Ireland and say you
understand that quite well.
Comment #4: “From
reading your articles each day, it looks like you have sought out every
other view out there to compare and consider” Carlie
A.
Response: Actually, I did
not seek out other views. I began my studies of this work many years ago by
looking at the scriptural record and deciding to let it take me wherever it
went. I had no preconceived idea about where the Land of Promise was located,
and actually didn’t care where it turned out to be. I simply thought it would
be wise to let Nephi and Mormon tell me where they went. In the course of doing
this, I ran across numerous other models and theories, as I still do, and my
nature is to compare whatever I find written or said about the Book of Mormon
to the scriptural record…if it does not match, it is wrong. In the course of
all these years, I have made what seems to me to be startling discoveries that
for some reason are not understood by others.
Comment #5: “Why does the Book of Mormon mention Bellows
(1 Nephi 17:11), Brass (2 Nephi 5:15), Breast Plates & Copper (Mosiah
8:10), Iron (Jarom 1:8), Gold and Silver currency (Alma 11), Silver (Jarom
1:8), and Steel Swords (Ether 7:9)? No evidence indicates that these items
existed during Book of Mormon times. In fact, according to Tom Ferguson:
"Metallurgy does not appear in the region until about the 9th century
A.D." Dick M.
Response: Metallurgy
has not been found in Mesoamerica before 900 A.D. where Mesoamericanist theorists have convinced a large number of people the Book of Mormon was to have taken place; however, since it did not take place there, when something in the real world does not agree, people attribute that to an error in the Book of Mormon when, in reality, it is an error in the location being promoted. Metallurgy has been found in Andean
Peru dating to Jaredites times (2155-1936 B.C.). The necklace (left) was dated
to 2100 B.C. found around Lake Titicaca. If you are going to look for Book of
Mormon evidence, you won’t find it in Mesoamerica. But if you look in Andean Peru, you will find untold evidence.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment