More Comments from Readers – Part IV

Here are some more comments received from our readers:
Comment #1: “From time to time you indicate that Joseph Smith and others talked about “this continent” as the Americas and that is where Lehi landed. Do you have any references for this?” Sharon G.

Prior to World War II, the Americas were considered one continent, and in some areas, including Latin America, still are

Response: According to the official designation, map makers, and the nomenclature of continents, “North and South America have been viewed as a single continent known as America or the Americas, which viewpoint was common in the United States until World War II, and remains prevalent in some Asian and Latin American six-continent models. In fact, “The United States viewed the two continents (North America and South America) as a single continent and referred to it as the Americas. However, this point lasted only until the Second World War. Geographers regard North America and South America as two continents” (World Facts, World Atlas, May 22, 2018, Rachel Cribby, Managing Editor).
    In addition to all the quotes that we’ve listed in our articles of Presidents and General Authorities, we will just add that Joseph Smith said of the plates he translated, “[they] contained the word of God which was delivered unto them. By it we learn that our western tribes of Indians all descendants from that Joseph who was old into Egypt, and that the land of America is a promised land unto them and unto all the tribes of Israel which will come with as many of the Gentiles as shall comply with the requirements of the new covenant” (DHC Vol 1, p3150. Many more can be added.
Comment #2: “All these claims about the Malay area as the Land of Promise. I understand that wheat and barley will not grow in the tropics of that peninsula” Ron J.
Response: The Equator runs through the middle of Sumatra with the Malay Peninsula between the Equator and 10º north latitude, with 5º degree line through what would be considered the Land of Nephi in their theory, which has a climate categorized as equatorial, being hot and humid throughout the year. The average rainfall is 98 inches a year and the average temperature is 80.6 °F., which is a climate where wheat and barley do not grow.

Wheat field of Idaho; wheat does not grow in Malaysia/Indonesia

According to Chris Lyddon, “Focus on Malaysia,” World-Grain.com, March 2014, (from CIA World Factbook): “Malaysia is a major producer of palm oil. It produces no wheat and little maize and needs to make up a shortfall in rice with imports. Maize and wheat are imported to feed livestock, while demand for wheat-based products is growing and the country does have a significant flour milling industry. The International Grains Council (IGC) puts Malaysia’s total grain imports at 4.5 million tonnes in 2013-14, compared with 4.1 million the year before. The total includes 1.4 million tonnes of wheat, up from 1.3 million the year before, and 3.1 million tonnes of maize, up from 2.8 million the prior year.”
    According to The Americana: “Wheat and barley do not grow in Southern India or Malay [same latitude], the winter not being sufficiently severe to prepare the ground for them” (The Americana: A Universal Reference Library, Comprising the Arts and Sciences, Literature, History, Biography, Geography, Commerce, Etc., of the World, Volume 2, Scientific American, New York, Frederick Converse Beach, Ed, 1904)
Comment #3: “As you know, 3 Nephi mentions many cities being burned at the death of the savior including Zarahemla (3 Nephi 9:3) I've been curious. Do you think 2,000 years later, there would be any evidence of a city once having been burned?  I'm thinking maybe like charred stone walls or perhaps volcanic lava?  I realize that there would have been woods and fabrics (and people) burned that would not have any remains. I also realize that Zarahemla and other cities were rebuilt later. If it is possible for there to be any evidence like a charred stone wall, have you ever heard of any? I don't think I have yet. Also, in Mormon 5:5, he explains that the Lamanites also burned many cities, which would have been much later, even to 375 AD. With so many cities burned by fire it would seem to me there should be some evidence of charred rocks or something.  On the other hand, the findings at Taraco indicate any findings would be buried deeply (and therefore perhaps not discovered yet) and at times the fires were so hot, they may have melted some structures. In addition many of the burned cities were built over” David K.
Response:   Good question; however, as you indicated, we need to keep in mind that Zarahemla was rebuilt so it is doubtful any evidence of burned edifices would have remained after the reconstruction. Plus, in regard to other cities burned, following this event, there was a 200-year-peace and period of untold prosperity unlike anything probably the Earth had ever known except perhaps for the city of Enoch period.
    During that 200-year-period whatever had been destroyed would have been renewed, rebuilt, etc., and again, unlikely burned elements remain. In 2000 years, the sediment, or earth pile-up would have covered most anything remaining as we see in South America from the accumulation of earth (hills and mountains) covering numerous cities where most have yet to be found and uncovered.

Rainforest in northeastern Ecuador where little, if any, investigation has taken place

Besides, your final analysis is correct. In the northern part of the country, except along the coast where some research has been done, much of what existed has yet to be uncovered or thoroughly studied. Evidence of burned stone after such a time can be determined, but the archaeologist needs to know what he is looking for and often such matters are overlooked unless they are studying matters pertaining to wars, or such destruction of stone complexes.
    However, when you talk about the Land Northward keep in mind that much of this area has never been investigated to any extent, possibly because so much of it is heavily forested or jungle. Just recently a huge pyramid complex was discovered in Ecuador. No one knows much about it and its investigation is going on and will probably take years to complete.
    Many of the areas in Ecuador are difficult to get to and the cost of doing so is beyond most research programs. Besides, archaeologists have no idea that there is a plethora of ruins in the country to be found and tend to ignore such areas, preferring to study along coasts or natural areas of movement. But when a country is overgrown (like Guatemala), without a strong reason to know something is there (FARMS/BYU investigations because of the Book of Mormon), such areas are simply ignored.
Comment #4: “Joseph Smith certainly made numerous mistakes in his so-called translation of your Book of Mormon. His English in Alma 46:19 about the rent garment was atrocious and had to be changed!” Carlyn P.
Response: “In the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon Alma reads, "When Moroni had said these words, he went forth among the people, waving the rent of his garment in the air” (Alma 46:19). Of course, the rent is the hole, the tear, the space that now separates what was once a whole. Yes, the Prophet made an error which has been corrected in later printings to read, "rent part." But, while it was poor English, and “waving his rent garment,” or “waving the rent part,” is not correct English, it is correct Hebrew.
    In Hebrew, the noun modified by a verbal substantive like rent is assumed from its context. Thus, "part" would not be included in the Hebrew text. It must be supplied by the translator. While Joseph failed to supply the missing word, thus leaving us this interesting evidential strand, it certain would be supplied by the reader of Mormon’s writing. That is, Joseph’s translation is correct for a Hebrew reader, just not for an English reader. As many other so-called mistakes have shown, when compared to the actual translation of Hebrew, Joseph Smith was correct.