Sherem's Knowledge

[Mormon Dude]

I have often heard people tell the story of Sherem from the 7th book of Jacob to help others realize that there were probably other peoples living in the Americas when Lehi's family arrived. Because as the story goes Sherem comes unto the people, and has a perfect knowledge of their language, so therefore he could not be one of them if he can "come unto them", and was not a native speaker of the Nephities language.

But he comes unto them trying to overthrow the doctrine of Christ, in favor of the Law of Moses. How could he know of the law of Moses unless he was from Jerusalem? Or did some people in the America's know about the law of moses prior to Lehi's family arriving there?

[Hieronymus]

I have often heard people tell the story of Sherem from the 7th book of Jacob to help others realize that there were probably other peoples living in the Americas when Lehi's family arrived. Because as the story goes Sherem comes unto the people, and has a perfect knowledge of their language, so therefore he could not be one of them if he can "come unto them", and was not a native speaker of the Nephities language.

But he comes unto them trying to overthrow the doctrine of Christ, in favor of the Law of Moses. How could he know of the law of Moses unless he was from Jerusalem? Or did some people in the America's know about the law of moses prior to Lehi's family arriving there?

Maybe he learned about it at the same time he was learning the language?

[Joseph Antley]

I believe the theory goes that, by the time of the Sherem episode, the Nephites had already intermingled with the nearby natives and converted some of them them. Israelite religion had been spread a little, apparently, and at least some of the writings on the brass plates had been copied and spread.

[volgadon]

I've always taken the perfect knowledge to mean that he knew the subtelties and nuances in and out and was extremely eloquent.

He could have been a Lamanite.

[bluebell]

If he had been among them enough to know their language, then it seems plausible that he would also know their religion-especially if it was a subject he was interested in.

[Kevin Christensen]

My own theory is that he was Mulekite trader. His approach to the Law of Moses is like that of the Deuteronomist Reformers from Jerusalem, and very distinct from Jacob's First Temple Judaism.

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

[LifeOnaPlate]

Brant Gardner discusses this, I can;t recall his take but I found it very interesting. I don't have the books handy but I recommend his series to everyone. It is called Second Witness.

[volgadon]

Kevin, I think that the so-called deutoronimists had probably begun before the exile, as the fashion among the metropolitan Jerusalemites, I wouldn't be surprised if Laman and Lemuel weren't influenced by them.

[cinepro]

Just to get the chronology straight, the chapter heading estimates 544 BC for Sherem's arrival (about 45 years from Lehite Landfall).

I believe the theory goes that, by the time of the Sherem episode, the Nephites had already intermingled with the nearby natives and converted some of them them. Israelite religion had been spread a little, apparently, and at least some of the writings on the brass plates had been copied and spread.

God being OK with marrying the natives, and all that.

I think a big problem with the "others" argument is in Jacob 1:

13 Now the people which were not Lamanites were Nephites; nevertheless, they were called Nephites, Jacobites, Josephites, Zoramites, Lamanites, Lemuelites, and Ishmaelites.

14 But I, Jacob, shall not hereafter distinguish them by these names, but I shall call them Lamanites that seek to destroy the people of Nephi, and those who are friendly to Nephi I shall call Nephites, or the people of Nephi, according to the reigns of the kings.

For a book that is so focused on Christ and bringing people to him, and missionary work in general, it seems odd that they wouldn't mention the conversion of whole cultures of natives in the first few decades of their colonization. The mass conversion of such people (who didn't even share a common language upon Lehite landfall) would be one of the greatest miracles in the history of Christianity, and hopefully worth mentioning somewhere between the lengthy transcriptions of Isaiah and descriptions of Nephite coinage.

[Calm]

God being OK with marrying the pagan natives, and all that.

Is there anything that says the Nephites couldn't have married them after they were converted?

And surely it goes without saying that just because God gave a commandment in this, the Nephites followed it to the letter, given the example we've already had of the Israelites.

[cinepro]

Is there anything that says the Nephites couldn't have married them after they were converted?

No, of course not. Just odd that they wouldn't mention it.

[Calm]

No, of course not. Just odd that they wouldn't mention it.

Why?

[cinepro]

Why?

See post #9.

[Calm]

See post #9.

Is there any indication that such conversions have to be "mass conversions of whole cultures"?

[cinepro]

Is there any indication that such conversions have to be "mass conversions of whole cultures"?

2 Nephi 5 seems to indicate such a thing:

9 And all those who were with me did take upon them to call themselves the people of Nephi.

10 And we did observe to keep the judgments, and the statutes, and the commandments of the Lord in all things, according to the law of Moses.

11 And the Lord was with us; and we did prosper exceedingly; for we did sow seed, and we did reap again in abundance. And we began to raise flocks, and herds, and animals of every kind.

12 And I, Nephi, had also brought the records which were engraven upon the plates of brass; and also the ball, or compass, which was prepared for my father by the hand of the Lord, according to that which is written.

13 And it came to pass that we began to prosper exceedingly, and to multiply in the land.

14 And I, Nephi, did take the sword of Laban, and after the manner of it did make many swords, lest by any means the people who were now called Lamanites should come upon us and destroy us; for I knew their hatred towards me and my children and those who were called my people.

15 And I did teach my people to build buildings, and to work in all manner of wood, and of iron, and of copper, and of brass, and of steel, and of gold, and of silver, and of precious ores, which were in great abundance.

16 And I, Nephi, did build a temple; and I did construct it after the manner of the temple of Solomon save it were not built of so many precious things; for they were not to be found upon the land, wherefore, it could not be built like unto Solomonâ??s temple. But the manner of the construction was like unto the temple of Solomon; and the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine.

17 And it came to pass that I, Nephi, did cause my people to be industrious, and to labor with their hands.

[Brant Gardner]

For a book that is so focused on Christ and bringing people to him, and missionary work in general, it seems odd that they wouldn't mention the conversion of whole cultures of natives in the first few decades of their colonization. The mass conversion of such people (who didn't even share a common language upon Lehite landfall) would be one of the greatest miracles in the history of Christianity, and hopefully worth mentioning somewhere between the lengthy transcriptions of Isaiah and descriptions of Nephite coinage.

There are some real methodological problems with the "I think this is what they should have done" type of analysis. It makes huge numbers of assumptions and most of them are based on 21st century thinking (not even nineteenth).

Start with the fact that what we have in 1 and 2 Nephi are specifically noted as "not history" records--the more historical was translated on the lost pages, not in what we have. Since the text declares that these books are different, we have to understand how they are different and what they are intended to do long before we can assess what they should or shouldn't have done.

As a second issue, we have the assumption of a mass conversion. There is certainly a conversion, but I don't know how it could be called "mass." We don't hear of Nephites (the ones who did the converting) outside of the City of Nephi for quite a long time (probably sooner, but not explicitly for over 400 years after the founding).

The original City of Nephi doesn't tell us how many people are in it, but a reasonable guestimate would suggest maybe 300-500 families at the most. That is a lot of people, but hardly a "mass conversion."

Next, we have the problem of understanding the ancient concepts of religion and politics rather than the modern assumption that they were separate. Once a person agreed to be Nephite, that required a political and religious system as well as a place (though not explicit in the Book of Mormon, it is so common in the time period to be remarkable in its absence).

Then the last part of your throwaway sentence (between 2 Nephi and Alma) occupies way too much time and a change in the complete circumstances. Jacob is still early in the City of Nephi, but I believe pretty demonstrably after it has acquired a larger population.

As for the possible suggestion that the increase in population was the result of a mass conversion, that also reads more into history that secular history allows. For most ancient peoples, particularly those coming from polytheistic societies, altering their allegiance to a particular god was often a change of convenience, not necessarily conversion. Once part of the city, however, enculturation over generations creates a more devoted (or at least a more stable) religious population.

When I read the text, I don't see any mass conversion--even in the absence. I also see 1 and 2 Nephi as texts written for specific purposes which are explicitly excluding much of the kinds of history that we would like to see (and that many excoriate the text for not having). I don't see anything in the text that argues against the development of a people according to principles that have been seen in many locations around the world.

[LifeOnaPlate]

There are some real methodological problems with the "I think this is what they should have done" type of analysis.

Ah yes, BoM myth #4.

http://www.lifeongoldplates.com/2008/09/ga...s-number-4.html

[cinepro]

As a second issue, we have the assumption of a mass conversion. There is certainly a conversion, but I don't know how it could be called "mass." We don't hear of Nephites (the ones who did the converting) outside of the City of Nephi for quite a long time (probably sooner, but not explicitly for over 400 years after the founding).

I guess it depends on what theory of integration you subscribe to for the Book of Mormon.

How many people were here when the Lehites showed up?

Did the Lamanites join with an existing population? If so, did that existing population adopt Lamanite language and culture, or did the Lamanites adopt the existing language and culture? How many existing natives "joined" with the Lamanites in their vendetta against the Nephites, and how many just didn't care?

Did the Nephites join with an existing population? If so, did that existing population adopt Nephites language and culture, or did the

Nephites adopt the existing language and culture? How many existing natives "joined" with the Nephites in their war of defense against the Lamanites, and how many just didn't care?

What is the time frame for this integration?

Brant, if you have a consistent theory that fits the Book of Mormon claims regarding population sizes, cultures, affiliation and religion (instead of excusing them as misreported errors), it would be interesting to hear.

But if I remember correctly, you have even suggested that 4 Nephi overstates the uniformity of belief at that point of time, so I guess in the end all bets are off when it comes to what the "text" says.

[Brant Gardner]

I guess it depends on what theory of integration you subscribe to for the Book of Mormon.

Of course. I'll have to answer only for myself.

How many people were here when the Lehites showed up?

Depends upon where "here" is. In the hemisphere, a million plus? In the limited area of the Book of Mormon, hundreds of thousands. On the coastal area where the best quess puts the landing, there were at least six communities of over 1000, with others that were smaller.

Did the Lamanites join with an existing population?

All of the Lehites did, probably unavoidably. I'm not sure if they had a very high chance of survival if the didn't.

If so, did that existing population adopt Lamanite language and culture, or did the Lamanites adopt the existing language and culture?

I think the textual evidence of their "apostasy" strongly suggests that they adopted local language, culture and religion--though I suspect that the change in religion took a generation or two.

How many existing natives "joined" with the Lamanites in their vendetta against the Nephites, and how many just didn't care?

By the time we get Lamanites being aggressive, we have the name Lamanite genericized to something we might better understand as "gentile." As a collective, it referred to anyone who wasn't Nephite. It is probable that many of the aggressive peoples had no genetic ties to the Old World--and probably had no understanding of who the original Lamanites (with the genetic ties to Lehi) would have been.

Did the Nephites join with an existing population?

The events of the text require their presence.

If so, did that existing population adopt Nephites language and culture, or did the

Nephites adopt the existing language and culture?

The text doesn't say, so we have to rely on the probabilities of cultural contact. In the case where you have a smaller population (very small, less than 30) entering a larger culture (I think the original connection would have been a smaller village which grew after the establishment of the City of Nephi) the most probable is the Nephite adoption of language and culture. Language simply for communication (at least bilingual--probably retaining a "scholarly" language for the plates). Culture would have been adopted because it was already adapted to the locale and the Nephites inherited Old World culture was not fully transferrable to the New World, particularly in the important aspects of foodstuffs.

How many existing natives "joined" with the Nephites in their war of defense against the Lamanites, and how many just didn't care? What is the time frame for this integration?

Timeframe is an important consideration. The chances of any immigrating group becoming the dominant player in one of the six larger communities is pretty slim. The initial integration would have been in a much smaller community, say a hamlet of up to 200 families.

The split between Nephite and Lamanite moves the Nephites into the Guatemala highlands (current most plausible location). Once there, they establish another small hamlet. They must also begin to establish trade connections with the peoples already in that area. My hypothesis is that the Nephite presence increased the viability of having desired trade goods. The success in trade would naturally lead to the accretion of individuals reattaching themselves to the new village. Larger numbers gather until Nephi is probably looking at a city of around 1000 plus at his death.

As for skirmishes with the Lamanites, we don't hear much about them at this time, though what we do hear appear to be defensive, which requires fewer people.

Brant, if you have a consistent theory that fits the Book of Mormon claims regarding population sizes, cultures, affiliation and religion (instead of excusing them as misreported errors), it would be interesting to hear.

I laid out the outlines above, the rest is in the commentary, with the sources of the information. I believe that the history is consistent with locations, populations, and timeframes. The question of religion is interesting in that virtually all readers of the Book of Mormon impose anachronistic expectations of the nature of religion into that time period. I think the text is consistent with and appropriate with, the timeframe.

But if I remember correctly, you have even suggested that 4 Nephi overstates the uniformity of belief at that point of time, so I guess in the end all bets are off when it comes to what the "text" says.

No, all bets are not off. Historians are required to read texts and interpret them against both known history and other texts. In the case of 4 Nephi overstating the uniformity, that is a rather common trait in ancient texts. The nature of how much is overstated can be deduced from the region that would have been plausibly defined as Nephite-influenced.

One might try to read the text literally and infallibly. That may be comforting to modern religious sentiments, but it does not describe authentic historical texts. Oddly enough, if there were not evidence that the text participates is ethnocentric hyperbole, but were to be taken as literal fact--it would be one of the more interesting signs that it was a modern creation and not ancient.

[cinepro]

By the time we get Lamanites being aggressive, we have the name Lamanite genericized to something we might better understand as "gentile." As a collective, it referred to anyone who wasn't Nephite. It is probable that many of the aggressive peoples had no genetic ties to the Old World--and probably had no understanding of who the original Lamanites (with the genetic ties to Lehi) would have been.

While those people may have existed, they don't seem to show up in the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon Lamanites do know the story of who the original Lamanites were. We are told a couple of times that at least some of the Lamanites did keep this memory alive over the centuries.

So...were the missionaries able to distinguish between the "genetic" Lamanites who knew the story of Lehi and the "generic" Lamanites who were just garden variety bloodthirsty natives who didn't give a fig who "Lehi" was?

It would be like Hatfield missionaries going on a mission 300 years from now and just happening to run into a group of McCoy's who had kept a memory of the feud alive for all that time.

Mosiah 10 (~300 years after Lehite landfall)

12 They were a wild, and ferocious, and a blood-thirsty people, believing in the tradition of their fathers, which is thisâ??Believing that they were driven out of the land of Jerusalem because of the iniquities of their fathers, and that they were wronged in the wilderness by their brethren, and they were also wronged while crossing the sea;

13 And again, that they were wronged while in the land of their first inheritance, after they had crossed the sea, and all this because that Nephi was more faithful in keeping the commandments of the Lordâ??therefore he was favored of the Lord, for the Lord heard his prayers and answered them, and he took the lead of their journey in the wilderness.

Mosiah 28 (~500 years after Lehite landfall)

1 Now it came to pass that after the sons of Mosiah had done all these things, *they took a small number with them and returned to their father, the king, and desired of him that he would grant unto them that they might, with these whom they had selected, go up to the land of Nephi that they might preach the things which they had heard, and that they might impart the word of God to their brethren, the Lamanitesâ??

2 That perhaps they might bring them to the knowledge of the Lord their God, and convince them of the iniquity of their fathers; and that perhaps they might cure them of their hatred towards the Nephites, that they might also be brought to rejoice in the Lord their God, that they might become friendly to one another, and that there should be no more contentions in all the land which the Lord their God had given them.

Alma 22 (~500 years after Lehite landfall)

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?

10 And Aaron said unto him: Yea, he is that Great Spirit, and he created all things both in heaven and in earth. Believest thou this?

There are others, of course, but the Book of Mormon really seems to paint a picture of Lamanites that had preserved a pretty explicit knowledge of the Laman/Lemuel/Nephi story over 500+ years.

[Brant Gardner]

While those people may have existed, they don't seem to show up in the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon Lamanites do know the story of who the original Lamanites were. We are told a couple of times that at least some of the Lamanites did keep this memory alive over the centuries.

Actually, I see them all over the Book of Mormon. We clearly have a difference of opinion on that point. As far as your suggestion that the Lamanites knew their origins, I think you have it just slightly off. We have what the Nephites tell us about what the Lamanites remembered. We don't have any Lamanite documents (save a couple of letters with military demands).

So...were the missionaries able to distinguish between the "genetic" Lamanites who knew the story of Lehi and the "generic" Lamanites who were just garden variety bloodthirsty natives who didn't give a fig who "Lehi" was?

I doubt it. I also don't think it makes any difference in the story whatsoever. Lamanite, as a label, did not imply genectic connections (except is the case when there is a tribal distinction being made, and that ceases after Jacob). Later, Nephite apostates become the most "Lamanite" of the Lamanites.

It would be like Hatfield missionaries going on a mission 300 years from now and just happening to run into a group of McCoy's who had kept a memory of the feud alive for all that time.

See the evidence of the long-standing feud between Calakmul and Tikal, which lasts for hundreds of years. Still, it isn't even that. Since Lamanite as a label covered any city group not belonging to the Nephite hegemony, the fact that they had any enemy at all, regardless of who it was, was designated Lamanite, and as part of the designation, subsumed into the mythical (in the anthropological sense) understanding of the Nephite world order.

There are others, of course, but the Book of Mormon really seems to paint a picture of Lamanites that had preserved a pretty explicit knowledge of the Laman/Lemuel/Nephi story over 500+ years.

Again, the Nephites paint the picture. Why do you automatically assume that the Lamanites would have agreed with the way the Nephites pictured them?

[Cold Steel]

...he comes unto them trying to overthrow the doctrine of Christ, in favor of the Law of Moses. How could he know of the law of Moses unless he was from Jerusalem? Or did some people in the America's know about the law of Moses prior to Lehi's family arriving there?

Well, if he was from Jerusalem, he wasn't necessarily from the Jerusalem in the Middle East.

And just because he had a knowledge of the Law of Moses only means he had knowledge of the Law of Moses. That's it. Nothing more. In our own society, our enemies often are well versed in our own history. If Sherem was trying to use his knowledge against the people, what was his motivation? What was he trying to do? The scriptures state that he was trying to "overthrow the doctrine of Christ." To do that, he needed a wedge, and he used the Law of Moses as that wedge.

We're also told that "he labored diligently" to do this. He also taught that the Law of Moses was "the right way," so it's correct to assume that he must have been an Israelite. But since Nephi and his father had spoken a great deal of Christ, it's entirely likely that wherever he was from, that he was from another community that did not share the Nephite messianic expectations. Part of the problem is that we don't know who was here at the time. He also called Jacob "brother," meaning that he claimed some sort of kinship with the people. He knew the language and the culture. The scriptures also indicated that he really knew better that what he was teaching the people and that he feared that he had committed the unpardonable sin.

I'm a big believer in going by just what the scriptures tell us. We know, too, that Sherem was rooting around for followers and seeking power. It also appears that he was not one of the people of Nephi, so could he have been from another Israelite community that was already here? Certainly. We know the Mulekites were here, but the Nephites didn't find out about them until later. Sherem also was aware of the sin against the Spirit of God, so he knew his stuff. He may not have been a Nephite believer, but he knew enough about the Nephites to use the scriptures against them.

[volgadon]

Or he could have been a Lamanite. That calls for the least suspension of disbelief.