With the number of theorists there are today, and their desire to promote their particular theories, numerous ideas, and beliefs—descriptions and models have flooded the geographical setting of the Book of Mormon. Some have done so with an intention to help people understand, others to promote their saleable books and tours.
This has led to many theories and most are not accurate at all, let along be helpful for people to understand the geographical setting. One of the difficulties is the confusing of the People, who get ideas of their geographical opinions and beliefs in one of several ways:
Promoting a theory
1. Listen to someone else’s theory
• Lehi landed in Florida and traveled north into Tennessee
2. Listen to someone else’s theory and make changes that fit a particular view of a single or multiple item change
• Lehi landed in Florida along the south coast of Florida and sailed up the Chattahoochee River to its source at Unicoi Gap, Georgia, with the source of the Hiawassee River taking them to Chattanooga, Tennessee.
3. Create their own theory
• Lehi landed at Crustal River along the west coast of Florida and traveled north and then west to Tallahassee in the Panhandle and then northward to Tennessee
4. Combine two theories
Lehi landed in Florida, travelled to Louisiana and sailed up the Mississippi
5. Evaluate theory
Compare a theory against the scriptural record. Accept or reject according to accuracy
6. Start with the scriptural record
• Follow Lehi’s trek in the wilderness, the family crossing the great deep, Nephi’s journey northward, and Mormon’s many statements. Make sure every step of the way matches the descriptions given.
Only the last way (#6) is viable for both accuracy and the understanding of the scriptural record. The other ways all leave room for original errors and their repetition.
In short, there is no excuse to write an article or a book about the Book of Mormon. As an example:
1. Use scripture incorrectly;
The Mulekites did not replace the Jaredite culture, but were absorbed into it. Their language became corrupted, and eventually was replaced by the Jaredite language (Hobby, p 19)
The scriptures say nothing of the Jaredite language among the people of Zarahemla. Speaking of the Mulekites, Amaleki wrote: "...and their language had become corrupted; and they had brought no records with them; and...Mosiah, nor the people of Mosiah, could understand them." (Omni 1:17). The question need only be asked: what language had become corrupted? The Hebrew, of course, for the people of Zarahemla came with Mulek from Jerusalem (Omni 1:15), and were led across the sea by the Lord and landed where Mosiah found them and had dwelt there from that time forth (Omni 1:17). Because the Mulekite language had originally been Hebrew, there was common ground for the Nephites to reteach them Hebrew and the task was evidently not so difficult.
2. Use scriptural reference as though it supports the point being made when it obviously does not:
Zedekiah on the throne of Israel
In 1 Nephi 1:4, we are informed that Lehi lived in Jerusalem when Zedekiah was placed on the throne as king of Judah. (Allen, p 21)
The scriptures does not tell us that Lehi lived in Jerusalem. The actual scripture quoted states: "For it came to pass in the commencement of the first year of the reign of Zedekiah, king of Judah, (my father, Lehi, having dwelt at Jerusalem in all his days)..." (1 Nephi 1:4) While some might not find much difference between the word in and at, Noah Webster's 1828 dictionary of the American language shows that in Jerusalem would mean “inside the walled city,” while I would mean living out in the nearby countryside. This difference has led to the possible understanding of Lehi's occupation which Nibley and the Hiltons have so effectively expanded upon. But regardless of the discussion on Lehi's occupation, the misuse of a word that determines meaning when quoting a scripture is a sign of sloppy writing!
3. When Nephi's party fled...in fear of his elder brothers, they traveled "many days," ending up at a site where they named their settlement for their leader, Nephi. They were still not far from the coast (2 Nephi 5:7-8). (Sorenson, p 139)
The actual scripture says nothing about direction, topography, seashore or inland: “And we did take our tents and whatsoever things were possible for us, and did journey in the wilderness for the space of many days. And after we had journeyed for the space of many days we did pitch our tents. And my people would that we should call the name of the place Nephi; wherefore we did call it Nephi” (2 Nephi 5:7-8). Later, we learn that the land of Nephi was at an elevation higher than the land of Zarahemla (Alma 27:5; 53:10,12; 57:15-16, 28, 30; Helaman 6:4), for the Lamanites constantly came down to do battle with the Nephites (Alma 51:11; Helaman 1:17; 4:5). We also learn that the land of Nephi stretched from the west sea to the east sea (Alma 50:8). Consequently, to say that Nephi settled near the seashore as Sorenson does, or that he traveled inland as Hauck does, is not known from the scriptural record and is misleading.
near (at) Jerusalem would have no viewers and be private. Scriptural content is important
to understand
4. Make statements which cannot be supported by scripture;
“The experience of pioneers suggests that first success for an imported crop does not necessarily mean continued vigor for it. What happened later to those plants from the seeds the Lehi party carried across the ocean is not stated” (Sorenson, 139).
The scriptures tell us exactly what happened to those plants from the first seeds planted. The first crop, of course, grew exceedingly and provided an abundant harvest (1 Nephi 18:24). Soon after, Lehi died and Nephi was commanded to flee. He took his journey into the wilderness for "many days" (1 Nephi 5:7), which included provisions (seeds) to a place they called the Land of Nephi (2 Nephi 5:8). In this place they planted their seeds again, and had another abundant crop (2 Nephi 5:11). Over one hundred years later, Enos writes about the bounty these seeds were still producing (Enos 1:21), and more than three hundred years later, when Zeniff returned to the Land of Nephi, he planted wheat and barley, obvious some of the Old World plants (seeds) Lehi brought from Jerusalem. The scriptures tell us they grew abundantly (Mosiah 9:9). Thus, the statement that what happened to the seeds is not stated is grossly incorrect.
(See the next post regarding what theorists cover and how it effects what is known and understood)
No comments:
Post a Comment