Sherem Is Not A Very Strong Candidate For Interaction With "others"

[canard78]

On the other thread, the question of Sherem being a non-Lehite or indigenous has come up. I wanted to start a new thread as it was a substantial tangent to the topic but still of interest to discuss. Here's the post I wanted to respond to:

Sevenbak

Sherem 'came among the Nephites' when they had only been there for one generation. They may, at this time, be a group of 200 people at the most. You are making a false comparison. It simply is not possible for him to have come among them an not have met Jacob before this time. It is also unlikely that Jacob would have commented that he had 'a perfect knowledge of the language of the people' if he was one of the original group. He would have to have been a son of Jacob or one of his brothers. They would have been very closely associated.

Freedom makes several statements not supported by the text.

It doesn't specify when in Jacob's life this event happens. The fact that chapter seven is added after the conclusion and farewell in chapter six would suggest seven is a later addition.

Enos, Jacob's son, lives until around 420BC, 180 years after Lehi left Jerusalem. It doesn't say when Jacob, his dad, died, but if we split the difference it would mean they both lived into the 90s at the very least. Enos needed to be old enough to hear and remember the lessons of his father before he died, so they might have even both lived until they were 100+.

If Jacob lived until 95 and was still having children until at least 80 (to have had Enos) then, if the Sherem event was later in Jacobs life, there could have been far more than 200 people. Where does it say he came among them when there had only been one new generation? It doesn't. If it was when Jacob was 70 or 80 there could have been a third or fourth generation born during Jacob's lifetime. If Zoram, Nephi and Sam had kids soon after marrying (before even reaching the Americas) the group could even have had a fifth generation born during Jacob's lifetime.

Four or possibly five generations means there could have been anything from 2,000 to 10,000 people at the time Sherem appears on the scene. Remember that at Sherem's death a "multitude" gathers, not "the family."

Let's put that to one side for a moment though and accept Freedom's premise that it was earlier. Nephi and presumably Zoram are dead when Jacob takes leadership. "Some" years have passed away since the conclusion at the end of chapter six. So we're probably still looking at Jacob being in his 40s or 50s. Sherem could have been a grandchild of Nephi or even Zoram (born around the time Jacob's eldest kids were born).

If Sherem was Zoram's grandson then he's Jacob's great nephew (by marriage) or possibly a second cousin once removed (by marriage) if Jacob married a grand-daughter, not daughter, of Ishmael. Either way, Sherem could be a distant relative (and not a blood relative) even after two or three generations.

Besides all of which, there's nothing in Jacob 7 that even says Sherem was unknown to Jacob nor that they had never met. Sherem could have been Jacob's nephew and the story still works. It just says that Sherem sought to meet Jacob for a very specific reason:

6 And it came to pass that he came unto me, and on this wise did he speak unto me, saying: Brother Jacob, I have sought much opportunity that I might speak unto you; for I have heard and also know that thou goest about much, preaching that which ye call the gospel, or the doctrine of Christ.

This is where the idea of Sherem being one of the Mayans (or other indigenous tribes) gets a little stretched. If Sherem was Mayan or "other," why would he make the following complaint about them straying from the Law of Moses? Seems an odd critique from a non-Hebrew.

7 And ye have led away much of this people that they pervert the right way of God, and keep not the law of Moses which is the right way; and convert the law of Moses into the worship of a being which ye say shall come many hundred years hence. And now behold, I, Sherem, declare unto you that this is blasphemy; for no man knoweth of such things; for he cannot tell of things to come. And after this manner did Sherem contend against me.

The only thing left is the reference to him having a knowledge of the language of the people. If you look at it in context this could refer to his ability to use language of flattery and power of speech.

4 And he was learned, that he had a perfect knowledge of the language of the people; wherefore, he could use much flattery, and much power of speech, according to the power of the devil.

Bear in mind that if you insist on him being "other" and appears early (Freedom suggested one generation) he has to have been an indigenous outsider who learns to speak and read Hebrew and possibly read reformed Egyptian and also to have studied and understood the nuances of the Law of Moses within it. All to a level where he can entice away crowds of people and be given an audience with the king to debate doctrine.

I know Sherem is a popular candidate for "other" (he was the first I remember being proposed back in the 1990s) but there are plenty of reasons why he could have not been "other."

[Brian 2.0]

What is the rebuttal from the "Sherem is native" camp on the Law of Moses point?

[Kevin Christensen]

There is an essay on Sherem's identify and discussion with interesting comments at Interpreter.

http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/who-was-sherem/#more-6522

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

[stemelbow]

eh...I could see it either way. If he came among them and became kind of expert among them, then it's possible that he'd look to the law of Moses.

[Glenn101]

There is too much that we don't know. What we do pretty well know is that the America's were populated at the time of Lehi's arrival. How or whether they mixed with the locals is not even mentioned in the Book of Mormon, but it is pretty much of a certainty that there were "others" to be found just about anywhere in the lands.

 

There is something that has always intrigued me about the Book of Mormon, and that is from 2 Nephi, Chapter 1:

" 5 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.

 

 6 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."

 

That leaves open a lot of possibilities.

 

Glenn

[Robert F. Smith]

 

There is too much that we don't know. What we do pretty well know is that the America's were populated at the time of Lehi's arrival. How or whether they mixed with the locals is not even mentioned in the Book of Mormon, but it is pretty much of a certainty that there were "others" to be found just about anywhere in the lands.

 

There is something that has always intrigued me about the Book of Mormon, and that is from 2 Nephi, Chapter 1:

" 5 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.

 

 6 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."

 

That leaves open a lot of possibilities.

 

Glenn

 

Yes, one of which is the land of promise for Abraham and for Israel in the Bible, which was a land closely circumscribed and relatively small -- as it is today -- whereas many of us used to think in unrealistic continental terms about the Book of Mormon.  We need to apply the same standards to both Bible and Book of Mormon.

[cinepro]

While I agree with you canard78, try to go easy on the Sherem rebuttal.  It's all they've got.

[cinepro]

 

There is too much that we don't know. What we do pretty well know is that the America's were populated at the time of Lehi's arrival. How or whether they mixed with the locals is not even mentioned in the Book of Mormon, but it is pretty much of a certainty that there were "others" to be found just about anywhere in the lands.

 

There is something that has always intrigued me about the Book of Mormon, and that is from 2 Nephi, Chapter 1:

" 5 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.

 

 6 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."

 

That leaves open a lot of possibilities.

 

Glenn

 

 

Not really.  In the context of the Book of Mormon, it's just explaining why the Jaredites and Mulekites were there.  He's not saying that the Lord might also invite a bazillion idol-worshipping pagans to set up camp.

[canard78]

There is an essay on Sherem's identify and discussion with interesting comments at Interpreter.

http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/who-was-sherem/#more-6522

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

From the abstract:

This short article reviews the various suggestions about Sherem’s identity and suggests he was most likely a descendant of the original Lehite party but that his identity was purposely suppressed so as not to give him more credibility than he deserved.

So even the Interpreter (or A. Keith Johnson) agrees that Sherem isn't a particularly strong candidate for interaction with others.

[canard78]

eh...I could see it either way. If he came among them and became kind of expert among them, then it's possible that he'd look to the law of Moses.

Yes... Possible.

Plausible? Not so much. From a direct reading of the text, what's the most likely option?

[canard78]

There is too much that we don't know. What we do pretty well know is that the America's were populated at the time of Lehi's arrival. How or whether they mixed with the locals is not even mentioned in the Book of Mormon, but it is pretty much of a certainty that there were "others" to be found just about anywhere in the lands.

I agree with you completely that in 600BC there was an indigenous population established in the Americas. The question is whether and if so when the Book of Mormon makes reference to them.

Is Sherem the first mention in the BoM of "others?" I'm saying the text doesn't support that conclusion very strongly.

There is something that has always intrigued me about the Book of Mormon, and that is from 2 Nephi, Chapter 1:

" 5 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.

6 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."

That leaves open a lot of possibilities.

Glenn

Indeed. Is it talking about "this land" being a land of promise for other people in the future in terms of America (USA), the americas (North and South) or the little corner of Guatemala Sorenson et al have hedged him into?

If the unknown, uninhabited land of promise Lehi was led to was only referring to the limited geography in Central America, is there any reasonable support for that also being a (or The) land of promise that others would be led to?

[churchistrue]

Are there other passages in the BOM where Others are referenced?

[stemelbow]

Yes... Possible.

Plausible? Not so much. From a direct reading of the text, what's the most likely option?

I know, but what does that matter? Do we want to suggest the text demands no interactions with others ever happened? This goes right to the question of historicity that I think David Bokovoy does a nice job talking about.

[canard78]

I know, but what does that matter? Do we want to suggest the text demands no interactions with others ever happened? This goes right to the question of historicity that I think David Bokovoy does a nice job talking about.

I think there is a desire in several areas to attribute certain passages to other indigenous populations. If the historicity of the Book of Mormon leans on interactions with others then there's a reasonable question as to why they are not mentioned.

[Nevo]

Are there other passages in the BOM where Others are referenced?

 

I've seen it suggested that the odd assortment of animals that greeted Lehi's party when they landed in the Americas—the cow, the ox, the donkey, the horse, the goat, and the wild goat (1 Nephi 18:25)—included domesticated animals, therefore indicating the presence of "others." But if you cross-reference this verse with Ether 9:18–19, it appears that the "others" the author had in mind were the Jaredites.

[cinepro]

Are there other passages in the BOM where Others are referenced?

 

The Joseph Smith Papers Project recently published these verses that were lost from 1 Nephi 18, which describe what the Lehites found when they landed in the New World.  I assume they'll be added to the online and print editions of the Book of Mormon soon:

 

 

 

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.

Edited June 1, 2015 by cinepro

[canard78]

The Joseph Smith Papers Project recently published these verses that were lost from 1 Nephi 18, which describe what the Lehites found when they landed in the New World. I assume they'll be added to the online and print editions of the Book of Mormon soon:

Had to switch from mobile to desktop version of the forum to rep-point this. You had me chuckling out loud.

[cinepro]

Had to switch from mobile to desktop version of the forum to rep-point this. You had me chuckling out loud.

 

Another point that needs to be made is that the Nephites do find "others" in the Book of Mormon.  But everytime a group of people is introduced, it is explained how they got there and where they came from.

 

For example, the people of Zarahemla are found several hundred years after the Lehites landed.  After several hundred years, if there were really "other" civilizations around, why would it be a big deal to be walking through the jungle and finding another city?  But even in this case, the reader must be told where these people came from, and how they are also from Jerusalem:

 

 

 13 And it came to pass that [Mosiah] did according as the Lord had commanded him. And they departed out of the land into the wilderness, as many as would hearken unto the voice of the Lord; and they were led by many preachings and prophesyings. And they were admonished continually by the word of God; and they were led by the power of his arm, through the wilderness until they came down into the land which is called the land of Zarahemla.

 14 And they discovered a people, who were called the people of Zarahemla. Now, there was great rejoicing among the people of Zarahemla; and also Zarahemla did rejoice exceedingly, because the Lord had sent the people of Mosiah with the plates of brass which contained the record of the Jews.

 15 Behold, it came to pass that Mosiah discovered that the people of Zarahemla came out from Jerusalem at the time that Zedekiah, king of Judah, was carried away captive into Babylon.

16 And they journeyed in the wilderness, and were brought by the hand of the Lord across the great waters, into the land where Mosiah discovered them; and they had dwelt there from that time forth.

 17 And at the time that Mosiah discovered them, they had become exceedingly numerous. Nevertheless, they had had many wars and serious contentions, and had fallen by the sword from time to time; and their language had become corrupted; and they had brought no records with them; and they denied the being of their Creator; and Mosiah, nor the people of Mosiah, could understand them.

 18 But it came to pass that Mosiah caused that they should be taught in his language. And it came to pass that after they were taught in the language of Mosiah, Zarahemla gave a genealogy of his fathers, according to his memory; and they are written, but not in these plates.

 19 And it came to pass that the people of Zarahemla, and of Mosiah, did unite together; and Mosiah was appointed to be their king.

Omni

 

The people of Zarahemla are another isolated civilization that lived for several centuries in the New World, but had a tough time maintaining their language. Not because they were intermingled with the natives, but because they didn't have written records. 

 

The story only works if these are isolated people (and also the most powerful people).  If we theorize "others", we are also theorizing that the Nephites, Lamanites and Mulekites were all able to wield total political control over the civilizations they mingled with while at the same time adopting their language and culture (while maintaining their own separate language and culture as well).

Edited June 1, 2015 by cinepro

[churchistrue]

What do you guys think of Terryl Givens for using this argument in Crucible of Doubt?  Misinformed or disingenuous?  

[Robert F. Smith]

I know, but what does that matter? Do we want to suggest the text demands no interactions with others ever happened? This goes right to the question of historicity that I think David Bokovoy does a nice job talking about.

The problem is that the Bible suppresses so much, including the folk religion of the masses -- which has been disclosed archeologically (as pointed out particularly well by Bill Dever).  Then there is the Deuteronomic Reform beginning with King Josiah, and superintended by the religious establishment.

 

We cannot expect the Book of Mormon to be less opaque in certain respects.  Even Nephi is believed to have composed his small plates in fashion suited to put all that he and his father did in the best possible light, and to likewise make Laman & Lemuel look as nasty as possible.  That is what writers and editors do.  Thus, if it did not suit the "party line," you can be sure that very little about the already extant natives would be mentioned -- unless there was a very good reason, as in the case of the Jaredites.  The Book of Mormon is not a history text.

[Robert F. Smith]

Another point that needs to be made is that the Nephites do find "others" in the Book of Mormon.  But everytime a group of people is introduced, it is explained how they got there and where they came from.

One could argue that this would only make sense if it served a real purpose, not "everytime."

 

For example, the people of Zarahemla are found several hundred years after the Lehites landed.  After several hundred years, if there were really "other" civilizations around, why would it be a big deal to be walking through the jungle and finding another city?  But even in this case, the reader must be told where these people came from, and how they are also from Jerusalem:

 

The people of Zarahemla are another isolated civilization that lived for several centuries in the New World, but had a tough time maintaining their language. Not because they were intermingled with the natives, but because they didn't have written records. 

 

The story only works if these are isolated people (and also the most powerful people).  If we theorize "others", we are also theorizing that the Nephites, Lamanites and Mulekites were all able to wield total political control over the civilizations they mingled with while at the same time adopting their language and culture (while maintaining their own separate language and culture as well).

I don't know why you insist on "total political control" outside the context of that very factor playing such a big role in actual domination of some great Middle American city-states by foreign elite families.  There would naturally be cultural and linguistic transfers during an extended period of such close contact, as happened in both the Old and New Worlds.  One must, for example, understand that the Ptolemies were Greeks ruling Egypt, even though they adopted the trappings of traditional pharaonic religion, ideology, and language.  Yet, the Hellenism brought to Egypt and the rest of the ancient Near East by the conquests and administration of Alexander the Great had far-reaching effects.

 

So too, the widespread trade by the Olmec, the later domination by Teotihuacan, etc., brought with them powerful linguistic and cultural transfers -- including Semitic and Egyptian effects -- which cannot be ignored (unless one decides apriori that it is impossible).

[Robert F. Smith]

What do you guys think of Terryl Givens for using this argument in Crucible of Doubt?  Misinformed or disingenuous?  

Perhaps you could be a little more specific.  Was Givens not convincing in some way?

[canard78]

Perhaps you could be a little more specific. Was Givens not convincing in some way?

I'm guessing he means something like this:

However, the actual text of the Book of Mormon does not require that we read Lehi as entering upon an uninhabited continent. In fact, the record itself contains the materials to read a very different context behind the Lehite settlement. As early as Jacob 7, that record keeper mentions one Sherem “who came among the people of Nephi.” And this stranger, apparently unexpectedly, “had a perfect knowledge of the language of the people.”iii One would hardly trouble to mention that someone spoke perfect Hebrew if he were from a Hebrew-speaking background. The reasonable inference that follows from this, in other words, is that Sherem came from an indigenous people or a different group of settlers than the Nephites. And his was unlikely to have been the only non-Nephite or non-Lamanite group.

http://terrylgivens.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Letter-to-a-Doubter-2014-Revised.pdf

Letter to a doubter is essentially the synopsis of Crucible of Doubt. I've not read it, but I wouldn't be surprised if Givens makes a similar point in the book.

To answer the original question (assuming this is the question), no, I don't think Givens was being disingenuous at all. The idea of Sherem being an outsider has been going around for years (decades in fact). It's not surprising that Givens used it. As Cinepro said, if you're looking for mentions of outsiders in the BoM then Sherem is one of the best candidates. What I'm proposing is that he's not a very good one.

[churchistrue]

To answer the original question (assuming this is the question), no, I don't think Givens was being disingenuous at all. The idea of Sherem being an outsider has been going around for years (decades in fact). It's not surprising that Givens used it. As Cinepro said, if you're looking for mentions of outsiders in the BoM then Sherem is one of the best candidates. What I'm proposing is that he's not a very good one.

Yes, that was the background to the question.  The Sherem-Others logic as a satisfactory answer to BOM DNA/historicity issues is a key point he makes.

 

It's sometimes difficult for critics to take apologists at face value, when the arguments are so weak.  Sherem as candidate for Others is terrible logic.  So it's understandable for a critic to go down this logic trail.  

 

1. Givens is not stupid.  He knows these issues as well as any person on earth.

2. The Sherem as support for Others as a satisfactory answer to BOM DNA/historicity issues is weak.  It's beyond weak.  It's confusingly weak.  Confusing in that you wonder why an honest, intelligent person would use the argument.

3. You conclude Givens is disingenuous.  

 

I believe Givens is a good man.  So I'm going to suspend judgment on this, but you can see the conundrum.

 

Is it possible he's misinformed?  Maybe he just hasn't analyzed that particular issue deep enough.  He read a cursory explanation by another apologist, jumped on the train, and didn't bother thinking it through?

[canard78]

eh...I could see it either way. If he came among them and became kind of expert among them, then it's possible that he'd look to the law of Moses.

I decided to have a quick look for the phrase "came among" in the Book of Mormon.

It happens one other time. Alma, talking to his son Helaman, talks about the Jaredites and how the prophets "came among them." There's no suggestion that the prophets are ethnically different... just that they are taking a distinct action (preaching) that is described with this particular phrase:

"30 For behold, they murdered all the prophets of the Lord who came among them to declare unto them concerning their iniquities"

Alma 37:30