Wednesday, March 22, 2017

Problem: The Plants And Animals Supposed To Exist In The New World At The Time Of The Arrival Of Nephi


Problem: The Plants And Animals Supposed To Exist In The New World
At The Time Of The Arrival Of Nephi

            Man has sought for answers from the beginning of time as can be found in the earliest of manuscripts, artifacts, inscriptions, etc., and even have gone as far as they can to prove their theories to be correct even when there is proof opposite their theories. The way that it is done most often is by the use of words that have the “ring” of authority or to redefine a word. This can be found to be true in politics as well as religion. Words that are not familiar by most people that have not learned by education those words and have respect and belief in men, or women, who have degrees or some sort of acclaim in a subject do not go much further than to accept whatever is purported to fit a particular doctrine or belief. A debate over the plants and animals as recorded in the Book of Mormon is one such belief or doctrine that has by Mormons given a “spin” to prove their Book of Mormon as being what they say that it is: Another Testament of Jesus Christ. I must then give definition(s) as necessary to educate so that there can be no misunderstanding and the word “anachronism” is a word used by Mormons to explain their doctrine or belief about the fauna, and animals listed in the Book of Mormon. A question that needs be answered is whether or not that list of a fauna and animals listed in the Book of Mormon is actually true. Webster’s Dictionary defines anachronism: an error in chronology to which a person, object, event, etc., is assigned a date or period other than the correct one. A thing, or person, that belongs to another, especially an earlier, time: a wrong time reference.[1] A way to begin an argument that would favor your view is to set up an example that contains the opposite, that is, some object to the list within the Book of Mormon, to set forth the possibility or arguments that are to prove that the Mormons are wrong as to the fauna and animals found listed in the Book of Mormon. How is this done? First, bring up the word anachronisms: i.e., fauna, animals, flora, textiles, warfare, metals, pre-Christian Christianity, compass, coins, etc., and the to mention that all these categories have some similarities. Now, the statement that is crux as a basis for their argument as to the truth of the Book of Mormon they state that there is an argument of a possibility that such things were once in America but the evidence as either disappeared or has not been found and the Mormons are re-labeling of New World items with familiar Old World labels. It is true that all things are possible and the question that needs answer: are they probable? Possible and probable are two sides of the same coin, not all possibilities are probable or have a measure of probability to give validity to a subject. When beginning a study of anything of importance it is best to look for operative words, i.e., supposedly, maybe, possible, could be, etc., and of course it is best to also look up the author and publisher. Mormon apologists use operative words as “I deal with a category and a general overview of why supposedly anachronistic items may appear in the Book of Mormon. Operative words in this statement: supposedly, and may, giving a sense that while they appear in the Book of Mormon, that which they cannot deny, may not be anachronistic. Another operative word, a word of disdain to many is the word “critic” those who oppose the Book of Mormon and the list of fauna and animals, etc., to be not true are called, not scientists, not archeologists, or other learned men with sound credentials, no, they are called critics. Yes they can be critical as any researcher is to be if they are good researchers. To not list, and it the article by a Mormon organization; the Fair Mormon does not list the ones they claim to be critical, is nothing more than a ploy to lead a person(s) in the direction they want them to be led. To lead by a ploy is done by many by introducing arguments that are nothing more than “rabbit trails” and not addressing directly the problem, or question. Therefore, I will address each question and give answers with footnotes.
            To be able to address this subject the place where this is said in the Book of Mormon, the land of Promise in North America must be verified. This verification will aid to establish what animals and plants could be found or not found determining the truth as outlined in the Book of Mormon and their position as where is the land of promise. Was this land North America, or some other place on earth? To do this examination as to the Book of Mormon Land of Promise we must take into account the actual scriptural accounts of the geography as given by Nephi, Jacob, Alma, Helaman, and especially by Mormon, and by Moroni. The Mormon historians and scholars have drawn a map in regards to their theories on this subject: (1). The Great Lakes Theory, (2). the Heartland or Eastern U.S. Theory, (3). The Zarahemla (Iowa) Theory, and (4). The Baja California Theory. What must be kept in mind is that any location for the land of Promise is that they must meet all of the Scriptural references in the Book of Mormon.
Here are the references:
  1. The Land of Promise was an isle [island] (2 Nephi 10:20)

    2. Nephi’s ship sailed across the ocean to land at a point, along the seashore, of their first landing [first inheritance] (Alma 22:28)

    3. Zarahemla was southward from the Land Northward (Mormon 1:6)

    4. A Land Northward and a Land Southward separated by a Narrow Neck of Land (Alma 22:32)

    5. A Narrow Neck of land that was both "small" and "narrow" (Alma 63:5; 22:32)

    6. The Land Southward was nearly surrounded by water except for the Narrow Neck of Land (Alma 22:32)

    7. The Land of Nephi stretched from the east sea to the west (Alma 50:8)

    8. Narrow strip of wilderness between the Land of Zarahemal and the Land of Nephi ran from the east sea to the west sea (Alma 22:27)

    9. The Land of Bountiful was north of the Land of Zarahemla (Alma 22:29)

    10. The Land of Desolation was north of the Land of Bountiful (Alma 22:29,32)

    11. North of the Land of Desolation was the land of the Jaredites (Alma 22:30)

    12. The Land of Bountiful ran from the east sea to the west sea [hemming in Lamanites to the south] (Alma 22:33)

    13. The Narrow Pass ran from the Land Southward into the Land Northward between the west sea and the east sea (Alma 50:34; Mormon 2:29)

    14. Land of Nephi ran from the east sea to the west sea (Alma 22:27)

    15. The Land Northward ran from the sea east to the sea west, and from the sea north to the sea south (Helaman 3:8)

    16. There were four seas--north, south, east and west (Helaman 3:8)

    17. The Land Northward was covered with large bodies of water (Alma 50:29)

    18. The Land of Zarahemla (including north to the Land of Bountiful) ran from the sea west to the sea east (Helaman 11:20

    19. North of the Narrow Pass was the city and land of Desolation (Mormon 3:5)

    20. A major river, the Sidon, running down from the moutains to the south of Zarahemla, running from the south to the north through the Land of Zarahemla on the east of the city of Zarahemla (Alma 16:6)

    21. Sidon, a major river to the east of the nation’s capital, that ran by (or through) the Land of Zarahemla, that eventually emptied into the sea with a strong enough current that would carry dead bodies along its course to the sea (Alma 2:15, 34; 3:3)

    22. The Sidon river, either bridged, or shallow enough, so that armies could cross over the river (Alma 16:7)

    23. A land that held a similar climate to that of Jerusalem (Mediterranean Climate) for Jerusalem seeds to grow exceedingly (1 Nephi 18:24)

    24. Obviously, a land that was much longer than its width

    In addition, there are many other points that do not match, or items not found in the eastern U.S.

    1. Two unknown animals that were unknown to Joseph Smith—the cureloms and cumoms, which were useful to man like an elephant (Ether 9:19)

    2. Two unknown grains that were unknown to Joseph Smith—neas and sheum (Mosiah 9:9)

    3. Vast amounts of gold, silver and copper in a single ore (1 Nephi 18:25)

    4. A land with its southern half surrounded by water (Alma 22:32) conducive to extensive ship building and shipping occupations (Helaman 3:10, 14)[2]
There are some 65 different points of scripture that must be met for any claim as to where the Land of Promise existed and this paper does not have time to list all but the above should be enough for a thorough research and examination.
Mormons teach of a people, the Nephites and Lammanites as living people who lived in Central and North America. Did they actually live or is this not true? Mormon scholars favor a limited geography model, this model is that the Book of Mormon’s narrative was only a historical record of people in a limited geographical region, rather than the entire Western Hemisphere. This was and is an attempt to reconcile the claims in the Book of Mormon with archeology and geography and have given the Book of Mormon geography to be in South America, Mesoamerica, and the Great Lakes region. One theory place the setting for the Book of Mormon’s narrative to be that of Mexico, and Central America, and the area surrounding the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Mainstream scholars do not recognize the Lammanites as a valid category of people.[3] This fact that there are no mainstream scholars recognizing the people called by Mormons as the Lammanites is also true of the people they call the Nephits: the Smithsonian Institution[5] and the National Geographic Society have issued statements that they have seen no evidence to support these claims in the Book of Mormon.[4]
How do Mormon’s counter-act this problem? They redefine words or introduce other possibilities, and there may be other possibilities, but can the possibility of a possibility be proven to be true? In Helaman 3:8 the Book of Mormon states that there was a multiplication and spread of these people and that they began to cover the face of the whole earth, from sea south, to the sea north, from the sea west, to the sea east. It is true that the Hebrew word “yam” has several meanings, and as a differentiation from a body of water to that of land. This is used to provide evidence that the Book of Mormon’s mention of a sea could also mean an inland body of water. This may be true but does not the Book of Mormon mention that the landing was on an island? Yes! “The Land of Promise was an isle [island]” (2 Nephi 10:20). “The Land Northward ran from the sea east to the sea west, and from the sea north to the sea south” (Helaman 3:8). “There were four seas--north, south, east and west” (Helaman 3:8). The attempt is to say that these accounts are only in regard to direction. There is mentioned a small strip of land but this mentioned does not rule out that the Book of Mormon is speaking about an island. The Mormons claim that the Hebrew name listed in Joel 2:20 translated “utmost sea” can also be translated “west sea” and this is wrong for Strong’s Concordance #3220 defined this Hebrew word as “eastern.” The Mormon scholars in their attempt to find answers to this problem use several methods of definition and possibilities, such as the Book of Mormon does not say that the entire land northward is a land occupied in the United States. The reason is that, as they say, these covenant lands are in the are in the borders of the prophetic United States, notice the word prophetic (Alma 46:17), and say that this being surrounded by seas in each direction matches perfectly Ontario, Canada. Mormon scholars speak of mistaken regions, one for another, and even the maps used by Mormons are false. A problem is that there seems to be little, if any consensus between Mormon scholars.
The Land of Promise in the Book of Mormon not having a positive location and the fact that the people who were supposed to have inhabited this land are not recognized by mainstream scholars cast doubt upon the fauna, animals, and other supposed objects as listed in the Book of Mormon. A truthful examination still must be completed so as to rule this subject as to fauna, and animals listed in the Book of Mormon as to whether or not they are truthful listing. To do this examination there must be an impartial study and to address arguments. One claim made by Mormons is that critics of their archeology argue from silence or ignorance. The argument forward by Mormons is that due to the fact that there is a possibility for things to exist even though there is no evidence that they did exist. This has its foundation that a lack of evidence does not mean there was not evidence. This is to argue from either silence or ignorance the same as they speak against their critics. To give support for their argument they cite several findings to prove their point. One of the Mormon argument is that of the use of camels and that some scholars held to a belief that camels were domesticated in the 10th century and that the Bible mentions the use of camels many years before that, in fact in the time of Abraham. Scholars today have evidence that the camel was used previously: “many archaeologists regard the date for domestication of the camel to be sometime in the 3rd millennium BC. Scarre states that “both the dromedary (the one-humped camel of Arabia) and the Bactrian camel (the two-humped camel of Central Asia) had been domesticated since before 2000 BC.”[5] The wide geographical and chronological distribution of findings related to camel domestication further strengthen the argument that the camel was domesticated far before the Iron Age, and with new excavations and analyses, additional evidence will likely reinforce this theory.[6] The Mormon argument seems to state that due to ignorance they have a right to use that there is a use of ignorance in the argument from silence. Another such argument is about lions being written about in the Bible and there are no bones to prove that there were lions in Israel. Prehistoric fossils are found: “Although there are references to animals being found in places far apart on the modern world map”[7] and this then as an argument in silence loses its validity as there are bones of “big cats” and this would include lions. Archeological evidence has problems finding remains even in areas were animals lived in large numbers. Mormons used this argument that even if horse bones haven’t been found in the New World this does not mean that Mesoamericans did not have horses. The Mormon claim that no lion remains from ancient Israel have been found is false. What is known is that the fauna of Palestine is almost unchanged from historic times and that the wild ox and the lion have become extinct. An Egyptian traveler in Lebanon in the 14th century B.C. said that its bones are found in caves and in the Jordan gravels.[8] The Maxwell Institute mentions lions: "The biblical narrative mentions lions, yet it was not until very recently that the only other evidence for lions in Palestine was pictographic or literary. Before the announcement in a 1988 publication [L. Martin. "The Faunal Remains from Tell es Saidiyeh," Levant 20 (1988): 83—84] of two bone samples, there was no archaeological evidence to confirm the existence of lions in that region.”[9] What has been learned is that the camel has been used in Egypt from prehistoric times to the present. Picture references in ancient Israel give reference to lions and other animals adding the proof that lions did exist in the times of Abraham and earlier. Here is a problem for Mormons: there are absolutely no pictures or references in any ancient Native American art. All Mormons have is that the Book of Mormon mentions that there were horses. The Mormon argument in regards to lions is invalidated.


[1] Random House Webster’s College Dictionary; Random House, New York, New York; p. 46, 1997
[2] http://nephicode.blogspot.com/2012/04was-land-of-promise-in-north-america.html
 Southerton claims that "[t]here is only one serious contender accepted by most Mormon academics, which proposes that most Book of Mormon events took place in a restricted part of Mesoamerica. Only in Mesoamerica are there ruins of civilizations of the magnitude evident in the Book of Mormon."
[4] Terry L. Givens, By the Hand of Mormon: The American Scripture that Launched a New World Religion (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 132.
[5] Scarre, Chris,1993, Smithsonian Timelines of the Ancient World, DK Adult, 176.
[6] http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2014/02/17/The-Date-of-Camel-Domestication-in-the-Ancient-Near-East.aspx
[7] http://messybeast.com/cat-prehis Dictionary of the Bible, ed. James Hastings, 1900."tory.htm
[8] Dictionary of the Bible, ed. James Hastings, 1900)."
[9] Robert R. Bennett, “Horses in the Book of Mormon,” Maxwell Institute, 2000

"

No comments: