Any new evidence for the historical account of the Book of Mormon?

[Honorentheos]

Which was said by an OT prophet (or at least poet). If one reads the scriptures, they are full of repetition as well, most prophets adding a personal twist to teachings given in the past. I highly doubt we have all the teachings of either OT or NT prophets, the repetition would be even more obvious imo if we did.

Why would the repetition of teaching salvific truths cease prior to the acceptance or rejection of salvation by all peoples?

I woudn't disagree.

I was commenting on Nomad taking exception to what he felt was a repetition of a critique of the faithful. As you point out, if not exactly, the repetition of a statement is not evidence for or against it's intrinsic value.

[beastie]

While I have some catching up to do, I wanted to post this quickly before work:

The BoM describes a continual cycle that had to do with the people's willingness to follow the prophet's counsel and live in an egalitarian fashion. Remember the United Order experiment early in church history? The church and its people still lived in a socially stratified society, but they made a religious choice to try and eradicate the effect of that stratification through the United Order. This appears to be similar to the attempts in the BoM to practice an egalitarian lifestyle. When the people listened to the prophets, it doesn't necessarily mean that their over-all society devolved into a non-ranked, tribal society, but rather that they made a religious choice like the early Saints did. When they backslid, they stopped making that effort and simply enjoyed the benefits of their rank in society. This is why we repeatedly see prophets "begin" to see the excesses of pride - it's the first sign of backsliding in the people, not necessarily a sign of increasing social complexity. We first see this concern as early as Jacob 2:

13 And the hand of providence hath smiled upon you most pleasingly, that you have obtained many riches; and because some of you have obtained more abundantly than that of your brethren ye are lifted up in the pride of your hearts, and wear stiff necks and high heads because of the costliness of your apparel, and persecute your brethren because ye suppose that ye are better than they.

14 And now, my brethren, do ye suppose that God justifieth you in this thing? Behold, I say unto you, Nay. But he condemneth you, and if ye persist in these things his judgments must speedily come unto you.

15 O that he would show you that he can pierce you, and with one glance of his eye he can smite you to the dust!

16 O that he would rid you from this iniquity and abomination. And, O that ye would listen unto the word of his commands, and let not this pride of your hearts destroy your souls!

17 Think of your brethren like unto yourselves, and be familiar with all and free with your substance, that they may be rich like unto you.

18 But before ye seek for riches, seek ye for the kingdom of God.

19 And after ye have obtained a hope in Christ ye shall obtain riches, if ye seek them; and ye will seek them for the intent to do goodâ??to clothe the naked, and to feed the hungry, and to liberate the captive, and administer relief to the sick and the afflicted.

This is clearly a society in which some form of economic exchange allowed some folks to "seek riches", and for some to "obtain more abundantly than others". So when hundreds of years later, Alma notices the same thing, it doesn't necessarily indicate that the society devolved to a simpler form, poliitcally - but rather that during some periods the people actually listened to the prophet and practiced a more egalitarian life-style, like the early Saints tried with the United Order.

I'll try to catch up later tonight.

[beastie]

Sorry it's taking me a while to catch up, I got behind on lots of things this past week.

Since Brant feels I unduly dismissed his â??figurativeâ? statement, Iâ??ll respond to that:

When they leave and show up in Nephite territory, they are "clothed and nourished." Now we have the problem of discerning whether or not that is a phrase that is to be read literally (that they really needed clothing and food) or if it is a figure of speech for a type of care and acceptance. Obviously, you read that literally. I don't. One reason I believe that we are allowed to see it as figurative is that it is directly contrasted to the conditions were we last saw them. Where text provides two different descriptions, and one is essential to a description of their class and the second essential to a description of Nephite magnanimity, the time when the text cares specifically about the clothing should be our model, not one that is easily seen as a figure of speech.

I bolded the sentence I find particularly problematic, and upon which your entire reasoning is predicated. There is nothing in the text to indicate that these people being in need of clothing and food is â??contrasted to the conditionsâ? prior to that point. In fact, the text uses phrases such as â??exceeding povertyâ? to describe these folks.

Now, if you are wondering whether or not it is "cheating" to not take every statement in a text literally, it is a normal problem in dealing with ancient texts. We must always be asking of the text the information that will help us understand how to understand the text. It is simply part of the normal process, whether you are tying to interpret the Chilam Balam of Chumayel or the Book of Mormon.

You are very selective in what you â??ask of the textâ?.

Regardless of how you want to read specific items of archaeology, the logic of peoples actions in the text follow the "rules" of the more ancient culture in ways that make no sense if we limit the context to the 19th century.

Please provide some examples that demonstrate this.

The Preclassic was the birthplace of the Classic and there were more of the Classic features that appeared in the Preclassic than was originally thought. Nevertheless, assuming that the full development of the Classic was also in the Preclassic overextends the data (as an example).

In fact, Iâ??ve read some scholars state that there appears to be very little difference between the Late PreClassic period and the Classic period at all. While the â??full developmentâ? of the Classic may not be present in earlier periods of the PreClassic period, there are underlying consistencies in regards to general worldview that were not only present in the PreClassic period, but were the seeds of the Classic worldview.

She uses Tikal, Calakmul, and Teotihuacan as examples of cities where they influenced a wide areas. She therefore asserts that Nephite polity should have been similarly influential--ignoring, of course, that there were thousands of polities in time and space that never had the impact of those three, yet had some "influence," such as Chiapa de Corzo. Again, it is an argument built upon over-generalization and misapplication of the data.

You are ignoring the size of the region involved in the question of influence. Of course there were more minor polities such as Chiapa de Corzo (although it wasnâ??t minor in its particular area), but that is not the size of the range of influence described in the BoM. Iâ??ve already cited numerous scriptures that demonstrate just how far that influence spread, and intend to share even more, as time permits. Even the FAIR article I linked pages ago specifies that the BoM region was over 400,000 square kilometers. What kind of polities in Mesoamerica had such extended influence?

[beastie]

The first question we must answer is: what is the nature of the â??inequalityâ? that Alma sees among the people of the church?

First of all, we can see from verse 6 above that the people who are becoming â??lifted up in the pride of their eyesâ? had accumulated their wealth â?? and this is a very significant point to consider â?? â?by their industryâ?.

This does not describe an aristocratic upper class like could be seen later in Mesoamerica. This is simply a group of people who, through their hard work and good management of resources, has accumulated a certain degree of wealth.

Readers familiar with the distinctive marks of classic social stratification will recognize the import of this fact: this culture has not yet arrived at the point of true class distinctions, but it is showing the first symptoms of the conditions that will tend towards that end.

You are ignoring inconvenient facts, such as that kingship was passed from father to son, and that different polities had a supported priest-class. In addition, leadership positions were restricted to pure Nephites:

Mosiah 25, 120 BC

12 And it came to pass that those who were the children of Amulon and his brethren, who had taken to wife the daughters of the Lamanites, were displeased with the conduct of their fathers, and they would no longer be called by the names of their fathers, therefore they took upon themselves the name of Nephi, that they might be called the children of Nephi and be numbered among those who were called Nephites.

13 And now all the people of Zarahemla were numbered with the Nephites, and this because the kingdom had been conferred upon none but those who were descendants of Nephi.

This is what Alma desires to see in all the believers in Christ â?? the willingness to be humble and impart, as possible, of their abundance to those who have less. It is a question of attitudes and social philosophy, as dictated by the precepts of their religion.

Yes, this is part of the point I tried to make: the egalitarian society that the Nephites attempted to implement at various points in their history was not reflective of how advanced their society was in terms of rank and class, but rather it was a religious imperative, such as with the early Saints.

The â??inequalityâ? that Alma sees is not predominantly material in nature! It is their souls about which he is concerned, and he simply understands that the welfare of their souls depends on their being consistently humble and willing to impart to those in need. One can easily perceive, by the very structure and content of Almaâ??s sermon in Zarahemla, that the need of the would-be proud to impart of their material substance is greater, in Almaâ??s mind, than even the material needs of the â??poorâ? among them.

There is no justification in the text for this conclusion. The text does not insinuate that the needy werenâ??t really needy. The text repeatedly describes people in dire need.

These are not classes in the fashion we see later in Mesoamerica, and which would have been known and understood in 19th century Britain or America. There is no perceptible â??ruling classâ? or â??aristocracyâ?. There is apparently a growing bourgeosie, as it were â?? undoubtedly a mercantile class who is able to parlay their business acumen (their â??industryâ?) into substantial wealth in a very short period of time. There is probably even a class of quasi-gentry â?? businessmen farmers who also have obtained considerable riches through â??their industry.â? But there is no perceptible proletariat present in this tableau vivant. Sure, here as elsewhere throughout human history, â??the poor always ye have with you.â? But thatâ??s not the issue at all. Itâ??s all about shaping the attitudes of the believers in order to optimize their faithfulness, humility, and generosity towards all.

And this is what we see in every instance that beastie cites and misreads. She is mistaking the threat of socio-economic division, and its accompanying recognition and condemnation, with a picture of class stratification straight out of Engelsâ?? The Condition of the Working Class in England

Her entire argument is an example of miscomprehended proof-texting run amok. One is inclined to question if she ever apprehended the intent of the authors of this book in which she used to believe. Her misreading of this episode in the life of Alma and his people is sadly consistent with her misreadings elsewhere, and typical of exmormon minds everywhere, as I have observed them.

As I already commented, you allow yourself to draw this conclusion only by allowing yourself to ignore the parts of the text that directly contradict this same conclusion. (see above: inherited kingship, restricted leadership based on lineage)

In certain polities, and at various points in history, the royal class made the deliberate decision to support themselves, as King Benjamin did, but this is always presented as a moral choice. The other avenue, that of the royal class being supported by the people, is also presented as an (evil) alternative, but a real alternative.

To the extent there is social stratification within the church â?? and I agree there are valid arguments that might be made to that effect, especially when one takes into account the â??international churchâ? â?? I would also argue that the specimen of modern Mormonism is anything but a classic example of the kinds of social stratification that have given rise to the broadly accepted definition of the same. I would imagine the classic example is, in fact, industrial England in the mid-19th century. (Read Charles D i c k e n s' Hard Times and Elizabeth Gaskellâ??s Mary Barton for eloquent contemporary illustrations of that benighted era.)

Nevertheless, to the extent that social stratification can be said to exist in the present-day church, I would argue -- and strenuously so -- that the limited stratification we see among the Saints is roughly parallel to what Alma and his fellow prophets confronted among the Nephites in their day. Just as those ancient prophets labored constantly to combat the threat of disunity in their day, we similarly hear the constant admonitions in our day to avoid the very kinds of things against which Alma preaches in the address to which I have referred above.

The â??inequalityâ? to which Alma refers is the stark difference between those who have grown proud and selfish with their substance, and those who have substance and yet remain humble and generous. The former are at risk of losing their souls, whereas the latter are the paragon to be emulated.

That even the casual reader would not discern precisely that message upon reading Alma 4 â?? 5 is, to me, simply dumbfounding. But Iâ??m quite certain that you, beastie, and others will continue to see what you want to see, as opposed to seeing what is really there. Thatâ??s a given in any case. So â?¦ carry on.

Well, of course I understand that is the main point. But it is dumbfounding to me that you are able to readily provide the situation in the modern church as a parallel without realizing that this does not work to your benefit, if your purpose is to demonstrate that the BoM does not described a fairly advanced civilization in terms of social stratification. Yes, yes, modern prophets chastise modern LDS for neglecting the poor just as Alma did. Part of the reason they have to do so is because of the make-up of the larger culture which hosts the LDS church. We live in a socially stratified civilization, and this social stratification causes stress and challenges to members who are striving to achieve a more idyllic society within the larger society. The same situation was described in the BoM: the larger culture had advanced to the point of notable discrepancy between the material goods of various groups, and this caused stress and challenges to believers. But the fact that the believers tried to resolve it by moving towards egalitarianism does not eradicate the fact that their host culture had presented these challenges to begin with by being fairly advanced in terms of social stratification. If the larger culture had been at an earlier stage of social stratification, the stresses would not be as notable and important to address. The very fact that the BoM repeatedly addresses this problem indicates to us that it was, in fact, a very significant challenge to the BoM peoples. In fact, I think itâ??s safe to say it is one of THE most important themes of the entire book.

[beastie]

Although clearly some of us are at an impasse in terms of how to interpret the BoM, I think it is still useful to continue to share verses that I think demonstrate a couple of points â?? mainly I hope to demonstrate that the Nephite polity was socially complex and extremely influential within the given 400,000 square kilometer region.

We learn more about the apostate religion that Ammonihah practiced, because it was inspired by Nehor, whose teachings are first shared in Alma 1:

1 NOW it came to pass that in the first year of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi, from this time forward, king Mosiah having gone the way of all the earth, having warred a good warfare, walking uprightly before God, leaving none to reign in his stead; nevertheless he had established laws, and they were acknowledged by the people; therefore they were obliged to abide by the laws which he had made.

2 And it came to pass that in the first year of the reign of Alma in the judgment-seat, there was a man brought before him to be judged, a man who was large, and was noted for his much strength.

3 And he had gone about among the people, preaching to them that which he termed to be the word of God, bearing down against the church; declaring unto the people that every priest and teacher ought to become popular; and they ought not to labor with their hands, but that they ought to be supported by the people.

4 And he also testified unto the people that all mankind should be saved at the last day, and that they need not fear nor tremble, but that they might lift up their heads and rejoice; for the Lord had created all men, and had also redeemed all men; and, in the end, all men should have eternal life.

Verse 1 again affirms that the Nephites were governed by a strict set of laws they were â??obliged to abideâ?. Verses 3 and 4 demonstrate that the apostate religion Nehor propagated still originated in Judeo-Christianity. We learn in Alma 14 that the apostate religion of Ammonihah was after the order of Nehor:

14 Now it came to pass that when the bodies of those who had been cast into the fire were consumed, and also the records which were cast in with them, the chief judge of the land came and stood before Alma and Amulek, as they were bound; and he smote them with his hand upon their cheeks, and said unto them: After what ye have seen, will ye preach again unto this people, that they shall be cast into a lake of fire and brimstone?

15 Behold, ye see that ye had not power to save those who had been cast into the fire; neither has God saved them because they were of thy faith. And the judge smote them again upon their cheeks, and asked: What say ye for yourselves?

16 Now this judge was after the order and faith of Nehor, who slew Gideon.

17 And it came to pass that Alma and Amulek answered him nothing; and he smote them again, and delivered them to the officers to be cast into prison.

18 And when they had been cast into prison three days, there came many lawyers, and judges, and priests, and teachers, who were of the profession of Nehor; and they came in unto the prison to see them, and they questioned them about many words; but they answered them nothing.

19 And it came to pass that the judge stood before them, and said: Why do ye not answer the words of this people? Know ye not that I have power to deliver you up unto the flames? And he commanded them to speak; but they answered nothing.

20 And it came to pass that they departed and went their ways, but came again on the morrow; and the judge also smote them again on their cheeks. And many came forth also, and smote them, saying: Will ye stand again and judge this people, and condemn our law? If ye have such great power why do ye not deliver yourselves?

So while Ammonihah may not have adhered to the â??trueâ? religion of the Nephites, they adhered to a form of Judaism, and still embraced the same founding story. This is a polity that also is governed by a strict set of laws, enforced by a developed hierarchy, and has complex social structure, just like Zarahemla. So our consideration of how extensive the Nephite influence was cannot be limited to one supposedly minor polity.

In chapter 17 of Alma, we learn additional information about the Lamanites. The Lamanite polity described in the BoM is even more powerful than the Nephite polity, so if the Lamanites also adhere to the same origin story as the Nephites, the zone of influence is extended even further, including incredibly powerful polities.

19 And Ammon went to the land of Ishmael, the land being called after the sons of Ishmael, who also became Lamanites.

20 And as Ammon entered the land of Ishmael, the Lamanites took him and bound him, as was their custom to bind all the Nephites who fell into their hands, and carry them before the king; and thus it was left to the pleasure of the king to slay them, or to retain them in captivity, or to cast them into prison, or to cast them out of his land, according to his will and pleasure.

21 And thus Ammon was carried before the king who was over the land of Ishmael; and his name was Lamoni; and he was a descendant of Ishmael.

Here we see that the Lamanites named their land after an individual in the Lehite founding party, and even determine their lineage after that same person. Remember that weâ??ve already established that King Laman would have been king over an incredibly powerful polity, that had the power to relocate his citizens in a different polity, but still the notable city of Nephi (Kaminaljuyu) to make room for Nephites, and had numerous kings under his control. We will hear more about this king later, but now we learn about his son, Lamoni:

13 For as sure as thou livest, behold, I have seen my Redeemer; and he shall come forth, and be born of a woman, and he shall redeem all mankind who believe on his name. Now, when he had said these words, his heart was swollen within him, and he sunk again with joy; and the queen also sunk down, being overpowered by the Spirit.

Lamoni has become an adherent of the â??trueâ? Nephite religion. When Lamoni takes Ammon to his father, the ultra-powerful King Laman, this is his fatherâ??s reaction:

10 And he also said: Whither art thou going with this Nephite, who is one of the children of a liar?

11 And it came to pass that Lamoni rehearsed unto him whither he was going, for he feared to offend him.

12 And he also told him all the cause of his tarrying in his own kingdom, that he did not go unto his father to the feast which he had prepared.

13 And now when Lamoni had rehearsed unto him all these things, behold, to his astonishment, his father was angry with him, and said: Lamoni, thou art going to deliver these Nephites, who are sons of a liar. Behold, he robbed our fathers; and now his children are also come amongst us that they may, by their cunning and their lyings, deceive us, that they again may rob us of our property.

Thus we see that this extraordinarily powerful king, lord over other kings, also adhered to the Lehite origin story. This is reaffirmed in Alma 21:

1 NOW when Ammon and his brethren separated themselves in the borders of the land of the Lamanites, behold Aaron took his journey towards the land which was called by the Lamanites, Jerusalem, calling it after the land of their fathersâ?? nativity; and it was away joining the borders of Mormon.

2 Now the Lamanites and the Amalekites and the people of Amulon had built a great city, which was called Jerusalem.

3 Now the Lamanites of themselves were sufficiently hardened, but the Amalekites and the Amulonites were still harder; therefore they did cause the Lamanites that they should harden their hearts, that they should wax strong in wickedness and their abominations.

4 And it came to pass that Aaron came to the city of Jerusalem, and first began to preach to the Amalekites. And he began to preach to them in their synagogues, for they had built synagogues after the order of the Nehors; for many of the Amalekites and the Amulonites were after the order of the Nehors.

This was a pervasive and powerful origin story, shared not only by the citizens of Zarahemla, but by â??apostateâ? Nephite groups and even the Lamanites. This is exactly why this story should have influenced the overall trend of Mesoamerican worldview.

In the same chapter, we learn that Lamoni began to spread the â??trueâ? religion among the Lamanites:

18 And it came to pass that Ammon and Lamoni returned from the land of Middoni to the land of Ishmael, which was the land of their inheritance.

19 And king Lamoni would not suffer that Ammon should serve him, or be his servant.

20 But he caused that there should be synagogues built in the land of Ishmael; and he caused that his people, or the people who were under his reign, should assemble themselves together.

In Alma 22, we learn more about the ultra powerful King Laman:

1 NOW, as Ammon was thus teaching the people of Lamoni continually, we will return to the account of Aaron and his brethren; for after he departed from the land of Middoni he was led by the Spirit to the land of Nephi, even to the house of the king which was over all the land save it were the land of Ishmael; and he was the father of Lamoni.

7 And Aaron answered him and said unto him: Believest thou that there is a God? And the king said: I know that the Amalekites say that there is a God, and I have granted unto them that they should build sanctuaries, that they may assemble themselves together to worship him. And if now thou sayest there is a God, behold I will believe.

8 And now when Aaron heard this, his heart began to rejoice, and he said: Behold, assuredly as thou livest, O king, there is a God.

9 And the king said: Is God that Great Spirit that brought our fathers out of the land of Jerusalem?

This is extremely important information. This ultra powerful king over a large region of Lamanites, who was lord over several other kings, referred to the origin story of Jerusalem. Once again we see that this origin story was powerful, pervasive, and persistent, not just in Zarahemla, but in apostate Nephite polities and even the Lamanites. Just what kind of region did King Laman control?

27 And it came to pass that the king sent a proclamation throughout all the land, amongst all his people who were in all his land, who were in all the regions round about, which was bordering even to the sea, on the east and on the west, and which was divided from the land of Zarahemla by a narrow strip of wilderness, which ran from the sea east even to the sea west, and round about on the borders of the seashore, and the borders of the wilderness which was on the north by the land of Zarahemla, through the borders of Manti, by the head of the river Sidon, running from the east towards the westâ??and thus were the Lamanites and the Nephites divided.

28 Now, the more idle part of the Lamanites lived in the wilderness, and dwelt in tents; and they were spread through the wilderness on the west, in the land of Nephi; yea, and also on the west of the land of Zarahemla, in the borders by the seashore, and on the west in the land of Nephi, in the place of their fathersâ?? first inheritance, and thus bordering along by the seashore.

29 And also there were many Lamanites on the east by the seashore, whither the Nephites had driven them. And thus the Nephites were nearly surrounded by the Lamanites; nevertheless the Nephites had taken possession of all the northern parts of the land bordering on the wilderness, at the head of the river Sidon, from the east to the west, round about on the wilderness side; on the north, even until they came to the land which they called Bountiful.

In combination with the Nephite polity already described above, this is a huge portion of Mesoamerica itself, including most of the Maya region.

This is why I asserted earlier that I didnâ??t even have to prove that the Nephites actually controlled other polities to make my case. The influence is extensive and pervasive, even without assuming direct control.

We learn that King Lamanâ??s conversion efforts were successful, at a very crucial period in ancient Mesoamerica â?? the period which gave us the first verifications of the Holy Lord system, around 90 BC:

1 BEHOLD, now it came to pass that the king of the Lamanites sent a proclamation among all his people, that they should not lay their hands on Ammon, or Aaron, or Omner, or Himni, nor either of their brethren who should go forth preaching the word of God, in whatsoever place they should be, in any part of their land.

2 Yea, he sent a decree among them, that they should not lay their hands on them to bind them, or to cast them into prison; neither should they spit upon them, nor smite them, nor cast them out of their synagogues, nor scourge them; neither should they cast stones at them, but that they should have free access to their houses, and also their temples, and their sanctuaries.

3 And thus they might go forth and preach the word according to their desires, for the king had been converted unto the Lord, and all his household; therefore he sent his proclamation throughout the land unto his people, that the word of God might have no obstruction, but that it might go forth throughout all the land, that his people might be convinced concerning the wicked traditions of their fathers, and that they might be convinced that they were all brethren, and that they ought not to murder, nor to plunder, nor to steal, nor to commit adultery, nor to commit any manner of wickedness.

4 And now it came to pass that when the king had sent forth this proclamation, that Aaron and his brethren went forth from city to city, and from one house of worship to another, establishing churches, and consecrating priests and teachers throughout the land among the Lamanites, to preach and to teach the word of God among them; and thus they began to have great success.

5 And thousands were brought to the knowledge of the Lord, yea, thousands were brought to believe in the traditions of the Nephites; and they were taught the records and prophecies which were handed down even to the present time.

As we have already seen, the origin/Jerusalem story was powerful, pervasive, and persistent. If we consider the entire Nephite region (remember the definition of â??Nephiteâ?), even including the â??apostateâ? polities (which still adhered to a form of Judaism), and then include the Lamanite polity described above â?? we have the majority of Mesoamerica itself that would have been influenced by some form of Judaism and/or the Jerusalem origin story. And, of course, several Lamanite polities outright converted:

6 And as sure as the Lord liveth, so sure as many as believed, or as many as were brought to the knowledge of the truth, through the preaching of Ammon and his brethren, according to the spirit of revelation and of prophecy, and the power of God working miracles in themâ??yea, I say unto you, as the Lord liveth, as many of the Lamanites as believed in their preaching, and were converted unto the Lord, never did fall away.

7 For they became a righteous people; they did lay down the weapons of their rebellion, that they did not fight against God any more, neither against any of their brethren.

8 Now, these are they who were converted unto the Lord:

9 The people of the Lamanites who were in the land of Ishmael;

10 And also of the people of the Lamanites who were in the land of Middoni;

11 And also of the people of the Lamanites who were in the city of Nephi;

12 And also of the people of the Lamanites who were in the land of Shilom, and who were in the land of Shemlon, and in the city of Lemuel, and in the city of Shimnilom.

13 And these are the names of the cities of the Lamanites which were converted unto the Lord; and these are they that laid down the weapons of their rebellion, yea, all their weapons of war; and they were all Lamanites.

14 And the Amalekites were not converted, save only one; neither were any of the Amulonites; but they did harden their hearts, and also the hearts of the Lamanites in that part of the land wheresoever they dwelt, yea, and all their villages and all their cities.

15 Therefore, we have named all the cities of the Lamanites in which they did repent and come to the knowledge of the truth, and were converted.

[beastie]

In chapter 24, we obtain even more evidence that the origin story influenced the Lamanites:

29 Now, among those who joined the people of the Lord, there were none who were Amalekites or Amulonites, or who were of the order of Nehor, but they were actual descendants of Laman and Lemuel.

From Alma 25, we obtain more evidence that the Lamanites still adhered to the basic worldview of the Nephites:

1 AND behold, now it came to pass that those Lamanites were more angry because they had slain their brethren; therefore they swore vengeance upon the Nephites; and they did no more attempt to slay the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi at that time.

2 But they took their armies and went over into the borders of the land of Zarahemla, and fell upon the people who were in the land of Ammonihah and destroyed them.

3 And after that, they had many battles with the Nephites, in the which they were driven and slain.

4 And among the Lamanites who were slain were almost all the seed of Amulon and his brethren, who were the priests of Noah, and they were slain by the hands of the Nephites;

5 And the remainder, having fled into the east wilderness, and having usurped the power and authority over the Lamanites, caused that many of the Lamanites should perish by fire because of their beliefâ??

6 For many of them, after having suffered much loss and so many afflictions, began to be stirred up in remembrance of the words which Aaron and his brethren had preached to them in their land; therefore they began to disbelieve the traditions of their fathers, and to believe in the Lord, and that he gave great power unto the Nephites; and thus there were many of them converted in the wilderness.

In Alma 27, we learn more about the strict laws the Nephites were governed by:

8 And the king said unto him: Yea, if the Lord saith unto us go, we will go down unto our brethren, and we will be their slaves until we repair unto them the many murders and sins which we have committed against them.

9 But Ammon said unto him: It is against the law of our brethren, which was established by my father, that there should be any slaves among them; therefore let us go down and rely upon the mercies of our brethren.

Even if the people offered themselves as slaves, the law forbade it. Clearly, these people were governed by a strict set of laws.

Chapter 27 is also interesting because of the fact that land was â??givenâ? to the exiled Lamanites.

21 And it came to pass that the chief judge sent a proclamation throughout all the land, desiring the voice of the people concerning the admitting their brethren, who were the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi.

22 And it came to pass that the voice of the people came, saying: Behold, we will give up the land of Jershon, which is on the east by the sea, which joins the land Bountiful, which is on the south of the land Bountiful; and this land Jershon is the land which we will give unto our brethren for an inheritance.

23 And behold, we will set our armies between the land Jershon and the land Nephi, that we may protect our brethren in the land Jershon; and this we do for our brethren, on account of their fear to take up arms against their brethren lest they should commit sin; and this their great fear came because of their sore repentance which they had, on account of their many murders and their awful wickedness.

First, we learn that the chief judge must still obtain some sort of polling from the people. Obviously his authority is restrained according to the â??voice of the peopleâ?. Jershon, as Iâ??ve repeatedly noted, is quite distant from Zarahemla, indicating an extensive range of authority and control. Even more, an army was set up for protection, and the people were expected to sustain the army. This sounds suspiciously like a standing army, which would have been an anachronism in 77 BC.

In Alma 30, we learn more about the legal system of Zarahemla:

7 Now there was no law against a manâ??s belief; for it was strictly contrary to the commands of God that there should be a law which should bring men on to unequal grounds.

8 For thus saith the scripture: Choose ye this day, whom ye will serve.

9 Now if a man desired to serve God, it was his privilege; or rather, if he believed in God it was his privilege to serve him; but if he did not believe in him there was no law to punish him.

10 But if he murdered he was punished unto death; and if he robbed he was also punished; and if he stole he was also punished; and if he committed adultery he was also punished; yea, for all this wickedness they were punished.

11 For there was a law that men should be judged according to their crimes. Nevertheless, there was no law against a manâ??s belief; therefore, a man was punished only for the crimes which he had done; therefore all men were on equal grounds.

Zarahemla is no â??Boy Scoutâ? institution that enacts laws but is powerless to enforce them. The polity had the power to execute.

We learn more interesting information about the apostate polity, Antionum, in Alma 31:

3 Now the Zoramites had gathered themselves together in a land which they called Antionum, which was east of the land of Zarahemla, which lay nearly bordering upon the seashore, which was south of the land of Jershon, which also bordered upon the wilderness south, which wilderness was full of the Lamanites.

Jershon was about 160 miles from Zarahemla, so Antionum was at least that far, as well.

These were the beliefs of the apostates:

12 Now, when they had come into the land, behold, to their astonishment they found that the Zoramites had built synagogues, and that they did gather themselves together on one day of the week, which day they did call the day of the Lord; and they did worship after a manner which Alma and his brethren had never beheld;

13 For they had a place built up in the center of their synagogue, a place for standing, which was high above the head; and the top thereof would only admit one person.

14 Therefore, whosoever desired to worship must go forth and stand upon the top thereof, and stretch forth his hands towards heaven, and cry with a loud voice, saying:

15 Holy, holy God; we believe that thou art God, and we believe that thou art holy, and that thou wast a spirit, and that thou art a spirit, and that thou wilt be a spirit forever.

16 Holy God, we believe that thou hast separated us from our brethren; and we do not believe in the tradition of our brethren, which was handed down to them by the childishness of their fathers; but we believe that thou hast elected us to be thy holy children; and also thou hast made it known unto us that there shall be no Christ.

17 But thou art the same yesterday, today, and forever; and thou hast elected us that we shall be saved, whilst all around us are elected to be cast by thy wrath down to hell; for the which holiness, O God, we thank thee; and we also thank thee that thou hast elected us, that we may not be led away after the foolish traditions of our brethren, which doth bind them down to a belief of Christ, which doth lead their hearts to wander far from thee, our God.

What is important about this declaration of belief is that this apostate group still defined themselves within the parameter of Judeo-Christianity (or, in this case, against Christianity).

This is why I stated, long ago, that my case can be made by simply demonstrating the pervasive and wide-spread influence of the Nephite polity. A polity that was able to directly influence the beliefs of polities quite distant (in terms of Mesoamerica, of course), and even influence the beliefs of their enemies was, simply put, a powerful polity.

Of course weâ??ve already looked at this verse in terms of social stratification:

Alma chapter 32:

1 And it came to pass that they did go forth, and began to preach the word of God unto the people, entering into their synagogues, and into their houses; yea, and even they did preach the word in their streets.

2 And it came to pass that after much labor among them, they began to have success among the poor class of people; for behold, they were cast out of the synagogues because of the coarseness of their apparelâ??

3 Therefore they were not permitted to enter into their synagogues to worship God, being esteemed as filthiness; therefore they were poor; yea, they were esteemed by their brethren as dross; therefore they were poor as to things of the world; and also they were poor in heart.

4 Now, as Alma was teaching and speaking unto the people upon the hill Onidah, there came a great multitude unto him, who were those of whom we have been speaking, of whom were poor in heart, because of their poverty as to the things of the world.

5 And they came unto Alma; and the one who was the foremost among them said unto him: Behold, what shall these my brethren do, for they are despised of all men because of their poverty, yea, and more especially by our priests; for they have cast us out of our synagogues which we have labored abundantly to build with our own hands; and they have cast us out because of our exceeding poverty; and we have no place to worship our God; and behold, what shall we do?

Now notice how Alma addresses the citizens of this apostate community, again from Alma 33:

12 And now Alma said unto them: Do ye believe those scriptures which have been written by them of old?

13 Behold, if ye do, ye must believe what Zenos said; for, behold he said: Thou hast turned away thy judgments because of thy Son.

14 Now behold, my brethren, I would ask if ye have read the scriptures? If ye have, how can ye disbelieve on the Son of God?

15 For it is not written that Zenos alone spake of these things, but Zenock also spake of these thingsâ??

16 For behold, he said: Thou art angry, O Lord, with this people, because they will not understand thy mercies which thou hast bestowed upon them because of thy Son.

17 And now, my brethren, ye see that a second prophet of old has testified of the Son of God, and because the people would not understand his words they stoned him to death.

18 But behold, this is not all; these are not the only ones who have spoken concerning the Son of God.

19 Behold, he was spoken of by Moses; yea, and behold a type was raised up in the wilderness, that whosoever would look upon it might live. And many did look and live.

20 But few understood the meaning of those things, and this because of the hardness of their hearts. But there were many who were so hardened that they would not look, therefore they perished. Now the reason they would not look is because they did not believe that it would heal them.

21 O my brethren, if ye could be healed by merely casting about your eyes that ye might be healed, would ye not behold quickly, or would ye rather harden your hearts in unbelief, and be slothful, that ye would not cast about your eyes, that ye might perish?

22 If so, wo shall come upon you; but if not so, then cast about your eyes and begin to believe in the Son of God, that he will come to redeem his people, and that he shall suffer and die to atone for their sins; and that he shall rise again from the dead, which shall bring to pass the resurrection, that all men shall stand before him, to be judged at the last and judgment day, according to their works.

23 And now, my brethren, I desire that ye shall plant this word in your hearts, and as it beginneth to swell even so nourish it by your faith. And behold, it will become a tree, springing up in you unto everlasting life. And then may God grant unto you that your burdens may be light, through the joy of his Son. And even all this can ye do if ye will. Amen.

Alma presumes that this apostate group not only is familiar with Nephite scriptures, but also would accept at least some of those scriptures, as well. Look at the reference to Moses, for example. This is exactly what I mean by an influential polity â?? people living in an â??apostateâ? city over 160 miles away still believed in the Nephite scriptures, and were familiar with specific information from those scriptures, like the character of Moses. This was around 74 BC. This means that for over 500 years, at this point, the Nephite stories were spread throughout this region, accepted by even those who rejected Nephite religion or authority. Verse 2 also demonstrates this:

2 And Alma said unto them: Behold, ye have said that ye could not worship your God because ye are cast out of your synagogues. But behold, I say unto you, if ye suppose that ye cannot worship God, ye do greatly err, and ye ought to search the scriptures; if ye suppose that they have taught you this, ye do not understand them.

Alma not only assumes that theyâ??re familiar with the scriptures, but he assumes that they have access to scriptures that they can search.

As previously mentioned, the group of poor who converted was relocated:

6 And it came to pass that after they had found out the minds of all the people, those who were in favor of the words which had been spoken by Alma and his brethren were cast out of the land; and they were many; and they came over also into the land of Jershon.

7 And it came to pass that Alma and his brethren did minister unto them.

8 Now the people of the Zoramites were angry with the people of Ammon who were in Jershon, and the chief ruler of the Zoramites, being a very wicked man, sent over unto the people of Ammon desiring them that they should cast out of their land all those who came over from them into their land.

9 And he breathed out many threatenings against them. And now the people of Ammon did not fear their words; therefore they did not cast them out, but they did receive all the poor of the Zoramites that came over unto them; and they did nourish them, and did clothe them, and did give unto them lands for their inheritance; and they did administer unto them according to their wants.

Iâ??m not going to belabor this point regarding the â??class of poorâ? referred to in this story. I think the verses speak for themselves, and thereâ??s little I can add to what honor has already posted.

Remember, Jershon is 160 miles away from Zarahemla. The Nephites already relocated one group there, and now another is being relocated. This demonstrates tremendous influence over a region 160 miles distant.

But weâ??re not done with Jershon. In the same chapter:

10 Now this did stir up the Zoramites to anger against the people of Ammon, and they began to mix with the Lamanites and to stir them up also to anger against them.

11 And thus the Zoramites and the Lamanites began to make preparations for war against the people of Ammon, and also against the Nephites.

12 And thus ended the *seventeenth year of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi.

13 And the people of Ammon departed out of the land of Jershon, and came over into the land of Melek, and gave place in the land of Jershon for the armies of the Nephites, that they might contend with the armies of the Lamanites and the armies of the Zoramites; and thus commenced a war betwixt the Lamanites and the Nephites, in the eighteenth year of the reign of the judges; and an account shall be given of their wars hereafter.

So after these relocations, everyone picks up and moves once again â?? so that this polity can now house the armies. The armies evidently need at least a semi-permanent base.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I want to give him a chance to help me learn some of this new evidence.

Billy, if only that were true.

[LeSellers]

I have to go with the fact that our Prophet says this is the hill, and there is a monument showing such. When the Prophet says this is the hill and errects a monument dedicating such place in Mesoamerica, then I will change my belief on where Cumorah is.

I have seen monuments attesting that a city in France is "Paris". I have also seen a plaque saying that "Paris" is in Texas.

Unless the monument you cite says that "Hill Cumorah" near Palmyra, New York, is the place described in the Book of Mormon as the scene of the final battles of the Nephites and Jaredites, there is no discrepancy in saying the Hill Cumorah (New York) is "Hill Cumorah", but recognizing that there is another "Hill Cumorah" elsewhere (most likely in or near Southern Mexico). It was Oliver Cowdery who applied the title "Cumorah" to the "hill of considerable size" near Joseph Smith's home in Palmyra, not Brother Joseph.

Sorry if others have pointed this out earlier. I have been offline all day, attempting to rectify a router problem.

Lehi

[beastie]

I have a pervasive and wide-spread *influence* on my children, they know the scriptures, but some of them do exactly the opposite of my wishes and moral standards.

Not sure what your point is. ****Without*** records, we only have physical artifacts, so "influence" in religion, if it rejected, if the individual goes completely against that moral standard, physical artifacts may not show the context that they are rejecting another influence.

Note that the city you mention killed every man, woman, and child who were Christians by fire. (according to your definition, was that human sacrifice?) How would physical artifacts show that they were rebelling against Christianity, against the teachings of Alma and Amulek, vs just killing a bunch of people. They were "under the influence" of the Nephites, but they had mass extermination of all Christians.

Please help me understand your argument.

Charles, at this point, there is probably very little risk of you understanding my argument, if your understanding of my posts on human sacrifice is any indication (hint: when a human being is decapitated or his heart is removed in a symbolic, religious context, itâ??s sacrifice, not simply murder). But Iâ??ll spend a few minutes trying for the sake of others.

Letâ??s use the term â??Lehite worldviewâ? as shorthand for the stories that were part of the worldview embraced by Nephites, Lamanites, and apostate Nephites. This doesnâ??t include Christianity, but includes a basic Judaic worldview, as well as the origin stories of the Lehites.

We know about the Mesoamerican worldview partly because it was so pervasive and successful that it was not only recorded in later text, but also can still be seen in the beliefs of the descendants of these ancient people. We can fill in the details due to information from the later time periods, and this helps scholars recognize the same elements in earlier time periods.

Now, if the BoM were true, then a region of about 400,000 square kilometers would have been inhabited by people that embraced the Lehite worldview for almost a thousand years. That means that the Lehite worldview would be providing the seed of the worldview that we could find recorded in more detail in later time periods, instead of the Mesoamerican worldview, in that particular area. Since that area was quite large, and actually encompassed not an insignificant portion of Mesoamerica itself, that worldview should have had an impact on the entire evolution of theological based worldview in the Mesoamerica. IOW, we wouldnâ??t have to rely on absent texts to figure out what the people in that region believed, because we could see that same worldview recorded in later time periods and manifested in later descendants.

Of course I understand that you seem to think that scholars have no business making any sort of assertion whatsoever about earlier time periods absent written records. You certainly have a right to your opinion on that matter, but I am content to trust the opinions of scholars who have spent many decades studying the topic, and they do feel there is enough continuity and pervasiveness in the Mesoamerican worldview to draw direct connections between the Classic and PostClassic periods and earlier periods.

[Anijen]

Now, if the BoM were true, then a region of about 400,000 square kilometers would have been inhabited by people that embraced the Lehite worldview for almost a thousand years. That means that the Lehite worldview would be providing the seed of the worldview that we could find recorded in more detail in later time periods, instead of the Mesoamerican worldview, in that particular area. Since that area was quite large, and actually encompassed not an insignificant portion of Mesoamerica itself, that worldview should have had an impact on the entire evolution of theological based worldview in the Mesoamerica. IOW, we wouldnâ??t have to rely on absent texts to figure out what the people in that region believed, because we could see that same worldview recorded in later time periods and manifested in later descendants.

I would agree with you if the entirety of the polity embraced the "Lehite worldview" for a thousand years then it should leave a remnant of it in the written histories. But I do not subscribe to the whole region was under a "Lehite worldview" for a thousand years. I think more than likely what happened is 30-50 people from the Old World arrived and were assimilated into the culture, politics, customs and lifestyle of the Mesoamerican people. The religions were different from village to village in one form or another. I would try to compare it to say a small handful of Christians living in the Middle East and each of these Christian groups were different Christian groups (Catholic, Baptist, Mormon etc) 2600 years later when reading of the Middle East we are going to see the influence of Muslim and not the small group.

[beastie]

I would agree with you if the entirety of the polity embraced the "Lehite worldview" for a thousand years then it should leave a remnant of it in the written histories. But I do not subscribe to the whole region was under a "Lehite worldview" for a thousand years. I think more than likely what happened is 30-50 people from the Old World arrived and were assimilated into the culture, politics, customs and lifestyle of the Mesoamerican people. The religions were different from village to village in one form or another. I would try to compare it to say a small handful of Christians living in the Middle East and each of these Christian groups were different Christian groups (Catholic, Baptist, Mormon etc) 2600 years later when reading of the Middle East we are going to see the influence of Muslim and not the small group.

This contradicts the BoM verses I've been quoting above, and contradicts other verses I've yet to share. First, the BoM specifically tells us the definition of Nephite - someone who accepts the truth of their records. It also tells us how widespread the Nephites were:

Helaman 3

1 And now it came to pass in the *forty and third year of the reign of the judges, there was no contention among the people of Nephi save it were a little pride which was in the church, which did cause some little dissensions among the people, which affairs were settled in the ending of the forty and third year.

2 And there was no contention among the people in the forty and fourth year; neither was there much contention in the forty and fifth year.

3 And it came to pass in the *forty and sixth, yea, there was much contention and many dissensions; in the which there were an exceedingly great many who departed out of the land of Zarahemla, and went forth unto the land northward to inherit the land.

4 And they did travel to an exceedingly great distance, insomuch that they came to large bodies of water and many rivers.

5 Yea, and even they did spread forth into all parts of the land, into whatever parts it had not been rendered desolate and without timber, because of the many inhabitants who had before inherited the land.

6 And now no part of the land was desolate, save it were for timber; but because of the greatness of the destruction of the people who had before inhabited the land it was called desolate.

7 And there being but little timber upon the face of the land, nevertheless the people who went forth became exceedingly expert in the working of cement; therefore they did build houses of cement, in the which they did dwell.

8 And it came to pass that they did multiply and spread, and did go forth from the land southward to the land northward, and did spread insomuch that they began to cover the face of the whole earth, from the sea south to the sea north, from the sea west to the sea east.

9 And the people who were in the land northward did dwell in atents, and in houses of cement, and they did suffer whatsoever tree should spring up upon the face of the land that it should grow up, that in time they might have timber to build their houses, yea, their cities, and their temples, and their bsynagogues, and their sanctuaries, and all manner of their buildings.

10 And it came to pass as timber was exceedingly scarce in the land northward, they did send forth much by the way of ashipping.

11 And thus they did enable the people in the land northward that they might build many cities, both of wood and of cement.

12 And it came to pass that there were many of the people of Ammon, who were Lamanites by birth, did also go forth into this land.

13 And now there are many arecords kept of the proceedings of this people, by many of this people, which are particular and very large, concerning them.

14 But behold, a hundredth part of the proceedings of this people, yea, the account of the Lamanites and of the Nephites, and their wars, and contentions, and dissensions, and their preaching, and their prophecies, and their shipping and their building of ships, and their building of temples, and of synagogues and their sanctuaries, and their righteousness, and their wickedness, and their murders, and their robbings, and their plundering, and all manner of abominations and whoredoms, cannot be contained in this work.

15 But behold, there are many books and many records of every kind, and they have been kept chiefly by the Nephites.

16 And they have been handed down from one generation to another by the Nephites, even until they have fallen into transgression and have been murdered, plundered, and hunted, and driven forth, and slain, and scattered upon the face of the earth, and mixed with the Lamanites until they are cno more called the Nephites, becoming wicked, and wild, and ferocious, yea, even becoming Lamanites.

In addition, apparently even apostate Nephite polities and Lamanite polities still adhered to the basic Judaic worldview.

(btw, I loathe and detested this new threaded view of posts - is there any way to turn it off?)

[Anijen]

This contradicts the BoM verses I've been quoting above, and contradicts other verses I've yet to share. First, the BoM specifically tells us the definition of Nephite - someone who accepts the truth of their records. It also tells us how widespread the Nephites were:

Helaman 3

In addition, apparently even apostate Nephite polities and Lamanite polities still adhered to the basic Judaic worldview.

(btw, I loathe and detested this new threaded view of posts - is there any way to turn it off?)

Thanks beastie foe your replies I really love this thread and cant leave it alone. I believe that Mormon here is being metaphoric in his descriptions of Helaman chapter 3. There are evidences of different times of migrations from the land southward to a northward direction. Having said that I am in no way disqualifying a land-bridge from Asia migration (North to south). Though the apogee of Mayan civilization was 600-900 AD and the verse you have quoted is about 49-46 BC but this time coincides greatly with the emergence of the mesoamerican states in this very late formative time. I have no problem with Nephite migration to the northern areas and IMO is one of the migrations. Can I prove this? Well no, but I have no idea how an archaeologist would be able to state in a definitive way a difference from a Mayan family from a Mayan Nephite family.

I believe the term "covering the face of the whole earth" is spoken metaphorically because it is elsewhere in the BoM and one can usually tell when it is meant to be taken literally (in most instances) and when to take it in a broader sense of the phrase. The following are links that support this view.

Thanks for the challenge you pose for my noggin.

Anijen

From Russel ball excellent paper found here;

This phrase is used sixty-four times in the Standard Works. Twenty-seven of these are in the Old Testament, and only one in the New Testament. The Book of Mormon uses the phrase twenty-two times. Often the context makes clear that it is intended to be taken literally, as in "God of the whole earth." Some references permit either a broad or a narrow meaning. But in many passages the phrase clearly describes a relatively local event. The relevant references follow:

Hugh Nibley states here The calamities of the Amlicite war brought the people back to a remembrance of God, and the Church strove mightily, "and many were baptized in the waters of Sidon and were joined to the church of God" (Alma 4:4). After Alma's enthusiastic account, which calls up images of thousands and tens of thousands flocking to the waters of the mighty Sidon,3 it comes as a shock to learn that the record increase of the church in the seventh year of the judges was just 3,500 souls. This is another reminder that terms like "great," "mighty," "numerous," etc., are purely relative and cannot for a moment be taken to indicate population on a modern scale. We are told, for example, that the people of the great northern migration "began to cover the face of the whole earth" (Helaman 3: . What is meant by "cover"? In case one thinks of something like greater Los Angeles one need only read a few verses farther to learn that the Gadianton robbers established their cells "in the more settled parts of the land" (Helaman 3:23), which makes it clear that "covering the face of the whole earth" does not mean a dense and uniform occupation but can signify the thinnest possible settlement.

This is implied in Mormon's impression of the land of Zarahemla when he came as a boy from the north country with his father: "The whole face of the land had become covered with buildings, and the people were as numerous almost, as it were the sand of the sea" (Mormon 1:7). The "as it were" again bids us be cautious, but it is clear that compared with his native north country the land of Zarahemla seemed to the youthful Mormon to be fairly bursting with people. Yet in the very year he made his visit a war broke out in the Zarahemla country "by the waters of Sidon," for which "the Nephites had gathered together a great number of men, even to exceed the number of thirty thousand" (Mormon 1:11). That is, the whole Nephite army gathered from a nation "as numerous almost as it were the sand of the sea" amounted to hardly more than a single modern infantry division! The overwhelmingly superior enemy host was only 50,000—less than two infantry divisions.

The Meaning of the Phrase Whole Earth by Russell H. Ball here

An interesting secondary problem in understanding the destruction described in 3 Nephi is the question of how to interpret the phrase whole earth that is used to describe the phenomenon (3 Nephi 8:6, 12, 17–18). It seems clear that this phrase should be understood as "whole land," that is, all of the area populated by the Nephites and Lamanites. Thus, the destruction was a localized rather than a global phenomenon.

Randall P. Spackman review of Mormons map found here suggests;

Near the end of his article, Clark describes in much greater detail another related directional pattern when he seeks to interpret Helaman 3:8. In that verse, the Nephites are said to have expanded "from the land southward to the land northward, and . . . spread insomuch that they began to cover the face of the whole earth, from the sea south to the sea north, from the sea west to the sea east." Clark acknowledges that his reading of the Book of Mormon directional system can be literal only to a point. Then another level of interpretation is called for and additional assumptions must be made. Clark refers to this change in interpretative process as requiring an explanation that is metaphorical:

The passage in Helaman may have been meant in a metaphorical rather than a literal way. Explaining away difficult passages as metaphors goes against one of my guiding assumptions for dealing with the text, but in this case I think it is well justified. North and south sea probably have no more concrete meaning than the phrases "filling the whole earth" and "as numerous as the sands of the sea." Mormon waxes poetic whenever describing the Nephites' peaceful golden age of uninterrupted population growth and expansion. This is understandable given the circumstances under which he wrote, and his knowledge of the certain doom of his people. It is interesting that in a parallel passage describing the same sort of population expansion [Helaman 11:20] no north or south sea is mentioned. .

. .

the phrase whole earth seems to refer to local phenomena. The account in Alma 36:7 of the appearance of the angel to Alma and the sons of Mosiah relates that the voice of the angel was as thunder "and the whole earth did tremble beneath our feet." However, the same event is described in Mosiah 27:11 as follows: "he spake as it were with a voice of thunder, which caused the earth to shake upon which they stood." This usage of the phrase whole earth seems to be a hyperbole, since the episode has all the earmarks of a very localized event.

and for interesting read;

The data from the southwestern United States is impressive. For example, the Hohokam culture of Arizona shows so many similarities to the cultures of Mexico that all who have investigated the matter have concluded that much of Hohokam culture originated in Mesoamerica

Apparently, from these and many other studies, peoples and cultural elements have spread by migration and trade from Mexico into North America periodically since well before the time of Christ. Although we cannot identify these movements with the Book of Mormon account specifically, we can see that the kind of migrations northward mentioned in the Book of Mormon are substantiated in general. Through avenues such as these, we again can also see how some of the Jaredites, Nephites, Lamanites, or Mulekites, or their descendants, or aspects of their culture, could easily have spread out, here a little and there a little, over the North American continent.

Did Book of Mormon Names Persist in Ancient America?

The name Zenock, from the Book of Mormon, and Tenoch, the Nahuatl name of a semi-legendary priest/leader of the Aztecs, may be linguistically related. The Book of Mormon refers five times to the Israelite prophet Zenock, spelled Zenoch in the Original Manuscript of the Book of Mormon [1 Nephi 19:10, c. 580 B.C.; Alma 33:15 and 34:7, c. 74 B.C.; Helaman 8:20, c. 23 B.C.; and 3 Nephi 10:16, c. A.D. 34]. Those passages remind the Nephites and the future readers of the Book of Mormon about the prophecies of Zenoch concerning Christ, which were contained in the scriptures that Lehi and his family brought with them from the Old World.

Given the prominence of these references to the prophet Zenoch, it would not be surprising if the name Zenoch was used among the Nephites and even among the mixed seed of the apostate Nephites that joined with the Lamanite peoples at the end of the Book of Mormon period and beyond.

It is possible that the name of Tenoch, whom Bancroft believes may have been one of the founders of Tenochtitlan, the Aztec city that was thriving at the time of the Spanish Conquest, was related to the name of Zenoch, the prophet of the old world. The Nahuatl name Tenoch may originally have been Tzenoch or Zenoch. Tz, z, t, and ts combinations are used in Mesoamerican languages, sometimes with one taking place of the other, depending on the region where it was used. For example, Tz combinations were used in Nahuatl. Tzihuacohuatl [also known as Tezihuaccoahutlutl] was a Nahua chief. The name of Zwanga, a Tarasco King, has also been spelled Tzihuanga. In the case of the name Zenoch, the shift to Tz, followed later by dropping the Z, would give us Tenoch.

Relationships between these letter combinations are also common in other languages of the world. For example, in French, ciel [siel], the word for "heaven," was at one time pronounced tsiel, and the name Charles [s

[mpschmitt]

Billy states,

Why do you feel that there are lots of things that help support the history of the Bible, but little (to none) that support the Book of Mormon? (Things like people, places, ancient manuscripts) Do you feel that God may be hiding the evidence?

LifeOnaPlate replies,

This shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation born of a confident ignorance of important information.

LifeOnaPlate may be right that I may have an "ignorance of important information". I want to give him a chance to help me learn some of this new evidence. (Note I would of ask him in the other thread, but I was warned not to further derail that thread)

1. Any ancient manuscript evidence prior to Joseph Smith

2. Any known cities from the Book of Mormon that correspond to cities in the Americas?

3. Any archeological evidence around the Hill Cumorah in New York?

4. Any evidence of the Lamanites or Nephites in archeological finds?

Hi Billy,

Let's look at the Bible as the first case study in answer to your question. The texts of the Bible have been around now for over 2000 years. Up until somewhere near the 1800's there were a number of unanswered Archeological questions about the Bible, which critics of the Bible used to undermine its authenticity. Here are but two examples:

A certain king Belshazzar was mentioned in Daniel chapter 5. This received criticism from skeptics for years since no secular listing of the Bablylonian kings could confirm it. Then in 1853, an archeologist discovered a stone tablet that did in fact confirm that such a historical figure existed. That argument went away...

Another example. Critics of the Bible long questioned it's authenticity because of the accounts of Solomon's large array of horses and chariots (horses you say? Where have I heard that before...). Then from 1925-1934, Dr. Henry Breasted excavated one of Solomon's "chariot cities" at Megiddo where they discovered stables for over 400 horses and barracks for his chariots and battalions. That argument went away...

There are still some unanswered questions today for that matter.

By contrast, the Book of Mormon has been known about in the modern world for about 178 years. The region where it is said to have transpired is nowhere near as excavated as the Middle East. The people of the Book of Mormon who would have had an interest in preserving the Judeo-Christian culture described in the Book of Mormon were annihilated and supplanted by a people who had no interest in preserving those traditions and every interest in destroying everything associated with them. Then, centuries later, it was conquered again by the Spaniards who burned thousands of pages of manuscripts. The Middle East for many years was under the strict jurisdiction of the Roman Empire and Romans were notoriously good note takers and record keepers with a far greater toleration (though that waxed and waned from time to time) for those with Judeo-Christian principles and practices. Some of the descendants of the people from Biblical times and places still live today and some still continue traditions that reach back for centuries.

If you're willing to wait another 2000 or so years, I'm sure we could provide you with ample evidence to be convinced...

In the meantime, God is more than willing to give you the evidence you seek through the Holy Ghost if you truly desire it, and I've personally found that to be much more persuasive than hearing a bunch of PhDs talk about the possible theological implications of dusty broken pottery.

I can assure you that God is not hiding the evidence from the sincere seeker.

...But if you're still not satisfied with that answer, perhaps this will help...

http://jefflindsay.com/BMEvidences.shtml

Blessings,

Mark

[Daniel Peterson]

Even the 'witnesses' never actually held the plates, but rather saw them with their 'spiritual eyes'.

This is flat-out nonsense.

Although it's become Accepted Wisdom among the critics and the disaffected, it's false.

A useful brief treatment of some of the issues is Richard Lloyd Anderson's "Attempts to Redefine the Experience of the Eight Witnesses," in Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 14/1 (2005):

http://farms.byu.edu/publications/jbms/?vo...um=1&id=357

[beastie]

8 And it came to pass that they did multiply and spread, and did go forth from the land southward to the land northward, and did spread insomuch that they began to cover the face of the whole earth, from the sea south to the sea north, from the sea west to the sea east.

The problematic portion for your assertion that it is metaphor is from "sea to sea". In fact, if you look at a LGT map (like the one on my website), you see it actually did spread from "sea to sea".

Placing the BoM in Mesoamerica may be "limited" geography in comparison to the hemispheric model, but it isn't particularly "limited" when it comes to the portion of Mesoamerica involved.

BTW, I do notice that every time I share a BoM verse that directly contradicts an assertion being made, I'm told it's "metaphorical".

[beastie]

Thanks beastie foe your replies I really love this thread and cant leave it alone. I believe that Mormon here is being metaphoric in his descriptions of Helaman chapter 3. There are evidences of different times of migrations from the land southward to a northward direction. Having said that I am in no way disqualifying a land-bridge from Asia migration (North to south). Though the apogee of Mayan civilization was 600-900 AD and the verse you have quoted is about 49-46 BC but this time coincides greatly with the emergence of the mesoamerican states in this very late formative time. I have no problem with Nephite migration to the northern areas and IMO is one of the migrations. Can I prove this? Well no, but I have no idea how an archaeologist would be able to state in a definitive way a difference from a Mayan family from a Mayan Nephite family.

I believe the term "covering the face of the whole earth" is spoken metaphorically because it is elsewhere in the BoM and one can usually tell when it is meant to be taken literally (in most instances) and when to take it in a broader sense of the phrase. The following are links that support this view.

Thanks for the challenge you pose for my noggin.

Anijen

. .

and for interesting read;

sorry for the length.

Sorry, I have to get used to this threaded view (which I loathe), so I'm repeating my reply:

The problematic portion for your assertion that it is metaphor is from "sea to sea". In fact, if you look at a LGT map (like the one on my website), you see it actually did spread from "sea to sea".

Placing the BoM in Mesoamerica may be "limited" geography in comparison to the hemispheric model, but it isn't particularly "limited" when it comes to the portion of Mesoamerica involved.

BTW, I do notice that every time I share a BoM verse that directly contradicts an assertion being made, I'm told it's "metaphorical".

[Brant Gardner]

Sorry, I have to get used to this threaded view (which I loathe)

At the top of each page there should be a button on the right that says "options." You should be able to change it there. I had the same thing happen to me, and I agree that I prefer a different view. Fortunately, the switch is easy. We usually don't see the button because we are deeper in the conversation.

[Anijen]

The problematic portion for your assertion that it is metaphor is from "sea to sea". In fact, if you look at a LGT map (like the one on my website), you see it actually did spread from "sea to sea".

Placing the BoM in Mesoamerica may be "limited" geography in comparison to the hemispheric model, but it isn't particularly "limited" when it comes to the portion of Mesoamerica involved.

BTW, I do notice that every time I share a BoM verse that directly contradicts an assertion being made, I'm told it's "metaphorical".

Perhaps sea to sea means Mayan Nephites were scattered from sea to sea, it doesn't mean however every human from the west sea to the east sea were Nephites.

Why are you told its metaphorically? Well lets examine the phrase covering the face of the whole earth, literally it would mean a covering of the whole earth, its plain that I and most others on this thread subscribe to a LGT and if we took that phrase literally it would mean the whole Earth. How else are we suppose to take this? If you say it is just the Mesoamerican geography, then you too would be guilty of taking it metaphorically. I think we are just in disagreement.

[Brant Gardner]

The problematic portion for your assertion that it is metaphor is from "sea to sea". In fact, if you look at a LGT map (like the one on my website), you see it actually did spread from "sea to sea".

Except that you have "all the world" statements in lots of ancient documents where the meaning is limited. The Aztec word for the world was "cemanahuac" or "surrounded by water." That fit Tenochtitlan, but it was used for "the whole world."

The problem with discerning geography is knowing when a statement is literal and when it isn't. There isn't a hard and fast rule that tells you.

Placing the BoM in Mesoamerica may be "limited" geography in comparison to the hemispheric model, but it isn't particularly "limited" when it comes to the portion of Mesoamerica involved.

This is also complicated, because (I suspect) you are using distances that cover more than the text ever did at one time. During the time when Zarahemla is capital, you have a range from the Cuchumatanes to the Isthmus (say about 250x150 miles). That yields about 97000 square kms - about 1/5 the size you are suggesting. I agree that it is still large, but more representative of the text at a particular time.

Later, the Nephites move above the narrow neck, but Zarahemla is no longer part of their land. The actual expanse of the territory inhabited by Nephites isn't entirely known, but it is unlikely to have reached the Usumacinta. Then, of course, we have the continuing issue of the nature of the Nephite presence in that area--upon which we do not agree.

Of course, there was a time when the Nephite story might have included a city or two in highland Guatemala, but that was from 600 B.C. to 200 B.C. and never really after that point. Similarly, the Jaredites occupied an unknown range (assumed to be along the Gulf Coast), but that wasn't part of the Nephite story until the end (and not under their "control" even then).

[LifeOnaPlate]

Even the 'witnesses' never actually held the plates, but rather saw them with their 'spiritual eyes'. No scholarly peer reviewed journal has ever accepted research based upon the BoM.

False, and false.

[beastie]

At the top of each page there should be a button on the right that says "options." You should be able to change it there. I had the same thing happen to me, and I agree that I prefer a different view. Fortunately, the switch is easy. We usually don't see the button because we are deeper in the conversation.

Thank you so much!

[noel00]

Well Beastie, I imagine there are even many LDS who do not have the knowledge of the text of the Book of Mormon like you have displayed. You have even motivated me (however boring) to read the whole book again after many years out. I hope one day you publish a book on all your research. I would sure like that. Better than trawling through a lot of message board stuff.

[LifeOnaPlate]

Well Beastie, I imagine there are even many LDS who do not have the knowledge of the text of the Book of Mormon like you have displayed. You have even motivated me (however boring) to read the whole book again after many years out. I hope one day you publish a book on all your research. I would sure like that. Better than trawling through a lot of message board stuff.

Why wait? Brant Gardner's books are available now.

http://store.fairlds.org/prod/p1589580478.html

[Mortal Man]

It was Oliver Cowdery who applied the title "Cumorah" to the "hill of considerable size" near Joseph Smith's home in Palmyra, not Brother Joseph.

CFR

I think Joseph pretty clearly associates Cumorah with the New York area.

D&C 128

An epistle from Joseph Smith the Prophet to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, containing further directions on baptism for the dead; dated at Nauvoo, Illinois, September 6, 1842. HC 5: 148â??153.

20 And again, what do we hear? Glad tidings from Cumorah! Moroni, an angel from heaven, declaring the fulfilment of the prophetsâ??the book to be revealed. A voice of the Lord in the wilderness of Fayette, Seneca county, declaring the three witnesses to bear record of the book! The voice of Michael on the banks of the Susquehanna, detecting the devil when he appeared as an angel of light! The voice of Peter, James, and John in the wilderness between Harmony, Susquehanna county, and Colesville, Broome county, on the Susquehanna river, declaring themselves as possessing the keys of the kingdom, and of the dispensation of the fulness of times!

[noel00]

I'll pass on that LOP, a bit expensive. I imagine a book by Beastie would be cheaper and valuable as she would deal with the issues Brant G brings up.