ALarson Posted February 18, 2014 Posted February 18, 2014 Unless I'm mistaken, many now believe that there were pre-existing populations here prior to when the Book of Mormon people arrived. Many also seem to believe that after the Book of Mormon people arrived, (during the time period covered in the Book of Mormon) they lived side by side and intermarried with these other populations. This has led me to wonder if there are any scriptures in the Book of Mormon referencing any teaching or converting that took place between them?
thesometimesaint Posted February 18, 2014 Posted February 18, 2014 Unless I'm mistaken, many now believe that there were pre-existing populations here prior to when the Book of Mormon people arrived. Many also seem to believe that after the Book of Mormon people arrived, (during the time period covered in the Book of Mormon) they lived side by side and intermarried with these other populations. This has led me to wonder if there are any scriptures in the Book of Mormon referencing any teaching or converting that took place between them? I believe that the Book of Mormon deals with a relatively small group of people within a much larger group of people. IE; The sons of Mosiah were missionaries to just some of that larger group.
ALarson Posted February 18, 2014 Author Posted February 18, 2014 I believe that the Book of Mormon deals with a relatively small group of people within a much larger group of people. IE; The sons of Mosiah were missionaries to just some of that larger group.Thank you for the response, but I get the impression that many now believe there was a huge population here prior to the people of the Book of Mormon arriving. Here's from the latest essay from the church on this (emphasis added): The evidence assembled to date suggests that the majority of Native Americans carry largely Asian DNA.3 Scientists theorize that in an era that predated Book of Mormon accounts, a relatively small group of people migrated from northeast Asia to the Americas by way of a land bridge that connected Siberia to Alaska.4 These people, scientists say, spread rapidly to fill North and South America and were likely the primary ancestors of modern American Indians If these people filled North and South American, I would think that could have been a huge missionary opportunity and would have been the greatest conversion event in the history of the Book of Mormon (IMO). I'm just asking if there are any writings in the Book of Mormon of this taking place?
thesometimesaint Posted February 18, 2014 Posted February 18, 2014 Thank you for the response, but I get the impression that many now believe there was a huge population here prior to the people of the Book of Mormon arriving. Here's from the latest essay from the church on this (emphasis added): If these people filled North and South American, I would think that could have been a huge missionary opportunity and would have been the greatest conversion event in the history of the Book of Mormon (IMO). I'm just asking if there are any writings in the Book of Mormon of this taking place? I've been a member of the Church some 43 years now, and have never believed the Book of Mormon was hemispheric in extent. While I believe a Mesoamerica model fits best I'm not religiously tied to it. We don't have stories in the Book of Mormon where a hemispheric missionary effort took place. It is all pretty local. Sure IF the Book of Mormon was hemispheric it would be a great missionary opportunity. But I have never had that belief.
The Nehor Posted February 18, 2014 Posted February 18, 2014 If these people filled North and South American, I would think that could have been a huge missionary opportunity and would have been the greatest conversion event in the history of the Book of Mormon (IMO). I'm just asking if there are any writings in the Book of Mormon of this taking place? Most likely a lot of the converts were shortly after the Nephite/Lamanite split. After that their descendants are the people being missionaried throughout the book. Not sure why you imagine other missionary work would be a huge success. The reality is the Nephites could barely hold on to the faith themselves let alone spread it. The Lamanites did a little better in the short period they were the righteous.
ALarson Posted February 18, 2014 Author Posted February 18, 2014 Most likely a lot of the converts were shortly after the Nephite/Lamanite split. After that their descendants are the people being missionaried throughout the book. Not sure why you imagine other missionary work would be a huge success. The reality is the Nephites could barely hold on to the faith themselves let alone spread it. The Lamanites did a little better in the short period they were the righteous.Interesting. I can see that happening too. I'm just thinking out loud here (thus the post) and would like to hear other's thoughts or feelings. Thanks for the response.
CV75 Posted February 18, 2014 Posted February 18, 2014 Unless I'm mistaken, many now believe that there were pre-existing populations here prior to when the Book of Mormon people arrived. Many also seem to believe that after the Book of Mormon people arrived, (during the time period covered in the Book of Mormon) they lived side by side and intermarried with these other populations. This has led me to wonder if there are any scriptures in the Book of Mormon referencing any teaching or converting that took place between them? While supporting just the opposite of missionary work, the 2 Nephi 1:9 -11 promise could have been fulfilled whenever the people dwindled in unbelief and rejected the Savior, even though these periods occurred much earlier than the “final battle” at Cumorah (See Alma 50:22; and Helaman 4:23 and 6:34). The Book of Mormon covers less than a “hundredth part” of the proceedings among the Lehites and Jaredites, so there may be a bit missing that refers to their involvement with neighboring groups occupying the same land and sharing the Gospel with them. This would include “their preaching, and their prophecies …and their building of temples, and of synagogues and their sanctuaries, and their righteousness…” (Helaman 3:14).
CV75 Posted February 18, 2014 Posted February 18, 2014 Unless I'm mistaken, many now believe that there were pre-existing populations here prior to when the Book of Mormon people arrived. Many also seem to believe that after the Book of Mormon people arrived, (during the time period covered in the Book of Mormon) they lived side by side and intermarried with these other populations. This has led me to wonder if there are any scriptures in the Book of Mormon referencing any teaching or converting that took place between them? While supporting just the opposite of missionary work, the 2 Nephi 1:9 -11 promise could have been fulfilled whenever the people dwindled in unbelief and rejected the Savior, even though these periods occurred much earlier than the “final battle” at Cumorah (See Alma 50:22; and Helaman 4:23 and 6:34). The Book of Mormon covers less than a “hundredth part” of the proceedings among the Lehites and Jaredites, so there may be a bit missing that refers to their involvement with neighboring groups occupying the same land and sharing the Gospel with them. This would include “their preaching, and their prophecies …and their building of temples, and of synagogues and their sanctuaries, and their righteousness…” (Helaman 3:14).
CV75 Posted February 18, 2014 Posted February 18, 2014 (edited) Unless I'm mistaken, many now believe that there were pre-existing populations here prior to when the Book of Mormon people arrived. Many also seem to believe that after the Book of Mormon people arrived, (during the time period covered in the Book of Mormon) they lived side by side and intermarried with these other populations. This has led me to wonder if there are any scriptures in the Book of Mormon referencing any teaching or converting that took place between them? While supporting just the opposite of missionary work, the 2 Nephi 1:9 -11 promise could have been fulfilled whenever the people dwindled in unbelief and rejected the Savior, even though these periods occurred much earlier than the “final battle” at Cumorah (See Alma 50:22; and Helaman 4:23 and 6:34). The Book of Mormon covers less than a “hundredth part” of the proceedings among the Lehites and Jaredites, so there may be a bit missing that refers to their involvement with neighboring groups occupying the same land and sharing the Gospel with them. This would include “their preaching, and their prophecies …and their building of temples, and of synagogues and their sanctuaries, and their righteousness…” (Helaman 3:14). Edited February 18, 2014 by CV75
Calm Posted February 18, 2014 Posted February 18, 2014 How about missionary work in the Old Testament. You have Jonah preaching repentance to Nineveh, but other than that any examples?
The Nehor Posted February 18, 2014 Posted February 18, 2014 How about missionary work in the Old Testament. You have Jonah preaching repentance to Nineveh, but other than that any examples?Most of the missionary work in Israel was inwardly directed. You do have a bit more. Rahab the prostitute seems to have converted, Ruth was apparently converted by her first husband and his family, Moses brought believers from other nations with him when they left Egypt, Abraham won souls as he travelled, you can probably count Elijah mocking the priests of Baal as missionary work (I think I would have been uniquely suited for a mission like that), you have Daniel and his friends winning over Babylonians, and you have Job who does not appear to be an Israelite.
Rob Osborn Posted February 18, 2014 Posted February 18, 2014 Unless I'm mistaken, many now believe that there were pre-existing populations here prior to when the Book of Mormon people arrived. Many also seem to believe that after the Book of Mormon people arrived, (during the time period covered in the Book of Mormon) they lived side by side and intermarried with these other populations. This has led me to wonder if there are any scriptures in the Book of Mormon referencing any teaching or converting that took place between them?The Book of Mormon contains a record of the peoplibg of America up until the destruction of the Nephites. It is completely possible thatAsian peoples came over after the Nephite destruction and we have no known record of them. It is also a possibility that trading between the Americas and Asia was in place in BoM times and Asian people ended up here as emigrants. It is also a possibility that peoples in either Lehis group were of Asaian descent or someone in the Mulekites group were of Asian descent. There is no record or scripture we know of that speaks of otherpeoples in the Americas besides the Jaredites, Mulekites and Nephites.
The Nehor Posted February 18, 2014 Posted February 18, 2014 There is no record or scripture we know of that speaks of otherpeoples in the Americas besides the Jaredites, Mulekites and Nephites.I read a history book about the Spanish Civil War last week. No mention of Egyptians, Indians, or Chinese. Obviously the writer does not believe they exist. 2
Rob Osborn Posted February 18, 2014 Posted February 18, 2014 I read a history book about the Spanish Civil War last week. No mention of Egyptians, Indians, or Chinese. Obviously the writer does not believe they exist.And your point is?
The Nehor Posted February 18, 2014 Posted February 18, 2014 And your point is?My point is.........obvious. 2
CV75 Posted February 18, 2014 Posted February 18, 2014 How about missionary work in the Old Testament. You have Jonah preaching repentance to Nineveh, but other than that any examples?The word "stranger" appears quite frequently in the Old Testament, which I understand to be used to convey "proselyte" or "convert" to the faith. In Matthew 23;15, Jesus alludes to some missionary enthusiasm on part of the Jews of that time.
Calm Posted February 18, 2014 Posted February 18, 2014 Most of the missionary work in Israel was inwardly directed. You do have a bit more. Rahab the prostitute seems to have converted, Ruth was apparently converted by her first husband and his family, Moses brought believers from other nations with him when they left Egypt, Abraham won souls as he travelled, you can probably count Elijah mocking the priests of Baal as missionary work (I think I would have been uniquely suited for a mission like that), you have Daniel and his friends winning over Babylonians, and you have Job who does not appear to be an Israelite.While not explicitly stated, it seems to me the missionary work in the BoM tends to run much in the same vein as the OT variety….most concerned about those they identify as their own people…even when they expand it to the Lamanites they are seen as wayward brethren. 1
cinepro Posted February 19, 2014 Posted February 19, 2014 Unless I'm mistaken, many now believe that there were pre-existing populations here prior to when the Book of Mormon people arrived. Many also seem to believe that after the Book of Mormon people arrived, (during the time period covered in the Book of Mormon) they lived side by side and intermarried with these other populations. This has led me to wonder if there are any scriptures in the Book of Mormon referencing any teaching or converting that took place between them? The answer to your question is "no". The only reason people "theorize" the "others" is because it isn't a "theory". Whatever the nature of the Lehites and Jaredites (and Mulekites), there is pretty strong evidence that whether they were real or not, there were plenty of other people living in the Americas before, during and after the events described in the Book of Mormon. But no one is willing to take it one step beyond admitting that logical reality and actually explaining how such a narrative would work. It just doesn't work. At some point, you either waffle by saying that the Book of Mormon is way, way off in describing what it describes, or just wave your hand and say "...and then a miracle occurred and such and such people did such and such. The End." 1
Rob Osborn Posted February 19, 2014 Posted February 19, 2014 The answer to your question is "no". The only reason people "theorize" the "others" is because it isn't a "theory". Whatever the nature of the Lehites and Jaredites (and Mulekites), there is pretty strong evidence that whether they were real or not, there were plenty of other people living in the Americas before, during and after the events described in the Book of Mormon. But no one is willing to take it one step beyond admitting that logical reality and actually explaining how such a narrative would work. It just doesn't work. At some point, you either waffle by saying that the Book of Mormon is way, way off in describing what it describes, or just wave your hand and say "...and then a miracle occurred and such and such people did such and such. The End." I am curious as to what you mean by strong evidence of other people before, during and after.
Anijen Posted February 19, 2014 Posted February 19, 2014 (edited) There were people here before the Lehi's family landed. Our church leaders have said so, common sense says so, and archaeological evidence says so. If you believe the whole of South and North America had no one on it before Lehi, then well, here's your sign... Because the Book of Mormon does not directly speak of others it strongly infers it. One reason it does not because it was not written to be a demographic history of Lehi's family, but a book that would bring us in this day closer to the Savior.The presentation of the Book of Mormon as a history of the ancestors of the American Indians is not a very compelling nor a very accurate introduction. When we introduce the Book of Mormon as such a history–and that is the way we generally introduce it–surely the investigator must be puzzled, even disappointed, when he begins to read it. Most do not find what they expect. Nor do they, in turn, expect what they find…The Book of Mormon is not biographical, for not one character is fully drawn. Nor, in a strict sense, is it a history. While it chronicles a people for a thousand and twenty–one years and contains the record of an earlier people, it is in fact not a history of a people. It is the saga of a message, a testament.~President Boyd K. Packer Edited February 19, 2014 by Anijen 2
bjw Posted February 19, 2014 Posted February 19, 2014 There were people here before the Lehi's family landed. Our church leaders have said so, common sense says so, and archaeological evidence says so. If you believe the whole of South and North America had no one on it before Lehi, then well, here's your sign... Because the Book of Mormon does not directly speak of others it strongly infers it. One reason it does not because it was not written to be a demographic history of Lehi's family, but a book that would bring us in this day closer to the Savior.What I am wondering is how they were able to bridge the language gap. I have no problem with Lehi's (or the other peoples) landing here in ships and populating the country side-by-side with the other people here, but how did they learn each other's languages? Especially when Lehi's people are Israelites from Ephraim and Manasseh and the people currently here are Asian. It seems the languages would be in totally different families, with Lehi's being Hebrew with the ability to write in Egyptian shorthand, and the natives speaking an Asian dialect.
The Nehor Posted February 19, 2014 Posted February 19, 2014 But no one is willing to take it one step beyond admitting that logical reality and actually explaining how such a narrative would work. It just doesn't work. At some point, you either waffle by saying that the Book of Mormon is way, way off in describing what it describes, or just wave your hand and say "...and then a miracle occurred and such and such people did such and such. The End." I have to disagree. I think it does work. I am sure first contact made it into the large plates of Nephi but the history we get from the small plates is VERY compacted. In 1 Nephi we get a reasonably detailed narrative about the fleeing from Jerusalem, the journey in the desery, arrival at Bountiful, building the ship, and then arriving in the Promised Land. Then the narrative is taken over by Lehi's final blessings and the Nephites fleeing the Lamanites. After that almost everything is Nephi (and Jacob) preaching with almost no history at all. We get brief interludes with Jacob at the temple and then Jacob and Sherem and then the history almost entirely stops. We get a personal experience from Enos but nothing much about his ministry or reign except that he had one. Then a bunch of recorders who wrote a couple of verses each and said nothing more then that there were wars. In the end we get King Mosiah's exodus, Coriantumr, and first contact with the Mulekites. That leaves just under 500 years of story that has almost no history. Amaleki obviously thought first contact with the Mulekites was a big deal but that seems to be mostly because of where they came from and the news they brought verifying the fall of Jerusalem and being distant relatives. I would guess that first contact with others happened when Lehi was still alive or early in Nephi's reign. In either case it would have happened when the historical portion of the record was neglected. If someone could get us the 116 pages I am guessing we would have more. I am guessing Mormon included it in his abridgement. Curse you Lucy Harris!!!!!! 3
Anijen Posted February 19, 2014 Posted February 19, 2014 how did they learn each other's languages? Well, I guess the same way we do now, by studying. 2
The Nehor Posted February 19, 2014 Posted February 19, 2014 I have no problem with Lehi's (or the other peoples) landing here in ships and populating the country side-by-side with the other people here, but how did they learn each other's languages? I am pretty sure that it could be picked up very quickly. Even without teachers people with different languages learn to communicate quickly. Cortez was discussing things with Montezuma shortly after he arrived and they didn't bring a translator. It appears Hebrew and Egyptian were not their spoken language for more then a generation or two after they landed. It became a language for antiquarians and students of ancient scripture.
bjw Posted February 20, 2014 Posted February 20, 2014 I am pretty sure that it could be picked up very quickly. Even without teachers people with different languages learn to communicate quickly. Cortez was discussing things with Montezuma shortly after he arrived and they didn't bring a translator. It appears Hebrew and Egyptian were not their spoken language for more then a generation or two after they landed. It became a language for antiquarians and students of ancient scripture. Interesting observation. I think the fact that the BoM peoples make a jump at some point from being a family to being a kingdom with a ruler over them. This may be the point where the people start communicating with other peoples and interbreeding with the existing peoples that are there.
Recommended Posts