Comments and Questions from Readers – Part III

Following are questions and comments from readers of this blog.

Comment #1: “It surprises me that no one seems to understand that the narrow neck is not necessarily an isthmus but a mountain pass through the narrow wilderness (mountain range) that runs east and west separating the land of Nephi from the land of Zarahemla” Don E.

Response: It could be a mountain pass, a flat land, rolling hills or a canyon—we simply do not know. In South America, there is a stretch of land along the eastern end of the Gulf of Guayaquil near the present-day border of Ecuador and Peru. This narrow stretch lies between the Gulf on the west and high-rising mountains on the east where an ocean once stood, and provides passage between the mountains and the sea from the south lands into  to the north lands, which is about 26 miles wide east to west, and runs about 30 miles long from north to south between the small fishing villages of Puerto Naranjal and San Pablo in the north and Machala to the south.

Mountain Pass (the trail through it is seen in the middle left, as it curves behind the lower left foliage and continues out of sight alongside of the Pass

 

Today there is also a mountain pass near La Joya in southeastern Ecuador up in the Andes mountains further east, but it seems unlikely that it existed before the Andes rose during the crucifixion.

Comment #2: “I don't know which model is correct. I don't know where the Book of Mormon took place. But I find it very difficult to believe that the Lord is pleased with the contention that has surrounded this subject” Don L.

Response: Certainly, the Lord is not pleased with contentious attitudes. However, there is a difference between contention and education—our approach to what we write and what we believe is based solely on the scriptural record. We reference and quote the scriptural record on all points made, and never state a belief or opinion without stating it as such. That theorists contend over their ideas and opinions has little to do with us, other than to show the inaccuracy of their models based on the writings of Nephi, Jacob, Mormon, and Moroni, which theorists tend to ignore, misquote, or try and change.

It also might be of interest to know that there are 75 books that have been removed from the Bible, as well as some banned books, 7 missing books, and 52 lost books. It might also be of interest to know that although 19 books were included in the Holy Bible for thousands of years, they were removed a little over 200 years ago in the 19^th century. These include 1 and 2 Esdras, The Book of Tobit, The Book of Susanna, Additions to Esther, The Book of Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, The Epistle of Jeremiah, The Prayer of Azariah, Bel and the Dragon, Prayer of Manasses, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Book of Enoch, Book of Jubilees, Gospel of Philip, and the Gospel of Mary.

The Vatican Removed 14 Books from the Bible in 1684

 

Whether or not these books belong in the Bible is not the question—the purpose is that books long held in the Biblical text were removed, such as those in 1880, when the American Bible Society voted to remove the 14 “Apocrypha” Books, which means “hidden” and were written between the time of the Old and New Testaments, from the King James Version, which contained 14 Books (There are 155,683 words in over 5,700 verses in 168 Chapters) that had been part of the King's bible since 1611. 7 of these books were removed by Martin Luther because they did not agree with his beliefs (R.H. Charles, The Book of Enoch, Oxford, at the Clarendon, University Press, Henry Frowde, London, and translated in part from Prof. Dillmann’s Ethiopic text, 1893, with the majority of the translation made from a British Museum manuscript, which is considered incomparably better than what Dillmann’s Ethiopic text is based).

In addition, there was considerable controversy over different views of the Bible books resulting in the First Council of Nicaea, convened by the Roman Emperor Constantine, which was the first empire-wide ecumenical meeting of church leaders to discuss various doctrinal controversies. However, the strife within the Church did not end with Nicaea, and the Nicene creed, which formulation remained contentious even among anti-Arian churchmen—a controversy that still exists today.

Comment #3: “Why was it assumed that African American's were descendants of Ham. Was this just another way to discriminate against them? Did anyone have any proof of genealogy? Another question, since Ham and his posterity are "lost" without the proper priesthood, does God have a plan of reconciliation with this people?” Romona G.

Response: Probably because Ham's daughter, Egyptus (a descendent through her mother of the Cain-Canaan lineage), settled in Egypt (Africa), and the curse and mark of the black skin continued through her lineage. The term African American is a very recent term for those whose genealogy emanated in Africa. God has a plan for everything and everybody. We don't always know what that plan is, but we do know that the saving ordinances now performed in the temples will continue through the millennium and that we will be busy doing the work for the dead throughout that period of time.

The First Council of Nicaea was a council of Christian bishops convened in the Bithynian city of Nicaea (now İznik, Turkey) by the Roman Emperor Constantine I 

 

Comment #4: “There seems to be agreement among various writers of the Book of Mormon geography that what lay farther to the north, beyond Desolation, or farther to the south, past the land of Nephi, is left unsaid by the ancient writers. Peoples of Lehite descent likely migrated in both directions during and after Book of Mormon times. As a result, descendants of Lehi may be found throughout the Americas, even though the events in the Book of Mormon played out in a more limited sphere” Pedro G.

Response: First, the so-called writers of Book of Mormon geography, are mostly all theorists, that is, they are more reliant on their own views, opinions, beliefs and understanding, than on Mormon’s writings and the scriptural record, continually ignoring, misinterpreting, misstating or changing the ancient writing. On the other hand, we rely completely on the statements of Nephi, Jacob, Mormon and Moroni, and others, in the Book of Mormon.

Second, the erroneous statement “that what lay farther to the north, beyond Desolation”

or “farther to the south, past the land of Nephi, is left unsaid by the ancient writers.” This is not so—Mormon describes a large area beyond Desolation, which includes 1) the Land of Many Waters, and the Land of Cumorah (Mormon 6:2,4,5-6). As to the South beyond the Land of Nephi was the Land of Lehi and the Land of First Inheritance (Alma 22:28), and the land where they landed (Nephi 18:23-25)—all are described or at least mentioned, giving us an understanding of the layout of the land.

Third, as for another erroneous statement: “Peoples of Lehite descent likely migrated in both directions during and after Book of Mormon times.

Not until after the mountains that Samuel the Lamanite described rose up to great heights (Helaman 14:23), could northward movement beyond the Land Northward take place, except by ship (Alma 63:4), because Jacob tells us that they were on an island (2 Nephi 10:20). After the crucifixion, we have no knowledge of northward movement beyond the Land Northward, except the incident of Mormon not continuing northward, but agreeing to a battle that resulted in Nephite destruction. Had he been able, one would think that Mormon would continue northward to escape the Lamanites. In addition, there is no suggestion there is anything to the south of where Lehi landed for Lamanites to expand in that direction—nor does it seem the Lamanites were interested in anything other than fighting the Nephites to regain what they thought was their rightful linage to control the Land of Promise. Also, since Jacob tells us the Land of Promise was an island for some 600 years, and there were never Nephites south of the Lamanites, southern movement does not seem likely.