Verifying the Land of Promise – Part II

Continuing from the previous post, regarding what the writers of the Book of Mormon specifically saw about the Land of Promise from living there, particularly Nephi, Jacob, Mormon and Moroni, as opposed to modern researches, theorists and others who write and speak about it.
    Consequently, out of sheer overwhelming evidence of the facts stated in the scriptural record by the one who saw all this, we should accept Nephi at his word. As a result, we need to understand Jacob’s comment as he preached about the atonement, the resurrection and forgiveness of sins to the Nephites during a two-day conference in that Land of Promise.
    Jacob clearly said, “And now, my beloved brethren, seeing that our merciful God has given us so great knowledge concerning these things, let us remember him, and lay aside our sins, and not hang down our heads, for we are not cast off; nevertheless, we have been driven out of the land of our inheritance; but we have been led to a better land, for the Lord has made the sea our path, and we are upon an isle of the sea” (2 Nephi 10:21, emphasis added).

Lehi’s course within the Southern Ocean across the South Pacific to the Humboldt Current turned his course to the north and a landing at Coquimbo Bay, Chile

Note the specific wordage: 1) The Lord made the sea our path, and 2) we are upon an isle of the sea. Stated differently, the Lord brought them across the “great deep” or ocean, to the Land of Promise that was an island within that ocean or sea. And according to Mormon, they landed along the coast of the West Sea (Alma 22:28). Thus, the island was within the sea over which they sailed, and they landed on the west shore of that island, which area became known as the “the place of their fathers' first inheritance, and thus bordering along by the seashore” (Alma 22:28).
    Now, being present at the meeting in the temple when Jacob spoke, Nephi recorded Jacob’s words exactly as they were spoken. And having seen the Land of Promise in a vision throughout its long history, the fall of his people, the coming of the Gentiles, and the subjugation of the Lamanites, Nephi did not alter Jacob’s description that they were on an island, and that the island was in the midst of the sea over which they sailed.
    We should also keep in mind that
1. Nephi saw the Land of Promise, including its history from beginning to end, even before he landed upon it;
2. Nephi’s ship, which could be steered (1 Nephi 18:13), when he took it back over after his brother’s rebellion on board, Nephi “did guide the ship, that we sailed again towards the promised land” (1 Nephi 18:22);
3. He guided his ship to a landing on the Land of Promise (1 Nephi 18:23);
4. He planted seeds on this new land; he journeyed in the wilderness; he saw the animals and beasts; he saw the ore of which he wrote (1 Nephi 18:24-25);
5. He acknowledged Jacob’s description that they were on an island in the midst of the sea over which they had traveled and wrote it down in the record;
6. He testified that the record he made was true, that he made it with his own hand, and made it according to his own knowledge (1 Nephi 1:3)
7. Only the most precious and sacred information was engraven on the plates (Jacob 1:2).

Jacob speaking in the temple to the Nephites

With this in mind, how is it possible that when Jacob said and Nephi wrote of the Land of Promise being an island that theorists today simply do not believe them? Or try to lighten its meaning, by changing or qualifying the word “isle” (island) to mean something other than it did and does.
    Why it is that theorists today feel so free to make such changes with the “facts” of the scriptural record, replacing them with their own beliefs, speculations and present-day beliefs and statements?
    Of course, it is not just about the Land of Promise being an island in the midst of the sea, but of all the descriptions listed in the scriptural record. It is obvious, that if a description in the scriptural record does not agree with a theorist’s model and location, then it is simply ignored and the theorist spends  is efforts only on those points that he feels verifies his location.
    Take for instance the comment Mormon makes regarding fevers in the Land of Promise. He stated: “there were some who died with fevers, which at some seasons of the year were very frequent in the land -- but not so much so with fevers, because of the excellent qualities of the many plants and roots which God had prepared to remove the cause of diseases, to which men were subject by the nature of the climate” (Alma 46:40).
    In this statement, five points are identified:

1. Fevers;
2. Deaths;
3. Diseases;
4. Nature of the Climate;
5. Plants and roots to cure fevers.
    When taking these five points into account, we find that:
• Fevers: The word was used by Mormon since other names did not exist at the time, such as malaria, yellow fever, dengue and chikungunya. However, of these killing fevers, malaria not only is the most prominent as a killer, but is a disease, while the others are all viruses.
• Deaths: Of fevers that kill, malaria is by far the most destructive. As an example, chikungunya is very rare with less than 440 deaths world-wide per year; dengue is also rare, with less than 22,000 deaths world-wide per year; and yellow fever accounts for 30,000 deaths world-wide each year with 90% occurring in Africa. On the other hand, malaria accounts for between 800,000 and 985,000 deaths world-wide per year (second only to deaths from tuberculosis).
• Diseases: Malaria is a disease caused by a parasite with five species known to infect humans, while yellow fever, dengue and chikungunya are caused by a virus. Though the infection of all four can result in death, the recovery rate of yellow fever, dengue and chikungunya  are far higher than malaria, which is frequently fatal as death rates for malaria are significantly higher. It should also be noted that  malaria is treatable and yellow fever is not—in fact, even today there is no treatment for yellow fever. Thus, it would be malaria which matches Mormon’s description.
• Climate: The nature of the climate where malaria is found is tropical and subtropical. Included in those two climates are also Equatorial, Monsoon, and Humid, which is where the Chinchona tree grows and where the climate is open to malaria fevers.

Climate of Andean Peru. The dark named areas have a climate in which the Chinchona tree grows and is highly conducive to malaria 

As can be seen, Peru has the climate where malaria is found. In addition, Mesoamerica has an Equatorial and Tropical Savanna climate, and also found in the northern part of the Great Lakes; on the other hand, Florida and the Heartland have a Warm Oceanic climate; most of the area of the Great Lakes has a Warm Continental Climate.
• Plants and roots to cure fevers: The only natural cure for malaria, and all other fevers, is quinine. Prior to the Europeans reaching the Americas, quinine was unknown in Europe and the rest of the world outside Andean Peru. In fact, Cinchona is a genus of flowering plants in the family Rubiaceae containing at least 23 species of trees and shrubs—all are native to the tropical Andean forests of western South America. Not until the conquistadors took back samples of the chinchona tree bark to Europe was quinine first used outside Andean Peru, and not until stolen seedlings were planted in Indonesia by Dutch traders in the 1850s, was quinine available outside Andean Peru.
   Thus it can only be concluded that the plants and roots the Lord provided to cure killing fevers that Mormon mentioned, would be found in Andean Peru—the only place in the world where quinine was available during the Nephite period and for a thousand years after. It is interesting that such details, available to all and easily readable in the scriptural record, is so readily ignored by almost all theorists—especially those who promote Mesoamerica or the Heartland/Great Lakes theories.