Freedom Posted August 29, 2013 Posted August 29, 2013 Helaman38 provided a long list of assumptions in another thread. This list, I think, represents a good example of how reading too much into the text can lead to many glaring misconceptions. There were perhaps too many to put all in one post, but a review would provide some insight into why we need to be careful when we read because our own personal biases creep in without us even being aware: 1. There were two factions - believers (Nephites) and non-believers (Lamanites). We can accept that there were two distinct groups, but to take it a step further and call them factions suggests that they were two cohesive groups with a distinct leadership and unified agenda. 2. The non-believing Lamanites vowed to erase all evidence of the Nephites from off the face of the earth. I cannot think of a reference that would support this idea so this is conjecture drawn from a false assumption. 3. The Lamanites were aware of Nephite prophecies that said among other things the following: This one is patently false and we can only speculate where this claim arises. It may be on the assumption that, like today, everybody had wide access to the scriptures and everybody was literate. Judging from how quickly the Nephites went into apostasy, however, it seem more likely that not even the Nephrites were not aware of the writings held by the scribes. 4. Prior to the final battle, the Lamanites destroyed all Nephite cities by fire. Yes, it is true that in Mormon 5:5, we read that the Lamanites burned every Nephite city, but we need to distinguish between burning and destroying. We also need to distinguish between burning every Nephite city and burning every city. The assumption seems to be that the Nephite cities were culturally unique in every way and had their own unique style of art, food source, utensils and building style. There is no basis for this conclusion. Just as a house in Calgary Alberta is indistinguishable from a house in Newark New Jersey, a Nephite house would have been indistinguishable from any given non-Nephite house. Thus, even if the Nephite cities were completely obliterated , other cities (such as those belonging to the Lamanites) were not and would have left the same type of evidence that a Nephite city would have left. 5. At the coming of Jesus every house, wall and building collapsed. Actually, a year before his coming there was widespread destruction, but nowhere does it say every single structure collapsed. In fact 3 Nephi 8: 3 states "And there were some cities which remained" 6. Prior to the coming of Jesus there used to be some cement homes, but they were only found in the Land Northward. Right, so this proves there were no stone houses. Regardless, nowhere does it state that there were only cement homes in the land northward. 7. After the destruction that occurred at the coming of Jesus they had timber so they only rebuilt with wood. There is no mention of the word timber outside of the book of Helaman. Having laid that foundation it should be clear that attempts to find a Nephite artifact are slim to none. The foundation, however, is not supported by the text and is based on false assumptions.Things To Keep In Mind The Lamanites vowed to erase all evidences of the Nephites, their culture & religion from the earth and they made sure nothing would remain to confirm the record when it came forth. There is no evidence to support this claim For 3.5 years prior to the final battle, all believers were restricted to the small area of Cumorah much like Hitler restricted the Jews. They lived in tents only and awaited the final battle. NO ONE before that time ever lived in Cumorah. Just because the Book of Mormon does not mention specifically any Nephites living at Cumorah this does not allow the conclusion that no one ever lived there. Cumorahland was chosen for the final battle because it was away from the core area of Book of Mormon lands. The winner of the battle did not want the burden of burying the dead so they needed a location down wind and far away. Thus, bones that are allowed to moulder upon the ground turn to dust - like the bones of the Jaredites did. I am not clear on what this has to do with the argument. But it was chosen for its strategic value. As Cursur points out elsewhere, the tiny mound in New York just does not satisfy this requirement. What Would Remain Aside from very distinct land marks and water boundaries, there should remain a great number of dirt palisades as described in the Book of Mormon. The largest number of such dirt palisades are found in one place - western New York. This is about a strong an evidence as saying the book mentions humans, and there were humans in China, therefore the Book of Mormon took place in China. Where Prophecies Were Fulfilled There are a great many prophecies that readers can identify and then use those to identify Book of Mormon lands. For example, prophecy says the record would come forth ON Book of Mormon lands, which came to pass in Palmyra. Another prophecy said that the record would come forth to the descendants of the Lamanites, which came to pass in Buffalo, NY where the first missionaries were sent with copies of the Book of Mormon. I would be interested in seeing these prophesies. Conclusion Even though no land markers remain for the public to see (yet), and all evidences of their existence were purposely destroyed, the plates themselves and the gospel on them confirm the Bible and the birth, death, and resurrection of our Lord Jesus, which we must each come to know like Peter, "not by flesh and blood." Again, the false conclusion is repeated here that all evidence of their existence was purposely destroyed. So my reason for posting this was not to dig at Hemaman38 but to simply use this as an example of how we need to be careful when we read the scriptures. Having a knowledge of the cultural and historical setting is in valuable in avoiding pitfalls of putting our own cultural biases into the interpretation of the text. 4
Tiki Posted August 30, 2013 Posted August 30, 2013 1. Alma 3:112. Enos 1:143 Nephi 3:8Mormon 6:63. Alma 21:87.http://www.lds.org/scriptures/search?lang=eng&query=Timber&testament=bofmNephi and Alma
Robert F. Smith Posted August 30, 2013 Posted August 30, 2013 (edited) 1. Alma 3:112.Enos 1:143 Nephi 3:8Mormon 6:63. Alma 21:87.http://www.lds.org/scriptures/search?lang=eng&query=Timber&testament=bofmNephi and AlmaAlma 3:1111 And it came to pass that whosoever would not believe in the tradition of the Lamanites, but believed those records which were brought out of the land of Jerusalem, and also in the tradition of their fathers, which were correct, who believed in the commandments of God and kept them, were called the Nephites, or the people of Nephi, from that time forth— Alma 21:88 And the man said unto him: We do not believe that thou knowest any such thing. We do not believe in these foolish traditions. We do not believe that thou knowest of things to come, neither do we believe that thy fathers and also that our fathers did know concerning the things which they spake, of that which is to come. Enos 1414 For at the present our strugglings were vain in restoring them to the true faith. And they swore in their wrath that, if it were possible, they would destroy our records and us, and also all the traditions of our fathers. III Ne 3:88 And behold, I swear unto you, if ye will do this, with an oath, ye shall not be destroyed; but if ye will not do this, I swear unto you with an oath, that on the morrow month I will command that my armies shall come down against you, and they shall not stay their hand and shall spare not, but shall slay you, and shall let fall the sword upon you even until ye shall become extinct. Mormon 6:66 And it came to pass that when we had gathered in all our people in one to the land of Cumorah, behold I, Mormon, began to be old; and knowing it to be the last struggle of my people, and having been commanded of the Lord that I should not suffer the records which had been handed down by our fathers, which were sacred, to fall into the hands of the Lamanites, (for the Lamanites would destroy them) therefore I made this record out of the plates of Nephi, and hid up in the hill Cumorah all the records which had been entrusted to me by the hand of the Lord, save it were these few plates which I gave unto my son Moroni. This is a big improvement over the mind-numbing junk which helaman38 gave us over on the other thread. If you could just flesh out these proof texts, with some sort of description of what they tell us, that would be wonderful.Of course, you would have to carefully distinguish between the periods before and a long time after Christ came to the New World, since the divisions after that were religious rather than ethnic. At that point, "Lamanite" and "Nephite" have very different meanings from their usage in the first two-thirds of the Book of Mormon. Perhaps you'd care to comment on the major deposit of records at the Hill Cumorah, with the Book of Mormon Plates being handed off to Moroni -- who slowly made his way from Mesoamerica to the future New York State in order to buy the records which would come forth at the hand of Joseph Smith much later. You'll also note that Joseph does not immediately identify that hill convenient to Manchester with Cumorah. Indeed, it is only many years later before one finds that reference being used in erroneous retrospect. The same is true of the hyperbole typical of nations and armies about to clash. Threats of extinction have very little meaning under such circumstances. Edited August 30, 2013 by Robert F. Smith 1
Tiki Posted August 30, 2013 Posted August 30, 2013 Perhaps you'd care to comment on the major deposit of records at the Hill Cumorah, with the Book of Mormon Plates being handed off to Moroni -- who slowly made his way from Mesoamerica to the future New York State in order to buy the records which would come forth at the hand of Joseph Smith much later. You'll also note that Joseph does not immediately identify that hill convenient to Manchester with Cumorah. Indeed, it is only many years later before one finds that reference being used in erroneous retrospect. The same is true of the hyperbole typical of nations and armies about to clash. Threats of extinction have very little meaning under such circumstances. Thank you for the assignment. I would be delighted. Is my report due at mid-term, or may I turn it in before the Christmas break? But I doubt it would ever be to your satisfaction, since you believe, as you wrote on 26 May 2013, that you know more than the Prophet Joseph Smith ever did on such matters, due to his erroneous retrospection and lack of any training in anthropology made him geographically opaque: And a good quote from Brother Joseph. Since he had no training in anthropology, and no sense of perspective on what the "continent" (singular) might entail, any vision he might see (and his description indicates some detail) would necessarily be geographically opaque to him. It is a vision of past glories and of a civilization like nothing he could see among local Amerinds. His interpretations would be no better than some of those being bandied about nowadays by untrained Mormons who can see "Cumorah" behind every woodland tree -- with the best of intentions. http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/60931-could-the-lamanites-really-have-disappeared/page-3 bold for emphasis And who would want to be accused of being geographically opaque like the Prophet Joseph Smith?
Freedom Posted August 30, 2013 Author Posted August 30, 2013 1. Alma 3:11 I do not see any reference here to factions. I can divide Canada into English and French speakers. This does not make each group a cohesive faction.2.Enos 1:14 3 Nephi 3:8Mormon 6:6 destroying records is not quite the same as erasing all evidence of a people. If someone goes into your home and kills you and burns your journal has your entire existence been obliterated? You are reading far too much into the text Helaman.3. Alma 21:8 Unfortunately, not believing something and being aware of specific prophesies are not related. I do not believe in Santa Clause, and have not read any material that tries to prove he does exist. I doubt many of the critics of the church have ever read the D&C.7.http://www.lds.org/scriptures/search?lang=eng&query=Timber&testament=bofmNephi and Alma I am not quite clear why you took the time to prove my point but thank you Helaman36.
Recommended Posts