Indigenous Peoples The Lehites Discovered?

[Questing Beast]

I was invited to bring this up: evidently, "again" here:

I said: And the BoM also does not indicate ANY resident "Indians" before the arrival of the Lehites.

cdowis said: May I ask if you have ever actually read the BOM itself, or this something that you just made up. There are several threads on this subject of "others", where many verses in the BOM have been quoted.

Why don't you start a thread on this question, and we will be happy to educate you.

The previous Jaredites are assumed to have killed off every man, woman and child except Ether and Coriantumr. It is only "our" additions to the textual stories that assert previous inhabitants greatly outnumbering the arriving Lehites, who then get largley absorbed by the indigenous population.

Start a new thread, please.

I am of course interested in these "many verses" that I am somehow unaware of - even after reading the Book of Mormon cover-to-cover well over two-dozen times - that assert "others" in the Americas prior to the Lehites and Mulekites' arrival....

[poulsenll]

I was invited to bring this up: evidently, "again" here:

I am of course interested in these "many verses" that I am somehow unaware of - even after reading the Book of Mormon cover-to-cover well over two-dozen times - that assert "others" in the Americas prior to the Lehites and Mulekites' arrival....

One example is the man Sherem who comes among the people of Nephi preaching against the Gospel.

Jacob 7:

1And now it came to pass after some years had passed away, there came a man among the people of Nephi, whose name was Sherem.

One might argue that he was a Lamanite, however, Jacob, later in this same chapter says

24And it came to pass that many means were devised to areclaim and restore the Lamanites to the knowledge of the truth; but it all was bvain, for they delighted in cwars and dbloodshed, and they had an eternal ehatred against us, their brethren. And they sought by the power of their arms to destroy us continually.

Therefore, it is unlikely that a Lamnite would be coming among the people of Nephi.

Larry P

[cinepro]

Depending on how you feel about Joseph Smith and his knowledge of Book of Mormon peoples and events and your understanding of the words "this", "origin", "first", and "distinct", this statement could mean between something and nothing:

[During the visit from the Angel Moroni], I was also informed concerning the aboriginal inhabitants of this country - America - and shown who they were, and from whence they came; a brief sketch of their origin, progress, civilization, laws, governments, of their righteousness and iniquity, and the blessings of God being finally withdrawn from them as a people, was [also] made known unto me;

---------------------------------

In this important and interesting book [The Book of Mormon] the history of ancient America is unfolded, from its first settlement by a colony that came from the Tower of Babel at the confusion of languages to the beginning of the fifth century of the Christian era. We are informed by these records that America in ancient times has been inhabited by two distinct races of people.

The first were called Jaredites and came directly from the Tower of Babel. The second race came directly from the city of Jerusalem about six hundred years before Christ. They were principally Israelites of the descendants of Joseph. The Jaredites were destroyed about the time that the Israelites came from Jerusalem, who succeeded them in the inheritance of the country. The principal nation of the second race fell in battle towards the close of the fourth century. The remnant are the Indians that now inhabit this country.

Edited June 10, 2011 by cinepro

[cdowis]

When Lehi landed, they made the following observation:

1 Nephi 18

[25] And it came to pass that we did find upon the land of promise, as we journeyed in the wilderness, that there were beasts in the forests of every kind, both the cow and the ox, and the a ss and the horse, and the goat and the wild goat

Edited June 10, 2011 by cdowis

[cinepro]

When Lehi landed, they made the following observation:

1 Nephi 18

[25] And it came to pass that we did find upon the land of promise, as we journeyed in the wilderness, that there were beasts in the forests of every kind, both the cow and the ox, and the a ss and the horse, and the goat and the wild goat

Actaully, Skousen's work with the printer's manuscript has shown this verse actually was longer in the original version. According to his article in BYU Studies, here is how it originally read:

1 Nephi 18

[25] And it came to pass that we did find upon the land of promise, as we journeyed in the wilderness, that there were beasts in the forests of every kind, both the cow and the ox, and the *** and the horse, and the goat and the wild goat, and all manner of wild animals, which were for the use of men. And we did find all manner of ore, both of gold, and of silver, and of copper, and....

Holy cow! What the heck is that?!! There's like a bazillion people living in this valley. It's a huge city, and they've all got dark skin and black hair. And they're worshiping some sort of sun god or something! They're heathens! What are heathens doing in our promised land?!

Chapter 18.2

[1]And it came to pass that we did give these others beads and feathers, after which they were exceedingly friendly. And though we could not speak their language, we were able to convert many thousands of them unto Jesus Christ, who we believe will come sometime in the next 600 years or so. And behold, this was the greatest miracle granted unto the children of men of all the days of the Earth. For do we not know that God destroyed the Earth in the days of Noah, and the children of Moses were sent to destroy the heathens in the Promised Land, and not to convert them, lest they should become tainted with their religion?

[2] But lucky for these natives, we Lehites were sent not to cleanse the promised land of sun-worshipping heathens, but instead to convert as many of them as possible to the gospel of Jesus Christ, and live among those others who would not convert, ruling over them when possible, preaching when we can, but never affecting them to the point that our isolated, minority religion and hebraic culture would be discernible to the people of the time of the great seer I will tell you about in my next book.

[3] And it came to pass that my brothers were able to convert many of the people to hate us, and they became their leaders, even though we spoke Hebrew, and the many thousands of natives didn't know what the heck we were saying. I guess either we taught them Hebrew, or we learned their language, I rememberest not.

[4] And it came to pass that the people were impressed with the manner in which we did work metal, and use rounded wheels, and sat upon our horses for transportation instead of eating them. But nevertheless, they did quickly forget about our sharp, durable swords, and our rounded wheels, and the usefulness of the horses, even unto the second generation.

[Questing Beast]

So I am being had. You guys are a funny bunch of stink weeds

[cinepro]

So I am being had. You guys are a funny bunch of stink weeds

No, you just have to read between the lines.

[ebeddoulos]

Beast, may I suggest that you read the Book of Mormon again, with a less jaundiced eye and without looking through the lenses of an anti-Mormon agenda? The church teaches and has taught for decades that there were other people here in the Americas prior to the Lehites arrival. Who exactly these other peoples were are unknown. They are discussed in the Book of Mormon but are not named. For example, the Book of Mormon talks of the blessings given to the descendants of the Lamanites and to those peoples who will be “numbered among” the Lamanites.

“Wherefore, my beloved brethren, thus saith our God: I will afflict thy seed by the hand of the Gentiles; nevertheless, I will soften the hearts of the Gentiles, that they shall be like unto a father to them; wherefore, the Gentiles shall be blessed and numbered among the house of Israel. Wherefore, I will consecrate this land unto thy seed, and them who shall be numbered among thy seed, forever, for the land of their inheritance; for it is a choice land, saith God unto me, above all other lands, wherefore I will have all men that dwell thereon that they shall worship me, saith God.” (2 Nephi 10:18-19 – emphasis added)

Nephi, patriarch of the Nephites, knew that they were not the only ones in the land. He knew that others would be lead there by the Hand of the Lord.

“For, behold, said he, I have seen a vision, in which I know that Jerusalem is destroyed; and had we remained in Jerusalem we should also have perished. But, said he, notwithstanding our afflictions, we have obtained a land of promise, a land which is choice above all other lands; a land which the Lord God hath covenanted with me should be a land for the inheritance of my seed. Yea, the Lord hath covenanted this land unto me, and to my children forever, and also all those who should be led out of other countries by the hand of the Lord. Wherefore, I, Lehi, prophesy according to the workings of the Spirit which is in me, that there shall none come into this land save they shall be brought by the hand of the Lord.” (2 Nephi 1:4-6 – emphasis added)

Nephi also knew there were others already there because when he separated his people from his brothers, in addition to his own family and the families of his brothers, Sam, Jacob and Joseph his sisters, and Zoram, he took “all those who would go with me.”

“And it came to pass that the Lord did warn me, that I, Nephi, should depart from them and flee into the wilderness, and all those who would go with me. Wherefore, it came to pass that I, Nephi, did take my family, and also Zoram and his family, and Sam, mine elder brother and his family, and Jacob and Joseph, my younger brethren, and also my sisters, and all those who would go with me. And all those who would go with me were those who believed in the warnings and the revelations of God; wherefore, they did hearken unto my words.” (2 Nephi 5:5-6 – emphasis added)

Mormon, one of the final prophets of the Nephites and the compiler of the Book of Mormon, indicates that unlike others around him who intermarried with the natives, he was “a pure descendant of Lehi.”

“I am Mormon, and a pure descendant of Lehi. I have reason to bless my God and my Savior Jesus Christ, that he brought our fathers out of the land of Jerusalem, (and no one knew it save it were himself and those whom he brought out of that land) and that he hath given me and my people so much knowledge unto the salvation of our souls.’ (3 Nephi 5: 20 – emphasis added)

In addition to the accounts in the Book of Mormon, the church has taught for decades that there were other peoples in the Americas.

In 1929 Anthony W. Ivins, a member of the First Presidency, pointed out in a General Conference address that the Book of Mormon “does not tell us that there was no one here before them” and that the Latter-day Saints “do believe that other people came to this continent.”

"We must be careful in the conclusions that we reach. The Book of Mormon teaches the history of three distinct peoples, or two peoples and three different colonies of people, who came from the old world to this continent. It does not tell us that there was no one here before them. It does not tell us that people did not come after. And so if discoveries are made which suggest differences in race origins, it can very easily be accounted for, and reasonably, for we do believe that other people came to this continent." (Anthony W. Ivins, “Conference Report – April 1929, First Day – Morning Meeting”, Salt Lake City: Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, [5 April 1929], pg. 15 – emphasis added)

A few years later, a scriptural study guide put out by the church stated that “Jewish origin may represent only a part of the total ancestry of the American Indian today.”

“Indian ancestry, at least in part, is attributed by the Nephite record to the Lamanites. However, the Book of Mormon deals only with the history and expansion of three small colonies which came to America and it does not deny or disprove the possibility of other immigrations, which probably would be unknown to its writers. Jewish origin may represent only a part of the total ancestry of the American Indian today.” (William E. Berrett, Milton R. Hunter, Roy A. Welker, and H. Alvah Fitzgerald, “A Guide to the Study of the Book of Mormon” (Salt Lake City: LDS Department of Education, [1938], pg. 47-48 – emphasis added)

In 1957, in a book titled Religions of America the Apostle Richard L. Evans wrote that the peoples discussed in the Book of Mormon “were among the ancestors of the American Indians.” This book was printed in London and intended for world-wide distribution

“The Book of Mormon is part of a record, both sacred and secular, of prophets and peoples who (with supplementary groups) were among the ancestors of the American Indians. It covers principally the peoples of the period from about 600 B.C. to A.D. 421. These peoples were of Asiatic origin, of the House of Israel, and left Jerusalem during the reign of King Zedekiah, eventually to cross the sea to the Western world, where they built great cities and civilizations.” (Richard L. Evans, "What Is A Mormon?", Religions of America, edited by Leo Rosten, London: Heinemann, [1957], pg 94 – emphasis added)

That there were other peoples in the Americas does not shock Latter-day Saints any more than we would be shocked to discover there were other peoples around the ancient Israelites in the Old World. Beast, if you have actually read the Book of Mormon "well over two-dozen times" it should not shock you either.

[bookofmormontruth]

So I am being had. You guys are a funny bunch of stink weeds

No, you just have to read between the lines.

It will be interesting to see you both "go around" ebeddoulos's post. I have no doubts you both will try: seriously or sarcastically. Either way; it will be painfully difficult to admit that something was learned (I was at least grateful to learn from his post) even after claiming to read the Book of Mormon "cover-to-cover well over two-dozen times".

Edited June 11, 2011 by bookofmormontruth

[Questing Beast]

Beast, may I suggest that you read the Book of Mormon again, with a less jaundiced eye and without looking through the lenses of an anti-Mormon agenda?

Here you assume because I bring up critical points, that I am "anti-Mormon". I love the Church, or rather the people resulting from it. But I find it, disappointing.

...

That there were other peoples in the Americas does not shock Latter-day Saints any more than we would be shocked to discover there were other peoples around the ancient Israelites in the Old World. Beast, if you have actually read the Book of Mormon "well over two-dozen times" it should not shock you either.

Each of your textual points from the BoM are duly noted and remembered by me. And in each case they support the pov that Joseph Smith as creator and author of the BoM was unaware of the assertions he made in the text being impossible in the real world of growing historical and archeological knowledge. To make the BoM work out with more facts as they come to light (the latest being DNA research to determine where Amerinds came from anciently), the exegesis must include the facts that the BoM text either is ignorant of or seemingly in conflict with.

It appears to me that Joseph Smith had virtually no awareness of the growth patterns and limits of ancient populations. This criticism came rather early, and so of course the teachers and leaders of the Mormon religion accepted the bald facts and assumed early a position of "other peoples were here and came later"; and, "the BoM does not claim that the Jaredites and Lehites were the only people living in the Americas at the time" (words to that effect).

I am not in difficulties with any of this. Even as a child I knew of and accepted this explanation; even at that tender age I could see the impossibility of less than fifty people resulting in a nation as "numerous as the sands of the sea"; and casualties in battles so huge that "we did not number them", etc. So I accepted that such being impossible, then it meant that the BoM simply did not mention the indigenous peoples that Lehi's family met upon their arrival in the promised land.

This thread was in response to the assertion that there are many references in the text to "the others". You have just about listed the lot, and of course the sum of them does not amount to anything more than what we already knew: that since the BoM in fact does not assert that the promised land was devoid of human inhabitants; and since curious passages can be taken to infer "others" who were already in the Americas previous to the arrival of the Lehites and Mulekites; that it is requisite to assume their implied existence as reality.

But equally, as I have said, it is reasonable - if one takes the stance that Joseph Smith created the BoM - to take the impossible population figures contained in the text as evidence of Joseph Smith's uneducated fancy at work. As B. H. Roberts observed, Joseph Smith was "uneducated but brilliant". He could have written such a book. And that is what I also believe....

[Bob Crockett]

In addition to the accounts in the Book of Mormon, the church has taught for decades that there were other peoples in the Americas.

In 1929 Anthony W. Ivins, a member of the First Presidency, pointed out in a General Conference address that the Book of Mormon “does not tell us that there was no one here before them” and that the Latter-day Saints “do believe that other people came to this continent.”

A few years later, a scriptural study guide put out by the church stated that “Jewish origin may represent only a part of the total ancestry of the American Indian today.”

In 1957, in a book titled Religions of America the Apostle Richard L. Evans wrote that the peoples discussed in the Book of Mormon “were among the ancestors of the American Indians.” This book was printed in London and intended for world-wide distribution

While I applaud the use of such authorities, I note that when I use the very similar authorities to attempt to refute the unorthodox notion of two Cumorahs I receive some rude treatment.

[Kevin Christensen]

While I applaud the use of such authorities, I note that when I use the very similar authorities to attempt to refute the unorthodox notion of two Cumorahs I receive some rude treatment.

ebeddoulous built his argument on a range of important Book of Mormon passages first, which makes a difference. The appeal to President Ivins at that early 20th Century date serves to counter the notion that seeing others in the Book of Mormon text is not just a late adjustment to the DNA controversy.

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

[cdowis]

Each of your textual points from the BoM are duly noted and remembered by me. And in each case they support the pov that Joseph Smith as creator and author of the BoM was unaware of the assertions he made in the text being impossible in the real world of growing historical and archeological knowledge.

Let me see if I understand what you are saying:

When we read the BOM, we must do it with the understanding that JS was the actual author.

Therefore, all of the passages we cite cite are moot because they were written by an uneducated clod. When we cite a passage, for example, that there were domesticated goats, and ox when Lehi landed, that was JS talking.

To make the BoM work out with more facts as they come to light (the latest being DNA research to determine where Amerinds came from anciently), the exegesis must include the facts that the BoM text either is ignorant of or seemingly in conflict with.

We appreciate your brilliant analysis. Please educate us.

It appears to me that Joseph Smith had virtually no awareness of the growth patterns and limits of ancient populations.

Probably not, and he never pretended otherwise. We are totally speechless with your observations.

This criticism came rather early, and so of course the teachers and leaders of the Mormon religion accepted the bald facts and assumed early a position of "other peoples were here and came later"; and, "the BoM does not claim that the Jaredites and Lehites were the only people living in the Americas at the time" (words to that effect).

Actually, the BOM tells us that explicitly. I gave you an "early" scripture that mentions domesticated animals when they landed. It was simply a matter of reading the text.

I remember my "aha" moment when an antimormon pointed out this verse. He thought it was very funny that there was an ox, when no one was living there. I then discovered that "others" were explicitly mentioned here. What was a "goof" was actually something that I had missed.

I am not in difficulties with any of this. Even as a child I knew of and accepted this explanation; even at that tender age I could see the impossibility of less than fifty people resulting in a nation as "numerous as the sands of the sea"; and casualties in battles so huge that "we did not number them", etc. So I accepted that such being impossible, then it meant that the BoM simply did not mention the indigenous peoples that Lehi's family met upon their arrival in the promised land.

Clearly there were "others". The numbers demand it. You, as a child, as well myself and many others had naively accepted that the Lehites/Lamanites were the only ones here at that time.

It was merely an issue of reading the text, and putting aside these childish assumptions.

This thread was in response to the assertion that there are many references in the text to "the others". You have just about listed the lot,

We have only begun. The first 50 year history demands "others". The wars between the Lamanites and Nephites clearly indicate larger numbers. Just think -- a handful of people migreated here, and they *split* into two groups, and there were major wars between the groups. How many were of age to conduct such a war. Nephi made "many" swords -- is this 5 or six?

Now, what about the Lamanites. The Nephites were practicing polygamy, but the lamanites outnumbered them. Well, the answer is simple -- they were joined by others, a large number of them. The Nephites would refuse to intermarry with them, but the lamanites would not have such restrictions.

and of course the sum of them does not amount to anything more than what we already knew: that since the BoM in fact does not assert that the promised land was devoid of human inhabitants; and since curious passages can be taken to infer "others" who were already in the Americas previous to the arrival of the Lehites and Mulekites; that it is requisite to assume their implied existence as reality.

But equally, as I have said, it is reasonable - if one takes the stance that Joseph Smith created the BoM - to take the impossible population figures contained in the text as evidence of Joseph Smith's uneducated fancy at work. As B. H. Roberts observed, Joseph Smith was "uneducated but brilliant". He could have written such a book. And that is what I also believe....

Well, he was brilliant for placing such clues into the text. But I think this is authentic history, and that JS did not figure out how to fix the population issue. The text itself does that for him.

[Hamba Tuhan]

No, you just have to read between the lines.

I'm a professional historian, and this is precisely what I do when working with authentic 16th-century historical documents. Oddly enough, my work is considered erudite and informed when I do this, not apologetic.

[Anijen]

ebeddoulos posted;

In addition to the accounts in the Book of Mormon, the church has taught for decades that there were other peoples in the Americas.

In 1929 Anthony W. Ivins, a member of the First Presidency, pointed out in a General Conference address that the Book of Mormon “does not tell us that there was no one here before them” and that the Latter-day Saints “do believe that other people came to this continent. A few years later, a scriptural study guide put out by the church stated that “Jewish origin may represent only a part of the total ancestry of the American Indian today.”

While I applaud the use of such authorities, I note that when I use the very similar authorities to attempt to refute the unorthodox notion of two Cumorahs I receive some rude treatment.

rcrocket, I apologize if anything I have ever wrote concerning the two Cumorah theory was "rude treatment." I do not recall writing any rude statements targeted at you because we disagree on this one aspect. If so, again I apologize. I try in every post to address the topic and not the person writing. I particularly try to address the archaeological evidence used for or against the Cumorah theories. I believe ebeddoulous post was well written and I enjoy reading his responses (as well as yours). I think the thing I see here is the words "among the ancestors" to me does not mean they were the only ancestors. Thanks for your time.

Edited June 11, 2011 by Anijen

[ebeddoulos]

Here you assume because I bring up critical points, that I am "anti-Mormon". I love the Church, or rather the people resulting from it. But I find it, disappointing.

Each of your textual points from the BoM are duly noted and remembered by me. And in each case they support the pov that Joseph Smith as creator and author of the BoM was unaware of the assertions he made in the text being impossible in the real world of growing historical and archeological knowledge. To make the BoM work out with more facts as they come to light (the latest being DNA research to determine where Amerinds came from anciently), the exegesis must include the facts that the BoM text either is ignorant of or seemingly in conflict with.

It appears to me that Joseph Smith had virtually no awareness of the growth patterns and limits of ancient populations. This criticism came rather early, and so of course the teachers and leaders of the Mormon religion accepted the bald facts and assumed early a position of "other peoples were here and came later"; and, "the BoM does not claim that the Jaredites and Lehites were the only people living in the Americas at the time" (words to that effect).

I am not in difficulties with any of this. Even as a child I knew of and accepted this explanation; even at that tender age I could see the impossibility of less than fifty people resulting in a nation as "numerous as the sands of the sea"; and casualties in battles so huge that "we did not number them", etc. So I accepted that such being impossible, then it meant that the BoM simply did not mention the indigenous peoples that Lehi's family met upon their arrival in the promised land.

This thread was in response to the assertion that there are many references in the text to "the others". You have just about listed the lot, and of course the sum of them does not amount to anything more than what we already knew: that since the BoM in fact does not assert that the promised land was devoid of human inhabitants; and since curious passages can be taken to infer "others" who were already in the Americas previous to the arrival of the Lehites and Mulekites; that it is requisite to assume their implied existence as reality.

But equally, as I have said, it is reasonable - if one takes the stance that Joseph Smith created the BoM - to take the impossible population figures contained in the text as evidence of Joseph Smith's uneducated fancy at work. As B. H. Roberts observed, Joseph Smith was "uneducated but brilliant". He could have written such a book. And that is what I also believe....

I answered your original post clearly, concisely, logically and documented each point with verifiable evidence. Typical of someone of your ilk, you responded with the standard anti-Mormon baloney: obfuscation, summary dismissal and an attack on the prophet Joseph Smith; all without a scintilla of evidence. Can you give me one good reason to further indulge your anti-Mormon antics?

[brightpath]

I was invited to bring this up: evidently, "again" here:

I am of course interested in these "many verses" that I am somehow unaware of - even after reading the Book of Mormon cover-to-cover well over two-dozen times - that assert "others" in the Americas prior to the Lehites and Mulekites' arrival....

There were only 3 groups of people brought to the America's as the BOM teaches prior to the Gentile invasion. The Jaradites(chosen lineage), The Mulekites(Judah), and the Lamanties(Joseph). There was nobody else in the Americas before them. After Israel rejected the gospel then God allowed the Gentiles to invade America as part of their punishment. Whoever makes a claim that there were people in the Americas prior to Israel does not understand the scriptures or what Jesus Christ taught in 3 Nephi.

[Kevin Christensen]

There were only 3 groups of people brought to the America's as the BOM teaches prior to the Gentile invasion. The Jaradites(chosen lineage), The Mulekites(Judah), and the Lamanties(Joseph). There was nobody else in the Americas before them. After Israel rejected the gospel then God allowed the Gentiles to invade America as part of their punishment. Whoever makes a claim that there were people in the Americas prior to Israel does not understand the scriptures or what Jesus Christ taught in 3 Nephi.

I find this comprehensive survey of Book of Mormon evidence far more convincing. Matt Roper on Nephi's Neighbors.

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=15&num=2&id=505

And this from Brant Gardner, The Social History of the Early Nephites.

http://www.fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/2001_Social_History_of_the_Early_Nephites.html

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

[Questing Beast]

@cdowis:

Let me see if I understand what you are saying:

When we read the BOM, we must do it with the understanding that JS was the actual author.

Where do you get "must" out of what I've said?

Therefore, all of the passages we cite cite are moot because they were written by an uneducated clod. When we cite a passage, for example, that there were domesticated goats, and ox when Lehi landed, that was JS talking.

I believe so. And he did not appear to know that "ox" is a term for domesticated bovines. Because the Lehites, as they "journeyed in the wilderness", discovered "both the cow and the ox" etc. even goats and "wild goats" and "all manner of wild animals" "in the forests".

It is obvious from the text itself that the land is denuded of human inhabitants. That is the image that Joseph Smith "saw"; countless "wild" animals discovered "in the wilderness". There is not the slightest hint that indigenous humans are anywhere in this pristine setting. Even the precious ores are visibly waiting for the taking, with no one about to accuse the Lehites of "claim jumping".

Clearly there were "others". The numbers demand it. You, as a child, as well myself and many others had naively accepted that the Lehites/Lamanites were the only ones here at that time.

It was merely an issue of reading the text, and putting aside these childish assumptions.

"Child", as in primary aged, yes. But "child", as a minor-aged teen, reading for comprehension with the rudiments of logic and education being acquired every day, no: the amount of time passing in the story, the number of people showing up right after the Lehites got there, was impossible. I don't recall exactly when I first noticed this impossibility, but I was in junior high school. And when I brought it up, I was told by everyone older than myself, that the BoM people upon their arrival discovered the land already inhabited. The story in the BoM that first got me wondering just how many people there could have been was when Sherem confronted Jacob. By then it seemed, according to the text, that Jacob was not easy to get at. He could sequester himself behind a crowd of people. Added to the detail that wars had already been going on in his older brother Nephi's day, this story of Sherem seeking audience with Jacob created a sense of sizable populations involved. And I was told that the Nephites and Lamanites were the ruling class over an already established native occupation. I was uncomfortable with this, but accepted it; since to argue against it would be to say my parents and other elders were wrong to believe it. And that feeling of not wanting my parents and their peers to be mistaken kept me on the "road" for decades.

We have only begun. The first 50 year history demands "others". The wars between the Lamanites and Nephites clearly indicate larger numbers. Just think -- a handful of people migreated here, and they *split* into two groups, and there were major wars between the groups. How many were of age to conduct such a war. Nephi made "many" swords -- is this 5 or six?

Now, what about the Lamanites. The Nephites were practicing polygamy,...

No they weren't. They were entertaining the idea only. Jacob nipped that fantasy in the bud.

but the lamanites outnumbered them. Well, the answer is simple -- they were joined by others, a large number of them. The Nephites would refuse to intermarry with them, but the lamanites would not have such restrictions.

Well, he was brilliant for placing such clues into the text. But I think this is authentic history, and that JS did not figure out how to fix the population issue. The text itself does that for him.

The answer IS simple. But more facile than believable. A tiny group of foreigners lands on the coast of an alien continent, bereft of communication skills, and find themselves in the midst of a numerous host of indigenous people; both highlanders and coastal lowlanders. Somehow, BOTH branches of the Lehites managed to supplant any local authority and take over rule of the natives; and to boot, drive them to war against each other in the names of their respective new dynasties. Can anyone reading this come up with a single other REAL WORLD example of such a phenomenal stroke of luck occurring, anywhere, at any time? I can't think of one.

Why would Nephi wax on with details about what his people found "upon the face of the land", including "wild" animals" and precious ores, and yet omit specific mention of their meeting with and suppression of "the others"? Inconceivable....

[Questing Beast]

I answered your original post clearly, concisely, logically and documented each point with verifiable evidence. Typical of someone of your ilk, you responded with the standard anti-Mormon baloney: obfuscation, summary dismissal and an attack on the prophet Joseph Smith; all without a scintilla of evidence. Can you give me one good reason to further indulge your anti-Mormon antics?

Yes, the things I addressed in my response just above to cdowis. I too, had only gotten started.

Like all matters of faith: reason enough is given to believe or disbelieve. For half a century I wanted to believe enough to give it a continuous run. The difficulties never receded or diminished; but rather increased in number and intensity. Finally, it was "revelation" to me to "discover" Joseph Smith's polyandry. This was the straw. I finally accepted that the whole notion of prophets of dogmatism, any brand of dogmatism, is fallacious. As a result of this conclusion, I have become very ecumenical. My religious world view has continued to broaden.

So don't take it so personally: I am not dissing Joseph Smith in particular; I have just lumped him in with all the rest of the world's oracles. I don't wish to follow any of them or any of that. "God" doesn't need any oracles to instruct any of us. Religion is an intensely personal matter; a possession, really.

I opened this thread to give an opportunity to such as yourself, to point to the textual evidence for "the others" that the Lehites discovered in America. And as I said up front, I've never seen ANY direct textual evidence for them, only inference and implication and the assertions of readers interpreting such passages. So far, I've seen nothing that I missed in all the cover-to-cover readings of the BoM that I have done....

[Questing Beast]

There were only 3 groups of people brought to the America's as the BOM teaches prior to the Gentile invasion. The Jaradites(chosen lineage), The Mulekites(Judah), and the Lamanties(Joseph). There was nobody else in the Americas before them. After Israel rejected the gospel then God allowed the Gentiles to invade America as part of their punishment. Whoever makes a claim that there were people in the Americas prior to Israel does not understand the scriptures or what Jesus Christ taught in 3 Nephi.

I don't know from this if you are a believer in the BoM or not. But what you dogmatically state here makes the BoM a faux history. It is impossible; if you hold any real-world measuring criteria up to it.

This page on BoM population compared to Real World population should show clearly enough what I am talking about. Table 3, about halfway down, is the clincher. If the Lehites (including the Mulekites) reproduced without wars, pestilences, famines and calamities, at the historical average rate of .04% per year, for the entire c. 980 year period of Nephite history, the total population would be c. 44 to 54 people! The author allows that for brief periods of time, and in limited locales, ancient populations increased by 2% or even 3% annually. But such population increases have never been sustained for more than very brief periods of time, until modern times. Only in the last 1 to 2% of human history have populations grown faster than the previous average of .04%.

He says: " No growth rate even close to the rate of increase prevalent from 590 B.C. to 390 C.E. would have produced the [p.250] population sizes described in the scriptures, even if there had been no wars, famine, earthquakes, or disease.

"... For the Amlicite-Nephite war of 87 B.C., Alma 2:17-19 reports a total of 19,094 fatalities. On the basis of these figures, John Sorenson estimated the total Nephite-Lamanite population to be over 600,000 at that time (about 200,000 Nephites-Amlicites and over 400,000 Lamanites). For an original band of thirty reproductive individuals in 590 B.C. to proliferate even to 19,094 by 87 B.C. would require an average annual growth rate of 1.3 percent sustained over the span of five centuries. To reach the 600,000 level Sorenson determined to have existed at that point, the growth rate would have had to be 2 percent, again maintained for five centuries. This is a level never reached on a global scale until 1960 C.E. and fifty times the actual world rate of the pre-industrial epoch. It is a rate that, even when attained, can only persist briefly (Hauser 1979, 5; Smith 1972, 68; Ehrlich and Ehrlich 1970, 18-21)."

[cdowis]

I believe so. And he did not appear to know that "ox" is a term for domesticated bovines. Because the Lehites, as they "journeyed in the wilderness", discovered "both the cow and the ox" etc. even goats and "wild goats" and "all manner of wild animals" "in the forests".

I see what you mean. What a breathtaking insight.

JS knew absolutely nothing about farming. He was too busy doing research in the library regarding the middle east. Indeed there is evidence from the BOM text that he spent much of his time, not farming, but wandering the entire Middle East, researching material for the BOM, e.g. with such names as Pahoran, Paanchi, sheum. Professor Albright himself was very impressed with JS research skills.

Clearly he has no time for farming, and did not even know what an "ox" was.

It's too bad that the BOM did not clearly tell us that there were no inhabitants there when Lehi landed. It would have made things so much easier, than for us to look at "ox" and the domesticated goat to guess what was going on.

You have given us such brilliant insights into the BOM. It certainly explains why we get the location for the Valley of Lemuel, NHM, Bountiful, etc etc. JS got those right, but he really goofed that he did not know that an ox was a domesticated animal.

You have presented the antimormons a powerful argument.

ah...... just a small matter of "goats and wild goats".... but let's just ignore that one.

Edited June 12, 2011 by cdowis

[ebeddoulos]

Yes, the things I addressed in my response just above to cdowis. I too, had only gotten started.

Like all matters of faith: reason enough is given to believe or disbelieve. For half a century I wanted to believe enough to give it a continuous run. The difficulties never receded or diminished; but rather increased in number and intensity. Finally, it was "revelation" to me to "discover" Joseph Smith's polyandry. This was the straw. I finally accepted that the whole notion of prophets of dogmatism, any brand of dogmatism, is fallacious. As a result of this conclusion, I have become very ecumenical. My religious world view has continued to broaden.

So don't take it so personally: I am not dissing Joseph Smith in particular; I have just lumped him in with all the rest of the world's oracles. I don't wish to follow any of them or any of that. "God" doesn't need any oracles to instruct any of us. Religion is an intensely personal matter; a possession, really.

I opened this thread to give an opportunity to such as yourself, to point to the textual evidence for "the others" that the Lehites discovered in America. And as I said up front, I've never seen ANY direct textual evidence for them, only inference and implication and the assertions of readers interpreting such passages. So far, I've seen nothing that I missed in all the cover-to-cover readings of the BoM that I have done....

In short, just more of the same ol' anti-Mormon broken record. And in four paragraphs, you could not come up with a single good reason for me to further indulge your anti-Mormon antics. Fair enough. See-ee yah.

Edited June 14, 2011 by ebeddoulos

[brightpath]

God only led the chosen seed to America after the flood. There were only 3 groups of people. The Jaradites(Hebrews), The Mulekites(Judah), and Lehi's group(Joseph). All of them landed in different parts of America. The Mulekites discovered the the last living Jaradite along with the 24 gold plates. Mosiah discovered the people of Zarahemla(Mulekites). All were eventually killed off which left the Lamanites(seed of Joseph). There were no "others" present in America before the Mulekites and Lehi's seed arrived. When Israel rejected the gospel then God allowed the Gentiles to slowly invade The Americas.

[cinepro]

God only led the chosen seed to America after the flood. There were only 3 groups of people. The Jaradites(Hebrews), The Mulekites(Judah), and Lehi's group(Joseph). All of them landed in different parts of America. The Mulekites discovered the the last living Jaradite along with the 24 gold plates. Mosiah discovered the people of Zarahemla(Mulekites). All were eventually killed off which left the Lamanites(seed of Joseph). There were no "others" present in America before the Mulekites and Lehi's seed arrived. When Israel rejected the gospel then God allowed the Gentiles to slowly invade The Americas.

The movie "Frequency" is about a son who, through his short-wave radio and a cosmic disturbance, is able to temporarily talk to his father back in the 1950s. Brightpath's post made me think for a second that I was communicating on the internet with someone from the 1840s.

Boil your water, brighpath! Wash your hands! Polygamy will stop in 1890!