My Three Book of Mormon Questions

[Uncle Dale]

Considering the following quote from Helaman (below), I have three questions:

1. Did American Indians surround the Nephites & Lamanites on the north & south?

2. Was the Gospel then carried to those neighboring Indians?

3. If so, what evidence is there for preColumbian Christian Indians?

UD

And thus it did come to pass that the people of Nephi began to prosper again in the land, and began to build up their waste places, and began to multiply and spread, even until they did cover the whole face of the land, both on the northward and on the southward, from the sea west, to the sea east. And it came to pass that the seventy and sixth year did end in peace. And the seventy and seventh year began in peace; and the church did spread throughout the face of all the land; and the more part of the people, both the Nephites and the Lamanites, did belong to the church; and they did have exceeding great peace in the land...

[Bob Crockett]

Prescott. Appendicies.

I have my thoughts about the strength of these accounts, but it is the evidence you're asking for.

He assembles statements from the conquistadors attesting to pre-existing evidence of Christianity. I've seen plenty of studies which say that they just saw what the wanted to see but who can say?

[Uncle Dale]

Prescott. Appendicies.

Mexicans today, at the Shrine of the Virgin of Guadalupe,

profess that Christianity came to them before the Spaniards

ever set foot in the Americas. Even the Pope recognizes these

claims as valid.

I have my thoughts about the strength of these accounts, but it is the evidence you're asking for.

He assembles statements from the conquistadors attesting to pre-existing evidence of Christianity. I've seen plenty of studies which say that they just saw what the wanted to see but who can say?

A few paragraphs following my quote, the prophet states that he

wishes that all people might become converts.

It would seem very strange, that the Nephites and Lamanites

would have refused to share eternal life with the American Indians.

Would any missionary refuse to carry the Gospel across an

ethnic border, just because a "different" sort of people

lived in adjacent lands?

Again, within a few paragraphs of my quote, the prophet states

that he induced God to bring a great famine upon his people --

so that they would return to their religion. If such a famine

did not extend to the neighboring American Indians, then the

Nephites and Lamanites might have gone north or south to obtain

maize from the Indians. Or -- if the famine extended over into

the neighboring lands, then American Indians starved for the

sins of the Nephites and Lamanites.

Either way, there appears to be a problem here.

UD

[Joseph Antley]

Are you familiar with Ostler's expansion theory?

[Uncle Dale]

Are you familiar with Ostler's expansion theory?

Yes -- but I'd be more inclined to listen to the explanations

of a General Authority -- on whether the Gospel was to be withheld

from any particular ethnic group (nowadays or in the past).

UD

[Robert F. Smith]

Considering the following quote from Helaman (below), I have three questions:

1. Did American Indians surround the Nephites & Lamanites on the north & south?

2. Was the Gospel then carried to those neighboring Indians?

3. If so, what evidence is there for preColumbian Christian Indians?

UD

1. Depends quite heavily on which sort of geographical correlation one accepts, if any. However, many Mormon scholars maintain that Amerinds lived all over the Western Hemisphere including in the immediate areas occupied by the Jaredites, Mulekites, Nephites, and Lamanites. One might reasonably assume that there was a great deal of commerce and conflict over time, undoubtedly including intermarriage. The overall pattern of elite ruling groups coming in and taking over (a classic case is that of Mosiah I coming into Zarahemla from the outside and becoming king, and this is typical of central Mexico & Mesoamerica, in which rulers from Teotihuacan come into Maya country and rule various city-states) may have been a constant factor throughout Book of Mormon history. However, since the Book of Mormon is basically a lineage history, we read little about other peoples. In most cases, only hints are available between the lines.

2. Certainly a reasonable assumption.

3. Plenty of such evidence is available, including monumental symbolism of the cross, tree of life, feathered serpent, etc., on very ancient structures throughout Mexico and Guatemala. Here is a sampling:

a) Allen Christenson says that, among the Maya,

[Uncle Dale]

...

3. Plenty of such evidence is available

...

I was thinking more along the lines of irrefutable evidence --

such as the ruins of a church, or preserved icons, scripture, etc.

I think that a coin with a cross on it was found in the ruins of the

Norse colony in Newfoundland -- correct?

At least we know that American Indians were there -- densely present

across the inhabitable landscape (except in the seas east and west).

If practically all the Lehites became Christians -- and if they had

spread across the entire face of the land -- it would seem that

American Indian Christian churches were inevitable.

Same thing again in 4th Nephi -- except there, we are not told that

the Church had spread over the entire landscape.

UD

[Robert F. Smith]

Considering the following quote from Helaman 4:24-26 RLDS, 11:20-21 LDS:

"And thus it did come to pass that the people of Nephi began to prosper again in the land, and began to build up their waste places, and began to multiply and spread, even until they did cover the whole face of the land, both on the northward and on the southward, from the sea west, to the sea east. And it came to pass that the seventy and sixth year did end in peace. And the seventy and seventh year began in peace; and the church did spread throughout the face of all the land; and the more part of the people, both the Nephites and the Lamanites, did belong to the church; and they did have exceeding great peace in the land..."

I have highlighted the central phrases, which are at issue in any geographical correlation.

Exaggeration for effect (hyperbole) is a concept familiar in ancient Egyptian and Hebrew, and phrases such as "the whole earth, land" (Egyptian pa ta dr.f = Coptic pto terf; Hebrew kol ha'aretz) often have only local reference, as in Helaman 3:8 (LDS) where the people of Nephi "began to cover the face of the whole earth," i.e., simply the land northward, not the entire planet, and (judging from data internal to the text) not even the entire northern hemisphere. See H. Nibley, Lehi in the Desert, 2nd ed., 128 n. 52; A. Yahuda, Language of the Pentateuch, 53, 78-79; M. D. Pack, "Possible Lexical Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon (Words of Mormon - Moroni)," master's thesis (BYU, 1973), 57-59; A. Gardiner, Egyptian Grammar, 3rd ed., p. 84; W. Crum, Coptic Dictionary, 396a. Cf. Exodus 10:15, Joshua 11:23, Deuteronomy 29:23, Isaiah 13:5 (=2 Nephi 23:5), Jeremiah 1:18, 4:27, 12:11, etc., in which (in every case) the same Hebrew phrase is translated either "whole land" or "whole earth." Cf. also Alma 36:7, 38:7, Helaman 11:6, 18, 20, Mormon 1:7, 13, 8:8, Ether 10:21, 13:17, 14:21. The context will usually tell us which meaning is intended, but it is not always clear.

[Robert F. Smith]

I was thinking more along the lines of irrefutable evidence --

such as the ruins of a church, or preserved icons, scripture, etc.

I think that a coin with a cross on it was found in the ruins of the

Norse colony in Newfoundland -- correct?

At least we know that American Indians were there -- densely present

across the inhabitable landscape (except in the seas east and west).

If practically all the Lehites became Christians -- and if they had

spread across the entire face of the land -- it would seem that

American Indian Christian churches were inevitable.

Same thing again in 4th Nephi -- except there, we are not told that

the Church had spread over the entire landscape.

UD

The Nephites were supposed to have been eliminated around 1500 years ago, at about the time that the Council of Nicea was taking effect in Europe and the Mediterranean. I think it doubtful that the Christianity of the Nephites bore a strong relationship or similarity to normative Protestant or Roman Catholic Christianity of the Nicene Creed. Aside from the abandonment and divestiture of early Christianity by Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, there are obvious cultural differences among these Christian traditions so that any interpretation that requires all Amerinds to be European Christians of some sort might not accord with reality. Our expectations ought at least to be reasonable and to consider what happens to a religion when the overall practice of it has been eliminated (as happened in India, where Buddhism had been dominant, but was replaced by Hinduism), or what happened to Buddhism when it entered Nepal and Tibet.

Even at that, however, the non-Mormon anthropologists who have taken a close look have been surprised by the range and depth of similarities to Christianity in Mayan religion (I cited many of them), something they had not expected. The local iconography is bound to be different, but the fundamental principles ought to cohere in some powerful ways with what was there long before. And such is indeed the case among some Amerinds in Mesoamerica. I consider it very doubtful that the extent of coverage by Christianity extended much beyond Mesoamerica, but that is only my opinion.

Moreover, since we only find high culture and civilization (with writing, calendar, construction using cement, etc.) in Mesoamerica, it seems highly unlikely to me that any important aspects of Jaredite or Nephite civilization extended much beyond that. Certainly there was trade far and wide by third parties, but any other effects were limited. For much the same reason, we don't expect either the Mongols or the Turkic peoples to exhibit Christianity and to have built Christian churches. We need to have more limited expectations.

[Gervin]

Exaggeration for effect (hyperbole) is a concept familiar in ancient Egyptian and Hebrew, and phrases such as "the whole earth, land" (Egyptian pa ta dr.f = Coptic pto terf; Hebrew kol ha'aretz) often have only local reference, <snip> The context will usually tell us which meaning is intended, but it is not always clear.

If a literal interpretation is not reasonable, then what do you propose as a reasonable geographical area for "the whole earth" in this context?

[Brant Gardner]

I was thinking more along the lines of irrefutable evidence --

such as the ruins of a church, or preserved icons, scripture, etc.

I think that a coin with a cross on it was found in the ruins of the

Norse colony in Newfoundland -- correct?

The question suggests that there is an inherent architecture and iconography associated with Christianity. While we have a traditional set, there is no inherent set. What we have came from the adoption of styles and symbols from other cultures (typically repurposed from Greek art in the iconography). In the very simple case of Lehites leaving the Old World 600 years before Christ (and who knows how many before the final adoption of "Christian" iconography--in another thread Bill Hamblin noted that cross iconography was a couple hundred years AD) and then a full Christianity after long exposure to different architecture and iconography, there is simply no way to know whether we have discovered a pre-Hispanic "Christian" icon.

By the way, I don't believe that the Mesoamerican cross is even remotely Christian. There is a coincidental similarity, but to connection--nor should there be. The Book of Mormon does not support cross imagery as any kind of important icon.

[Koloborator]

Mexicans today, at the Shrine of the Virgin of Guadalupe,

profess that Christianity came to them before the Spaniards

ever set foot in the Americas. Even the Pope recognizes these

claims as valid.

As a Catholic, I try to follow what the Pope was pretty closely. I've never heard anything like this. Could you describe your source(s) please? Thank you.

[cdowis]

in another thread Bill Hamblin noted that cross iconography was a couple hundred years AD) and then a full Christianity after long exposure to different architecture and iconography, there is simply no way to know whether we have discovered a pre-Hispanic "Christian" icon.

By the way, I don't believe that the Mesoamerican cross is even remotely Christian. There is a coincidental similarity, but to connection--nor should there be. The Book of Mormon does not support cross imagery as any kind of important icon.

I agree. If we have any candidate for a Christian icon in the BOM, it would be the serpent.

[nosmelone]

In Tom Cryers "Visual Testament" there seems to be plenty of ties to the Law of Moses and OT prophecies and promises including some that could be looked upon as Christian ties to Hopi (Pueblo) ceremonies and visual imagery of a lot of their ceremonial costumes.

[Uncle Dale]

As a Catholic, I try to follow what the Pope was pretty closely. I've never heard anything like this. Could you describe your source(s) please? Thank you.

It was my understanding that the veneration of the Virgin of Guadalupe

("Guadalupe Tonantzin") had received official Vatican sanction as far back as

the 1820s. But perhaps I'm wrong. If this is a Mexican apostate church,

honoring St. Thomas' evangelism in the New World, then I suppose it should

be exposed as such.

???

http://campus.udayton.edu/mary//meditations/samaha6.html

Uncle Dale

.

[Robert F. Smith]

If a literal interpretation is not reasonable, then what do you propose as a reasonable geographical area for "the whole earth" in this context?

I gave a number of examples in which the same Hebrew word is used for "earth" or "land," but the geographical context for each varies. One has to make reasonable judgments as to what is "literal," and what is not. I don't propose some particular Book of Mormon geographical area in the New World, although I think that the distances (number of days of travel from here to there) clearly require a relatively small area -- say, for example, the size of ancient Palestine, as John Sorenson has pointed out. Hemisphere-wide events are out of the question.

[Robert F. Smith]

I don't believe that the Mesoamerican cross is even remotely Christian. There is a coincidental similarity, but to connection--nor should there be. The Book of Mormon does not support cross imagery as any kind of important icon.

I tried pointing out above that the primary connection of the New World cross icon is to the tree of life (perhaps not coincidentally, the Coptic Cross = the ancient Egyptian 'ankh or crux ansata, which is a definite symbol of "life"). However, there are references to Jesus being raised up on the cross in 1 Nephi 11:33, 3 Nephi 12:30, 27:14, so that the image may have had an additional meaning. So much of what we interpret now is Classic or Post-Classic that it is hard to recall that the Nephite world ended before the Classic period began. Perhaps much of that earlier meaning was transferred in later thought to serpent-symbolism.

I agree. If we have any candidate for a Christian icon in the BOM, it would be the serpent.

We might want to examine Quetzalcoatl/Kukulcan "The Feathered Serpent" in light of the Book of Mormon "fiery flying serpents" (1 Nephi 17:41, 2 Nephi 25:20) and the brazen image consequently created and raised up by Moses as a kind of apotropaic amulet or symbol ("hair of the dog that bit you") to remove the harm of the bites of those serpents. For that brazen serpent (Nehushtan), which was kept in the Temple of Solomon for a long time, was an antitype of Jesus -- who was to be similarly raised up on the cross in order to remove the venom of a curse of a different kind (Alma 33:19-22, Helaman 8:14-15, Numbers 21:6-9, John 3:14), namely spiritual death.

[bu11fr0g]

There is no reason to expect that there would be mass conversions to Christianity, look at India, China, Africa ...

Most of the European conversions were by force.

And without any communication ability (languages were undoubtably very different, as they are today) and ongoing instruction from the prophet due to distance and language difficulty, a highly warped form would be expected to rapidly develop in any land where it had spread.

[Koloborator]

It was my understanding that the veneration of the Virgin of Guadalupe

("Guadalupe Tonantzin") had received official Vatican sanction as far back as

the 1820s. But perhaps I'm wrong. If this is a Mexican apostate church,

honoring St. Thomas' evangelism in the New World, then I suppose it should

be exposed as such.

???

http://campus.udayto...ns/samaha6.html

Uncle Dale

Thanks for the citation. I infer that your point is this: Since the Vatican has endorsed veneration of Our Lady of Guadalupe, then the Vatican has also endorsed other beliefs associated with the image. One such belief is described in your link to the University of Dayton:

"An additional elaboration had been expressed on the eve of Mexican independence when Servando Teresa de Mier claimed that Mexico had been converted to Christianity long before the Spanish Conquest. St. Thomas the Apostle had brought the image of Guadalupe Tonantzin to the New World as a symbol of his mission, just as St. James the Elder had converted Spain with the image of Our Lady of the Pillar."

I don't believe that the Vatican has endorsed the claims made by Servando Teresa de Mier in the early 1800s. I think it's just a sort of nationalist legend.

There are also many legends about where the apostles went after Christ's ascension. The most prevalent legends about St. Thomas have him going to India. I've never heard any legends about apostles visiting the New World.

[Brant Gardner]

There are also many legends about where the apostles went after Christ's ascension. The most prevalent legends about St. Thomas have him going to India. I've never heard any legends about apostles visiting the New World.

And in the mind of the Spanish, India was right next door to the Americas. The St. Thomas legends about a visitation to the New World exists only in Spanish records from after the Conquest. If you are interested in a good overview, see Lafaye, Jacques. Quetzalcoatl and Guadalupe: theFormation of Mexican National Consciousness, 1531-1815, translated byBenjamin Keen. Chicago: Chicago UniversityPress, 1974.

[Uncle Dale]

...

I don't believe that the Vatican has endorsed the claims made by Servando Teresa de Mier in the early 1800s. I think it's just a sort of nationalist legend.

...

OK, I stand corrected.

Papal visits to Mexico include visiting the shrine, if I recall correctly.

If the Vatican felt that the St. Thomas connection was a falsehood, I suppose

that there were opportunities when that story could have been ended.

Although the political elevation of the St. Thomas connection to the shrine

only became popular after 1800, the idea that St. Thomas had visited the

Americas pre-dated that phenomenon.

Clavigerio leaves open the possibility of a St. Thomas visit, as does Acosta,

if I recall correctly.

Ethan Smith improved upon these notions. by making Moses the ancient biblical

visitor to the Americas.

Had the core story of the Book of Mormon been written as an early 19th century

piece of fiction, it is very doubtful that any reputable American publisher

would have consented to have issued the book to the public, with the Christophany

of 3rd Nephi. However, a novel containing a visitation from St. Thomas would

not necessarily have been rejected, as too blasphemous for publication.

UD

[krose]

I agree. If we have any candidate for a Christian icon in the BOM, it would be the serpent.

Why would that be? Because of the serpent in the Hebrew creation myth?

(I assume you mean "in MesoAmerica" rather than "in the BOM.")

[Uncle Dale]

Why would that be? Because of the serpent in the Hebrew creation myth?

(I assume you mean "in MesoAmerica" rather than "in the BOM.")

Not exactly -- the BoM itself compares Jesus' crucifixion

to the brass serpent held up by Moses.

But not all modern Christian scholars agree that the Moses episode

prefigured Jesus' crucifixion -- so the identity is not absolute.

A serpent was also seen as dying (in shedding its skin) and living

again (after emerging from the shed skin) -- so serpents are in

some cases associated with dying and resurrecting gods.

My belief is that Jesus was unknown in the Americas until the

Northmen arrived in Newfoundland. Unless (as Solomon Spalding once

speculated) some Christians on a boat made it to the Americas.

This is essentially the story told in Robert Southey's "Madoc."

It makes for good fiction, and for Barry Fell sorts of diffusionist

theories -- but, as I said, I do not think Jesus was known in

ancient America.

UD