Indigenous Peoples The Lehites Discovered?

[brightpath]

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!

So are you one of them that believe Asians were present in America before Lehi came?

[Anijen]

So are you one of them that believe Asians were present in America before Lehi came?

The archaeological evidence of many people before the Jaredites is impressive. How do you reason with the, bones, projectile points, mummies etc that date before the time of the Book of Mormon?

[cinepro]

So are you one of them that believe Asians were present in America before Lehi came?

Well, if they were here, they weren't Asians.

[cdowis]

So are you one of them that believe Asians were present in America before Lehi came?

I go where the evidence takes me.

I look to the BOM and science and follow where they lead me, rather than traditional but misguided interpretation of the text. That tradition tells us that the Americas were completely empty when the Jaredites landed, but the BOM does not say that.... ANYWHERE.

Putting aside those old traditions, we discover that there were inhabitants here when Lehi landed, and it was not empty.

It's always been there, but everybody ignored it.

[LeSellers]

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.

I think brightpath (I see him—unknown sex, so the common gender applies—as a woman, for some reason) has a Gospel hobby horse, and simply doesn't know how to dismount.

BTW, I really like Frequency. Just scary enough that my Jacquie doesn't have to freak out, and still keep me intrigued.

Lehi

[brightpath]

The archaeological evidence of many people before the Jaredites is impressive. How do you reason with the, bones, projectile points, mummies etc that date before the time of the Book of Mormon?

You need to remember before the flood the earth was one land mass. After the flood the earth split apart. Yes there is evidence in the land of the Americas that there were ancient people living but that was before the flood. After the flood the Jaradites were the first people to inhabit the choice land(The Americas). No people were present in the Americas when the Jaradites were here. Lehi came next followed by the Mulekites. These were the only groups in the Americas with the Lamanites(Native Americans) being the descendants of both groups. When Israel rejected the gospel then God allowed the Americas to be invaded by the Gentiles nations(Spain-England-France-Portugal etc.

[brightpath]

I go where the evidence takes me.

I look to the BOM and science and follow where they lead me, rather than traditional but misguided interpretation of the text. That tradition tells us that the Americas were completely empty when the Jaredites landed, but the BOM does not say that.... ANYWHERE.

Putting aside those old traditions, we discover that there were inhabitants here when Lehi landed, and it was not empty.

It's always been there, but everybody ignored it.

When Lehi landed in America the only person here was Coriantumr the last Jaradite who was found by the Mulekites. What people were here? Please tell us.

[brightpath]

I think brightpath (I see him—unknown sex, so the common gender applies—as a woman, for some reason) has a Gospel hobby horse, and simply doesn't know how to dismount.

BTW, I really like Frequency. Just scary enough that my Jacquie doesn't have to freak out, and still keep me intrigued.

Lehi

You are a funny person! Please tell me who was present in America when Lehi landed.

[Calm]

When Lehi landed in America the only person here was Coriantumr the last Jaradite who was found by the Mulekites. What people were here? Please tell us.

How long do you believe Coriantumr had been living on his own when the Mulekites found him? When do you think the Mulekites arrived in comparison to the Lehites? Trying to figure out your timeline.

[brightpath]

I go where the evidence takes me.

I look to the BOM and science and follow where they lead me, rather than traditional but misguided interpretation of the text. That tradition tells us that the Americas were completely empty when the Jaredites landed, but the BOM does not say that.... ANYWHERE.

Putting aside those old traditions, we discover that there were inhabitants here when Lehi landed, and it was not empty.

It's always been there, but everybody ignored it.

If there were people present in America then why didn't the Nephites indicate this. When the people of Zarahemla were discovered this was a major event. You would think when Lehi landed he would've said, Hey we met some other people here, they have dark skin and have slanted eyes(Asians). The BOM does not indicate at anytime that there were other people discovered besides the people of Zarahemla(Mulekites). It would have been big news if they discovered other people here but they didn't. It was also big news when the Mulekites found Coriantumr and he lived with them 9 moons. The Mulekites related this to Mosaih. They did not tell Mosiah of any other people they discovered other than Coriantumr.

[Brant Gardner]

If there were people present in America then why didn't the Nephites indicate this.

That is a reasonable question for a modern reader to ask. Unfortunately, however, it isn't necessarily a reasonable question to ask of an ancient writer. Typically, ancient writers wrote for an audience that knew what they knew, and the reasons they wrote do not match with the reasons we would write something similar. Malina and Rohrbaugh use the terms "high context" and "low context" to describe the audience expectation. For the Bible, for instance, the writers wrote in a "high context" culture--that is, they wrote assuming that everyone understood what they were talking about, and so they didn't explain it. Most modern writing, however, is "low context," or writing that assumes that the reader does not have the necessary background. Therefore, it explains more.

One of the ways to see how this works is in fantasy/science fiction, where the writer has to describe a new world and how it works. There is a lot of description so we can understand the world they are creating. That is completely different from the way an authentic ancient writer wrote. Unfortunately, we don't share their world. Therefore, we want information from them that it didn't occur to them to give us.

In a Mesoamerican example, the Quiche were relatively late-comers to the land where they wrote the Popol Vuh as their history. Archaeologically, we know that they displaced an earlier population. They didn't mention that at all in the Popol Vuh.

The situation is complicated in the Book of Mormon in that the earliest text we have is one from Nephi where he explicitly tells us that it wasn't intended to be history. He had a different purpose in mind. Therefore, 1 Nephi is at least two steps removed from any text that we might think would "obviously" mention other people. Even the book of Lehi, which might have mentioned other people originally, was present in the 116 lost pages only in what we have from Mormon. As someone writing nearly 1000 years later, it wasn't anything he was all that interested in either, and there is no reason to suppose that he would have added it. It didn't fit the model he was creating for his text.

So--the idea of the question is reasonable, but not if we accept the Book of Mormon as an ancient text. If it really is what it claims to be, that question does not apply.

[Questing Beast]

When Lehi landed in America the only person here was Coriantumr the last Jaradite who was found by the Mulekites. What people were here? Please tell us.

And Ether, don't forget him.

Actually, realistically, it is unreasonable to assume a fantasy ending where every living soul participated in the final bloodbath that killed off the entire population. But as the Mulekites did not even meet Coriantumr till they were established, and ONLY him: and as this chanced to occur far north of the land of Nephi, and the Nephites under Mosiah The First only learned of the existence of Jaredites from the Mulekites centuries after arriving in the promised land: it is inaccurate to argue, as some have done here, that the people indigenous to this hemisphere were surviving Jaredites.

I can see a scattering of some Jaredite emigrants who fled the wars earlier than the last battle, but not whole settled populations of them: that's realistic, but not what the book says, so this realistic picture is problematic textually. It is reasonable; but if that had occurred, then the Book of Ether would not have claimed that all the people were collected into Shiz's and Coriantumr's armies. It was complied by a prophet of the Lord, after all; and if some "less wicked" Jaredites had managed to save themselves, then Ether would not have been wandering alone till he died or was "taken up", etc....

[erichard]

When Lehi landed in America the only person here was Coriantumr the last Jaradite who was found by the Mulekites. What people were here? Please tell us.

Hi,

Here are some points your question brought to mind:

1.

The account of Lehi and his family traveling from Jerusalem to Bountiful does not talk of any other people.

So some have concluded that Lehi and his group had no contact with anyone on this journey.

But research into the milieu of that area in that time period overwhelmingly proves that it would have been impossible for them to not had contact with the local people. One main reason is water. Water from wells while in the desert is absolutely necessary, and the wells were NOT public property. There are other strong reasons also.

So, notwithstanding that the account in 1 Nephi does not mention any other people in the 8 year journey to Bountiful, historically this would have been impossible.

2.

Jacob 1 starts the BoM terminoligy of "Lamanites" and "Nephites":

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.

This was early in BoM history. From this point, if other groups of people aligned with either the Nephites or Lamanites the BoM record may not mention it. One exception, of course, was the Mulekites. They were mentioned, but they were then called Nephites also.

3.

At the time the Melekites became Nephites, Mosiah 25 says this:

2 Now there were not so many of the children of Nephi, or so many of those who were descendants of Nephi, as there were of the people of Zarahemla, who was a descendant of Mulek, and those who came with him into the wilderness.

3 And there were not so many of the people of Nephi and of the people of Zarahemla as there were of the Lamanites; yea, they were not half so numerous.

This says that there were twice as many Lamanites as Nephites and Mulekites combined. How did that happen?

At the time of the division after the death of Lehi those who went with Nephi were comparable in number to those who stayed with Laman and Lemuel. Why would the lazier Lamanites had been so much more prolific than the more diligent Nephites?

Since the term Lamanite meant anyone who joined with the Lamanites, then one honest consideration is that the Lamanites married into the locals and the locals joined with them.

Richard

Edited June 20, 2011 by erichard

[cdowis]

Brightpath, I like the way you think. Asking very intelligent questions, you are half-way there. Sounds like me awhile back, so let me see if I can give you some ideas.

\

If there were people present in America then why didn't the Nephites indicate this.

Good question but you assume that they didn't write about them.

Take a look at the difference between the large plates and small plates of Nephi. Assuming that they did keep a record of those peoples, where do you think it is likely that they recorded these minor historical details? Think about the purpose of the small plates vs the large plates.

So, they did record it, but on the large plates. The small plates only give us hints, but some of those hints are significant.

When the people of Zarahemla were discovered this was a major event. You would think when Lehi landed he would've said, Hey we met some other people here, they have dark skin and have slanted eyes(Asians). The BOM does not indicate at anytime that there were other people discovered besides the people of Zarahemla(Mulekites). It would have been big news if they discovered other people here but they didn't.

Again look at your assumption. It was a "major event" -- why? Because they thought that they were alone here and discovered someone else?

Think about why the Mulekites are included in the spiritual records, rather than some footnote on the large plates.

Who were these people? Why was their discovery so important, relative to finding some savages in a villages, in a huts.

Well, they were Jews, who were the chosen race. They also had an answer to a question that had been niggling the Nehites for centuries == Lehi had prophecied that Jerusalem would be destroyed, and that is why he lead them to the strange land.

The Mulekites held the answer to the question on what happened to Jerusalem shortly after Lehi left.

Finally, the Jewish tribe had special authority in the government -- e.g. they were descendants of David, for example, and it was from their tribe that the Messsiah would arise.

It was also big news when the Mulekites found Coriantumr and he lived with them 9 moons. The Mulekites related this to Mosaih. They did not tell Mosiah of any other people they discovered other than Coriantumr.

Actually there is evidence that they were already aware of the Jaredites. Some of them had Jaredite names, for example. But, again, you are assuming that the spiritual record would fill in all of those details, which was forbidden by the Lord.

Anyway, great questions, but your thinking needs a bit more maturity.

Edited June 20, 2011 by cdowis

[Pahoran]

You need to remember before the flood the earth was one land mass. After the flood the earth split apart. Yes there is evidence in the land of the Americas that there were ancient people living but that was before the flood. After the flood the Jaradites were the first people to inhabit the choice land(The Americas). No people were present in the Americas when the Jaradites were here. Lehi came next followed by the Mulekites. These were the only groups in the Americas with the Lamanites(Native Americans) being the descendants of both groups. When Israel rejected the gospel then God allowed the Americas to be invaded by the Gentiles nations(Spain-England-France-Portugal etc.

LaDonna, is that you?

Regards,

Pahoran

[Rivers]

I don't dispute that the text of the Book of Mormon leaves wiggle room for other peoples. But how the heck do you account for the fact the main ancestors of the native Americans came over here across the land bridge before the time of Adam and Eve?

[cinepro]

Take a look at the difference between the large plates and small plates of Nephi. Assuming that they did keep a record of those peoples, where do you think it is likely that they recorded these minor historical details? Think about the purpose of the small plates vs the large plates.

I think it is likely that they would mention finding new cultures of dark-skinned people and mass-converting them to pre-Christianity right around the part where they mention that they found copper and goats.

[Rivers]

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.

Edited June 20, 2011 by Rivers

[Rivers]

I think it is likely that they would mention finding new cultures of dark-skinned people and mass-converting them to pre-Christianity right around the part where they mention that they found copper and goats.

Maybe they talk about the other people in the sealed portion.

[Calm]

LaDonna, is that you?

Regards,

Pahoran

Unlikely in my view. This is the only topic that brightpath comments on, IIRC and has done so consisently from the start. Edited June 20, 2011 by calmoriah

[Questing Beast]

Finally, the Jewish tribe had special authority in the government -- e.g. they were descendants of David, for example, and it was from their tribe that the Messsiah would arise.

You raise an interesting problem. If the Mulekites were the dominant segment of the combined population, and were Jews, while the Lehites were Ephraim and Manasseh, why then did the Lehite dynasty take over the government?...

[cdowis]

You raise an interesting problem. If the Mulekites were the dominant segment of the combined population, and were Jews, while the Lehites were Ephraim and Manasseh, why then did the Lehite dynasty take over the government?...

Exactly. At the beginning they took over because they had the records and the artifacts. (We often forget how these were so important.) But later this became the issue behind the rebellion of the kingmen, that they had the right to govern. Read their story within that context, and it explains alot.

I had always wondered -- who the heck are the kingmen.

Anyway, I wish I had thought of this, but this was the subject of a book (forget the title).

Edited June 20, 2011 by cdowis