Friday, July 20, 2018

Are the Scriptures implicit or explicit? – Part III

Continued from the previous post regarding some of the points theorists like to present to suggest that the scriptural record is not entirely accurate. Another such point theroists raise is:
• Theorists claim another point showing “ample evidence,” was the vast numbers of Nephites and Lamanites involved in their wars, and the large numbers of those killed, etc. Theorists claim the Nephite would not have had such vast numbers and that other peoples had to also have been involved.
Early battles between Nephites and Lamanites might well have been small, with minimal antagonists, while later battles would have had the large numbers the scriptural record indicates

However, at the time of the first battles between these two groups, no numbers are mentioned, only that they had wars (Enos 1:24), which followed with many wars over much of the next 230 years (Jarom 1:13-14), and then were many seasons of war (Omni 1:3), which continued (1:10), but no numbers of any kind are given on either side. There were “serious wars and much bloodshed between the Nephites and the Lamanites” (Omni 1:24), but again, no numbers.
    The first mention of numbers is ambiguously stated by Zeniff after the Nephites from Zarahemla returned to the City of Nephi, in which it is stated that there “began to be wars an contentions in the land” and that “a numerous host of Lamanites came upon them” (Mosiah 9:13-14), with the numbers of the dead shown when the Nephites killed 3,043 Lamanites (Mosiah 9:18). The Lamanites had “numerous hosts” in a later attack (Mosiash 10:8), in which so many Lamanites were killed they did not count them (Mosiah 10:20). Even later, Zeniff’s Nephite forces were outnumbered by a Lamanite force that was twice their number (Mosiah 20:11).
As time passed, and populations grew, the battles between the Lamanites and Nephits involved more and more combatants
  
The point is, even thru the first 500 years in the Land of Promise, there is no scriptural record of any Nephite or Lamanite numbers regarding how many fought or died in these battles and wars. Consequently, it cannot be said that their numbers were too large for the Nephite or Lamanite populations, since we have no idea how many were involved in these wars and battles. However, through 500 years, a population would expand into the many hundreds of thousands, and likely into the millions over approximately 20-25 generations.
    Work at Purdue University by Sal Barone in 2017 shows that one couple, having four children, in the first 30 years of marriage would reach five billion in 960 years. Thus, it must be acknowledged that despite the deaths in war, the Nephites and Lamanites, beginning with at least four families (Laman, Lemuel, two sons of Ishmael) and the Nephites, with seven couples (Sam, Nephi, 2 sisters, Jacob, Joseph, and Zoram), or a total of 11 couples overall (not to mention any servants and household members), in 500 years would theoretically at least reach many millions during those first 500 years into the period covered by the book of Alma, where we find numbers of the dead in a battle numbering 12,532 Amlicites and 6,562 Nephites (Alma 2:19), and later encountered a Lamanite army referred to as a numerous host, numbering as the sands of the sea (Alma 2:27). In fact, in the fifth year of the reign of the judges, there “were thousands and tens of thousands of souls sent to the eternal world” (Alma 3:26). By this time, of course, the population could have been in the millions.
    Obviously, no outside groups would have been necessary to deal in the numbers recorded later in the scriptural record.
• Another point of so-called “ample evidence” is that of Sherem “a man who came among the Nephites” (Jacob 7:1) wanting to see Jacob, saying: “I have sought much opportunity that I might speak unto you” (Jacob 7:7). The theorists claim that it was a small community at this time and why would a man “come among them” if not from the outside or from another people, and why would he seek “much opportunity to speak unto you” if there were not a lot of people and he had to find Jacob among them.
Sherem confronts Jacob, in which he is exposed as a liar and disruptor 

However, it is just as easily explained by the fact that Sherem was a flatterer of the people looking for contention and argument—as Sharem eventually told Jacob that he had led away the people, perverted the right way of god, did not keep the law of Moses, saying of Jacob’s preachings “this is blasphemy” (Jacob 7:7). His goal was to confront Jacob and anyone else who believed in Christ and Jacob, a man who had seen more than his share of serious and violent argument among his brothers, likely did not want to meet with Sherem. Why would he? Not everyone wants confrontation and contention with someone whose goal is to shake them from their faith (Jacob 7:5). As for coming among them, this is easily understood that at some point in his life, Sherem began to preach in the public arena (Jacob 7:2) and in so doing became known among the Nephites as he circulated among them, preaching all sorts of erroneous doctrine, being a man of the devil (Jacob 7:14).
    Thus, this is no evidence of other groups of people at all, but merely an incident of a person who sought power, money and authority over others and Jacob avoided meeting with him as long as he could.
• Still another bit of “ample evidence” is that there were left-over Jaredites among the Lamanites and Nephites, citing Jaredites names among the Nepihte as the so-called evidence of their existence. As an example, Alma the Younger gave two of his sons Jaredites names: Shiblon and Corianton. The Jaredite name, however, was not Corianton, but Coriantor, Coriantum and Coriantumr. Was there a connection?
    Now names are a funny thing. Take, as an example, the current famed Russian name of Alek (Alexei and Alexey), but then, Alexander is a Greek name (Alexandros) which is found in the American/English name Alex, and in French Allex, or the Scottish Alec (Aleck). Does that mean all these names are Greek? Or are even connected to Greece?
    Or take Luis, the Spanish name for American/English Louis, which is the same as the French Louie, German Ludwig, Latin Ludovicus, and connected to Luke. Or the Italian Benedict, does that mean that Benedict Arnold of colonial America was Italian? Or the Italian Jacopo, which is connected to Jacob and Jake. Or the German name Karl, which is associated with both Carl and Charles, both common American/English names, as well as the Italian Carlo, and is also connected to the name Chad, and is seen in Carlsen, Carlsson, Kartsen, Karlsson, etc.
     Theorists often point to more isolated names in antiquity, however, they seldom consider that all names came from Noah’s family around 2343 BC, including both Jaredite (2100 BC) and Hebrew (2000 BC).
    The point being that to determine the existence of a people by simply a few who have such names is foolhardy. Names are handed down, used by others, and in the early days of the Nephites (600 BC) the Hebrews were continually using other names to give their children, especially if they felt those names were valuable or worthwhile.
It was long the Hebrew and Jewish custom to give children the names of previous heroes, spiritual men, and past men of stature for the purpose of their living up to such greatness. It did not matter where the name came from as long as it was considered to represent considerable accomplishment or achievement

    We should keep in mind because of the dates of the Patriarchs and their long lives, that Isaac and Jacob were alive at the time of Shem and Eber, and were taught by them. The overlapping of these early generations should suggest the overlap of names and their usage.
    The point is, the scriptural record was written with explicit language for our benefit and understanding. To make claims that the language was implicit and needing further knowledge and understanding in order to know what was written is simply without merit; however, such claims allow theorist to promote their far-flung ideas and beliefs that actually have little or no support in the scriptures at all.

No comments:

Post a Comment